This is an image you’re going to see a lot of in the news and around the bloggernacle. It’s from a leaked powerpoint presentation (UPDATE – the LDS Church has issued a take down notice to Mormon Leaks) that was given to the 12 Apostles in December of 2015. It highlights what Church leaders deem as the most important issues or ideas causing Church members to be “lead away from the gospel.”
Might I just say at the outset of this post that I truly respect these men who are sincerely trying to grapple with very difficult issues confronting the Church. I know many of them. Some are my friends. I do not envy their positions. I believe them to be as sincere as I ever was as an active LDS person, or more so.
But might I also suggest that this bubble chart is very much the stuff of the corporate realm. Where paid data analysts and middle management folks do the research and then present a well-thought out proposal to their VPs and CEOs. As you know, this is one of my issues I have with the Church. I feel like the Church operates too much like a business rather than by revelation.
I did find it interesting that this particular page of the powerpoint refers to people “leaving the gospel.” I can’t speak for others, but I see some of these bubbles on this chart as reasons why people may leave the Church (although not necessarily), but who in many cases as a result of their “issues” may actually find the gospel.
As one example, the chart speaks of “pornography, chastity, and lack of righteousness” as to why many people are leaving. And yet we learn in scripture that the Lord gives us weakness that we may come unto Him:
And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them (Ether 12:27).
I can personally testify that God gives us weakness (one might say the tendencies of the natural man) — that we may be humble — that we may turn to Him. Or you could say, turn towards the Gospel.
Perhaps the Church is too worried about people’s weaknesses and should see them more as God’s hand in our lives. This reminds me too much of the obsession we have as Mormons to be a part of the Not Even Once Club. It’s almost as if the Church would prefer no one ever make a mistake rather “learn by our own experiences to choose good over evil.”
I love the verse in the D&C that shows how our Lord uses our weaknesses and trials to His advantage:
And after their temptations, and much tribulation, behold, I, the Lord, will feel after them, and if they harden not their hearts, and stiffen not their necks against me, they shall be converted, and I will heal them (D&C 112:13).
It is usually when I feel most broken (often from my sins and weaknesses) that I experience the Lord feeling after me. And of course the best part, it is most often then that I become more converted to Him and more healed by Him.
The Church seems to be more concerned with Church activity as a way to measure righteousness. Some of my most spiritual experiences with ward members have been in hospitals, prisons, at grave sides and in the homes of “inactives,” where in many cases sin or other tribulations have brought someone to their knees.
I spoke to a family member recently for example who is inactive. Her bishop asked her the other day if she has been praying. His insinuation was that she was not, because after all, she is “inactive.” She replied in disbelief and in tears, “I have never prayed so hard in my life for answers. I have never cried so hard to God.” She then added that she had recently and for the first time in her life, screamed at God to not let a person she loved, die. I asked her if it helped. She explained that although the person did die, something powerful had taken place in her heart in the process of yelling at God. There was a new trust developed. A new understanding. New healing despite the heartache. All this from someone who has “left” the gospel according to the bubble chart.
Perhaps a better title for this powerpoint page might be “Issues and Ideas Leading People Away From The Church.” Or “Leading People To The Not Paying Tithing Category.” I think it would be a more accurate title based on what I think is their goal — to keep people active in coming to Church.
I’d like to spend a minute on what I think is the most important and interesting bubble on the leaked powerpoint: Denver Snuffer.
Denver is unique on this chart. He claims to have seen the Lord. Other people on the chart may be interesting, but in the case of John Dehlin, my understanding is he’s more progressive and would like the Church to change or adapt to more popular and modern positions.
I personally like John Dehlin. I think he does a great job helping people tell their stories. He encourages and embraces dialogue. While I don’t always align with his ideology, I generally find him interesting, intelligent, and compassionate.
But interestingly, Denver seems to want to lead people to the Gospel. He makes the case that by focusing on the message of the Book of Mormon, all can have and should try to have the same experience he has had. In fact, Denver, more than anyone else, defends the Restoration and Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham and the Lectures on Faith etc.
I personally always struggled defending the Church narrative when it came to issues such as Polygamy, Blacks and the Priesthood, and Mountain Meadows. I made awful excuses that justified awful things because I believed the Church version of its own history.
But Denver HELPS the Church enormously. He makes a great case for example that Joseph never had sexual relations with Fanny Alger (14 years old) or with anyone, save Emma. One would think that IF this was true, the Church would want to exonerate Joseph from all the awful accusations of pedophilia, polygamy, fornication, and adultery. Can you imagine how many people would be relieved and overjoyed — who perhaps would “Know brother Joseph again” if Snuffer is right?
Snuffer also makes a great case that blacks should have never had priesthood withheld from them. At least not the priesthood the Church has and gives. Can you imagine how much easier it would be IF the LDS Church had not discriminated against Blacks up until 1978? Joseph was campaigning to free the slaves in the 1800s! and was giving them priesthood. That all stopped with Brigham Young, the self-professed Yankee Guesser.
Denver Snuffer also offers a very compelling reason why the LDS Church is still under condemnation, culminating with the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum at Carthage, fulfilling the promise from the Lord in D&C 124 and reflecting the idea of Moses being taken from Israel as is depicted in D&C 84. Joseph is described by Nephi to be like unto Moses is he not? (2 Nephi 3:9). Maybe Joseph was taken because we, like Israel, wanted something less than the Higher Priesthood and the Fulness of His Glory? This sure makes sense to me.
Everything I have read from Snuffer suggests to my mind a return to what the Lord was trying to restore through the prophet, seer, and revelator Joseph Smith.
Everything the Church seems to do today is with the goal of saving the Church and with keeping people coming to Church.
Admittedly the Church has a very difficult path. If it exonerates Joseph from polygamy, it throws Brigham and ALL prophets and Church leaders up to the present under the bus. Wilford Woodruff included, who said, “Keep your eye on the prophet, he can’t lead you astray, the Lord won’t let him.” (Wink, wink.)
If the Church admits that Brigham was the real culprit in polygamy (misunderstanding Joseph’s doctrine of sealings completely), and in denying Blacks the priesthood and in Blood Atonement — the teaching of lawful killing to help save the sinner, i.e. a mixed race couple, then it admits that everything post Joseph is unreliable at best and must be seen as condemned by the Lord rather than condoned.
And hence the dilemma. Good men generally, who find themselves at the helm of a massive corporate organization, without a Joseph-like connection to heaven. They believe it is the Kingdom of God on Earth as did I for 40+ years.
I love them. I am sad for them. Because they rely upon research rather than revelation. And because they simply cannot consider a more beautiful and truthful narrative that restores and preserves the restoration itself, because it very may well undo the Church. It certainly would undo the confidence many have in the Brethren, which as Denver has noted is the last doctrine left of the LDS Church. We hear it over and over in Conference: “Stay on the Ol’ Ship Zion and look to the Brethren, who can’t lead you astray.”
In my view, Denver Snuffer is the most reliable witness of our day.
Many of my questions, many of my concerns, many of my issues regarding deep and important questions about the gospel and eternity HAVE been answered by this obscure and interesting man the Church sees as a threat. Denver ironically has kept me in the gospel when I might have otherwise been tempted to throw the baby out with the bathwater as so many have when I discovered harsh truths about the Church. Truths the Church seemed to deliberately keep from me.
I hope the Church will come to see Snuffer as a friend to Mormonism. IF Snuffer has seen the Lord and IF Snuffer has been called to some work in these the Last Days (another dangerous bubble apparently) THEN perhaps we should at least read and consider what he is saying and ask God if it is from Him or not.
When I read his books, it makes me want to be a better person, turns me to scripture and makes me want to come unto Christ. If the Church determines that is “dangerous” then I am guilty as charged. Guilty of wanting to repent, be redeemed, and to have no more disposition to do evil.
God damn me I suppose, but for now, I’m inspired to hold fast to the gospel, in large part because Denver Snuffer helped me not throw away the restoration along with my many concerns I have with the Church. This is why I see him as unique. One the Church should see as a friend, if in fact they care about people not leaving the Gospel.
I cannot think of any other Church that excommunicates members as readily as we do; if at all. They have learn’t to live and even work with people of differing ideas. I suspect that they have learn’t to deal with past mistakes – like Catholics burning Protestant and vice versa – rather than throwing past leaders under the bus. High church and low church Episcopalians can co-exist. Orthodox and reformed Jews can co-exist. Mormons can’t. Until we can learn to co-exist there will always be tension, either open tension or bubbling under the surface. Maybe that’s why there seems to be a large number of blogs for such a relatively small membership.
Hello Anonymous,
I find the leaked powerpoint bubbles very interesting as well. Especially the Sabbath, but I doubt in the way they are thinking. That bubble, more than any other, has led me “away from the gospel” in that I don’t attend church on Sunday every week like I used to. A while back, I met and questioned a Seventh Day Adventist why they keep the sabbath on Saturday, and not Sunday. She said it is because Saturday has always been, and still is the seventh day that God wants us to keep holy, and that it was never changed in the Bible. I have looked it up, and she is right. The Catholic church “transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday … by the plenitude of that divine power which Jesus Christ bestowed upon her” when Constantine was “converted” to Christianity in an effort to facilitate the conversion of pagans who were accustomed to worshipping Mithra (the sun god) on Sunday. Now it’s supposedly “The Lord’s Day”, but not according to the God I worship. It is one of those false traditions we have inherited from our fathers, that nobody dares ask God to clarify because of it’s social ramifications. If the Mormon church suddenly moved their sabbath meetings from Sunday to Saturday, because that is the day God actually wants us to worship Him on, what would the immediate drop in attendance and revenues look like? It is also the only thing that causes me to raise an eyebrow at Denver Snuffer and the trail he is blazing. Are we more interested in the “restoration of the fullness of the gospel” from the eyes of Joseph, or from the eyes of Jesus? I absolutely believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and that the Book of Mormon is scripture. The only reason I think he failed to observe God’s sabbath day was because the issue never came up with him. It was never an issue with me until I impulsively asked myself – Why DO we keep the Sabbath on sunday? In every revelation I am aware of, God doesn’t just give us “the answer” when we haven’t asked “the question”. I understand the whole “one day in seven” principle, but that’s not what the commandment says, and it doesn’t matter where your heart is, or if that’s not what Sunday means to you. You’re not the one being worshipped. For all we know, Cain’s heart was in the right place when he and Abel went to worship God – probably on the Sabbath.
Genesis 4:
3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.
4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
6 And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.
God doesn’t want us to worship Him in the way that may be meaningful or convenient for us. God wants us to worship Him in the way that He finds meaningful, so that He can “teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths” (Isaiah 2:3) This is something I have wanted to talk with you about for awhile (and hope you will prayerfully consider), but alas you are “Anonymous” and I don’t know who you are, but I follow your blog and find in you a kindred spirit.
Thank you!
PS. My wife saw the chart and was surprised that “The Mall” is not illustrated.
Kyle,
The church does not seem to have a firm position on which day in seven “ought” to be kept holy. In predominantly Christian countries, meetings are held on Sunday, but in Israel, the sabbath is kept on Saturday (sundown Friday to sundown Saturday), and in Jordan, church meetings are held on Friday. I have also heard that in Hong Kong meetings are available any day of the week to accommodate the work schedules of members in that part of the world.
The Book of Mormon tells us that the members met “oft” and that when priests left their labor to teach, the people left their labor to listen. Even Christ taught that the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath. I believe in this instance, the spirit of the law is the relevant measure, and I tend to agree that sabbath observance is far from ideal, beginning with the fact that our Sundays are so booked with meetings and responsibilities that the day is often neither a day of rest nor a delight.
The sabbath day was part of the law of Moses. Jesus fulfilled the law of Moses (ALL OF IT) with his atonement. (See Alma 34: 13–14). During the Savior’s ministry to the Nephites when he overturned the law of Moses, he simply tells them to “… meet together oft” which they did. There is NOTHING said about keeping the Sabbath day holy with a list of rules about what is appropriate Sabbath day worship.
Snuffer is an imposter.
Can’t believe you’ve been taken in by him AB.
