Can prophetic consensus reliably tell Latter-day Saints what is true\u2014or does the process simply disguise our existing assumptions?<\/p>\n
In this episode of Let\u2019s Disagree and Other Interesting Conversations, I\u2019m joined by Jonathan Young, an active Latter-day Saint and elders quorum instructor, to examine Jacob Hansen\u2019s \u201cCollective Witness Model.\u201d<\/p>\n
Jacob\u2019s model proposes that believers can identify the mind and will of God by combining reason, personal spiritual impressions, and the collective teachings of prophets across scripture and Church history. Jonathan approaches that proposal sympathetically\u2014but argues that the method faces serious problems when we try to apply it consistently.<\/p>\n
We discuss:<\/p>\n
\u2022 How much weight should be given to reason, spiritual intuition, and prophetic authority
\n\u2022 Whether adjustable weighting makes the model vulnerable to confirmation bias
\n\u2022 How believers unconsciously select some prophets while ignoring others
\n\u2022 What happens when most supposed \u201cwitnesses\u201d are silent
\n\u2022 Whether new revelation can ever overcome an existing prophetic consensus
\n\u2022 Adam\u2013God, evolution, the priesthood restriction, and changing LDS teachings
\n\u2022 How culture shapes what believers identify as reason or revelation
\n\u2022 Why ancient scripture is often interpreted through modern assumptions
\n\u2022 The divine council, the Nephilim, Huldah, Junia, and disputed biblical translations
\n\u2022 Whether repeated scriptural teachings actually represent independent witnesses
\n\u2022 How editing, redaction, translation, and proof-texting can manufacture apparent consensus
\n\u2022 What a transparent and consistently applied model would need to look like<\/p>\n
Jonathan\u2019s argument is not that prophets, scripture, tradition, or spiritual experience are worthless. His concern is that the Collective Witness Model does not provide clear rules for choosing, interpreting, and weighting its evidence. Without those rules, the model may function less as a method for discovering truth and more as a rhetorical tool for validating conclusions someone already holds.<\/p>\n
This conversation brings together a believing Latter-day Saint and a post-Mormon critic to ask a shared question: How can faith remain intellectually honest when religious authorities disagree?<\/p>\n
Subscribe to Let\u2019s Disagree for conversations about Mormonism, religion, skepticism, biblical scholarship, deconstruction, and the search for better ways to reason together.<\/p>\n
#Mormonism #LDS #JacobHansen #CollectiveWitnessModel #Epistemology #BiblicalScholarship #LatterDaySaint #ExMormon #ReligiousDeconstruction #LetsDisagree<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Can prophetic consensus reliably tell Latter-day Saints what is true\u2014or does the process simply disguise our existing assumptions? In this […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":1681,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1680","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\n\n\t\n