Cry Mightily Unto the Lord

BrotherofJaredThe Brother of Jared took sixteen small stones to the mountain. We know they were small because he carried them in his hands. They were certainly smaller than an egg. Perhaps he had eight in each hand. When he came down from the mountain he had eighteen stones. The Lord gave him two more to be used by future prophets to read and translate the words the Brother of Jared would write of the Savior.

After the Brother of Jared cried unto the Lord in a prayer of great faith and sound reasoning, the Lord touched the stones one by one with his finger. The record does not say the Brother of Jared placed the stones on a rock in front of him as we see depicted in the painting by Arnold Friberg. I like to think he held them in his hand as he cried unto the Lord in mighty prayer saying, “Lord, see these stones…”

Assuming he held the stones in his hands, I wonder what that would have felt like as the Lord stretched forth his hand and touched them one by one. The Brother of Jared would have felt the pressure of the Lord’s finger as He touched each one of them. I also wonder at what point the Brother of Jared finally saw the finger of the Lord. Was it on the first stone or did it take sixteen touches before he could see?

Taught by a Servant of the Lord

This is an example of one of the things Denver Snuffer taught us this weekend. I have been a member of the LDS Church all my life and have never heard anyone teach the importance or significance of the phrase to “Cry Mightily.” I am not seeking to point out any deficits in the teachers or the material. This may not be a new idea to you. I can only conclude I was not ready to hear or did not understand before.

I have been praying unto the Lord all my life. I have been asking the Lord to reveal Himself to me from the time I was seventeen when I first entered into His presence. I fasted for three days once thinking the Lord did not hear me or doubted my sincerity. At the end of the fast he reminded me I had not yet been endowed. He invited me to return to my quest in a few years. Thus I continued to study and prepare.

After being endowed, I got busy with my mission. After being sealed, I got busy with building a marriage and responding to the demands of my career. I forgot about the Lord’s invitation. I think I would have appreciated a reminder from those who lead this church of the importance of completing the invitation of the Lord to come into His presence. For some reason it never came up again from our church pulpits.

Reminded of the Promised Invitation

It wasn’t until I was introduced to the writings of Denver Snuffer and read Passing the Heavenly Gift that the Lord visited me again. It was on the night of 25 January 2012. I wrote to my Facebook friends a few days later I hadn’t stayed up until 2:30 in the morning to read a book in many years. I knelt in prayer that night and cried mightily to the Lord asking if the invitation I had received at age seventeen still stood.

He assured me it was an open invitation. From that day to this I have been living in a state of rejoicing and anticipation. Knowing the path I was on, the adversary visited me last year to discourage me. I saw him, or rather his minions with my natural eyes. It was not a pleasant or uplifting experience. It has been a mighty struggle these eighteen months to recover from that experience, walking daily with the Lord.

Even stranger than the opposition from the adversary has been the opposition from those who love me. I find it amazing so many friends have fought against the Lord in their attempts to discourage me from fulfilling my promise to receive Him. It is especially disconcerting to see those who should know better, oppose the Lord and even deny Him by claiming He doesn’t work the same way taught in the scriptures.

Do Not Hinder Members in Their Efforts

If you are a servant of Jesus Christ, you will not oppose his invitation to come unto Him. If you claim to represent Him, or claim to be authorized by Him, or that you hold keys from Him, I know you will not teach those who believe in Him and seek to follow Him that they cannot receive Him. That would be anti-Christ, wouldn’t it? Surely a key holder would not hinder members from crying mightily unto Christ.

I have been counseled to forsake the Lord by those who claim to be His servants. “Come off this path,” I have been told. “You are in the mists of darkness,” when I can clearly see the rod of iron in my hand. How can this be? “For the leaders of this people cause them to err; and they that are led of them are destroyed.” Surely a priesthood leader would not ask a member of the flock to not heed the shepherd.

Is it possible a humble priesthood leader, in his zeal to follow the handbook could be in the wrong? ". . . they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men" (2 Ne 28:14). Does our handbook contain policies with specific instructions against praying as taught in the temple?

A Sacred Sacrament Meeting

On Thursday evening I met with a number of my fellow travelers who are on the same journey. A small group of some fifteen to twenty of my friends met to take the Sacrament and to teach and testify to one another about the reality of being called of the Lord to come unto Him. The handbook of the LDS Church includes a policy that forbids members from administering the sacrament without a Bishop’s permission.

As instructed in scripture, and in order to not change the ordinance, new wine – not grape juice - was used instead of water. We partook of unleavened bread, as a reminder of the Passover. We had loaves of additional bread, that we all could be filled as we met and talked about the Lord for a few hours. It was a sacred experience. We all knelt. I was honored to bless the bread. Nobody led or controlled us.

I don’t think I have been to a more sacred, uplifting and sweet sacrament meeting in my life. Tears were shed, especially mine, as I realized how much I loved my fellow Saints while I listened to them describe how difficult their journey to Christ was because of the persecutions of their leaders. Some had been excommunicated. Others left voluntarily because they were forbidden to worship in the Lord’s way.

A Meeting With a Prophet

On Friday evening Carol and I enjoyed dinner with Denver and his family. I’ve declared and proclaimed on my blog at least a half dozen times now my conviction, borne of the spirit after years of studying, pondering and praying, that this man is a prophet of the Lord. I have never said he is a prophet of the LDS Church, which some have misunderstood. Nevertheless, he is an authorized messenger of Christ.

I love how many people start their private emails to me writing, “I know something of this man…” and then proceed to share their fears – borne out of love for me – that he is no prophet. I promised I would report on my meeting with him. I specifically asked the Lord for this opportunity some six months ago. Just a few days later Denver called me, without any prompting from me, and asked for this meeting.

I had no desire to ask him anything. I did not want to interview him. I did not want to discuss doctrine. I simply wanted to feel of his spirit and see how he treated his family. I had spoken with the Lord several times about my desire to know the truthfulness of this man’s claims and to know if his witness could be trusted. After all, it’s not every day a man claims to have been visited by the Lord, at least not lately.

A Witness Confirmed – Again

I don’t know how many more times the Lord can tell me Denver Snuffer is His servant before I weary the Lord with my petitions. I do not need to ask again. The matter is closed. There is nothing anyone can say, there is no argument anyone can offer, there is no doubt in my mind. When the Lord tells you he has asked a man to deliver a message, then you reject that message at the peril of your own salvation.

If I haven’t made it clear before, then I do so now. I am a second witness the Lord calls men in this day to do His work. This prophet messenger did not and does not challenge the right of President Thomas S. Monson or the rest of the men we sustain as Prophets, Seers and Revelators to preside over this Church. Denver Snuffer is not claiming that authority. He is doing what the Lord has asked him to do for now.

I know this is a radical claim that causes anger in some people. I have received those angry emails and have read those angry comments on my blog. The only response I can offer is the same one the Lord gave to his disciples when He visited them in the Americas. Contention is the spirit of the devil. If you feel angry because of the message of Denver Snuffer to receive Christ, think carefully about the source.

Excommunicated for Being Visited by Christ

I am grateful Carol agreed to attend the lectures this past weekend. I am grateful she attended the sacrament meeting and the dinner with Denver and his family. I am also grateful she gave me time to meet with other friends in a private setting to discuss changes in the LDS Church over the past few years. She joined us later for dinner on Saturday evening for a wonderful meal and entertainment.

I hope I don’t embarrass Him, but I want to publically thank Will Carter, “Good Will,” for joining us that evening and sharing story after story after story of faith-promoting evidences of the Lord working in his life. I don’t believe I have ever witnessed a man more filled with faith than Will Carter, a man who wants only to do the will of the Lord and come into His presence. For this he was cast out of the LDS Church.

I once originally entitled a post about Max Skousen, “The LDS Church Excommunicates Those who Know Christ.” Because so many LDS members were offended, and told me so, I changed it to something less offensive but just as factual. I wish I had kept the original title. For me, the evidence continues to mount. In spite of claims to the contrary, I can almost promise you will be cast off if you say you have seen Him.

My Witness, My calling and Election

I have shared my witness many times of the reality we can be born of the spirit. I have born witness we can enter the presence of the Lord. I have testified He will converse with us through the veil. I look forward to the day when I fall on my knees to bathe his feet with my tears. I hope to embrace him, in the flesh, and feel the wound in his side and touch the nail marks in his feet and his hands – in this life.