Would love to hear your reasons. Have you read much of what he has written?
According to the scriptures those who carry the mark of cain will not have claim to the priesthood in this life or in the life to come. This means litterally that “piest-hood” will never come alive in them. When Cain is told that sin lieth at the door means that when he rebelled he litterally opened the door for those who were predestined for perdition to come here and receive physical bodies. Predestined for perdition because they openly rebelled against God and his plan set forth in the pre-existence. The gentiles did not openly rebell but didn not stand with Christ therefore they were given a probationary time to choose what they will do. They have been given a “half time” to “preserve the root alive”, or in other words to maintain custodial rights to the houes of Israel for a short season. The house of Israel has a predestined redemption set aside for them. It is also called a preparatory redemption. Usually the only time that the scriptures talk of those of perdition is in warning to those of the house of Israel. Call it racism or whatever you choose but that is just the way it is, always has been and will always be. Christ will redeem those who The Father hath given him (Israel), and has prepared a way for the gentiles who repent and come to know the true points to the doctrine of Christ to recieve of the full blessings that is the right of The house of Israel. This is the message of the Book of Mormon, it is one of birth right, shemitah and tusheri and can be defined with two verses. One verse in the begining and another toward the end. Call them book ends if you will, but to understand the message contained in the Book of Mormon and to fully understand the true points to the doctrine of Christ we must understand 1nephi 13:33 and Mormon 5:10.
Have you read his “new scripture”? The man’s a fool to think he can hoodwink people with such nonsense. A lot of Snuffer believers are now abandoning him, and I don’t blame them.
And then there’s all the false doctrine!
To answer your question, I read PTHG a while back. Thought it was mostly very poor.
I am very surprised you even give Snuffer consideration. The reputation of you and your blog is seriously compromised now in my view.
Is the PowerPoint presentation still available?
That bubble diagram presents the problems as though they are all the fault of those who leave the church. It does not have bubbles for the problems that are the fault of the church. I see no bubbles for the numerous blasphemies: the Blood Atonement Doctrine’s blasphemous denial of the sufficiency of the blood of Christ; the blasphemous denial of God truly being the Creator (not merely the organizer) of physical matter; the blasphemous assertion that anyone’s, let alone everyone’s, salvation and eternal life are dependent upon the judgment of someone other than Christ; the blasphemous doctrine of ultimate incest–that God the Father, as a corporeal, exalted (and sexually aroused) Man, ejaculated semen from his penis into the vagina of his daughter Mary to conceive Jesus; the blasphemous, supremely hubristic doctrine that men, utter screw-ups all, become Gods, who, by the way, “inherit” their omniscience and omnipotence and omnibenevolence; and the blasphemous implication that God is essentially a pimp, directing women to become plural wives to his specially chosen VIPs, and directing married women to become wives to those VIPs–men other than their actual husbands whom they chose for themselves (all this, of course, under threat of death to the prophet by angel with drawn sword).
The general authorities who can’t be told they need to confront the blasphemous doctrines of the church are living in a bubble themselves.
Who or what is the significance of Robert Norman?
Mormonism has produced a whole string of false prophets. James Strang, Yankee Guesser Brigham Young, Warren Jeffs, Snuffer is just the latest.
“…I saw among the nations of the Gentiles the formation of a great church… I saw the devil that he was the founder of it.” (see 1 Nephi 13:4–9)
The scriptures actually mention the latest one here by name.
And the wild asses did stand in the high places, they SNUFFED up the wind like dragons; their eyes did fail, because there was no grass. O Lord, though our iniquities testify against us, do thou it for thy name’s sake: for our backslidings are many; we have sinned against thee. (Jer 14:6–7)
Do not be deceived by the wolves in sheep’s clothing who will be SNUFFED out when their time comes!
I believe Robert Norman used to write general conference talks for many of the apostles. I beleive he associates somewhat with Avraham Gileadi these days. Please check sources and do not quote me. I do not speak for him. He is a very kind man with a beautiful knolwedge of the scriptures.
The LDS church is a business masquerading as a church. Whatever effects their bottom-line is what is of concern to the 15 board members. That’s it.
Also, with regard to the sabbath, one ought to keep in mind that the calendar we use has been changed several times, adding days (and months!) while deleting WHOLE WEEKS!
As the earth travels around the sun (in 365.24 days per circuit) something LESS than a day must be added to the calendar every 4 years…and every hundred…and every four hundred…to keep it “accurate”. It’s PREPOSTEROUS to assume that ANYONE can (or ought to) figure out PRECISELY the EXACT day God set apart, in an unbroken chain of observance from whenever Moses descended the mount clutching those two tablets, to worship God on His holy day.
The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath. Kyle’s claim evidently justifies the presence of that bubble on this chart.
***
BTW, AB, wonderful summation of DS contributions to the restoration. I woke up this morning saying to myself: “Denver Snuffer has the Spirit of the Lord”, meaning he has “tapped into” that holy spirit that can, and ought to, pervade those who come unto Christ.
It has gotten to the point that I can read something — almost anything — posted on the internet and, regardless of content, identify its author. “This is good. This ‘tastes’ right. This is inspired.” And then I discover it was written by Denver Snuffer.
THAT indicates to me that what he says is true. “My sheep hear my voice.” NOT that Denver Snuffer is the Lord, heaven’s no! But “whether by mine own voice, or the voice of my servants, it is the same.” DS’s words bear the — I would say “unmistakable”, but I know MANY mistake His words — imprimatur of the Lord’s Spirit. DS has the words of eternal life, having received them from the Lord (by the power of the Holy Ghost). This, to me, is a testament of his divine calling, something we all can aspire to.
Note I did NOT say “We can and ought to aspire to [some church calling]”, like many imagine in the Church.
I heard the son of my former home teacher say “When I grow up, I want to be a bishop…so I can help people!” As if he couldn’t help people without being a bishop.
I couldn’t help but suspect that, like many, he was beguiled by the suggestion that “being a bishop” would somehow “make” him “somebody”; that he would, therefore, be “righteous” and “important” and “on the right path”. MANY feel this way…and, once they “serve”, they wear their service with pride.
In fact, many would say and do — or NOT do! — almost ANYTHING at the behest of their “file leader” to not forfeit this COVETED “prize”: the “endorsement” and “chance to serve” as a “church leader”.
But, as we’ve seen with Denver (and others), one may serve the church (at the discretion of “the Brethren”), but one may ONLY serve GOD after FIRST obtaining one’s “errand from the Lord”. That’s the more difficult challenge.
The LDS Church seems to run INDEPENDENT of the Lord nowadays. The leaders of the Church “deny the power of God” evidently working through Denver Snuffer, as well as his testimony of “the Holy One of Israel”. (See 2 Nephi 28:5.) They say to the people: “Hearken unto us, and hear ye our precept; for behold there is no God today, for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done his work, and he hath given his power unto men” — meaning, TO THEM, the Church leaders, the ones THEY see as embodying and personifying “the church”.
In fact, without THEM (in their eyes) there would be NO church!
Ironically, that’s what I taught all those years (when I was a Mormon): that the gospel (or church) rested upon the “backs” of the twelve apostles and when they, one by one, were killed (after Christ’s ministry), the gospel (or church) “fell” and shattered like a piece of glass, every little piece of “truth” going its way, to be embraced by this sect and that. That’s why “the gospel” (and church) needed to be “restored”.
So, you see, I was conditioned to believe we could NOT have the church (or the gospel) without THEM, the “brethren”.
But, no, Jesus said HE is the Vine and we (ALL of us) are the branches. Without HIM we (individually and collectively) have (and can do) nothing.
Clearly all of us (except for a few, like Denver Snuffer) are “cut off” from the presence of the Lord (to a great degree). He does NOT stand in our midst — or we in His presence — as we would LIKE to appreciate. And, clearly, this is NOT happening with the Brethren, either. Dallin Oaks made that painfully clear in his recent “testimony” wherein he revealed that he knew of NO MEMBER of the Twelve or First Presidency who had any type of supernatural experience like that of Alma the Younger.
If THESE men say “there is no God today” and “deny the power of God” to see God, entertain angels, receive revelation, etc.; if they deny the testimony of “the Holy One of Israel” born by the likes of Denver Snuffer or, as the Brethren did anciently, by MERE WOMEN who huddled around the tomb, looking for a way to get to the body of Jesus (out of love for Him), who testified boldly that He is the LIVING God (yet “the Brethren”, even then, disbelieved their report)…then the LDS Church is an irrelevancy. It is INCAPABLE of bringing us to Christ on its own. It’s ordinances, programs, etc., (like Scouting) are NOT ordained of God to bring us to Christ.
They may bring us to empathy for gays, teach us social skills, or help us develop our talents, etc.. But they will NOT bring us back into Christ’s presence (in and of themselves). The Church’s (or the Brethren’s) witness is that “coming unto Christ” in the flesh is not necessary (or even advisable); that seeking to meet and know Jesus face to face is, actually, a tool of the adversary, a lie, and an opportunity for deception TO BE AVOIDED.
They teach false doctrine and encourage others to embrace their own disbelief. (Like you, I grieve for them, knowing and loving them also as you do.)
But they have looked over their kingdom and their greatness and glory…and desire to preserve it unto themselves. (Or, perhaps, unto the Lord, to “hand it over” to Him upon His return.) They see that temple in Salt Lake and those ward houses and farms and factories and businesses and malls as “essential”. The members of the church? Not so much.
Unlike their “stuff”, they see people like Denver Snuffer to be “expendable” and “irredeemable”.
No minister of the Mormon Church who excommunicated me has ever come to reclaim me. These are NOT the Lord’s true shepherds who follow their Master. They follow the Brethren, who feed themselves first from the flock.
I’m sorry. I wish it were otherwise. But it is not. Sadly, you are not mistaken. The LDS Church went on life support sometime within the first few years of its birth. It remained in a coma ever since Joseph and Hyrum were taken. And, if DS is to be believed, it “died” in April, 2014, when “the Brethren” and the whole church sustained the very men who unrighteously excommunicated Denver Snuffer (and, that same week, excommunicated me).
This loss of authority is very evident to me because my (former) bishop called me as the credits for that very conference were still scrolling on the tv screen. (The LDS Church, ironically, excommunicates its MOST faithful and zealous members, while leaving slackers and inactives alone!) At my excommunication hearing, one of the high priests asked me “Do you believe that Jesus Christ is our PERSONAL Savior?” (He meant “Must we know and interact with Jesus PERSONALLY in order to be saved?” I said “Absolutely!” and he said “That’s false doctrine!”
Not a single “leader” in that room openly disagreed with him.
THAT’S when I knew the LDS Church was dead. The Lord had withdrawn His Spirit from them. They knew Him not.
I will leave it to the reader to infer how confidently they may trust in these men who claim they can (and have) been “saved” without ever interacting with or meeting the Lord PERSONALLY. You may infer what your prospects are by “following” them.
On the other hand, there is Denver Snuffer — by all indications, a faithful servant — who suggests something else entirely.
No one “has claim” to the priesthood. Pharaoh tried to claim it as a right because of his descent from Noah, but only a specific lineage can claim it as a right.
The rest, and that includes us (black, white or whatever), can qualify for it through righteous behaviour and commitments.
I am intrigued by the size of the bubbles. The diameter of each circle corresponds to a number. This means they conducted a survey and gathered data on why people are leaving the church. It is interesting that they separated “False Prophets,” “Denver Snuffer”, “Church has lost its way” and “Disagree with current policies.” I think they should have replaced a few of their options with “Church is in apostasy”, and that would absorb the vast majority of these bubbles.
Robin Hood,
I have not read Snuffer’s new scripture, do you know where I can find it? I really don’t know what to think of Snuffer, I’ll admit that I haven’t read much of his stuff and what I have read has only been in passing. I think he has brought out some good things, but he also has brought out some false doctrine. He has some characteristics of a false prophet, offering new forms of flattery to confused latter day saints. If he has indeed come up with “new scripture” I think I can be more definitive about him after reading it.
