Q: What are the risks of a closed canon (no revelation)? What are the risks of an open canon (ongoing revelation)?
Closed cannon locks you into potentially obsolete knowledge. Galileo stood up for what he new was correct. Time proved the point and religion followed, albeit the slow lane. With open cannon new information may contradict the old, giving the old less credibility in general.

Q: Should we liken scriptures to our day or liken our day to scriptures (through GC talks)? How can we get the best of both ancient and modern counsel?
Scriptures need to be put in the context of the limited knowledge of the times in which they were written.

Q: Do living prophets always trump dead prophets? Why or why not?
Depends on the topic and their position.

Q: Why is revelation a key concept of the restoration? Could there have been a restoration without revelation? What does revelation mean to you (inspiration, spiritual channeling, divine dictation, or something else)?
Revelation is the “authority stamp” to new concepts.

Q: How does the above revelation provide order to the church? When does our personal revelation trump organizational revelation?
It asserts authority to the hierarchy. The difficulty is that title and understanding do not always coincide.

Personal understanding trumps when it exceeds the organizational understanding.

Q: How do we avoid the trap of being “too wise to be taught”?
Most will find the more they learn the less they know. Keep an open mind, allow yourself to think freely. Don’t be strictly bound to the limited wisdom of the past.

Personal revelation is essential for our salvation according to Alma 12:

“9 And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.
10 And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.
11 And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell.”

So, we are captives of the devil unless we seek to receive the mysteries of God. This knowledge, as I read this scripture, is only given through personal revelation.

I need to add one more thing that is critical, so I will capitalize and bold it:

NEARLY ALL OF CHRISTIANITY DOES THIS! IT’S NOT UNIQUE TO MORMONISM.

There are very few Christian denominations today that require the women to remain silent in church, as just the simplest example. Even though they might teach the Bible as the inerrant word of God, they still choose to ignore parts they can’t accept – and that includes actual religious teachings, as well. The words of the Christian fathers who wrote the Athanasian Creed and the Protestant leaders who wrote the Westminster Confession, for example, are accepted by MANY as the canonized interpretations of Biblical doctrine, taking the Bible’s place as the authoritative word of god in a very real way.

It’s easy to forget that, but it’s critical to this discussion.

I say that we as followers of the prophets trump all prophets. We are our most important prophet, because we must receive revelation for ourselves as to what the Lord has for us to believe and to do. After that though, I believe our Church teaches it like this:

Living prophets > dead prophets
More recent prophets > prior past prophets

It’s the prophet closest to your time that has the most relevant info normally, at least that is my understanding of our system.

Beware of those who would pit the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence. President Wilford Woodruff stated

The prophets since Joseph Smith may have been wrong about doctrinal and historical matters. (There are probably better examples than the follow)

1. Brigham Young taught that Adam was our God.
2. Joseph F. Smith’s explicit denial of evolution
3. Teaching that the Hill Cumorah that Joseph found the plates in, was the same Hill Cumorah mentioned in the Book of Mormon where two great battles were fought killing over 2.2 million people. (No archaeological evidence has been found at that hill, Mormon scholars are considering there may be another Hill Cumorah ).

If the current prophet can say that a previous prophet was wrong about doctrine, Then how do we know what the current prophet says won’t be judged invalid by the next prophet?

Of these:

” Could there have been a restoration without revelation?”
I don’t think so. No revelation means no restoration and no LDS church. I think it’s (revelation) what keeps the church alive.

“Q: What are the great and important things yet to be revealed? Any guesses?”
Probably that related to the millennium and later kingdoms. Also clear cut revelation on issues such as homosexuality and same sex marriage could be timely now, but then the recent letter from the 1st presidency could be just that.

“Q: Can members of the church disagree with church leaders without becoming apostate?
Most definitely, but we need to avoid the spirit of contention when doing so. Disagreement is very different to hostility or belligerency.

I was teaching the death and dying lesson today (I had someone cover for me when I was gone, but part of that was that I had to teach that lesson anyway).

I’ll be thinking on what you have to say, I find it helpful when I prepare.

Thanks!

Full test: http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=024644f8f206c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=2fefba9ff599b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1