"Is the Mormon My Brother: Chapter 2-What Do Mormons Believe?"

I am going to blog through a couple of chapters of James White's book "Is the Mormon My Brother?" I believe the average Christian in the pew is ignorant of the vast differences in theology between Mormonism and Christianity. This vast difference is confused due to the use of "orthodox language" by Mormonism. However, the language is redefined. They may have an "orthodox dictionary," but their definitions are wrong.
I skipped the introductory first chapter because most of it is Dr. White simply saying he's going to let Mormon sources and authorities speak for themselves as to what Mormonism is. In other words, he's going to let Mormons define Mormonism so as not to mis-represent them.

Apostles and Prophets
The Standard Works of Mormonism include: The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price, and The King James Version of the Bible. Mormon claims to be a record of the inhabitants of North America in ancient times and Jesus' appearance to them. D&C is a collection of revelations/prophecies given to Joseph Smith. Pearl is a collection of smaller works. However, Mormon doctrine also holds to the continuation of revelation via apostles and prophets to this day. White cites from Mormon Apostle George Cannon, Mormon Prophet Spencer Kimball, and Mormon Apostle Bruce McConkie on the continuing nature of revelation. Perhaps the most shocking citation comes from Mormon Elder Orson Whitney at the 1916 General Conference of the Mormon Church. Whitney states, The Latter-day Saints do not do things because they happen to be printed in a book. They do not do things because God told the Jews to do them; nor do they do or leave undone anything because of instructions that Christ gave to the Nephites [a reference to the Book of Mormon]. Whatever is done by this Church is because God, speaking from heaven in our day, has commanded this Church to do it. No book presides over this Church, and no book lies at its foundation...Divine revelation adapts itself to the circumstances and conditions of men, and change upon change ensues as God's progressive work goes on to its destiny. There is no book big enough or good enough to preside over this Church."  
White goes on to show that there are Mormon pronouncements by other "apostles and prophets" that say that the oracles of continuing revelation ought to be judged by the 4 Standard Works. So there is disagreement even in Mormonism as to whether continuing revelation is to be on par with or on a lower level of authority than the Standard Works.

My Thoughts
Catholics make the same claim with the infallible pronouncement from the Pope when speaking ex cathedra (interesting aside: the Catholics could never point to this theology in Mormonism as a point of apologetic dialogue). There are many problems with the claim of continuing revelation. The continuing revelation of the Catholic Church is well-documented with contradictions, multiple popes excommunicating each other, etc. If direct revelation from God continues today, then there can never be a closed canon, and anything that becomes embarrassing can just be marginalized or flat out contradicted using the claim of "God's new revelation for today." There can never be a final and sufficient corpus of divine revelation. Dr. White documents how the Journal of Discourses which contains sermons from early Mormon Prophets was viewed as Scripture by these early leaders of Mormonism, yet it is downplayed or ignored in modern Mormonism. With continuing revelation, what you have is a religion and theology that is constantly in flux. Obviously, this causes a problem because a divine truth cannot possibly become a falsehood without impugning the  character of God Himself. As White says, "When God reveals truth 'X' about His nature and attributes, 'X' will not 'become' false tomorrow. While God's means of dealing with His people over time may change, His revelation about who He is will not. That is the nature of divine truth."

It's interesting to me that Mormonism wants to claim the continuing revelatory function of the office of prophet and apostle without any of the miraculous gifts that accompanied the prophets and apostles of the Bible. These miraculous signs and gifts such as healings, resurrections, et.al., went along with the office of the prophet and apostle to confirm their message. These offices had a message and signs to accompany the message that testified to the truth and divine nature of the message being given by the one holding onto that office. Examples of this include Exodus 7:17, 8:10, 16:12,  Deuteronomy 13, 1 Kings 18, Matthew 10, and Luke 11. So where are the miraculous signs to confirm the teachings of Mormonism (or Catholicism for that matter)? Why only continue the revelatory aspect and not the authenticating aspect? No, rather Mormons and Catholics (and any that claim continuing direct revelation from God) have added to the Word of God, which God has explicitly forbidden (Deut 4:2, 12:32; Rev. 22:18).

Soli Deo Gloria