Thank you for your honest comment
I don’t agree that Denver Snuffer is or could be a help to the LDS church. He believes the scriptures, and the scriptures cannot co-exist with the LDS church. One has to change in order for them both to be in accord. The LDS church would have to let go of their entire hierarchy, all their money, their wards, their programs, their claims of priesthood, etc., and admit that the only difference between them and the rest of the Christian world is the fact that they have the Book of Mormon–which very few actually read and believe. That will never, ever happen.
I also think it is worth mentioning that considering Denver’s position on polygamy worth celebrating is actually a lot more similar to Ordain Women and John Dehlin-esque arguments than most Snufferites realize. Denver has explained that his position on the issue is his opinion, not revelation. To treat it otherwise is foolish, and to celebrate it as a way to make the gospel more palpable to those who find it disagreeable is great folly. We cannot be saved without accepting God with all his warts, or rather without accepting that what we perceive as warts are in fact our own limits of understanding and projection of our fallen desires and lusts onto his perfection. Whether polygamy is a thing or not is actually irrelevant except as a very evident measurement of our level of trust in God and pride in ourselves. There are plenty of similarly on-the-surface questionable things that God has commanded. We shouldn’t be in the business of trying to water down the gospel until it is attractive to fallen men and women and whatever their current social norms dictate is “right.” Instead, we should preach God in all his glory to help all men and women trust him absolutely, and humble themselves to the dust.
Not incidentally, I do not think the Snuffer movement has done this very well. I do not see people humbling themselves and connecting to God. I do not see people experiencing God to a greater extent than they did in the LDS church. Instead, I see a lot of people who have traded idols but not traditions. They are on just as ineffective a hamster wheel as they were in the LDS church, distracting themselves with variants of everything they had in the LDS church instead of actually repenting of their sins and relying on God instead of men. That is incredibly sad.
Robin Hood, if the idea of Denver producing new scripture is so ridiculous, what makes Joseph Smith’s claim to the same any less ridiculous? Back in 1830, we likely would have been saying all the same stuff about Joseph as people are now saying about Denver. Where do you draw the distinction between the two? On what basis should we judge Joseph’s claim? On what basis should we judge Denver’s claim? In both cases, it makes sense to suspend any judgment or conclusion until we have tested the fruit by reading it. Perhaps that’s exactly what you did. If so, what in this “newly revealed” Testimony of St. John strikes you as ridiculous?
What if the false prophets are being snuffed by snuffer?
I’ve since heard the same report Dan. And that he worked for Church Education. Sounds like a very nice person who the Church for whatever reason sees as a threat or an issue. Perhaps their suggestion is that he represents a type of person leaving the Church. I’m told he was very focused in his time in the Church teaching the unapproved doctrine of calling and election. Absolutely heretical ;).
“Do you believe that Jesus Christ is our PERSONAL Savior?” (He meant “Must we know and interact with Jesus PERSONALLY in order to be saved?” I said “Absolutely!” and he said “That’s false doctrine!”
Will, I agree with everything you wrote, thank you. It is absolutely true that most leaders in the LDS church don’t believe Christ is our personal savior any longer. I remember when my kids were little and they would talk all excitedly about Jesus and incorporate him into their pretend play. I remember my 3 yr old on the trampoline saying he was jumping so high he thought he was going to touch Jesus. Others viewed this as not reverent but I loved it! They were so excited about Jesus and His love. Christ wants us to be close to him and develop a deeply personal relationship with him. We are supposed to be one with him, as he is one with his father.
I agree with you that Denver has the spirit of our Lord. About 18 months ago a friend mentioned we should listen to these talks from a guy named Denver. I started listening knowing nothing about him, his message, etc. Previous to this my husband and I (more my husband) had been studying General Conference talks for months (starting with the first ones on lds.org). The difference between the talks and Denver’s was instantly recognizable. This started us on our journey of faith and discovering how far the LDS church has removed themselves from Christ’s pure doctrine.
I have listened to Denver’s talks a couple times each about a year ago. Since then I have been studying and devouring the scriptures, praying fervently all the time, and truly trying to come closer to Christ. This week I started listening again to some of the talks and I’m amazed at how much I missed the first few times! I listen to something and then say – ‘Oh! That’s what he meant when he said this. The Lord taught this same thing to me last week/month/etc.’
No, I do NOT follow Denver nor place his word above the Lord’s. However, I believe he is a true messenger and am so grateful for him. My family and I have found many true messengers from the Lord since branching outside the confines of the LDS church. Growing up I was told to ONLY go to church approved messengers and this is bogus! I am so grateful for true messengers from God who are courageous in declaring the truths and messages they have received.
As far as the Sabbath being on Saturday or Sunday – after researching about the sun worship, Constantine, etc. our family has decided to observe the Sabbath from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. It works for us and it’s a wonderful day. We also now do not observe typical holidays (Christmas, Easter, Halloween, etc.) after learning the history behind each.
Little John, the original document can be downloaded here from Denver’s site: http://denversnuffer.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/The-Testimony-of-St-John.pdf. At the following link, someone has done a side-by-side comparison with the KJV gospel of John: https://mampfoundation.wordpress.com/2017/02/21/2017-02-21-pt2/.
Let me just start with, while I appreciate your concern for my blog reputation, it’s not something I’m worried about. I’m not in the blog world as funny as that may sound. I rarely am online and never really read or comment anywhere. I wanted a place to say what I think and to make observations and to vent. I have no idea how many or how few read this blog nor do I worry about that. I have a unique visitor count on the website but frankly I don’t even pay attention to that and really should take it off. But, I do thank you for reading and for caring enough to speak your mind. I certainly don’t and can’t judge you or your heart. I simply don’t have the benefit of knowing you. On Snuffer, I read his first book in 2009 and did so with tremendous skepticism. I had read so much garbage in my life from Deseret Crook that Snuffer had no chance with me. I grew to hate the types of books that used words I cared so much about like Charity, Calling and Election, Redemption, Exaltation, Salvation, Holy Ghost, Born Again etc., words that meant something to me for as long as I can remember. “Charity for Dummies,” “Odds are You’ll be Exalted” (Sadly that’s a real title), “Faith, Hope, and Awesomeness.” As a dude not from Utah, I began to hate all things Utah, because I WAS believing and DID hope to receive greater light and knowledge and felt like I was being played by the latest Charlatan or MLM guru selling some new potion. So I sincerely do get where you may be coming from. Then a friend, who was and still is a very sincere LDS, and who had worked for Church Curriculum and CES, and in whom I placed a very unhealthy trust, gave me a book called the Second Comforter. Again, I read it with absolute skepticism. While reading I became intrigued a few times but was by no means convinced. I more or less set it aside for the time. But eventually I decided to read it again. This time my interest was more peaked. Then I noticed that this Snuffer character had like 6 more books. So I ordered them all. Before reading I was absolutely convinced that every single book would simply be a rehash of the first. SOS with a different cutesy book cover. As this was what I was used to w/ LDS inc. I took my books on our family vacation and planned on MAYBE reading them if and only if I could also read the entire Book of Mormon during that same timeframe. As I started to get through the other books by Snuffer, something very peculiar happened. The best way I can describe it is — a symphony of scriptures was presented to my view and to my heart in a way I had never before heard or seen. With each book, I became more and more convinced that Snuffer was speaking with a uniqueness that made me WANT to feast upon the scriptures, that made me thirst and hunger for more. I was sure to be disappointed with each new book I read and came away astounded. When I finally read PTHG, his last book at the time, I admit that it was a very difficult experience for me. I hated that book the first time I read it. It was the first time in my experience with Snuffer that I felt like his message might be at odds with the Church I was so loyal to and in love with. So, I set it aside and tried to set aside the whole issue for a time. I was not yet ready to see my Matrix or MY Truman Show for what it was. But with time and prayer and pondering and some very very difficult experiences, I finally became willing to accept that maybe, just maybe, The Church was not all that I wanted it to be. I picked up more of Snuffer’s material (it seemed endless) – I found his blog, I listened to and or read lectures, and I tried to test his fruits. All I will say is that the experience has brought about tremendous personal fruits for me. Fruits I cannot and will not deny. Call me crazy. Be convinced I’m deceived. It doesn’t hurt me and I’m not threatened by your viewpoint. To the contrary I welcome it. BUT like I’ve been saying now for two years, we Mormons are so quick to embrace the romantic ideals of a prophet (ie Joseph), we tell people to leave their false traditions of Catholicism (that’s my DNA) or whatever and to jump on the prophet, seer, and revelator bandwagon, BUT are we perhaps least likely of all “faiths” to consider the Lord could or would do anything of the sort in our day? I would have said I was crazy just a few years ago. For me, I had to be unconverted to the LDS Church to a agree in order to consider other possibilities. But none of that would have happened if I had not read Snuffer’s books, with a sincere heart, and with a desire to know if he was a liar like all the others or if he was telling the truth. If he’s a scammer — there will never be one better in our day. Joseph was the biggest scammer of them all most recently by most people’s accounts. But as Ryan points out, we are told to read, ponder, and pray and yes to beware of false prophets and to bring the matter to God, with that seed planted in our fertile hearts, to hopefully know whether the seed is from God or not. I wish the Church would teach the same regarding their works. I wish we had the dilemma of New Scripture from them. I wish we’d ask investigators to pray whether those 15 men or any man was a prophet, after doing the required due diligence. I’d highly recommend anyone to read Snuffer’s works and to take the matter to the Lord. I think you and I can agree that skepticism is easy. And the more skeptical a person is the smarter many perceive them. But choosing true beliefs is the harder lot. Lo here and lo theres are everywhere. Well – I don’t like commenting, but wanted to reply to you Robin Hood. The little I know of you and the few comments I have read from you endear me to you. I think over an approved beverage in some interesting place in the world, I’d thoroughly enjoy getting to know you. In the meantime, I wish you the very best and hope God will continue to shower his blessings upon you.
Hey AB,
I just want to add my second witness to what you said about Snuffer. I first ran across his books in 2011, bought the Second Comforter, and promptly put it on a shelf for 6 months, because I was afraid to read it.
But when I finally put aside my fears and began reading, I found that book was an absolute flood of light. It was delicious to my soul and awakened me to a much deeper relationship with Christ, as well as a much more powerful understanding of scripture. The same has been true for me with the other books Snuffer has written.
Sure, it’s easy to point the finger of scorn, but as has been noted, how would we have responded to Joseph Smith and his claims in that day? Is this not the same pattern?
The Lord has set His hand again to continue and complete His work. That opportunity has now bypassed the LDS hierarchy and is occurring through other servants the Lord has called. I know this personally from conversations with the Lord. It is at once both overwhelming and delightful to see the Lord’s hand manifest. The fact that the LDS church views Snuffer as a threat to “the gospel” is indicative of just how ignorant they are of the Lord’s workings in our day.
Thank you for standing up and proclaiming. God bless you, anonymous brother.
I do agree that DS may have helped in snuffing out some false prophets down at 47 E. South Temple. But that doesn’t make him a true one.
From what I know, he became a polygamous
I’m sorry, who became a polygamist?
Robert Norman. From what I understand he was married to (2) women at the same time, and that’s what got him into hot water and the reason he had to resign from the LDS church.
Somewhat surprised that Divorce does not appear as an “issue” bubble. Also, as an indication of the PC influence in the corporate offices, Homosexuality does not appear as its own bubble. Spencer W. Kimball was unavailable for comment.
Thanks Bishop your thoughts on Denver Snuffer are the same as mine. The only possible reason the powers that be,needed to get rid of him was the realization that he had something that they couldn’t control,his message ,not him,his message . Like it or not we have two choices either believe it or disregard it.
Rob, if you think people in the “Snuffer movement,” as you call it, are not humbling themselves and connecting to God, you don’t know the people I know. A lot of people have connected to God. Many have seen the Lord and talked with him, but they don’t broadcast it to the world. It comes up in casual conversation, most often. In passing.
Yes, there are the crazies. There are those who are filled with pride. There are those who seem to have “prophet envy” in regards to Denver. There are those who have anger, jealousies, resentments, jarring, contention. There are those who proclaim, in one way or another, follow me! And they damn those who disbelieve them to hell. There are those who claim themselves to be “sighted” (that is, able to see into heaven whilst those around them cannot, and those who disagree with their “seeing” are consigned to being servants of the devil).
