ENTRY 38 REVELATION

Revelation is more than inspiration or more than a great idea. It is knowledge directly from God. Determining if a work is revelation begins with the speaker or author who is presenting the information. Does the presenter claim the information came from God? Or does the presenter claim to be the originator of the subject? We can't make claims that exceed the author's own claims. If the author does not claim the words are revelation from God, then we cannot jump to the conclusion that the revelation is from God.

God has told us to take caution how we use his name. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. That isn't referring to impolite language that you use when you smash your thumb with a hammer. Intention of the heart is everything to the Lord. Taking His name in vain is the act of using his name to gain more authority in the eyes of others.  This is essentially trying to rob authority from God that God has not actually granted. This occurs whenever we stand up at the podium and say that something is in the name of Christ when in all actuality Christ never told us to say it. It occurs when we perform ordinances without permission...from God. It also occurs when we seal in the name of Christ without receiving sealing power. It is especially tempting to use spiritual gifts to bolster ourselves up and seem more important than we really are. These are the kinds of actions that involve taking the name of the Lord in vain. It is vanity to declare we represent God without God asking us to make that representation.

Establishing a relationship with God is highly personal. There are a variety of the gifts of God and to each person is given different gifts. Learning to recognize those gifts and apply them to our personal situations without giving in to the temptation of pride and vanity is a test that everyone who seeks for the Lord must face. The gifts from God vary from subtle to the miraculous, but it is between the receiver of the gift and Christ to determine how to best apply those gifts in the service of others. Therefore, one person could receive communication from Christ by conscientious thought, or an internal conversation, by dreams, by voice, by angelic visitation, or by direct face to face communication. Regardless of the method there is only one source.  Christ is the source.  The person takes on the responsibility of speaking in the name of the Lord whenever they share those gifts with others, and especially when they share the source of those gifts which is Christ.  The level of commitment in taking on the name of the Lord must be determined by the individual. It is their risk of sin if they feign more authority than God grants. It is their responsibility to determine how much of that authority would be appropriate. 

It is an equal risk of sin to not give appropriate credit to the author of all good things, which is Christ.  If it is wrong to take on more authority in the name of Christ, it would be equally wrong to hide the true source of authority by which we receive a genuine gift from God.  This would be an attempt to rob Glory from God.  We attempt to do so by enjoying the gifts of God and enjoying the attention we receive for those gifts, without giving proper acknowledgment to the giver of the gifts.

We must not rob authority from God by claiming his name in something he has not given.  Neither should we rob glory from God by hiding his name in something which he has given.

For this reason, we must allow other individuals to make the determination of how much of the Lord's name is appropriate in the words that they speak.

If there is any hesitation on the part of the speaker to declare that the Lord gave him the words, then I will give the speaker the benefit of the doubt. That is to say, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he is not a vain, authority seeking person who would pretend to speak in the name of God. I would not presume that the speaker would pretend to speak for God and result to verbal sleight of hand to make us think he is speaking for God when he really is not.  God would see through such a ruse easily and wouldn’t accept the excuse that “Hey, I didn’t actually say you said it Lord.  They just assumed you said it.” Therefore, the words may be inspirational, good advice, best theory, worth pondering over, but I would not consider it as a revelation until the deliverer makes known that it is a revelation.    If God wants a spokesman, the spokesman will be direct about the origination of the words.  For that reason, we cannot claim revelation is received by someone else when that person has not made the claim themselves. If they did not deem it appropriate to make that claim public, then we are in no position to make that claim for them.

Therefore it is inappropriate to assert that "the Brethren" have known the Lord personally or been sealed up to eternal life or have been given the keys of the kingdom of God...etc...when they themselves have not made such a claim. If it is vanity to use such experiences to build oneself up as an authority, would it not be double vanity to amplify another's experiences to increase the persuasion of our own arguments? 

For example, to say that a leader of the church speaks for God even though the leader has never made that claim themselves.  Or to say, the leaders of the church have all seen the Lord, even though the leaders have never made that claim publicly.  Or to say that the leader was speaking for God when he spoke on some specific issue, even though the leader did not claim he was delivering a message for God at that time. Wouldn’t that be taking God’s name in vain by proxy? 

Why would someone do this?  They would do it to strengthen their assertions as they quote the statements made by the leaders.  They take on the position that should you disagree with them you are disagreeing with God.  The reasoning is that the leaders speak for God but are too humble to say it directly and since we agree with the leaders, we are “on the Lord’s side”.  And since you disagree with the leaders then you are not on the Lord’s side. 