Receiving the Second Comforter is a true doctrine. Having your calling and election made sure is a true doctrine. If you are a key holder in this church and fail to teach these doctrines, you are anti-Christ. You and I have the responsibility to receive these ordinances and to bear witness to others that they can and must receive them in this life as well. If not, we will be held accountable for not performing our duties.

God bless the men who we have placed in leadership positions in this church through common consent. I sustain the fifteen men who lead this church as prophets, seers and revelators. Joseph Smith was and is a prophet of God. He translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God. I sustain the local authorities I work with and pray for them every morning and night. God bless us to come unto Christ.

An Open Invitation to the Brethren

Yes, these words are directed at the men who lead this church. I am asking you to do your duty. If you have been in the presence of Christ, the only way you can help stem the tide of young people leaving this church in droves is to bear witness of Christ. Testify you have seen Him. If you haven’t, call mightily unto Him until he comes unto you. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He works this way.

I know it is considered bad form to counsel those who preside over you. I am sorry if this offends you. I can only do what the Lord has asked of me. I know my words may get me cast off. You are welcome to exercise control and compulsion and domination over me by virtue of your priesthood but you know the results. Amen to the priesthood of the man who does not use kindness, long-suffering and persuasion.

And please stop perpetuating the myth that those who are excommunicated will lose their souls or at least their exaltation. This is false doctrine. You cannot remove a man’s priesthood and you know it. Power in the higher priesthood comes from God, not from man. I have associated with enough of my friends whom you have cast off to know they are happy, they love the Lord and are trying to please Him.

Amen to the Priesthood of that Man

Read the appeal letter carefully: http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2013/11/appeal-letter.html. Notice the use of the words, control, compulsion, dominion and Amen. I know all appeal letters are supposed to be read by the members of the First Presidency. I suspect they are not, but are simply delegated to the bureaucracy. If that happened in Denver’s case, I have to wonder whose priesthood was really lost.

Comments

Gary Barlow said…
Tim I have enjoyed so much your blog. I'm still in Guatemala serving in the temple. I wish I could have come to Denver's lectures and enjoyed the friendship of the people seeking the same thing which he speaks about The Second Comforter. It has been wonderful reading these lectures on line and learning so much and also your comments have helped me a great deal. Thanks so much. Gary Barlow

Sent from my iPad

>
jenheadjen said…
Beautiful, Tim. I hope if you and Carol attend Phoenix that I can join whatever gathering may take place. What a beautiful experience that must have been. Grateful to receive your report this morning.
Bill Berrett said…
All in favor, say AYE. AYE.
Good Will said…
I was mortified to see my name mentioned above! I am so unworthy of the honor, Tim, believe me. (My wife and children will attest!)

I got home very late last night after visiting with friends after attending Snuffer's talks in Las Vegas and St. George. I was looking forward to apologizing this morning to Tim, Tony, Joe and their families for taking so much of their time Saturday night talking about my experiences! (It's not polite to dominate the conversation at the dinner table and I surely did! My sincerest apologies to you all!)

But it felt so good to bear witness of Christ and to acknowledge His power and glory and goodness to me and my family! It felt so good to bear witness of His work and His ministry, even if I am largely a failure! (I wish I had been able to bear that testimony in Church! Or to be a better example and witness of Him during my life!) But I am just a man, with all the weaknesses, frailties and foibles thereof. I'm afraid my enthusiasm for Christ (like that of Ammon) carried me away Saturday night.

However we need more people willing to "take chances", to "follow the Spirit" and to become "a fool for Christ's sake", even if we make mistakes. Little children make mistakes. That's because they're always trying! They want to know! They're always opening doors, asking questions, getting into things.

The Lord loves little children.

The Lord will always bear him up who seeks to do His will, but who nonetheless fails and falls because of his own human weakness. That does not mean the Lord won't correct or chasten! (Oh, He will! Perhaps even more so! But that's only because He loves us who serve Him and who seek to honor Him.) But with His reproof, He provides an increase of love. He keeps His own word. (See D&C 121:43-44.) I know that much.

My voice is not needed here. Tim has said it all (and better than I could say it).

There is no "cult" of "Snufferites". We are men and women, mostly, who love the Lord Jesus Christ; who seek Him and strive to serve Him; who are driven to our knees before Him in heartfelt, tearful prayer because of the message Denver Snuffer has borne; who yearn to repent and be cleansed of all our sins by the blood of Christ. We recognize our own utter and complete unworthiness and humbly, regretfully acknowledge, too, the failures of our Church. Yet, strangely, we feel buoyed up and inspired by Snuffer's message of hope that the Lord has not cast us off forever and that we can come back into His presence if we seek Him with all our hearts and cry unto Him. We are reawakened to the scriptures. We "hear" His "voice". He is calling us. We are not fanatics, seeking spiritual manifestations or signs, but simply wannabe saints who want to repent, to be made whole and clean again, and to come unto our Savior. We regard not the man nor the messenger, but rather the message, even the Word of Life.

Denver is inspired of God, perhaps more than any living man I have known. There is a clarity and conviction that comes from entering the Lord's presence, from receiving the word directly from His lips, and Denver demonstrates that clarity and conviction. One, like Denver, who knows by personal experience does not speak as the scribes and pharisees do.

Scribes and pharisees quote men. Prophets quote the Lord.

There is no substitute for saving knowledge, gained by experience. "Book learning" will only get you so far. You must KNOW THE LORD...or unavoidably perish. And when you know the Lord, you will do His will.

Because you love Him. Because you know Him.

It's that simple.
SteveF said…
"I know it is considered bad form to counsel those who preside over you"

Not only is it bad form, but it is contrary to the order of heaven:
D&C 28:6 And thou shalt not command him who is at thy head, and at the head of the church

How do you suppose you can achieve your goal of entering and abiding in celestial glory if you cannot likewise abide the celestial law?

Do you believe it is a righteous or wicked spirit that drives you to break this law of the Kingdom - taking it upon yourself to instruct those who hold a stewardship you do not, above your own, on what constitutes true and false doctrine and what is the best course of action to govern the Kingdom?

Paul and Christ among a wicked and degenerate kingdom still obeyed this law, are you and Denver greater than they?

Yes, the fruits of spending even more time with Denver are evident and clear. It's a sorry thing to witness, but to borrow from my analogy in your last post's comment section, perhaps you need to go to Canada to realize what you had in Egypt and get to your desired final destination. I hope it is something like this and not an unnecessary fall. I remain optimistic, my best wishes to you in your chosen path.
Nonrandom Set said…
I'm really confused. What do you mean by sustaining leaders? I find it hard to reconcile your statements in this post with sustaining your leaders. Maybe I just have a different definition.
Rick said…
Well Tim, look at all the rules and regulations you broke or fractured over the weekend, including the Word of Wisdom!

All I can say is, "When are you going to start your 10 talk tour?" :)

For this to gain momentum, more witnesses are needed. Looks like your in line. Maybe ya'll could come to Texas (during the winter would be better) and share some barbecue with us!
mjcunningham said…
I am so jealous, Tim! I SO wish I could have been there to dine with you all. I wanted to be to the St. George meeting so much, but could not swing it. (Won't go into the whys) Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your courage. You are SO courageous! I still struggle to say what I feel. I feel like I'm the pariah in RS already with my "radical" views. LOL It's gotten to the point where I told the Savior if he wants me to say something, he better make it really obvious because I'd prefer not to keep causing waves! At the same time, I have a responsibility to share my feelings on some topics. Sigh... You give me courage! You are a great example of plowing through rocky soil. Keep up the good work!
mjcunningham said…
When the Savior lived on earth he counseled the church leaders all the time, and He was NOT considered one in the ranks. The leaders of the church in His time did not recognize him as an authority of anything, were not teaching correct doctrine, and were not even in the spirit of considering what Christ said to be true.

Now, I'm not comparing Tim to the Savior in any way, but men are men. Men make mistakes. ANY man can be led astray if he doesn't follow the spirit. I am sure you will argue that this is the path Tim has gone down, but I am one who will stand up and say that he has not.

I have felt the spirit more powerfully in my life since studying DS's books. He is not perfect by a long shot. He's only telling us that we can have a relationship with the Lord if we work for it. That is what Tim did. I would NOT be surprised to read here one day that it has also happened for Tim. Seek and ye shall find. Knock, and it will be opened unto you. Why do people doubt that promise????