There are all manner of people in this restorationist movement, all along the spectrum. But there are still good fruits from what Denver has been and is preaching. There are people seeing angels and God. There are people repenting, refusing to engage in anger and persecution against those who persecute them (whether their persecutors are in the movement or not).
Robert Norman is not a polygamous. That is a rumor started right after he ended his membership. I know Bob, and that isn’t true. It was repeated on a podcast authoritatively, but incorrectly. It’s unfortunate anytime a rumor is spread and it becomes a cancer to someone’s name.
This is not true. There are many rumors being spread about him which are lies.
Rob,
Apologies in advance for the length of this response. Hopefully you’ll read it and respond.
I have observed you online for some time in various forums and here and thought I would try to add to the conversation you seem to be attempting to foster. I sense you are very sincere in your desires to get people to consider certain things you appear to see as vital and/or detrimental to faith in Christ and I respect your efforts. I can’t speak for others, but I thought my experience can possibly add light to your observations and declarations.
A little context: I am an independent believer in Christ (I still attend LDS services for the sake of my family, but not longer consider myself a believer/adherent of the LDS Church) who accepts and believes the testimonies and teachings of both Joseph Smith and Denver Snuffer. I have for decades made a diligent and prayerful study the teachings of Joseph Smith and church history, and despite the many challenges that have caused the likes of John Dehlin and others to disbelieve, I choose to believe Joseph’s witness based on the fruits of his ministry and the fruits his teachings have born in me. Likewise I have also studied closely virtually everything Denver has written and said publically. I have had many interactions with him personally. I have attended many of the public addresses/sermons he has given and I have interacted/worshipped/fellowshipped often with others who accept his testimony. As with Joseph, based on the fruits of Denver’s ministry and the fruits his teachings of Christ have born in me, I choose to believe his witness. I do this of sound mind and acknowledging fully the obstacles to believing anyone who declares “Hey I saw Jesus, and YOU can too!”. I have done as Alma directs in chapter 32 and I can say for myself that I know that the seeds/word from both Joseph and Denver are good. What’s more, I respect that others do not believe–I don’t fault them for that. As a side note, I have had a number of interactions with others claiming to have either seen/met the Lord and or had revelations from God, and for me I have observed and perceive rather stark distinctions between so many others who claim divine manifestations (and have therefore not believed nearly all of their testimonies) and both Joseph and Denver. I say that because I am willing to consider what others have to say and claim and then test their fruits. I don’t claim to be an authority or have authority on any of these matters–I’m just one flawed guy trying to put Jesus’ word to the test.
With that said, may I offer some perspective? Your use of the term “Snufferites”, whether intended or not, seems to indicate a level of judgment, perhaps even disdain and dismissiveness for some people who believe Denver to be telling the truth. That ad-hominem characterization allows you to lump a rather diverse group of people with very wide ranging levels of belief and adherence into one mass of misguided people. Moreover, you appear to accuse some with whom you disagree of idolatry, a serious charge. If you are trying to “recover” people who are going astray, may I suggest that your willingness to paint a group of people with such a broad and disparaging brush may perhaps not be an effective way to minister to them. I’m personally not offended by your use of the pejorative “snufferite” and you’re welcome to call me that, or even an idolater, and I won’t take offense. As for me, I am in no way a “snufferite” as I do not follow the man, idolize him and place him between me and my Lord. I take very seriously Denver’s oft repeated warning that if I do so, I will be damned. I have spoken with Denver about this and I have found him both privately and publicly to be quite meek in his approach to teaching the gospel–preferring at every turn to deflect attention away from himself and to point the individual to the Lord. He dissuades anyone from relying on him as a source of knowledge–just try asking him questions and you’ll see what I mean. I’m amazed at the number of people who either accuse him of things he has never done (profit from his believers) or seem to be waiting breathlessly for him to start another church or begin preying on young women (heard this the other day on a podcast), etc. Well…it’s been 10 years and he’s been true to his word thus far. If he’s going to start “profiting” from all of this, mind you he’s not a young man–he might just kick the bucket before he sees a penny–he’d better get to it. But I digress.
A few words regarding those who believe Denver. Like you I have noticed varying levels of zealotry, pride, folly and contention on occasion from the interactions (nearly all online) of some people who seem to believe Denver’s words. I hasten to add, I have noted that most who thus engage have tended to disbelieve and distance themselves from or denounce Denver and his “followers” over time. Those who are eager to contend eventually become adversaries if they began as believers. Contention is truly of the devil and is a fruit of the individual to pay careful attention to. Though there have been a few contenders among the “snufferites”, my experience with most of these people you thus characterize have displayed the opposite–a hesitance to engage in contention and a reluctance to display pride. We are all imperfect creatures, but I have been pleasantly surprised at the number of people who believe Denver who are also working to become peaceable followers of Jesus.
Regarding idolatry, I personally don’t know a single person who idolizes Denver as you accuse some of doing. It seems likely there are some, but in my experience, those who sincerely seek to follow the Lord and accept Denver’s testimony tend to be the least idolatrous and most Christ-focused people I’ve ever encountered–and I’ve had close interactions with sincere people of many different faiths my whole life. I have seen a number of believers in this “movement”, as you call it, who are striving to be kinder, more meek, more patient, less willing to judge, slower to contend, quicker to forgive. Far from sanctified, I have seen people willing to admit their weakness and their sins. I have seen people eager to share their hearts, time and money–my family has been a recipient of astonishing and enormous financial generosity in a time of tremendous need from a group of “believers” who without my asking for aid (and without being a part of their group), took the time to see our need and of their own free will, fill it. I’ve never seen before such individual, voluntary private charity–never before experienced anything close to that from the church. I in turn have experienced the fruits of putting to the test what Denver, Joseph and the Book of Mormon all teach about imparting substance one to another. Delicious fruit indeed. I have never before seen so many people who search the scriptures with more diligence than those I know who believe Denver’s testimony. I have not encountered closed minds, but searchers for truth whose minds are open to further light and knowledge. I generally have not found people who implicitly trust Denver, but rather take to the Lord what he says for confirmation. I for the most part have not found them puffed up with pride, but rather to be among the humble followers of Christ. These fruits and more that I have observed in others, and in Denver himself, have encouraged me to repent and turn to God. The fruit of my re-baptism was an outpouring of the Holy Ghost that I had previously not experienced and will never forget. Perhaps this group of ragtag believers, myself included will not fully rise up and sufficiently repent and actually achieve Zion–there’s a long way to go and much to be done (especially by me)–but so far, I’m encouraged.
Now, a word regarding polygamy. This is a subject you have returned to again and again and therefore it appears you believe it to be a true principle. Am I mistaken? I have been and remain truly open to whatever is true on the subject. Previously, I have believed that polygamy is true–I come from a long line of prominent polygamists. I have also in the past been agnostic on the subject. After carefully study, I now choose to believe that Joseph was not lying and that he never practiced it. I find Denver’s and others thesis to be compelling. You are correct that Denver has not declared by “revelation” that polygamy is an incorrect principle. He has laid out a strong case for consideration and has left it to people to work through it. However, he has also declared that he has been visited by Joseph and Hyrum. Having spoken to him on the subject, I can tell you he is not equivocal. I don’t speak for Denver, but I think it would be a mistake to look at what he has laid out as nothing more than mere “opinion”. It deserves more careful consideration than that, and of course, it should be taken to the Lord.
So, I would ask you: do you, Rob, have actual knowledge that polygamy is a true principle? By knowledge, I don’t mean a “spiritual” confirmation, a dream, or other experience that gave you assurance. Have you spoken to Jesus Christ, face to face, and had him declare to you in plain humility that polygamy is His principle and that it is true, and eternally so? Are you willing to declare that? This is important because you have made the argument that those who disbelieve polygamy are “setting up stakes”, not trusting God, and looking to make the gospel more “palpable”. Since you are so forceful in your argument that we should remain open to polygamy (more than that you seem to imply that really we should embrace it), I think it very important that you clarify whether or not it is just your “opinion” or whether you actually “know”. Here is an illustration of why I believe it is vital that you clarify this:
My brother is a believer in polygamy–he has studied the issue in depth and has believed the teachings of Brigham through Wilford. He believes that John Taylor received a true revelation on the subject. One of the reasons that he knows it is a true principle is because of an encounter with a man who bore witness to my brother that he had been visited by the Lord, by the Father and the Father’s “wives”. This man told my brother that polygamy is a true principle. My brother accepted his testimony. That kind of testimony (and remember what Joseph teaches about human testimony being the genesis of true faith) is important because it puts to the test a principle that frankly can’t be proven, or disproven with certainty by the historical record (the historical record does not, contrary to the views of Palmer, Dehlin and others, convict Joseph. Yes the record raises serious questions, but it does not convict). So, will you add to that man’s testimony that you have seen the Lord and he has told you the principle is true? I, for one am open to what you have to say. If you won’t or can’t declare actual revelation from God that polygamy is true, then might I suggest you try gentleness and persuasion and then perhaps people like myself, if we are deceived, may by your pure knowledge, patience, long-suffering and love unfeigned, be recovered.
I agree with you. I have seen, heard about, or read about as many people leaving the church as a result of those two factors as anything else.
Hello Eric,
Yes, Jesus did fulfill “every jot and tittle” of the law of Moses, but that does not give us a free license then to lie, murder, commit adultery, or break any of the commandments that God wrote with His own finger in stone. What we are to no longer observe are the “performances” and “ordinances” of the law.
2 Nephi 25:30 “And, inasmuch as it shall be expedient, ye must keep the performances and ordinances of God until the law shall be fulfilled which was given unto Moses.”
Alma 30:3 “Yea, and the people did observe to keep the commandments of the Lord; and they were strict in observing the ordinances of God, according to the law of Moses; for they were taught to keep the law of Moses until it should be fulfilled.”
Alma 25:15 “Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet, for it was not all fulfilled. But notwithstanding the law of Moses, they did look forward to the coming of Christ, considering that the law of Moses was a type of his coming, and believing that they must keep those outward performances until the time that he should be revealed unto them.”
3 Nephi 9:
17 And as many as have received me, to them have I given to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me redemption cometh, and in me is the law of Moses fulfilled.
18 I am the light and the life of the world. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.
19 And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.
4 Nephi 1:12 “And they did not walk any more after the performances and ordinances of the law of Moses; but they did walk after the commandments which they had received from their Lord and their God, continuing in fasting and prayer, and in meeting together oft both to pray and to hear the word of the Lord.”
God still expects us to keep His laws, and the only thing Jesus ever overturned were the man-made commandments and traditions of the Pharisees. Jesus FULFILLED the law that He gave, of which he was the type and shadow, or embodiment of.
Colossians 2:
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
The Sabbath is neither an ordinance, nor “against us”. As Ranae and William both point out, “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath”. (Mark 2:27) The Sabbath existed before Sinai (Exodus 16:26 “Six days ye shall gather [manna]; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none”), and even before sin.
Genesis 2:
2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Jesus never failed to keep the Sabbath day holy, and even in death He rested on the seventh day. Jesus anticipated that His disciples would be keeping the Sabbath after His death when He said in Matthew 24:20 “But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day”. We’ll even be keeping the sabbath in the new earth.
Isaiah 66:
22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.
You are right in that there is not a list of rules about what is appropriate Sabbath day worship, but there is a definitive day in which it is to be observed.
Exodus 20:
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
If you want to have the seal of God, there you go. The sabbath is God’s notary seal declaring His:
1. Name (the Lord)
2. Authority or Office (made – He is the Creator)
3. Dominion or Jurisdiction (heaven and earth)
Ezekiel 20:
19 I am the Lord your God; walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments, and do them;
20 And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God.
Exodus 31:
12 ¶And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you.
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
Sign, holy, put to death, rest, perpetual, for ever … it sounds pretty important to me.