But they are making claims for the leaders that the leaders would not make for themselves.

Why did the leaders not claim it was revelation from God?  Because the leaders have integrity. They know that a revelation is a message from God and that no statement should be made in the name of God unless it actually came from God.  Likewise, leaders with integrity know that when the message does come from God that they must make the means of that revelation known so that the people can judge appropriately and be held to the weight of full responsibility for any words that God delivered personally.

Therefore, when a member claims revelation on behalf of a leader, they are speaking in the name of the Lord falsely because they themselves have not received revelation from God and the leaders have not claimed to receive revelation for God, but they claim the leader’s statements are revelation.  They claim more in the name of the leaders than the leaders claim for themselves.  They do so to increase their own personal authority.    

Remember when the Spirit of God took Jesus up to the temple wall and then withdrew from him?  The devil came and tempted Jesus telling him that it was written that the angels would protect him.  If he tossed himself off the wall and the angels saved him before all the people,  just think of all the people who would believe.  The display of power would grant Jesus instant authority to persuade the people.  But Jesus would not do it.

“Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.

3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.” (Mathew 4)

 

It is evident from the narration about the temptations of Christ that the miraculous power of God is not to be used for self gratification.  Authority of God is used to serve others, not to serve self.  Anytime God speaks to someone it is a miraculous occurrence.  Therefore, speaking as if you have received a revelation in the name of God is a serious claim.  There is a heavy weight associated with that claim.  If it is true, it is a miracle.  If it is true that God wants you to deliver a message in His name, then He will make that known to you.  If God is giving people knowledge through the miraculous means of revelation than the message is something that we should listen to carefully.  The miraculous stamp of authority means that God is giving you knowledge that you will be held responsible for.  It is being delivered with His seal of approval.  It was something Christ did not do even to win persuasion over others.  Christ only used the authority of God in accordance with the will of God for the purposes of God.  Christ did not exceed the authority given by the Father.  

When a prophet speaks for the Lord and the Lord has genuinely given him or her a message to deliver, the person will tell us in some manner that the message is from the Lord. The words may be "thus saith the Lord" or something to that effect.  There should not be any ambiguity about the level of ownership the Lord has taken on the words delivered.   If there is ambiguity then it carries no more authority than the opinion of the speaker and the precepts of men.   But when it is truly made in the name of the Lord, it carries the full authority of God. 

For some examples, I would recommend reading the story of Joseph Smith in the History of Joseph Smith (Pearl of Great Price), or in the revelations published in the Doctrine and Covenants.  I would also recommend a few other examples from the Book of Mormon, such as Lehi, Nephi, Jacob, Isaiah, Abinidi, Alma, 3rd Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni.  I would also recommend all of the stories regarding revelations from the Old and the New Testament.  Anytime someone had a prophetic message to deliver to the people, they declared:  what the message was, how they received the message and who the source of the message was.  The originator of the message was the Lord and sometimes he spoke to these individuals by dreams, by angels or by his own voice or in person.  They included the explanation of the source for the audience to determine how much validity to place on the message.  By doing so, the weight of responsibility was put on the shoulders of the people.  It was up to the hearers of the word to determine how valid the words were.

Sometimes a man is speaking and we just have this feeling in our heart that his words are true.  In fact more than a feeling, we just know that it is a message from God to us.  "It was just what I needed to hear", we say as we tell our friends about the message delivered in church last Sunday.  However, that does not mean the speaker was speaking by revelation.  It just means that you were listening by revelation.  It was a message from God...to YOU.  You received the revelation.  What was the form of the revelation?  The form was God's light filling your soul with a renewed understanding.  Again, that places the burden of revelation...and the burden of claimed authority of revelation...squarely on your shoulders.  The speaker must take responsibility for how much authority to claim on his own words.  And you must take on the responsibility for how much authority to claim on your words.  You may receive your revelations at any time and from any source.  And when you receive them, you must recognize that the source of any true revelation comes only from Christ.     

We are better off to be modest in our claims about speaking in the name of God.

We should hesitate before we claim more authority for others than they claim for themselves.

When the claim of Revelation is made in the name of God, we must weigh the claim seriously.

If it is a valid Revelation than we will be accountable to God for how we respond to the message.