Anyway, good luck to you on your path.
Lori Taylor said…
Thank you for your witness of the work and the word. Thank you for sharing your heart and thoughts, honestly and humbly. Sounds like you had some beautiful and sacred moments that have strengthened and nourished you. These are such very interesting times to live in, interesting and frightening yet also so exciting and joyful. Times that will try all of our hearts to see Who's Side we are really on. God bless you and Carol, Tim.
Adam said…
There are multiple occasions in the BofM of Prophets preaching above and beyond just the leaders of the Church. This book was written for our day. I fear that too many people will sleep through this because we have a living Prophet. Samuel came preaching while Nephi was the Prophet. Lehi and other Prophets were preaching. There was Alma and others. What makes us so special that it would not happen the same in our day? Who are we to put boundaries on what our Lord can do? Isn't he the same yesterday, today, and forever? Is this part of why the condemnation has not been lifted from the Church? Is this part of how we are taking the BofM lightly? How many times will the staff be raised and all we have to do is look? I am a man that is lower than the dust, but I am honestly seeking for Truth wherever I can find it. No one can honestly tell me that the people in the Church ( myself included ) are not swallowed up in Pride, do not help the poor, idol worship, the list can go on. Obviously, there comes a time when the leaders need a little outside help to stir us up to remember our Lord. I may be talking out of my rear, but at least I am being honest and not afraid to think these things. The Lord will never fault us for seeking more knowledge.

Tim... I appreciate your journey and if we all happen to be wrong, well at least we tried.
Sara said…
Tim, thank you for this post! It was very nice to meet you this past weekend, in front of you in line both times :). I feel the same as you do about the message Denver is giving. I consider it a miraculous blessing to have happened upon his first book a few years ago. I bought it, since the Second Comforter had been a subject about which I had read everything I could find, which was not much. It was pure light and truth to me, as have been the rest of his messages since. I can testify that the message Denver gives is the words of the Savior. The fruits have been wonderful in my life. I am closer to the Savior by far, and my desire to search and study the scriptures is much stronger, as well as my ability to understand them. The message Denver delivers is a vital message, and it breaks my heart that so many refuse to listen to it, either because they don't like the messenger for whatever reason, or because they think they are fine where they are, that "all is well."
Good Will said…
SteveF,

I am reminded of Paul "counseling" Peter (who was in error about circumcision); of Jethro "counseling" Moses (who was naive about filling the judgment seat); of an "angel" "strengthening" the Lord. (I know when I have been sick or in sorest need, my mother has been by my side. I wonder who came to comfort Jesus.)

You speak of "taking it upon yourself to instruct those who hold a stewardship you do not, above your own, on what constitutes true and false doctrine and what is the best course of action to govern the Kingdom?"

Are you not aware of the controversies, contentions and disputes that have rent the Church and Kingdom from the beginning of the restoration? Just for starters, are you not aware that Brigham Young (as prophet) taught from the pulpit in General Conference at least five "false" doctrines as "gospel truth" that have since been repudiated and rejected as "false", without doctrinal foundation, etc.? Or that Orson Pratt (his "inferior") "called" him on many of those false doctrines -- and that Orson's views, not Brigham's, are now the acknowledge and accepted "doctrines" of the Church?

Neither Denver nor Tim tell "the Brethren" what to do with regard to the LDS Church or its teachings. But the Spirit is speaking. The LDS Church is an affair unto itself, once organized by the light of men, inspired by the light of heaven and approved by God Himself. Neither Snuffer nor Malone seek any say or authority in that Church or over others, nor is Snuffer or Malone's "counsel" requested or respected by those in charge. Even so, for those seeking for "motes" and "beams" to remove, sufficient is the day unto the evil thereof (in our own eyes).

Nevertheless, Tim's "counsel" is correct. Do the Brethren preach of coming unto Christ in the flesh? How closely do their testimonies mirror those of Lehi, Nephi, Jacob, Enos, Alma, Amulek, Mormon, Mahonri, or Moroni? Are their experiences really more sacred than those of the prophets of old who testified boldly and in public of their witness of Him? Who among those (among us) has stood in the Divine Council and has received the word of the Lord from His lips (as did they)? Are the experiences of "the Brethren" really "too sacred" to relate to us?

I doubt it.

What are the "fruits" of "following" Denver Snuffer? For many, it is greater faith in Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, and the Book of Mormon (whether one is in or out of the Church).

How can that be a bad thing?
EricDL said…
@SteveF You can't see a difference between the to quotes you have referenced? Tim offered counsel...DC 28:6 says not to command...
There is quite a difference. Now if you can reference scripture that says the lesser shall not to counsel the greater, or something to that effect, then you have something. Perhaps you would prefer Tim had used the word Admonish

Speaking to Oliver about Joseph:

DC 6:19 Admonish him in his faults, and also receive admonition of him. Be patient; be sober; be temperate; have patience, faith, hope and charity.

I can see the above attributes in Tim's post.
grip said…
He didn't break the Word of Wisdom, he said they used grape juice. Even if they would have used new wine, they still wouldn't have broken the Word of Wisdom, they would have been keeping and honoring it.

5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.

6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.

(D&C 89:5-6)
grip said…
Maybe next time new wine?
SteveF said…
Good Will & Eric,

I felt your comments were similar enough that I'd respond just once. Yes, I do feel I see a big difference in the examples you have given, whether a difference in position/authority or in the way the "counseling" is being offered.

Without authority/keys/stewardship, where then comes the right to publicly and definitively declare a doctrine false that is taught by those who do have authority/keys/stewardship?

Without authority/keys/stewardship, where comes the right to publicly and definitively declare how the Kingdom ought to be operated?

Declarations that claim definitively one way is right and the other way is wrong may just as well be commands, because you are declaring the other person wrong before God if they do not follow your "counsel"; it's effectively drawing the line in the sand. In my mind, true and righteous counsel and admonition can surely be given, and it is that which advises but then allows the ultimate authority to determine the rightness or wrongness of the admonition. This preserves order and unity. It looks more like a kingdom and less like a democracy.
Mike said…
Ezekiel 34:
1 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?
3 Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock.
4 The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.
5 And they were scattered, because there is no shepherd: and they became meat to all the beasts of the field, when they were scattered.
6 My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and upon every high hill: yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them.
7 ¶Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;
8 As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock;
9 Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;
10 Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them.
11 ¶For thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out.

Ezekiel called the leadership to repentance, under the direction of the Lord. He did not command them, he instructed and warned them. Tim has done the same, there is no commandment in his words, only instruction and invitation. The difference between the two is simple and clear. Misapplying scripture to judge our fellow man is unwise.
SteveF said…
...and yes Good Will (to answer the question I missed) I am and have been aware of for a very long time all the supposed sticky issues of our history. I wish you were in Utah, and we could sit down face to face, I feel we could have a productive conversation.

I don't purport to know all things, so I don't wish to make final judgement in any one situation. If Denver has been / is helpful to you, then I leave that up to you to determine. There are many stages of progression and they're not all right for everyone; eventually all roads lead through the kingdom of God on earth to the kingdom of God in heaven.

All the best in your journey.
SteveF said…
"Anyway, good luck to you on your path."

Thanks, and to you as well.
kathryn said…
Tim

It looks like the week-end was an edifying experience. It was so nice to meet you and Carol. I hope she enjoyed it as well.... she has been so reluctant about Denver in the past. When I spoke with her she said she cannot read your blog... and we both laughed.

I was not able to attend in Vegas but I loved my experience in St.George. It was a last minute decision to attend and I am glad I did. I have read so much of Denver's material but I wanted to hear his words in person. It gave me a better idea of his spirit and energy. As usual, the message was wonderful and I left with a feeling of calmness.

I'm looking forward to reading his Vegas message to tie the weekend together.

Does anyone know what the theme is for Phoenix? I hope I can arrange my work schedule so I can attend.
SteveF said…
I don't know how much more commanding it can get than "thus saith the Lord".

So in my mind, I do see Ezekiel commanding, and I believe he had authority/keys/stewardship to do so.
kathryn said…
Will, I would have enjoyed meeting you. I ask Tim to point you out but apparently you had not entered the room yet.