THE LAW OF MOSES HAS BEEN FULFILLED (ALL OF IT)
“And, inasmuch as it shall be expedient, ye must keep the performances and ordinances of God UNTIL THE LAW SHALL BE FULFILLED which was given unto Moses.” (2 Nephi 25:30)
“Yea, and the people did observe to keep the commandments of the Lord; and they were strict in observing the ordinances of God, according to the law of Moses; for they were taught to keep the law of Moses UNTIL IT SHOULD BE FULFILLED.” (Alma 30:3)
“Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses AS YET, FOR IT WAS NOT ALL FULFILLED. But notwithstanding the law of Moses, they did look forward to the coming of Christ, considering that THE LAW OF MOSES WAS A TYPE of his coming, and believing that they must keep those outward performances UNTIL THE TIME THAT HE SHOULD BE REVEALED UNTO THEM.” (Alma 25:15)
And as many as have received me, to them have I given to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me redemption cometh, and IN ME IS THE LAW OF MOSES FULFILLED. I am the light and the life of the world. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. And ye shall offer up unto me NO MORE the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings SHALL BE DONE AWAY, for I WILL ACCEPT NONE of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings. (3 Nephi 9:17–19)
“And they DID NOT WALK ANY MORE AFTER THE PERFORMANCES AND ORDINANCES OF THE LAW OF MOSES; but they did walk after the commandments which they had received from their Lord and their God, continuing in fasting and prayer, and in meeting together oft both to pray and to hear the word of the Lord.” (4 Nephi 1:12)
And now ye have said that salvation cometh by the law of Moses. I say unto you that it is expedient that ye should keep the law of Moses as yet; but I say unto you, that THE TIME SHALL COME WHEN IT SHALL NO MORE BE EXPEDIENT TO KEEP THE LAW OF MOSES. (Mosiah 13:27)
Yea, and the people did observe to keep the commandments of the Lord; and they were strict in observing the ordinances of God, according to the law of Moses; for they were taught to keep the law of Moses UNTIL IT SHOULD BE FULFILLED. (Alma 30:3)
Therefore, it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice, and then shall there be, or it is expedient there should be, a stop to the shedding of blood; THEN SHALL THE LAW OF MOSES BE FULFILLED; yea, IT SHALL BE FULFILLED, EVERY JOT AND TITTLE, and none shall have passed away. And behold, this is the whole meaning of the law, every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and THAT GREAT AND LAST SACRIFICE WILL BE THE SON OF GOD, yea, infinite and eternal. (Alma 34:13–14)
Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own received me not. And the scriptures concerning my coming are fulfilled. 17 And as many as have received me, to them have I given to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, BY ME REDEMPTION COMETH, AND IN ME IS THE LAW OF MOSES FULFILLED. (3 Nephi 9:15–17)
And it came to pass that when Jesus had said these words he perceived that there were some among them who marveled, and WONDERED WHAT HE WOULD CONCERNING THE LAW OF MOSES; for they understood not the saying that old things had passed away, and that all things had become new. And he said unto them: Marvel not that I said unto you that old things had passed away, and that all things had become new. Behold, I say unto you that THE LAW IS FULFILLED THAT WAS GIVEN UNTO MOSES. Behold, I am he that gave the law, and I am he who covenanted with my people Israel; therefore, THE LAW IN ME IS FULFILLED, FOR I HAVE COME TO FULFIL THE LAW; THEREFORE IT HATH AN END. Behold, I do not destroy the prophets, for as many as have not been fulfilled in me, verily I say unto you, shall all be fulfilled. And because I said unto you that old things have passed away, I do not destroy that which hath been spoken concerning things which are to come. For behold, the covenant which I have made with my people is not all fulfilled; but THE LAW WHICH WAS GIVEN UNTO MOSES HATH AN END IN ME. (3 Nephi 15:2–8)
Wherefore, BY FAITH WAS THE LAW OF MOSES GIVEN. But in the gift of his Son hath God prepared a more excellent way; and IT IS BY FAITH THAT IT HATH BEEN FULFILLED. (Ether 12:11 The words of Moroni.)
Wherefore, my brethren, YE ALSO ARE BECOME DEAD TO THE LAW BY THE BODY OF CHRIST; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. (Rom 7:4)
Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. FOR CHRIST IS THE END OF THE LAW for righteousness to every one that believeth. (Rom 10:1–4)
KNOWING THAT A MAN IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW, BUT BY THE FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and NOT BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW: FOR BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW SHALL NO FLESH BE JUSTIFIED…. FOR I THROUGH THE LAW AM DEAD TO THE LAW, THAT I MIGHT LIVE UNTO GOD. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: FOR IF RIGHTEOUSNESS COME BY THE LAW, THEN CHRIST IS DEAD IN VAIN. (Gal 2:16–21)
And the church did MEET TOGETHER OFT, to fast and to pray, and to speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls. 6 And THEY DID MEET TOGETHER OFT to partake of bread and wine, in remembrance of the Lord Jesus. (Moroni 6:5)
THERE ARE ONLY TWO COMMANDMENTS
But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, THOU SHALT LOVE THE LORD THY GOD WITH ALL THY HEART, AND WITH ALL THY SOUL, AND WITH ALL THY MIND. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF. On these two commandments hang ALL THE LAW and the prophets. (Matt 22:34–40)
AB, your journey mirrors my own. While I have yet to see much personal fruit it more reflects more on my efforts and not God’s willingness. What makes Denver’s message stand out to me is that he uses the scriptures to make his arguments. He doesn’t cherry-pick a single verse to base an entire belief system on like the LDS church does with its leadership (Amos 3:7). I’m still working through it but Denver stands unique in that he’s held my attention this long and inspires hope in me that there is something to all of this and I want to find it.
@Eric
What would? What would a true prophet look like to you?
@Robin Hood:
One of the indications of a true prophet is that they minimize their own importance, and warn people not to become obsessed with them. One of the most powerful aspects of Denver’s message is that he follows that pattern — he warns people to not trust him, but to anchor their trust in Christ alone. He teaches that the Lord will manifest the truth to each of us as we seek with real intent. That is what Christ taught (John 7:17), and it’s what the Book of Mormon teaches (Moroni 10).
This is in sharp contrast to the “we’ll never lead you astray” mantra that is put forward by the mainstream officers within the church. They teach us to anchor our trust in them, in their policies, pronouncements, and handbooks. “Obey us, and our interpretations of the law, and you will be saved” — that is underlying core of their message.
To some extent, all mortals are false prophets (with the sole exception of the Savior during his mortal ministry), because all mortals have blind spots and misunderstandings about various matters — even if they have seen God and had visions. Men are not to be trusted or followed without reservation (2 Nephi 28:31).
Denver knows this and embraces it, and he warns of damnation to anyone who follows him. In this limited way, he has announced himself as a “false prophet” of sorts, and he doesn’t want followers. What he wants is for people to become their own spiritual authorities. He wants people to understand that the only “absolute” or “true prophet” that will ever exist in your life is the Holy Ghost, which will lead you to the Savior.
In this limited way, Denver would agree with you that he is an “imposter” and a “fool”. But unfortunately, you have used those words in a very demeaning and misguided way, and I’m not convinced that you have made anything close to a legitimate inquiry into his teachings or ideas.
In the best sense of the phrase, Denver is a “true messenger”. The Lord has chosen him, appeared to him, commissioned him with certain messages to deliver to the world. Denver hasn’t convinced me of that reality — the Holy Ghost has.
@eric
I think that Denver’s name is divinely meaningful, but not in the way that you have suggested in relation to Jeremiah 14.
I think that AB’s counter interpretation might be right — that because Denver is the real McCoy, his very existence blows out the false candles of the those who are leading people astray. The fact that he has specifically been named as a threat to the mainstream hierarchy is evidence that he is a powerful person.
I also think that Denver’s name has a connection to Malachi 3 and Zechariah 13. In these chapters, the Lord compares his people to gold or precious elements that have been separated out or refined.
In the field of mining, a snuffer tool is a suction device that is used for separating gold particles out of the water, after the gold has been washed and panned to get it away from the dirt and grit.
It is not a coincidence, in my opinion, that Denver’s name is the name of a tool for separating out gold from dirt. Nearly everyone that I know who takes Denver seriously is a person of high spiritual caliber and an honest seeker of truth — a gold-caliber person, in the spiritual sense.
This blog by AB is a good example of that, and so is Adrian Larsen’s blog To the Remnant, same with Pure Mormonism by Rock Waterman.
These writers have a lot of precious metal in them. They are not petty, or mean, or followers of other men. They are independent disciples of Christ, and they invite others to pursue that same path — to be independent and self-accountable disciples of Christ. They recognize Denver’s value, but they don’t “follow him”, or take orders from him. They answer to the Savior, and only to him.
Meanwhile, tragically, within mainstream Mormonism, following the Savior has been redefined as following and obeying local and general church officers.
One other note about names — Joseph Smith — a smith is one who works metal, refines it, separates it. Names are sometimes powerful and meaningful. They can be titles.
Figuratively speaking, Joseph Smith fired a ton of ore, broke it up, got it into the furnace, and into the water for sifting. And now messengers like Denver have been sent to complete the task, collect the gold, help to refine it further.
Ugh…Denver Snuffer?
Pass. Sorry. I enjoy your blog, but I’m not going to ride the “Snuffer” wave either.
A few things indicate a true prophet. All true and holy prophets tell the same story. The story as contained in the word of God which can be found in the Bible and the Book of Mormon. True prophets are schooled by God through decades of excruciating learning at the hands of God. The experiences of Job are not unique, all the prophets could tell a similar one. They have all been through the refiners fire.
AB and Eric, The Jews used a couple of ways to tell who a true prophet was. Of course the easiest way they used was if their prophecies actually came to pass. Of course there is a problem with that because often there are dual fulfillment as in the case of the destruction of Nineveh. Nineveh was indeed destroyed as Jonah prophesied but not until I think it was 613bc. So that is one way.
The other way is are the prophecies written in the language of the Lord which is metaphorical. If you look at the revelations to Joseph Smith they are metaphorical and in fact are sealed as a result of that language. What I mean by sealed is you cannot understand the language unless you have been taught that language or have the spirit of prophecy. There are only two people I know who understand that metaphorical language and that is Avraham Gileadi and Robert Smith (not the BYU one).
Years ago I read many of the unpublished revelations to John Taylor. You can find his unpublished revelations at the library. There isn’t any metaphorical language in those revelations. They don’t have the rich metaphorical language of the real revelations that Joseph or any of the ancient prophets received. Look at a great metaphorical vision of Ezekiel 47:1–12 if you want to know what I mean by metaphorical. If you understand the metaphors then you understand this vision. D&C 133 is another great one about the gathering of the Tribes of Israel in the last days. It cannot be understood.
The next thing you need to look for are the prophecies consistent with the former revelations. Do they contradict those revelations. Isaiah tells us that the Lord is watching over us in silence at this time near the end. In other words there is no revelations being given today (Isaiah 29:9–10).
9. Procrastinate, and become bewildered; preoccupy yourselves, until you cry for help. Be drunk, but not with wine; stagger, but not from strong drink.
10. The Lord has poured out on you a spirit of deep sleep: he has shut your eyes the prophets; he has covered your heads, the seers.
So if a person claims a revelation then they are in violation of Isaiah and what he said. The same is true of D&C 101:43–62 where the Lord tells us that revelation was cut off to the Church after 1847. A quick check of the D&C and you see that this is the case. The one revelation to Kimball was a lie and phony.
So I would apply these tests to Denver Snuffer or whomever comes along claiming revelation. Is the revelation consistent with former revelations, do they have metaphorical language and are they fulfilled. If you can match all of these things then perhaps you have one.
Thing of it is right now the scriptures tell me that there aren’t any prophets sent at all according to Isaiah and the D&C and therefore by default all those claiming revelation right now are phony and their revelations should be suspect.
@ Michael,
Don’t blame you mate.
My point exactly. The law of MOSES, not the law of GOD. What I am saying is that the 10 commandments sum up the law of God, almost as succinctly as the 2 commandments you still believe in.
