I'll continue to develop this but is it possible that sometimes in our efforts to look to the mark we may inadvertently look beyond the mark not recognizing precise patterns of how God operates. Keeping in mind that the development of faith itself is one of the paramount obligations of this existence explains why the leaders prepared this very formalized treatise to the School of the Prophets. If they would be prophets and act as prophets they must understand the proper manner in which all truly can become prophets.BrianM wrote:brlenox, good points on testimony of faith vs a testimony of knowledge. This is one reason I find it unfortunate that there aren't more people who have actually seen Christ and can testify to the world that they have seen Him. There seem to be very few. Not even the modern Apostles are bearing this testimony that the original charge to the Twelve suggests they should be seeking and sharing. Such a testimony of knowledge is important in order for even more people to gain a testimony of faith or belief. I've actually been pondering this for myself a lot lately (in regards to what I can personally testify of and whether it is a testimony of knowledge, faith or belief). I think too often people get up and bear testimony that "I know..." when in fact they only have a hope, belief or faith in such things, not knowledge.they had to initiate their faith based on another's testimony of knowledge and then establish a testimony of faith or belief which is developed bit by bit until they also had the same experience as the one who had the theophany, or appearance of deity unto them giving them a testimony of knowledge
Thus when we read of Brigham Young's observations in this type of verbiage:
Brigham is actually expounding upon a core principle of the restoration and of the dispensational concept. This concept is also what the Lectures on Faith are developing and what the observations of Bruce R. McConkie are clarifying. While others will, within a dispensation, stand in the presence of God, they will never testify as a lone witness but will always link to the power of the dispensational head's testimony of knowledge to validate their second witness. If these brethren of the church did not understand this profound pattern it is easy enough to lead the children astray by simply claiming with words to have stood in his presence and I am convinced that were they dishonest men they would readily do so. However, the pattern, such as we will discuss later, of Elder Packers testimony in conference is to protect the dispensational heads testimony of knowledge as the premier testimony that must be accepted or men cannot return to the presence of God in this dispensation. It is also to protect those who follow the process of Alma 32, who let their testimonies of belief become greater and greater testimonies of personal revelation by degrees until Christ personally reveals himself.Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation,... no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are—I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation—the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim—"Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!" But it is true. (Brigham Young, October 9, 1859 Intelligence, Etc. Remarks by President BRIGHAM YOUNG, delivered in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, October 9, 1859.Reported by G. D. Watt Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p.282-91)
I might come back to this topic later as there is a very powerful clue found in D & C 19 that bears a particular witness to this concept but now is not the right time to introduce it. We can also weave in the statement in the OP and find there is nothing that opposes this perspective but I need to go in small bites.