I too confirm what you have said... "We are not fanatics, seeking spiritual manifestations or signs, but simply wannabe saints who want to repent, to be made whole and clean again, and to come unto our Savior. We regard not the man nor the messenger, but rather the message, even the Word of Life"

Thank you for your testimony
Rebecca Johnson said…
Thank you, Brother Malone. Your words were what the Lord wanted me to hear today. My soul was filled with a warm peace as I read every word aloud for angels to hear. As I read your open invitation to the brethren I grew very emotional. I love this church. I love the people. I have been so blessed to be a member of the Lord's church. It is sobering to realize the day may come when I could lose my membership. On the other hand, I will joyfully do anything the Lord requires of me to enter again into His presence....and whatever work He may assign me in the days ahead. I have great appreciation for Carol. She is a woman of faith and I am grateful she has stayed by your side on this difficult journey. I will continue to pray for the servants the Lord is raising up to help us. With sincere appreciation, Rebecca
brotherjr said…
Thank you Tim for your testimony. We were there too in LV and St Geo. Wish I could have met you and shook your hand, but alas, in the crowd of HUNDREDS of hungry faithful seekers of truth, I did not see you. Your testimony rings so true to those who have taken the Holy Spirit as their guide. I am sorry for those who continue to find fault with your words, and the words of Denver and others who continue to bear testimony of CHRIST. How can people find fault with their brothers who are bearing testimony of the Savior? People, stop fearing and open your eyes and ears! Thank you Tim and Will and Denver.
JR
Freddie S said…
Brother Tim,
It was good to finally shake your hand and offer a word of thanks and encouragement at Vegas. While DW & I were at StGeo also, we didn't have the opportunity to attend the "extra-curricular events". I wish we had.

We have read your blog for some time, and so much appreciate the simple and humble words of truth you offer. It was through you we were inspired to visit with Mel and Gwena Fish, a more loving and Christ-like couple could hardly be found! Why is it that so many good and humble people, who read the Scriptures and are hungry for a closer relationship with our Savior that all the Scriptures advocate, have to find it in the by-ways, and not in the institutional church -- and are increasingly ex'ed for their troubles if they do!

Ah, these are sad times in so many respects! But there are bright rays of light to be found if one seriously seeks. Denver is certainly one, you are another, and Rock too. Not to forget the humble testimony of GoodWill, who was so seriously abused for loving the Lord.

As Denver mentioned, and as we ourselves have considered, it may well be sad times ahead too for those of our leaders who seem to have completely forgotten the most serious warnings in D&C 121 against unrighteous dominion! Who among us can honestly now or in the future raise our hand to sustain those placed above us who have apparently lost their priesthood for unrighteous dominion against those who would righteously seek the face of the Lord!

I try hard to be humble myself and not to judge, but it is with increasing difficulty to avoid the latter. The Lord knows the hearts of all of us, and will Himself do all the necessary righteous judgment. But I cannot avoid fearing for those at any level with stiff necks of brass who do not repent!
boo said…
Thank you Tim for your faith and your testimony. I too have had a witness that he is a true messenger and I too pray for the 15 and my local leaders everyday. I pray that they may be strengthened and inspired and that they might have their eyes opened even as William Tyndale prayed that the king of England eyes might be as he was being martyred . I hope for and will pray for the same blessing for your Stake President.
johnD said…
IF, you’re insecure in your testimony of the restoration, and or, full of pride, the messages delivered this last week in Henderson and St. George are not for you.
IF, you regard a “knowledge” of the Savior above all else, and look to strengthen your testimony of the restoration and willing to subdue your pride, the message delivered in Henderson and St. George IS for you!
I have been seeking further light and knowledge for years and trying to do all things the Lord would have me do, but today I awoke with fear and trembling for my salvation. I’m determined to do all possible to succeed and feel I have received in these messages parts to MY puzzle that I lacked in seeking that knowledge!
Tim Malone said…
We will be in Mesa for the last lecture. Gives me a good excuse to visit my sister who comes to see us in California much more often than we go to visit her in Arizona.
Tim Malone said…
Hi Nonrandom set: I didn't see any response to your question. Not sure it was directed at me, but I'd like to answer. Sustaining is a) a vote as part of common consent, authorizing or accepting them in the leadership role in this church. It is also b) striving to support and help them in the direction they provide for the church. In other words, helping to get the Book of Mormon into all the corners of the world and providing the funds to do so. Bottom line definition for me as far as what it means to sustain: Pay tithing and pray for the Brethren. but it's late and I'm tired. I'd enjoy reading your definition if you care to share it.
Nonrandom Set said…
I've always liked what Brigham Young said to those in Kirtland complaining about Joseph Smith:

“I rose up, and in a plain and forcible manner told them that Joseph was a Prophet and I knew it, and that they might rail and slander him as much as they pleased, [but] they could not destroy the appointment of the Prophet of God; they could only destroy their own authority, cut the thread that bound them to the Prophet and to God, and sink themselves to hell. Many were highly enraged at my decided opposition to their measures. …

“This meeting was broken up without the apostates being able to unite on any decided measures of opposition. This was a crisis when earth and hell seemed leagued to overthrow the Prophet and Church of God. The knees of many of the strongest men in the Church faltered. During this siege of darkness I stood close by Joseph, and with all the wisdom and power God bestowed upon me, put forth my utmost energies to sustain the servant of God and unite the quorums of the Church.”

I guess to me supporting our leaders means much more than paying tithing and praying for them (not that I'm discounting those things). I just think about how I hope others would support me in my various callings - and it would mean being patient with me, listening to my counsel, forgiving me my mistakes, loving me, and yes, praying for me.

Perhaps I am misinterpreting, but when I read this post, all I come away with is various ways the leaders are doing it wrong: warnings against being anti-christ, admonishment to teach true doctrine, speculation about motives, claims (unsubstantiated) about them delegating their duties to the bureaucracy, etc. If that is sustaining, then I hope no one ever sustains me!
Nonrandom Set said…
I know this Joseph Smith quote has been left in the comments of other posts, but I think it bears repeating: “I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”
Tim Malone said…
[If] any member in the Church that has not the Priesthood, should see one doing wrong that had the Priesthood and he should correct him in the spirit of meekness and humility and the man having the Priesthood should rise up in anger and say, "Oh you have no business to correct me, I have the Priesthood and am a great man." "Well" says the other, "I feel to warn you against evil, but we will wait and see how it will come out." Which is the most justified? The man without the Priesthood!" (The Teachings of President Brigham Young, vol. 3, 1852-1854, p. 227)
Tim Malone said…
Then let us be certain to not condemn others, especially the leaders of the church we love. I have no desire to find fault with the church, not do I believe the church is out of the way, but is fulfilling the mission for which it was established - to declare the message of the restored gospel, providing the proof of that restoration in the Book of Mormon. I have heard Snuffer call himself a fool many times. He continuously points us toward the Savior, just as the fifteen men we sustain as the leaders of this church should do and for the most part, I believe they do.

But let us also remember the difference between apostasy and heresy. Those who leave of their own free will are indeed apostates. They have separated themselves from the church. while heresy, on the other hand, is disagreeing with the official interpretation of the scriptures and of the doctrines as interpreted by the Brethren, which has changed from generations to generation. God bless us as a people to forgive the foibles of men. We are all sinners and come short of the glory of God. Let us seek after Christ and lead and encourage others to do the same.
Tim Malone said…
Good night all. Carol and I are driving to Salt Lake tomorrow to attend the Sunstone Symposium later this week. I have always wanted to go, but being a California boy, always thought it out of the question. I will not name the individual who made it possible but I am confident this will be a wonderful experience to consider the pertinent issues of the day with my dear wife at my side. Thank you my friend, thank you.
Tim Malone said…
By the way, did anyone catch the analogy of the sixteen small stones? It was related to Denver's teaching that the Lord touched the stones while they were in the Brother of Jared's hand. He felt the pressure each time but it was probably not until the sixteenth stone that he had sufficient faith to see within the veil.

How many times have we felt the touch of the Lord upon us in slight, imperceptible ways until we have sufficient faith to see his finger and have him show himself unto us? We must continue to try, continue to cry mightily until we have the faith sufficient to part he veil and have the Lord reveal himself unto us. It can be done.
Nonrandom Set said…
In that quote, Joseph didn't make any distinction about leaving the church on one's own. Perhaps that is the ultimate sign of apostasy, but I believe it's possible to be on the road to apostasy far before that. I think anyone we begin to think in our hearts that we know better than the leaders of the church, we start on that road. I have certainly been guilty of that - luckily I caught myself and repented.