Matthew 22:
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
1) Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind
– Thou shalt have no other gods before me
– Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or … bow down thyself to them, nor serve them
– Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
– Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy
– Honour thy father and thy mother
2) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself
– Thou shalt not kill
– Thou shalt not commit adultery
– Thou shalt not steal
– Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour
– Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house … nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s
There are not as you say “only two commandments”, rather “on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets”. Hang as in to sustain, not hang as in to kill. The 10 commandments are as applicable today, as they ever were. We do not keep them to establish our own righteousness. We keep them to submit ourselves to God out of love. Which ones do you think God no longer cares about?
@iterry54
Excellent comments.
I really must read more of Avraham Gileadi’s work.
If Mr. Snuffer had a divine visitation, good for him. It matters not to me. It would not qualify him or authorize him to be God’s spokesman to me. If God has a message for me, He will convey it in my mind. If I am not worthy to receive a truth in my mind from my Maker, why would I be worthy to hear it from someone else who received it in his mind? If God wants me to understand and embrace a truth, He will give it directly to my mind, just as He will give it directly to all the other countless billions of minds that He has created (yes, created). To me, Mr. Snuffer is just another person seeking truth and expressing what he believes. I don’t judge him, but I will never follow (as in disciple follow) him (or any other person, for that matter). I just don’t buy the guru concept anymore. I am not looking for some person to be my guide to the mysteries and the truth path. I am an utter jackass, but I don’t know if I am a worse jackass than, say, Snuffer or Monson; and I don’t know whether I am a better jackass than the ex-con druggie who lives up the street from me.
I understand that some claiming to be prophets have said or written that God delivers the truth through specially chosen individuals. But, even if it is true, it is exactly what a false one would say if setting up a hoax. ‘Pssst. I saw the Lord, and he told me I am his guy, and he said he will never tell anybody else the big truths, so you need to get them from me. By the way, he wants you to give me everything of value and importance to you. You can refuse, of course, but you need to know that he also put me in charge of who gets to go to heaven.’ Anyone with enough arrogance, even in the form of feigned humility, could make that claim; so how would you ever know if you are dealing with a true or false prophet?
No, I am done with trying to sort out the true and false prophets. I will proceed with reason and conscience, which are available to all; and I will seek no shortcuts, insider tips, secret passwords, secret gestures, or magic tricks. If it turns out that some of you, or a 144,000 of you, see the Lord and go on to inherit omnipotence, I will be the guy bobbing on the surface of the lake of fire and brimstone shouting, “I’m still not as much of a jackass as Bill Maher!”
I think you answered your own questions. The ten commandments (along with the rest of the law of Moses) have been ‘swallowed up’ in these two great commandments.
In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go ye know, and THE WAY ye know. Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and HOW CAN WE KNOW THE WAY? Jesus saith unto him, I AM THE WAY, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:2–6).
During Jesus’ ministry in both the old and new worlds, He gave us a SIMPLE GOSPEL message comprised of a few things He called THE WAY. Those few things are:
Believe His message
Repent
Have faith
Receive baptism by water followed by the baptism of fire
Jesus then gave us the sacrament as a means of remembering Him
That is the sum total of what Jesus required us to do in order to live and walk in THE WAY.
Nowhere in the Bible or Book of Mormon did Jesus or his apostles and prophets outline THE WAY as a complicated set of requirements or a list of things we must do. We’re not asked to spend our time and means at church or in the service of a church or to submit to the rules of men.
So far as I can tell, life is intended to be a beautiful experience of living simply, searching the scriptures, serving the poor, and walking with God in THE WAY.
For behold, again I say unto you that IF YE WILL ENTER IN BY THE WAY, and receive the Holy Ghost, it will show unto you all things what ye should do. Behold, THIS IS THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST, and there will be no more doctrine given until after he shall manifest himself unto you in the flesh. And when he shall manifest himself unto you in the flesh, the things which he shall say unto you shall ye observe to do. (2 Nephi 32:5–6)
great point Friend!!!
RobinH, you should look at A Gileadi because Isaiah has ALL the answers for us in the last days. He solves the dilemma for us because of the apostasy, and tells us what we are to do about it. A Gileadi is pretty good but he doesn’t interpret all the verses. In fact very few of the verses are interpreted by Gileadi. He did provide a mostly correct translation.
Robert Smith completed the commentary of Isaiah in about 2001. He first published the work in 1992 and then updated the work. His work is complete and every verse is explained clearly and completely. Even those dark seemly impossible verses are all explained clearly. Gileadi made a mostly correct translation with some great comments about the Davidic King of the Last Days and Robert Smith made a complete commentary of the work. They both stand as two witnesses to the Lord’s work in the last days. And as an added bonus neither one claims to be a prophet which is prophesied we would not have at the time of the 2nd coming by Hosea chapters 2 and 3, D&C 101:43–62, Isaiah 29:9–10 and chapter 18, and Ezekiel 13 just to name a few.
I should have mentioned in that last post that though the Lord left us without LIVING prophets He opened up for our understanding the old prophets who preach to us today. They tell us about the apostasy and how we are to repent of that apostasy. They prepare us for the coming tribulation and other events of the last days. Isaiah is the most important of these ancient prophets.
Isaiah 29:11–12
11. For you the sum of vision has become as the words of a sealed book that they give to one who is learned, saying, Please read this, and he answers, I cannot; it is sealed.
12. Or if they give it to one who is unlearned, saying, Please read this, he answers, I am unlearned.
These verses have traditionally been interpreted as a prophecy of the coming of the Book of Mormon and there is a small similarity. The story of Martin Harris taking part of the translation and some symbols to Professor Anthon is well known. When Martin Harris told him part of the book was sealed, he is reported to have said, “I cannot read a sealed book.” He then asked for his signed document, which he tore up because he did not want his name written authenticating a book delivered by an angel.
These two verses are not talking about the Book of Mormon, however. Isaiah is talking about another book, which details the events that are going to come to pass in our day. This book is a substitute for the prophets who are not receiving any revelation. The book, however, is sealed. That is what he is talking about here. The book, when given to the learned cannot be interpreted because it is sealed. When given to the unlearned, the rank and file members, they cannot read it because they do not have the knowledge to do so.
What is this sealed book? It is the book of Isaiah, of course. What the Lord is saying is that in the absence of revelation, which he knew would be the situation at this time, he prepared a book and sealed it so no one could understand it for 2700 years, whether the reader be learned or unlearned. This is the book that details the things that are going to happen to Ephraim in the last days, in the last seven years of this dispensation. The only problem is that it is sealed.
Nephi explained why he was including so much writing from Isaiah and he tells us some important things about the book.
Now I, Nephi, do speak somewhat concerning the words which I have written, which have been spoken by the mouth of Isaiah. For behold, Isaiah spake many things which were hard for many of my people to under-stand; for they know not concerning the manner of prophesying among the Jews. Yea, and my soul delighteth in the words of Isaiah, for I came out from Jerusalem, and mine eyes hath beheld the things of the Jews, and I know that the Jews do understand the things of the prophets, and there is none other people that understand the things which were spoken unto the Jews like unto them, save it be that they are taught after the manner of the things of the Jews. (2 Nephi 25:1–2, 5)
So he explains that his own people could not understand Isaiah and he explains why. There is a particular method of writing that the Hebrew prophets used which is called the manner of prophesying of the Jews. In this manner, which is really the Lord’s manner, there is a rich use of metaphor, symbols, rhetorical links and other devices, which effectively encode the writing. Unless one knows this encoding technique, he cannot interpret what is being said. In this way the book was sealed for all these centuries to come forth at this time. It is for our day as Nephi explains.
…nevertheless, in the days that the prophecies of Isaiah shall be fulfilled men shall know of a surety, at the times when they shall come to pass. Wherefore, they are of worth unto the children of men, and he that supposeth that they are not, unto them will I speak particularly, and con-fine the words unto mine own people; for I know that they shall be of great worth unto them in the last days; for in that day shall they understand them; wherefore, for their good have I written them. (2 Nephi 25:7–8)
These verses explain why Isaiah in particular is so important in the last days. In the last days we do indeed understand Isaiah and through this great prophets writings we know what we must do in order to survive what is coming.
@iterry54
Thanks for the heads-up re Robert Smith.
What is his Isaiah commentary titled?
Also, is this the same Robert Smith who wrote Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men? I have that book, and have to say I thought it was very poor.
Maybe if it is the same bloke his Isaiah work is better.
RobinH, No different Robert Smith. Too many out there with the same name. There is one at BYU I know and that might be the one you are referring to.
This Dr. Robert Smith wrote “Scriptures of the Last Days” which is the commentary on Isaiah. He has retranslated and written commentaries for Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and the 12 prophets Hosea-Malachi. He studied at University of Utah, Brooklin Mass, and in Jerusalem. He is a Hebrew scholar. Anyway, if you can find his books it would be worth looking at. Good luck.
Iterry54. Thank you for your perspective. The way i understand the doctorine on the sealed book is that it is not just the book of Isaiah. This sealed book being spoken of is the same book that is also mentioned again in 2 nephi 27 & 28 and many other places in the scriptures. It is this book that will bring the convinceing of men to the “words which have already gone forth among us” so we can come a knowledge of the true points to the doctrine of Christ so that we may “know how to come unto Christ” and be saved. It contains the words of many many records, Isaiah being included. This book is the book that is presented by the end time servant that will end all contentions and disputations concerning the doctrine of Christ. This book is the book that we will bejudged by. It contains the words the prophet wherein is prophesied by Moses and others that those who would not hear this prophets words will be cut off root and branch. These are the words that are required to put the House of God back in its proper order.
Dan, Yes you are correct. The language that seals the book is metaphor. I will tell you that the D&C is a sealed book unless you understand the metaphors that are used you cannot understand quite a few of the revelations.
The scripture I sited however gives one important that all these other books do not have. And that is the complete vision of the last days. That is the reason for the book of Isaiah. Isaiah was brought to Salt Lake City and shown the vision of the last days from that perspective. He saw everything about the Church and what would happen to the Church including the leaders. He saw all the world events through the Tribulation and Judgment period right up into the Millennium. He saw the gathering of the 10 tribes and this is discussed. There are great detail to his work. It Cannot be understood at the literal level but only at the metaphorical level.
From time to time the Church has some scholar like Peterson that puts out a commentary on Isaiah. None of these guys understand metaphor and so they don’t understand the meaning at all. It completely bypasses them and they flay around trying to make sense of it which they can’t. It wasn’t until these 2 scholars came along that opened it up.
So yes you are correct that other books are sealed but Isaiah is specifically about the last days. The other books have lots of detail like Daniel, Ezekiel, Revelation, and Jeremiah but none have the entire vision that Isaiah has.
I don’t recall Denver ever claiming to be a prophet or asking anyone to follow him. Neither have I at any time ever heard him asking for money or honor. He did say that he was a teacher and that any one of us who wants to know a truth should go to the lord and ask Him…. that lord wold instruct and that chances are that God has already spoken but that we in our stubborn way are past feeling.
Let us then humbly approach or God patiently and await His answer.
Personally I am greatful to Denver for his faith and his testemony. I am persuaded and my hope in my God is more sure because of Denvers witness.
Thanks to you all who lift by the words that you share.
AB, i have very much enjoy your blog.
Thank you!
David, Denver just came out with something only a prophet can do and that is he has revealed the Testimony of John the Beloved. I took the time to read it yesterday and it is not from God. There is no metaphorical language in the thing. But beside that as I mentioned he is now claiming to be a prophet because of this thing. I don’t know when he made the change but this new text is the game changer. He is now claiming to be a prophet. No question about it.
Iterry…Will you please expound on how DC 101 says there is no more revelation. I am having trouble seeing that.
Not to be contrary, but I have the book, Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men by Robert Smith and thought it was very good.
@iterry & eric
So that’s it then? There is no more revelation ever? God can not work any more works because the scriptures mean what you think they mean? I suppose that next you’re going to tell me that God has finished his work and committed his power into the hands of men.
