Definitely. If a person is righteous enough and has sufficient faith then they may receive a visitation by Father and/or Son. However, in such a visitation, the information given to the individual would be limited to that person's area of responsibility. For example, if I were to receive such a visitation (not that I am claiming that I ever have) then I would probably be given directions that would help me in my personal life or in how to help the young men in my congregation since those are my areas of responsibility. God would not give me direction concerning the governance of the Church in general. Such revelations would only come through the First Presidency of the Church. pacella23: First of all, not that Jesus gave that warning before His crucifixion and death. So, if we take it as an absolute prohibition on his returning again before He comes to reign, then we would have to throw out the appearances that He made to His followers after His resurrection. So, Mary and the other women were either lying or were mislead when they said that they saw Him. So were the Apostles and all of the others who made similar claims. So, an absolute interpretation of that verse pretty well destroys one of the cornerstones of Christianity, that Jesus rose from the dead and that there were lots of witnesses to this fact. Now a somewhat less stringent interpretation would recognize the fact the all of the witnesses in the gospels new Jesus personally and would have been able to distinguish Him from a false messiah. So, their witness is in tact. However, this then brings us to one Saul of Tarsus. He also claimed to have been visited by Jesus. However, he had not been one of His followers. Not only that, Jesus' Earthly ministry had ended some time before Saul's visitation (Acts 1: 1-11). So, by your interpretation, we would definitely have to say that Saul was, at the very least, mislead. Since he didn't know Jesus personally, it would have been fairly easy for Satan to have mislead him wouldn't it? Of course, this would also mean that we have to throw out a large part of the New Testament because Paul was obviously a false prophet. So, what does this tell us? It tells us that Jesus was not telling us that He would not visit the Earth again between His ascension and second coming. In those verses of Matthew, He was warning us to beware of those that would come in the interim claiming to be Him returned. If you think about it, I am sure that you can name some such instances in recent years. David Koresh is on that comes to mind. As a missionary, I met another such man. He took a rather obscure verse in Zechariah (I think) and claimed that it referred to him. Therefore, he was the Messiah come again. These are the people against which Jesus was warning. He was not saying that He would not periodically visit men as He decided it was necessary to further the plan of salvation. He would just not come back openly to reign until all of the signs had been given.

I would agree with Mr. Glenn Blaylock's interpritation regarding Matthew 24:22-28 if the passage stopped at verse 24. Look at verses 26-27. They are talking about False Prophets telling people that Christ is in the desert or in SECRET chambers. Then Christ says to NOT believe them. Here are the verse's. 26Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. 27For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. We will all know when Christ comes again. Christ appeared to a number of people before his ascension. As Mr Blaylock said, this does not apply here. It is my understanding that Saul heard a voice and was blinded in his encounter with Christ. How could he see Christ?