I guess we also have different definitions of fault-finding, because as I said in a previous comment, all I come away with from this post is various ways the leaders are doing it wrong: warnings against being anti-christ, admonishment to teach true doctrine, speculation about motives, claims (unsubstantiated) about them delegating their duties to the bureaucracy, etc. If that is sustaining, then I hope no one ever sustains me!
jenheadjen said…
Ironically, this powerful quote has been long misunderstood. When this was spoken, it was directed towards the leaders of the church, (I believe specifically attending the school of the prophets, but I may be incorrect on that point). The "church" was then the body of saints, not the "Church" as in the administration/leadership as we interpret it today. Therefore, if those attending - then considered leaders - were to "rise up" to "condemn" others, saying they are in the way, righteous, while others are out of the way, know *that man* is in the high road to apostasy.

It puts a new spin on it, knowing context. For your viewing pleasure... :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kjnasl1Kyuo :)
Nonrandom Set said…
I believe it's a general principle, applicable to all of us. And in fact, in the same discourse, Joseph addresses both apostles and saints. That doesn't really change the context for me.
Loretta Love Grover said…
Thank you for your profound comments.
Rodney said…
I caught it Tim. I would think some might wonder how a personage of spirit might effect a 'pressure' upon the stones... even though in this case we are talking about Jehovah. Personal experience with a personage of spirit has taught me that they indeed can be felt, though I can't speak to more than that. I thought it was interesting.

~Rodney
Rodney said…
(I got it...) but not because I was able to participate this past weekend. You said, "Was it on the first stone or did it take sixteen touches before he could see?", You sometimes lead a thought and I was putting myself in TBoJ's place,... wondering if I'd have the faith... and I thought of my life and how it took 52 years to be Born of Fire... so,... still working on 'sufficient' faith, but your visuals made it for me. Thanks.

~Rodney
jenheadjen said…
I really enjoy what Good Will had to re-share on his blog a few weeks back on this very topic. http://in200wordsorless.blogspot.com/2014/07/upon-this-rock-i-will-build-my-church.html

Let us soften our hearts and lose all fear.
Nonrandom Set said…
I find that whenever I start to excuse myself or start to think that some particular thing doesn't apply to me, that is when I most need that counsel. I'm learning (slowly) to always reflect back on myself when I have critical thoughts of others.

The quote is so powerful to me because Joseph says it is one of the keys of the mysteries and an eternal principle. It seems like it has very broad applicability to all of us.
Lynn Bernhard said…
Tim, the WORD is good and Denver's talks were moving as always. I saw you there but remained still and let you be. The Spirit moved me to allow you one less person interrupting your experience.

I visited my new Bishop on Sunday. The wheels of the institution where already in motion before I walked into his office. He had my record on his desk and my SP and Bishop had called him.

I briefly went through my story. There was no sympathy for me, my children, or my wife. He could not wait to blurt out "Do you sustain...as the only...for the whole church? I said "Yes, but like I said, I'm here because I believe there are many prophets in the land testifying of the living Christ and crying repentance, Has President Monson ever stated that there no other prophets in the land but himself?" Silence. I said "Bishop, there are prophets in the land preparing the way of the LORD. I will not cast them out or stone them." He smiled and said "don't start preaching, I don't want to excommunicate you." With that he stood patted me on back, walked me to the door professing his love for me.

Welcome to the 3rd Ward.
Geoff said…
I hope it was not pride and feigned love. What record did he have on his desk? Evidence? From where?
Good Will said…
Kathryn,

I saw you (walking away, on the far side of the room!) and went after you (but you disappeared!). Alas! Maybe I'll have better luck next time.
Geoff said…

D&C 131
7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;
8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.


E=mc2 shows that matter and energy are related, similar like ice, water, and vapor. Denver mentioned it in his talk when he referenced these verses and talked about “temperature” and “quickening.” It might be stated this way: all physical (maybe even telestial) matter is energy (think spirit) which has been reduced (or has fallen or condescended) by a factor of the speed of light (186,000 miles/second) squared (a huge factor!). The course matter we are tabernacled in is a very low vibrational/energy state. All spirit/energy is matter; and all matter is energy/spirit. Matter is a kind of manifestation of energy.

In any case, we are incorrect if we assume that celestial and exalted beings cannot change form (of course they can!). Perhaps they dwell in an extremely fine “matter” state, what we might even consider an energy state, when they are in everlasting burnings (very high temperature/quickening level). The Lord truly condescended (lowered His vibrational/energy state) to come down here and redeem us. It must have been painful just to come down. O how we ought to thank and praise and adore Him!

Is Denver a true messenger or a deceiver? If any of you lack wisdom (including myself, especially myself), let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him, but let him ask in faith, nothing wavering...
SteveF said…
It's a good quote, I see what you're getting at. Even still, the way I would interpret a spirit of meekness and humility would be along the lines of the comment I made to Good Will & Eric above.

I don't think a spirit of meekness and humility is compatible with publicly and definitively declaring that the doctrines and/or methods of those who hold stewardship/keys as out of the way, while declaring the alternative you purpose as the true and righteous path.

In my opinion, this post was the first time I saw you cross the line in manifesting the spirit and sign of being on the high the road to apostasy. I do not have stewardship over you, and so don't wish to make any final declaration, but from my vantage point I believe unless you repent you will apostatize as God lives. At the same time, should that really be a surprise when in this same post you seem to already be coming to terms with the likelihood of excommunication for these things, almost as if you asking for it? And instead of looking inwardly you have already begun justifying your path by pre-blaming others for unrighteous dominion if it comes to that.

But as you haven't been able to see these same things in Denver, I would guess it would be doubly as difficult to detect in yourself. There is probably nothing I can say at this point that would persuade you from your chosen path, so again I hope it will all work for your good in the end. I do have a couple other clarifying questions on this post I'd like to ask you at some point.
SteveF said…
*propose (not purpose)
SteveF said…
Tim,

Aside from the conversation already, 2 questions jumped out at me when I first read the post.

You declared, "Nevertheless, [Denver] is an authorized messenger of Christ."

If he is authorized, what keys/authority does he hold?

Second, you said, "This is false doctrine. You cannot remove a man’s priesthood..."

What makes you say this? The Church, having been given the keys of the kingdom, has been given power that whatsoever it binds on earth is bound in heaven, and likewise whatsoever it looses on earth is loosed in heaven. Therefore they can grant priesthood authority in the kingdom on earth that is recognized in heaven, otherwise there would be no kingdom (no way that God could govern and officially operate through here on earth). What makes you believe then that the Church cannot likewise remove that same authority so that it is no longer recognized by heaven?
mjcunningham said…
I love love love the way you think and explain things. Right up my alley.
mjcunningham said…
To make it plain and easy, if a man's priesthood it "taken" away unrighteously, God probably won't recognize that act. There are those of us who believe DS was kicked out wrongly. He didn't do anything wrong but state church history facts that can be found online and in journals.

Many people in our church don't want to face that there is some really sketchy history. People are people. We make mistakes. Covering them up does no one any good. DS was just telling the truth about what he'd discovered.

It helped many people, including me, who felt like something was just not right. I don't know how to explain it. For me, it gives me understanding and even compassion for past leaders. It would be really hard to run an organization this big. Some of our leaders made mistakes, they argued and disagreed with each other (I'm talking the general authorities here) It isn't perfect. It never will be until Christ comes, but Denver taught me that we still have a long way to go and that we shouldn't sit back on our laurels, saying all is well in Zion. It isn't. We have a TON of work to do still. That's all. And if the Lord wants to pick Joe Blow to announce his message,(which would be a huge test of faith and would show Him who is really in tune) who are we to tell him he can't?
Jim said…
But Brigham was a fallen prophet or not a real prophet according to Denver, and his ilk. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the church has gone astray and all the keys and authority are lost or they are right and you are the ones falling away. Choose ye this day whom you will serve, as for me I serve the Lord and the path that has the means for redemption and exaltation.
mjcunningham said…
Not true. You can have cake and eat it too. How many times has Israel screwed up? How many times did they miss the boat? Can we even count that high? And yet the Lord continued to try to gather Israel in like a mother hen with her chicks.