If I want to look at the definition of a prophet I need to look no further than 1 Nephi 1. Lehi didn’t go through years of affliction. He was a wealthy man. He simply heard the message, took it to the lord, had his heart changed, and was accepted by God. He was taken to stand in the presence of God, spoke with the Lord face to face, received a message from Him, and delivered it to the people at the risk of his own reputation and life. He gave up all that he had to know the Lord and to follow the Lord’s will.
Lehi’s only claim was “I have seen the Lord, I have spoken with Him, and I have a message from him for you.” Denver at least has the conviction of that much. I can’t say as much for the men in Salt Lake.
@iterry54.
Many thanks.
It’s out of print right now but I’ll try and track a copy down.
Thanks once again.
RH
No Anonymous the Lords work is not done by any means. But what I was pointing out is what the scriptures say about prophets in our day.
At the time of Jeremiah and Lehi there were many prophets running around in Jerusalem claiming to be true prophets of God. There was Hananiah and Hulda just to name two. The people were gaga over these false prophets because they were telling the people that everything was fine. The Babylonians weren’t going to attack. Jeremiah and Lehi on the other hand told the people they were going to be destroyed because they were wicked.
Fast forward to the last days. Here we are today and the Lord set up his Church on the earth. The way the Church was set up was the president of the Church (should be) the prophet of the Church. So what if he is not the prophet and what if he does not receive any revelation. What if he doesn’t even keep the commandments of God? King Noah didn’t anciently and the Lord did not remove him until he had done much damage to the Church. What is the Lord to do? He set up the system so that we would have a pattern so that we wouldn’t be deceived.
Like anciently we have a number of people out there that claim revelation. Great – finally we have a prophet sent from God. Or do we? If you are claiming that any of these are prophets then the Lord has violated his own established organization that HE set up are you not? It’s easy to point to the Church as fallen into apostasy but it is a far different thing to tell me that the Lord has now corrected the situation because that Church is still here.
So what the Lord did is he caused to be opened up the ancient prophets. The language of the Lord is metaphorical. Nobody can understand Isaiah. I mean nobody and that was by design. Over the past 2,700 years since Isaiah if someone didn’t like what he said then they would have taken it out. So by coding the scriptures so that they cannot be understood the scribes down through the ages left it and the other prophetic books alone. Same is true of the D&C. If the Church today understood some of the prophecies there they would have done something to change them or eliminate them you can be sure. They’ve already changed some of the language of the BOM because it violates political correctness today.
So what the Lord did is he opened up these ancient scriptures for us to read and understand. Isaiah in essence has been brought back from the dead to call us to repentance and tell us what we need to do to survive the last days. He is the prophet that is in the tower warning us today. His vision extends into the Millennium. You can be sure and Isaiah tells us this that soon the awful situation we find ourselves in will change. The Lord will correct everything and he will destroy those wicked leaders who have changed all of His doctrines and Ordinances. There will be new leadership and new prophets since. But until that happens and the Church is still here (in its apostate condition) He will not violate what He set up. And Isaiah tells us this very thing. The Scriptures tell us that there will be no prophet sent to us in the last days while the Church is still around. When it is finally corrected then yes there will be new prophets that come along.
He has already told us who that person is and it’s John the Beloved. He was translated 2,000 years ago and is still hanging around. He has all the keys and authority having received them from Christ to lead the Church in the last days. He is the senior apostle on earth today. Why hasn’t he made himself known to those guys downtown? His mission is discussed throughout Isaiah, Revelation and D&C 77, 113. So you can be sure that the work has not stopped. But you can also be sure that Lucifer has another plan and that plan is that of deception. It is easy to be fooled if you don’t understand what the Lord has told us. The Standard Works should be our guide until further notice.
Robin Hood,
Unfortunately you are correct and all of Robert Smith’s books are out of print and very hard to find. There is one book of his that you can still find on Amazon called The Last Days Unsealed. Last I checked it was available for around 10 dollars. It is summary of the events of the last days from Isaiah, Daniel, and Revelation. It is basically a very condensed version of Scriptures of the Last Days.
(response to my friend who sent me this post in an email)
While bravely remaining anonymous the ‘anonymous bishop’ takes cheap shots at the character of those whom he feels unworthy of the same luxury. Bravo. At one point the shadowy author calls another church colleague, by name, a “coward.” I laughed in disbelief. The hemorrhaging hypocrisy is so spectacularly overshadowing that I nearly forgot to finish reading the article. I felt like a mouth-breathing, starry-eyed stargazer beholding the enormity of it. Awed. And dumbstruck. Just as I am wont to be when my 5-year-old daughter yells from the bathroom, “Dad! You gotta come see how big my poop is!” And, of course, I get up and go see. How can I not? And I lift the toilet lid and… wow, it truly is massive. And I think, “how is it physically possible someone so small could make a turd so big?!” Those are my sentiments now.
But I did finish the article. And here’s what I got:
First point: The phantom bishop feels that the church is fallen because it runs like a corporation, and since it runs like a corporation it therefore must be bereft of revelation. Whether he feels his reasoning is so obvious, or his feelings are just so implacable, is uncertain. But what is certain is that he makes no attempt at persuasive argument on this point. We just have to accept his view that if the Church is doing any research, or using any tools, or systems of governance, in any capacity (in other words the opposite of a slothful servant), then it must have lost the sanction of heaven. Bravo.
Second point: Church activity has no bearing on spirituality. Because, after all, you can have spiritual experiences outside of the Church. At least there was an attempt at some reasoning here. Limp as it was. So, replacing the church with medical school in this stellar train of thought we should conclude that going to medical school to become a doctor is unnecessary because you can learn medicine in other ways. And because there are other ways to learn about medicine, medical school is not only unhelpful and unnecessary, but somehow corrupted. Sure. Bravo. Again.
Third point: The Church is fallen because it excommunicated Snuffer. Whose only crime was calling the Church to repentance. “If only we had the church Joseph formed,” laments Snuffer and Captain Anonymous, “Then we would believe.” Sure. Just like when the Israelites rejected Moses saying if only we had Abraham. Or when the Jews rejected Christ saying if only we had Moses. Or Christianity rejected Joseph saying if only we had Paul. Now Snuffer and his ilk reject Monson saying if only we had Joseph. It’s self-righteous hypocrisy. It’s a deception. If you would reject the prophet today, then, chances are, you’d of rejected the prophet then.
And to that point here’s a little dose of reality: Excommunications happened ALL the time under Joseph’s prophethood. And the most common reason for excommunication was? Oh yeah, rebellion. The first definition of rebellion on any standard google search is the “the action or process of resisting authority, control or convention.” There was a rebellion in Kirtland in which a number of prominent men in the church, some of them apostles, hijacked the temple with knives and guns, insisting Joseph was a fallen prophet and that the church had lost its way. They called themselves the “old standard.” They wanted to go back to the restoration in earlier days. Joseph, the restorer, had become an apostate as far as they were concerned. Brigham Young and others loyal to the prophet had to flee for their lives. The “old standard” rejected the most recent church policies and revelations of the time. Like the battle cry of their bible-thumping counterparts, they had had enough revelation and “needed no more [revelation]!” Ironic. But here it is again. There was little patient from the prophet and other church leaders in regards to these types of people. They generally got excommunicated. And if the disgruntled didn’t speedily repent and come to terms, Joseph’s terms mind you, then they remained excommunicated. Lots of people got excommunicated in the early days of the church and most of them didn’t even have to take up arms to do so. But Snuffer and Anonymous will beat their chests and cry, “If only we lived in Joseph’s day!” Yeah, yeah, if only…
And before anyone gets all butt hurt about people getting excommunicated, like it’s some shocking recent development in an apostate church. Excommunication has been around for a LONG time. In Joseph’s time. In Peter’s time. In old testament times. Oh, and yeah, in premortal times, when A THIRD of the hosts of heaven were “excommunicated.” It is a heartbreaking event. And should be taken with the most careful, prayerful consideration. But it is one way the Lord regulates and protects his flock. Always has been. When people begin to rebel, i.e. “resist authority, control or convention” then they are crossing the line the Lord has set.
I am just concluding a very thorough read of the entire Doctrine & Covenants. Some major themes that are impossible to miss are: Joseph formed a Church that was governed by laws and systems and procedures. In some ways like a corporation. He claims that one of his greatest accomplishments was the organizing a church government that would continue after his death. The “Church” and “Zion” are synonymous so often in the Doctrine & Covenants that it requires careful scrutiny of the texts to know when Zion means anything other than the Church (which it sometimes does). The prophecies and revelations in D&C regarding the “Church” in our day are profound. As are prophecies throughout the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price. Isaiah says “the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains” and “all nations shall flow unto it.” Daniel speaks of “a stone cut from the mountain without hands … [that] filled the whole earth.” D&C reveals that, “Every man shall hear the fullness of the gospel in his own tongue.” The Book of Mormon speaks about the Church in our day being small but strong and in every land. And dozens more revelations. And beautifully, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints satisfies one revelation after another. And goes far beyond them. It is a tree that is bearing good fruit to all the world. It is a leavening force that even most antagonistic critics must often concede. The missionary program. The youth program. The welfare program. The education program. The humanitarian programs. The home teaching program. The temples. The family emphasis. The significant service opportunities for its members. It’s teachings of powerful, life-changing doctrines. The saving ordinances. Inspiring, enlarging church conferences. And on and on. The Church is this massive force for improvement in the world. The fruit it bears is good. A mind void of misty darkness can clearly see this. And then comes along Snuffer and company, having been nourished by this fruit their entire lives, with axe in hand, ready to start chopping away at the tree. Stretching forth their puny arms, declaring, “The Church is lost. If only we lived in Joseph’s day.” Really?! What are you talking about?! Well…hmm… Polygamy! …and people are getting excommunicated! …and the Church is run like a business! …and the Church doesn’t talk about the Second Comforter enough! …and I don’t like the way the Church has presented some of its history …and the leaders of the church are imperfect….
And the words of Jacob come to mind, “O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise and the hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves…”
It is certain in my mind that each of these criticisms are shrouds of justification for something deeper. And all are about as substantial as a wet piece of toast, even the Polygamy issue. But I’ll at least respond to that point.
MAYBE Brigham Young wasn’t inspired when it came to polygamy. Or MAYBE he took too much license with the practice of it. MAYBE Joseph never had a polygamous relationship of any kind and MAYBE there really is some “vast rightwing conspiracy” in the church inventing relations, revelations and altering historical records. MAYBE. And if that has to be chalked up as a massive mistake on the Church’s part I’m okay with that. People are fallible. And in light of the all the good that it does… whatever. But here’s something that’s not a big MAYBE: there is precedence for polygamy. The great patriarchs: Abraham, Jacob, Isaac, Moses, David and Solomon all practiced it. And although there is not a lot of detail regarding the doctrine of the practice, these polygamous periods stretched over a significant chunk of the old church’s history. Some may say the Lord didn’t sanction these relationships (of which there’s no evidence, at least in the cases of Abraham, Jacob, Isaac and Moses). But what’s irrefutable is that the practice of polygamy DID NOT disqualify any of these men from being the Lord’s anointed. Furthermore, Jesus’ very own lineage comes down through polygamous relationships. Which seems to imply some sort of acceptance. We also have Jacob 2:30 where the Lord speaks for Himself, generally condemning the practice of polygamy but offering this cutout, “For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up a seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.” So, there may be exceptions when the Lord commands otherwise. Just like when the Lord says the general rule is “thou shalt not kill” …but …if you’re Nephi and you need the plates, then… off with his head. The Lord is saying there MAY be a time when I command otherwise, and IF I do here’s why: to “raise up a seed”.
Well, the Lord’s “thoughts are not my thoughts, neither [his] ways [my] ways”, and I only have my paltry little brainpower to offer to the matter but it seems to me that if there was a time for a cutout then, MAYBE, it was when the Church was being driven west. And persecutions raged. And there was a brief window of time when it could be practiced without significant interceding cultural and political forces. When a righteous generation was desperately needed to prepare for the Lord’s return. MAYBE.