It's the same now. We are the Lord's church. We do have the Book of Mormon. There is priesthood authority. How much? Not sure. I guess we'll find out when Christ comes back and restores whatever we are missing.

Does he talk to the apostles face to face like he did with Joseph Smith? If so, I really wish they'd testify to us about it. That was Joseph's whole platform! That God lives! That he had seen him. How I wish our church leaders would do that for us! How I yearn to have someone, anyone prophesy like Joseph did!

And... unlike some people I know, I don't have a problem with angels or the Savior himself, appearing to normal, everyday people. I believe he does do this still, and I don't believe it's only to Latter Day Saints.
Mike said…
I think we've mangled the understanding of keys/authority/stewardship in the Mormonite traditions of our fathers. In the model you seem to propose, there is not left any room for some of our scriptures:

D&C 42
91 And if any one [no mention of chain of command, hierarchy, stewardship] offend openly, he or she shall be rebuked openly, that he or she may be ashamed. And if he or she confess not, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of God.
93 And thus shall ye conduct in all things.

It would appear that people complaining and noting openly the openly embraced and taught errors of leadership is following the counsel of scripture, even if in opposition to the Handbook. Because complaints in search of change are the absolute right of the victim in the Lord's eyes, and if the argument against the complaint is that the victim lacks "keys" to honestly describe the nature of the offense, well I suppose abused wives and other such victims need to keep their mouths shut too, due to lack of stewardship over their oppressors. Because the parallel is truly the same, sadly perhaps to a lesser degree even, rather than greater. The complaints are against things that damage souls, not just bodies. And they are not an effort by people to command anyone, and don't fit the ever misused "steadying the ark". The complaints do not say the leaders have relinquished the keys to the complainers, and that they must now do as the complainer says or their church membership is in jeopardy. That would perhaps be steadying the ark. This is instead calling out to the ark bearers and saying "heads up guys, it's tipping, YOU may wanna adjust that.". The Lord not only allows but endorses this type of behavior in our scriptures.

D&C 107
82 And inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;
83 And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.
84 Thus, none shall be exempted from the justice and the laws of God, that all things may be done in order and in solemnity before him, according to truth and righteousness.

So the President of the Church is subject to the judgments of those with "less" stewardship/keys of the kingdom? So all are accountable not only to God but our fellow men? Interesting. Its almost as if the Lord anticipated the potential abuse and misunderstanding of authority, and wanted to prevent any sort of tyrannical consolidation from occurring.

Stewardship and keys have their place, but they were never intended to make the church run like the military, or a business, or any other corrupt Gentile institution. David O. McKay (and earlier leaders) spoke rather strongly against us doing this, but we did it anyway, and now the consequences stare us in the face. Keys and stewardships and the like were intended to prevent what they now, in many ways, are used to justify.
SteveF said…
My questions were to Tim, but I don't mind having a side discussion.

If some things Denver have said have helped you, I don't have a problem with that. I think most people have some good and some bad in them, so it doesn't surprise me that you can find good. There are many religious teachers the world over that I would view in much the same way in many respects. But the crux of my question isn't whether Denver is a person that can have good opinions/thoughts from time to time that may help certain people, but whether he is actually an authorized messenger from God as Tim has declared. I do not believe he is an authorized messenger, and purporting or believing as much if it isn't true I believe can be damaging.

I agree that if priesthood authority is taken away unrighteously, it will be remedied in the hereafter where it won't affect a person when all things are made right in the eternities. But as God has delegated His keys to mortals on earth to operate His kingdom, if they have removed a person's authority, that removed person no longer has right to exercise authority in or from the kingdom on earth.

At the very least, Denver's authority is no longer valid in or by the kingdom established through Joseph Smith on earth. And therefore if it is true that he is authorized by God to act here on earth, he must have attained his authority/keys independent of this kingdom by way of heavenly messengers, which means that God would be setting up another kingdom (divided against the first?).

Not only does this fly in the face of the prophesies in the D&C that describe the kingdom set up through Joseph Smith as the "last" one, but my understanding is that Joseph Smith also taught in principle that this simply wouldn't/couldn't happen in this last dispensation since that authority had already been given him:
“An angel, said Joseph, may administer the word of the Lord unto men, and bring intelligence to them from heaven upon various subjects; but no true angel from God will ever come to ordain any man, because they have once been sent to establish the priesthood by ordaining me thereunto; and the priesthood being once established on earth, with power to ordain others, no heavenly messenger will ever come to interfere with that power by ordaining any more.” (Millennial Star 8, pg. 139)

So again, I ask, if Denver is an authorized servant of Christ, by what authority/keys is he acting? And where did he get it?

God may pick what appears to us to be some random Joe Blow, but he will be Joe Blow given keys/authority to act for God.
EricDL said…
@SteveF,
"I would interpret", "I don’t think", "In my opinion", "I believe", "I would guess"

When it comes down to brass tax, in a context such as this, our personal perspective really doesn't matter all that much, does it?
What matters is our own individual journey, don't you think? Perhaps you feel inspired to warn him. Quite the conundrum if that is the case. Yet isn't that what we see throughout church history; former and latter brethren/leaders claiming the same Spirit of inspiration and yet the latter are denouncing many of the former's teachings. So who is right?
Are you right, SteveF or is Tim? Both of you can't be.

Tim testifies that the path he's on is according to the will of the Lord. This most recent post and specifically his "counsel" to those who are over him, he said the has Lord asked him to say. You feel the need to persuade him off his path. Who is right?

I wonder if we Mormons have regressed to the same state as the christian sects of Joseph's day in that "[we] teachers/leaders/brethren of religion of the different [Stakes and Wards] understand the same passage of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the [Standard works]".

But then again, in a context such as this, what I wonder really doesn't matter does it. Some reader on here will inevitably find something wrong with this reply. And some may agree. Who is right?

You know what...I think you get the picture.
helorum said…
DS is a prophet just like Joseph Smith said all prophets got the MelchizidekPriesthood .

"All priesthood is Melchizedek, but there are different portions or degrees of it. That portion which brought Moses to speak with God face to face was taken away; but that which brought the ministry of angels remained. All the prophets had the Melchizedek Priesthood and were ordained by God himself" (TPJS, pp. 180-81).
Dave Park said…
Hello Steve F, Great questions. I dont see the pretext to it though. Denver Snuffer has never said he is a Prophet, never. He has never said he holds any Keys to act. He has asked over and over for us all not to impose those titles upon him, just for this very reason I suspect. But few listen. Authority comes from the Voice of God. That is not what he or any true messenger from God seeks to establish for them selves in my view. The true Key to authority is to wield none. I dont understand what you seek here. But I hope you find the answers you do, David Park
SteveF said…
Yes, exactly EricDL. I think that's one of the primary conundrums the restoration solves, with so many opinions in the public sphere who is right?

The answer is God sets apart authorities with the keys of the kingdom to authoritatively declare and interpret the truth, and the church can consent to have that be the binding accepted truth for that time. Then it is up to all individuals to obtain personal revelation that these authorities do indeed hold authority from God, for which we would be obliged to look to them as Israel looked to Moses, and to further test their words to discover through personal revelation what we accept and believe privately. Of course, since all revelation is a best approximation of truth according to the level we have advanced privately and collectively, hence the need for living authorities to continue this process as great and many truths continue to be revealed as the kingdom of God continues to roll forth rooting out bad branches and grafting in good ones.

Without authority, there is only a war of words and general chaos - unity will inevitably fail, but since we have the keys/authority from God, and living prophets who hold them, I do not believe we have yet or will fall into the state of general Christianity.
SteveF said…
helorum, that's an interesting claim. Is it one Denver Snuffer himself has made?

And if he has, or if you believe your claim is true, how do you reconcile that with the quote from the Millennial Star I gave where Joseph said with the priesthood already established on the earth with power to ordain others, no heavenly messenger would interfere and come to ordain any another, because the authority was already given (restored) through him?
SteveF said…
That's my concern Dave Park, if he hasn't claimed keys or authority, why are people claiming he is an "authorized" messenger from Christ, or a "prophet" comparable to other prophets who have had authority from Christ. I think Denver has alluded to this claim of authority, but I have never seen him straightforwardly make the claim. So why heap the claim upon him?