“But we have evidence that refutes it!” bawls Snuffer and company. Well there’s evidence that refutes your refutation. And it’s back and forth on who’s ‘evidence’, or ‘history,’ is better. The outcome being: none’s the wiser. Hugh Nibley (the unordained prophet ) made this point once when lecturing about the shaky footing one stands on when using “history” to “beat up the church”: “history is as much what man believes as his religion.”
The real Crux of the matter, as I see it, is that Snuffer, Capt. Anonymous & company resent others presiding over them. Making decision they don’t understand, don’t agree with, or may fall short of their expectations. It’s a pride issue. It’s ALWAYS a pride issue. Of course, no one will ever admit it has anything to do with pride, even to themselves. So, they cook up some pseudo-utopian theology. Void of any form of organization. Unencumbered by presiding priesthood. Or keys. Or ordinances. Or councils. Or modern day prophets. Some sort of strange hybrid creation, never before practiced or predicted in all the holy canon, full of the disgruntled who have just enough conviction to cast stones but not enough to throw themselves out. Putting the burden on others to do it for them. Incensed and shocked when others do. But consoling themselves in the sanctimonious cloak of “if I had lived in Brother Joseph’s day.” Drinking their own poisoned kool-aid. Then offering it to others. Missing the point of the entire 107th Section of D&C (as well as one of the major themes through out the entire D&C) in their half-hearted apostasy.
Even if Snuffer’s intentions are good, it doesn’t mean he’s doing good. The euphemism “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” seems applicable here. At best, Snuffer is the modern-day incarnation of Uzzah, the ark steadier. At worst, he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Either way the results are in, and always have been: “No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing!”
Adam – what I am about to say is not meant in any way to hurt you or to argue with you. But your every word is precisely why on certain days I want nothing to do with this Church. It’s like Church ball on steroids. The summary message is a BIG screw you to any and to all who are not willing to take orders from their fearless, fallible, leaders. Was Joseph Smith a rebel who would not conform to his leaders? They killed him. John the Baptist? Same. Jesus? Did he follow the program and just try to get along? The great patriarchs you mention? Were they content just sitting in Sunday School, supporting their leaders at all costs? You throw out words and scriptures like hand grenades. I agree I am a hypocrite. I am very flawed. I don’t know you and I certainly don’t wish you any ill will. God bless you. The good news is I won’t be publishing for a long time so you won’t be plagued with any new posts.
anonymous, what i say is not intended to hurt you or argue with you either. my first response was written to a friend in an email exchange. it was meant to be a persuasive, logical (albeit provocative) rebuttal, to your attack on the church. and let’s be clear, you’ve made an attack, in a public way, on something many hold very dear and believe is a tremendous force for good. The fact that your efforts may influence others is troubling and deserving of a response. so my intention was not to hurt you personally but to expose the faulty logic and poor foundation of your attack. in this kind of exchange reason, not emotion, should prevail, even if not gently delivered, otherwise it’s all nonsense.
I perceive, however, that this is not the case with you. Emotion has the upper hand. Or, in other words, something/someone has offended you. And now you seek justification. i don’t mean that unkindly. I just think it’s obvious. Feelings and emotion are the great moving forces in our individual lives but if left unbridled by reason and accountability they will become a tyrannical force. That will immediately begin to justify its own control. which is what the mist of darkness actually is, not sin as so many assume, but justification. just because a feeling is real doesn’t mean a feeling right. and as soon as one begins to validate their feelings with justification, truth dies and reality lost in the mists of darkness. the truth feels like “hand grenades” to those in the mists of darkness. or, otherwise stated, the “wicked take the truth to be hard.” When Jesus taught in the synagogues it felt like “hand grenades” to the Pharisees. Why? Because what he taught was the truth and because the Pharisees were in the mists of darkness i.e. justifying themselves.
your justifications for attacking the church were poor. and un-scriptural. your response to me was equally poor. For example: you quantified my words as a “BIG screw you” to anyone who is unwilling to take orders. The fact that you missed any of my points with that broad, inaccurate generality is yet another indication of the mists of darkness. I never once said, or hinted, that people should take orders in anything that I just wrote. The fact that you injected such says much about you. My points were basically this: (1) the church is not bereft of revelation because it has systems of governance. (2) the church should not be abandoned or diminished because spiritual experiences occur outside of church activities and finally, (3) excommunication has been a consistent method the Lord has implemented in his church, in the world and the previous one, for maintaining order and preserving his people. And, as a general rule, excommunication is reserved for those who become critical of the Lord’s spokesmen and then seek out others to become critical with them. Or for those placed in high responsibilities of leadership and then violate that sacred trust in a significant way. none of which implies “taking orders.” Btw. I have been in the church my entire life. I have NEVER once been given and order from any priesthood authority. I have often been invited to obey. Or even to repent. But ordered?? Really?? Your implication dishonest and inaccurate. But, if you are so easily offended at the notion of orders, you may want to reevaluate things a little. The Lord gives orders all the time. They’re called commandments. If it offends you when His servants invite you to obey His commandments you may have some serious soul-searching to do.
i don’t wish you any ill will and if you want to take offense and be disgruntled and critical of the church then that’s your prerogative. but when you do it publicly (well anonymously publicly) then you open yourself up to a response. and if your position is one generated in the mists of darkness then anyone responding with any degree of truth might just come across like they’re throwing grenades. in the doctrine and covenants the Lord often tells his servants to “let thy voice be a warning.” It is repeated in different ways but it’s a reoccurring directive. And, incidentally, the “voice of warning” is directed in about equal proportion between members of the church and the gentiles. in 112 section versus 9 the Lord says, “Thy voice shall be a rebuke (i.e. a grenade) unto the transgressor; and at thy rebuke let the tongue of the slanderer cease its perverseness.”
in your last comment you tried to justify your rebellion by calling to your defense the Patriarchs, the Baptist, Christ, and Joseph. but you did so to your own condemnation. because you do not understand the scriptures, you “wrest them to your own destruction.” Here’s one point: the Lord formed a church through Joseph, one that was destined to “fill the whole earth.” That would be responsible for millions of people. Diverse and scattered all over the world. one that would bless the lives of these millions and be a protection to them in the last days. and the name of the church?? Section 115:3-6 “…for thus it shall be called, and unto all the elders and people of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, scattered abroad in all the world; for thus shall my church be called in the last days, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Verily i say unto you all: Arise and shine forth, that thy light may be a standard for the nations; And that the gathering together upon the land of Zion, and upon her stakes, may be for a defense, and for a refuge from the storm, and from wrath when it shall be poured out without mixture upon the whole earth.” So… it’s not going to be called the Snuffer Reorganized Church? no. It’s the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So… when you endeavor to pull someone away from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints you are endeavoring to pull them away from the Church the Lord’s church. The Church he as established for “the defense and refuge” against the storms and wrath that will be poured out without mixture. it’s a BIG deal. It is a terrible position to be in. with terrible consequences.
I invite you repent. to be liberated from justifications and criticism. to read the entire Doctrine and Covenants with a heart void of such things. praying and fasting that the scales may drop from your eyes you may see the truth. grasping the whole scope of the revelations rather than picking off a few obscure scriptures here and there which you misunderstand, ignoring, or being wholly ignorant, of all the rest.
I too would like to hear Rob’s response to this humble question. I read Rob’s blog and am interested in what he shares. I agree with most I read there, on Rob’s blog, as the spirit confirms many parts of Rob’s posts, however, as definitively as Rob defends or prevaricates the belief in polygamy, I would also like to hear from Rob if he has first hand knowledge from Jesus Christ himself that polygamy is true and to be lived by his humble followers. Please Rob, clarify your stance and prevaricate no more.
Since you throw your TBM tradition-inspired belief-grenades at Anon and those who think like he does, may I ask you to give the answers to questions that the church cannot?
1. Why has the sacrament prayer been changed to read “water” instead of wine? Since it is an ordinance given us through revelation and was not to be changed, why and when did this change? Can you give the reason and date that the revelation came from the Lord for this change to occur?
2. When the Lord lays out some very serious language in D&C 124 about the possibility of the church being rejected (not to mention a direct statement that the priesthood had been lost) and unless they built the temple in nauvoo within “a certain period of time” in order to restore that which was lost (priesthood), just tell me…Adam…how did that all play out? The Lord says that if it is built and these things happen as he commands, then they would be protected and were to remain in Nauvoo, but instead they relocated with Brigham to Utah. When and where is the revelation to Brigham from the Lord that He had changed his mind and that Brigham had been told by the Lord to relocate the church to Utah and live out his polygamous orgy there?
3. Why are good faithful members with callings to teach in church being exed for teaching from the scriptures instead of the manuals (which are the literal manifestation of the “philosophies of men…mingled with scripture”)?
4. Why have we been told from the pulpit for our whole lives that we are a volunteer church and no person in this church receives a penny for their service, only to find out that the upper echelon has been paying themselves a very fine living expense in addition to all the other perks (children’s free tuition at church schools, book deals w/ Deseret book, access to an unlimited black card paid generously by the members through tithing meant to help the poor,etc)? This is literally called priestcraft and warned about all over the scriptures!!
5. If the Lord “sustains” his prophet, and if Monson were His prophet…explain Monson’s dementia to me! Isn’t that evidence right there that Monson is in fact NOT being sustained by the Lord if he doesn’t have his faculties available to him?
I could ask dozens more questions that I can’t find a single TBM can answer with any sort of coherence. Brigham conspired to murder Joseph, collect a reward from the government and take over the church. Those who followed were bribed and sold out to Brigham, and at that point the church was indeed rejected by the Lord. To whatever extent the Lord in his merciful omniscience has allowed members to feel and enjoy the spirit within the church, it has been in spite of the lack of authority that the church has retained, not because of it. For the church has long since surrendered priesthood authority through the many offenses over the years through control, coersion, hiding sins and unrighteous dominion <—all of which are specifically named as the "amen" listed for how one loses his priesthood in D&C 121.
Your "grenade throwing" is truly a desperate attempt to judge and condemn those of us who through painstakingly waking up to the fact that the church has sugar-coated and revised its' own history to feel warm and fuzzy, has instead offended God by lying to us, has even thrown Joseph's good name overboard by claiming he lived polygamy when even the best attempts at finding DNA evidence of children of his who came through any other woman (but Emma) have failed miserably…and have changed nearly everything good that was once restored through Joseph from the Lord.
If Denver has given us a more complete and JST-type reinterpretation of the Teatimony of John, why don't you read D&C 93:6–18 and see what it says about those who receive it (the Testimony of John). Tell me if that was revealed by your Q15 who have yet to prophecy, see or reveal anything!! Ever!
Look we are all flawed. If we think we have all the answers, we are stiff-necked and will never become like a little child and come unto Christ. I beg of you to repent and turn to Christ. I don't mean go confess your sins to your bishop (yet another hi-jacked tradition created in the church meant to control and manipulate its membership into submission and obedience), but rather to look to Christ for the answers and turn to Him, not your hierarchal superior in the corporate LDS structure. Last but not least, read the message from Christ to the nephites in 3 Nephi. When he gives the Doctrine of Christ, tell me…does all that the church is doing these days fit the mold of what Christ said was his church? Or does it do more or less than his doctrine, thus classifying it as the church of the devil? If you're honest with yourself, you'll realize that it comes down to the over abundance of facts that the church has taken many liberties with tithing money it never had the Lord's permission to do, and many other things which are more and less than His doctrine, and is therefore the church of the devil (the Great and Abominable church). There is plenty being leaked out these days about the church, and really it went off the rails when Brigham and others plotted to murder Joseph, Hyrum and his brothers to take over the church and make all his own changes without the blessing of the Lord. The nauvoo temple didn't get finished, dedicated and nauvoo failed to be the safe haven for them…and the very strong consequences spelled out in D&C 124 were indeed carried out. If you don't believe that, then you must believe that the Lord is a liar. He says it himself, and this is one verse that has not been altered by Brigham and company. Wake up! Repent! Turn back to God. Worship/follow NO man or arm of flesh. Not Monson, not Denver (although he is a true messenger). Only follow Christ and develop your spiritual discernment to receive what is good from whomever, and keep the good and discard the bad. Turn back to Christ and Live!!!
I’m with you Dave. Great comment.