I don't believe he has authority, and hence believe it is dangerous to assume or believe he does, since it could draw one away from God's true authority and kingdom on earth. I know God would not establish a new kingdom divided against a first one if He plans to keep the first one standing. Additionally, the D&C makes it abundantly clear that the kingdom established through Joseph Smith would not only be the last, but also that it will fill the whole earth while all other kingdoms will fall. As Joseph declared, "no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing".
Annalea said…
I'm sad I didn't manage to find someone who could point you out to me, Will. I would have liked to shake your hand.

Keep testifying. This world needs all the witnesses it can get. The words you use are your own, and will speak to some hearts differently than Tim's will, or anyone else's.

(Your comment would make a great blog post, hint, hint.) ;)
Helorum said…
Here is the problem in understanding DS. People want the short cut to knowing if he is a true messenger. There is no short cut. The only way to know if DS is a true messenger is to do what Tim has done: ..."years of studying, pondering and praying".

If DS is really what he says he is, we would be very unwise indeed not to put the effort into finding out for ourselves. He has published over a million words. Yet people want to understand him by reading a few of his blog entries. He has answered all of your questions. He needs no one to defend him. If it is worth it to find out if God has sent a true messenger put in the homework.

Having said that, no, DS has not explicitly made the claim that he has been ordained by God. He has not shared the specifics of his interactions with God and his Son. However, if you had read his writings the inferences are there. DS shares doctrine through using the scriptures and the writings of Joseph Smith, however, he knows much more that what he shares. He usually shares only what he can teach using already revealed sources. You would know that if you read his writings.

If you are curious about how priesthood is really obtained read his talk on the Priesthood. Then ask God if what he teaches, using scriptures and the revelations of Joseph Smith, is true. Then you will know how one "receives" the priesthood. Prophets do not receive the highest order of the Melchizedek Priesthood from angels. They receive it from God himself. Adam having conversed with the Lord through the veil desires now to enter his presence...Let him enter.
Annalea said…
An important thing to remember is that this quote specifies that the one condemning also has to claim s/he is "righteous". That is a rare instance, indeed, with Tim and Denver, and others along those lines. It's usually, "I know I'm not anyone special, and I make all kinds of mistakes. But this one thing I know . . . " Those who testify in this way often say "please don't follow me, I'm nobody special," and just want to point others to Christ.

Additionally, those outside of the hierarchy who are testifying are NOT claiming to be righteous, nor are they "finding fault". Finding fault means manufacturing problems with malicious intent. Those testifying currently are motivated by things like wanting to preach salvation through Jesus Christ, wanting others to realize they can receive the Baptism of Fire, receive their Lord in this life, and more. They want to bring to our remembrance the powerful and salvatory doctrines of the gospel, the first principles and truths, that were commonly spoken of and taught in the early church, and have been shut away in an attic corner for some unfathomable reason.

It's not reasonable to take one element of that Joseph Smith quote, eliminate all other requirements, and they apply it to those to whom it makes absolutely no reference.
Geoff said…
SteveF, good to see you online again. I keep up on Tim’s blog but do not speak up as often these days. I pray you the best, brother. I agree that there is less and less middle ground now when it comes to Denver. He has made some open declarations that his message is directed by the Lord and that he is His servant on His errand, specifically these 10 talks he is delivering, which you owe it to yourself to read if you have not been keeping up and intend to continue to engage in this ongoing conversation about him. Anyway, if you subscribe to what Denver calls the "brethrenite" paradigm, which is a very traditional/orthodox view (what you seem to be advocating), then there is no room for any prophets or true messengers of God from outside the institutional church hierarchy - essentially all is well in Zion, or at least at the top level (see Pres. Uchtdorf’s recent address: https://www.lds.org/prophets-and-apostles/unto-all-the-world/all-is-well?lang=eng). Nor would any true messenger/angel from heaven come to a person and reveal anything contrary to current church doctrine, policy, or practice - as this would divide the kingdom, as you say, and would be “out of order” - please correct me if I’m wrong, or clarify. See this post for DS's definition of the "brethrenite" paradigm vs his paradigm:

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-gulf-needing-bridge.html

I don’t want to assume, so perhaps you could confirm if this description matches your position (from DS's post linked above), or perhaps clarify which points do not match your view:

I call the first position the “brethrenites” because it is a shorthand way to capture the view: These Mormons believe that everything done since the death of Joseph Smith through Brigham Young and successors in the Presidency and Twelve of the LDS Church has been entirely conforming to God’s will. They believe “keys” were passed and, as a result, these successors control God’s power and can seal on earth and in heaven. They believe the statements made by the successors are invariably in the status of “prophet, seer and revelator” and therefore inspired by God (or binding upon Him by reason of the “keys” held). The general authorities are able to give binding statements as mentioned in D&C 1: 38. They speak the "mind of the Lord" as described in D&C 68: 4. As part of this construct, any criticism of the Brethren is by definition ‘evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed’ and therefore criticism is apostasy. These people also believe the scriptures are secondary to a “living oracle” and therefore the scriptures are not as important as whatever the president of the church says now.
Nonrandom Set said…
Just to be clear, I didn't apply it to anyone (but myself in subsequent comment). I would repeat, however, that whenever I find myself making excuses, rationalizing, thinking something doesn't apply to me, or otherwise getting legalistic about commandments, etc., that is when I most need to repent and get my heart right. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like that's human nature. Just something to think about.

I don't think finding fault has to be with malicious intent. It is often with very good intentions, certainly in the mind of the one finding fault. And many of these voices are not simply preaching salvation and the second comforter, etc. They are specifically identifying shortcomings of the leaders of the church. I don't know what to call that but fault finding.
Geoff said…
correction in first paragraph: "drastic potential consequences in D&C 124 if the people did NOT fulfill His commands?"
Geoff said…
sorry for the messy post, I block quoted wrong too but you can see the obvious error and break. :)
EricDL said…
@SteveF

I agree with most of this. However:

"for which we would be obliged to look to them as Israel looked to Moses,"

As I'm sure you are aware, former day Israel rejected, as well as latter day Israel rejects, ascending the mount to converse with God themselves but would rather have the prophet speak to God for them. Joseph, himself even spoke against dependence upon the Prophet. And Remember...Moses would to God that all his people were prophets. God spoke to Joseph from heaven and "gave him commandments; and also GAVE COMMANDMENTS TO OTHERS, that they should proclaim these things unto the world...that man should not counsel his fellow man, neither trust in the arm of flesh, but that EVERY MAN might speak in the name of God the Lord, even the Savior of the world." (Sorry about the caps, they are for emphasis, not yelling)

This is the premiss of Tim's and DS blogs...ascend the holy Mount and come and see and feel for yourselves. Do not depend upon any man for your salvation and exaltation.

That people believe DS to be a prophet doesn't bother me. (The jury is still out on that, for me) I like his message. I think it was -Good Will- who said he was not going to hear a man speak. He was going to hear if God spoke through this man

At the risk of redundancy...Tim says he (Tim) is doing the Lords will. You think he is on the road to apostasy. You both believe you're inspired. You both can't be right. And if Tim is Right. What the Lord wants him to do supersedes anything he is told to do otherwise by those over him. It is the same for anyone who will receive it.
EricDL said…
@SteveF,
that was supposed to go under your july 29, 2014, @ 3:57 pm post
sorry about that.
Annalea said…
The D&C "makes it abundantly clear" that no man can see the face of God and live without the Melchizedek priesthood. Denver has stated: "I have seen Him. He has ministered unto me." I'll leave the obvious conclusion that can be drawn from those two sentences to you.

Denver has also stated, over and over, that he only seeks to bring to our remembrance the things Joseph taught, as Joseph taught them. That he is NOT starting another church, and honestly just wants to disappear into the sunset on his Harley and be done with all this.

In the Wentworth letter, Joseph Smith wrote: "Our missionaries are going forth to different nations, and in Germany, Palestine, New Holland, Australia, the East Indies, and other places, the Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear; till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done."

"The work" is the "truth of God" going forth. Of COURSE no unhallowed hand can stop that! But unhallowed hands absolutely can make choices that influence earthly organizations. Unhallowed hands can (and have) chosen to disregard the D&C's clear instructions for how missionary work is to be conducted, how the church is to be run, and many more things.

If that wasn't possible, then we wouldn't have the well-known "Pride Cycle" in the Book of Mormon. The Nephites would never have fallen from righteousness, but would have continued as Nephi began, eventually being taken up into heaven as Enoch's and Melchizedek's cities were. The Zoramites' ramaeupmtom wouldn't have existed, nor could their hauntingly familiar style of worship. Defining "the work" as the church organization simply doesn't agree with scripture.

The Lord's truth will roll forth . . . with or without any given individual or group. But it does take a messenger whose words are ratified by the Holy Ghost, and the words must bear the fruit promised in scripture.

It's up to each individual to investigate for him- or herself, and to make the decision upon which their salvation hangs. It is quite the conundrum, and is as it should be.

Truth will weather any storm. The question is, will we seek it out as earnestly and relentlessly as the woman in the parable of the lost coin, and then abide in it once it is found?
SteveF said…
Agreed - that we should all be doing what we can to make the individual ascent up the mount.

I don't think we were/are like wicked Israel in terms of rejection of the opportunity since we have not had the Melchizedek priesthood taken from us, neither the ordinances of the Melchizedek priesthood (endowment, etc.) that open the gate to power in the Priesthood to make that ascent possible.

I also agree with you that people should follow what they believe the Lord is revealing to them, with caution and care, yes, but I definitely agree each person must ultimately follow what they feel God is revealing to them.
SteveF said…
That may be a sufficient response to the single quote, but the D&C makes it clear that it is the kingdom restored through Joseph Smith (not merely the truth) that will roll forth as the stone cut out of the mountain without hands to fill the earth.
SteveF said…
Geoff,

Good to hear from you again. My immediate thought is it would be the same reason the Lord warns anybody previous to them doing the right thing. Why warn Ninevah that they would be destroyed when God knew they would repent and not be destroyed? I'm sure there are many scriptural examples.

As far as what was or was not lost in Nauvoo, we discussed this so long in the 600+ comment section, and I repeated myself so often, I'm surprised you don't know what I would say to this. I went to great lengths showing and quoting the history of the restoration and passing on of the fulness of the priesthood, have you forgotten? Yes, Joseph Smith and Hyrum were lost, but the keys, authority, and Kingdom restored through Joseph were preserved to continue to roll forth as prophesied.
SteveF said…
Yeah, that doesn't describe my paradigm very well at all (particularly "everything...has been entirely conforming to God's will", "are invariably", "binding on Him", "criticism is apostasy" - I wouldn't say apostasy but rather a road thereto, "not as important as whatever..."). I find them to be mostly straw men, because I don't think most of them are believed by most people in the Church. Under this definition I can't say I've ever met a "brethrenite".

Last year I spent a great deal of time putting together some long emails describing my paradigm in pretty great depth. Did you read them? It feels like maybe you didn't. Or maybe you have just forgotten the things I said?
Tim Malone said…
Lynn, thank you for sharing the latest in your saga. I mentioned you to Denver in our dinner conversation Friday night. he said he is aware of you and many others in similar situations. Is there just something about Utah that some stakes are paranoid about Denver? I had an intelligent two-hour conversation with my Stake President, Bishop and Carol to consider the need to convene a council. We read from the handbook.

We discussed the possibility of prophets from outside the hierarchy. In the end, all the SP said was, I see no apostasy here. Go back and work it out with your bishop to get your temple recommend back. And we are working it out. Your situation is so similar to that of Will Carter. Why can I write about Denver in my blog yet if a member talks about Denver in the halls of the church to his neighbor he is then subject to disciplinary action? I don't get it.

It can't be because California is more tolerant because Will is from my state. Lynn, my wife and I have prayed for you many times in our family prayers and will continue to do so. God bless you my friend. I don't know what it is but every time I read something you have shared, my eyes are wet and I feel the love of the Lord for you. I talk to hundreds of online friends but there is just something about your situation that has the Lord's attention. I am in SLC until Sunday noon for the Sunstone symposium. God bless.

Tim 818-257-0513
SteveF said…
Because I take claims like DS's seriously, I have spent a probably inordinate amount reading much of what he has written/taught, including PtHG, some of the Second Comforter, and most of his blog and many of the transcripts from his talks.

I have prayed about it, and I know for myself that Denver is a false prophet, and is caught by a false and lying spirit, which is why I have spent a lot of time here warning others.

By revelation, I have an understanding of how Priesthood is obtained. On this point Denver teaches many false doctrines that are also contrary to that which Joseph Smith taught.
sfort said…
Let us refer to Joseph who said that keys are knowledge. The church has transposed this to mean authority strictly, thus the random keyholder speech by Oaks. Tim spoke true principles. Trying to retort truth born by the Spirit is a tough call. Claiming keys flowing from Joseph can only suffice if you know every detail of your history. Since there is a void, you can't claim keys, authority or anything of the sort. That takes you out of the calling and election train, becuse you put your faith in man. I am grateful to be with the fine brothers and sisters at the conference. Thank you.
mjcunningham said…
My comment is actually for SteveF, but it doesn't give me a place to comment to him. When I read that you have studied extensively about Denver Snuffer and prayed about it, and that your answer is that he isn't a prophet, I'm stumped. How does anyone comment on something like that? No one has the right to tell you you're wrong, but it does remind me of my sister telling me that she had read and studied the Book of Mormom, and prayed over and over about it, and the answer she got was that it wasn't true. It didn't ring true for her twenty years ago, and it still doesn't.

I have no answer for that. It's just inconceivable to me that she would get an answer like that. Naturally, most of us would say she hadn't studied enough, prayed hard enough, or wasn't worthy or something, but that's just stupid in my opinion. What I've come to conclude is that some people are ready for certain things and some people aren't. That doesn't mean anyone is better than anyone else, more gifted, more spiritual. It's just how it is. We are all on different paths, different levels of learning etc...

Arguing here about it isn't going to change anyone's feelings. I'm not going to convince you DS is a mouthpiece for God and you can't convince me he's not. We're at an impasse. ;)

(I don't mean you, per se, arguing. I mean the whole comment thread)
bd said…
SteveF, then we really are at an impass here.

I have also read, struggled in the spirit, and have received a witness of the things I've learned from the scriptures taught through Denver.

Neither of us is going to convince the other that the spiritual experiences we have received in relation to this material is something that we should discard. Resorting to logical argument, even based on the scriptures, is going to be fruitless, because the way I understand the scriptures and the things i have received witness of are personal. I cannot properly judge that your experiences are "wrong" anymore than you can judge that mine are "wrong."

All religion is necessarily anecdotal and based on personal experience with the spirit.

You are right, we have all gone the rounds for pages and pages, and neither of us is going to convince the other. The evidence (even scriptural) you use to back up your assertions ring as hollow to me as the ones we use to back our understanding sound to you.

It feels like groundhog day around here, all we do is go 'round and 'round talking past each other.

I wish I could've been in that room with Tim, Good Will, etc and partaken of that spiritual feast. Here all we get is the constant tearing down (and rising to defense, etc) of what many of us have been enjoying is getting exhausting.
SteveF said…
I agree with you. We may offer some points we feel could be helpful for one another to consider, but in the end we each need to follow what we feel the Lord has revealed to us personally.

"What I’ve come to conclude is that some people are ready for certain things and some people aren’t... We are all on different paths, different levels of learning etc…"

I feel the same way, and couldn't have said it any better. All the best!
johnD said…
SteveF
I'm not sure there is a delicate way to say this but.
Well you’re wrong. I have read all of his works and transcripts, went to the last two talks and can testify that he is a true messenger and on an errand of the Lord.
I have experienced the baptism of fire, have felt on more than one occasion the love of God wash through my soul, I know the difference, this isn’t a lying spirit, I’ve had experiences with that creature also and this isn’t it!
Make sure your witness hasn’t been generated by fear or pride or your conviction to the traditions of your fathers!
SteveF said…
If you are interested in my background, and the traditions of my fathers, see here, here, and here .

It's a bit long winded, but it is my testimony and you will see why this is such a personal thing for me, why I stick around in the face of so many opposing voices. I hope you'll take the time to see this from an alternate viewpoint. All the best!
Tim Malone said…
SteveF: My long-time friend Bill Mason, who is an instructor of many years in political science, logic and debate, has challenged me to a public duel, I mean debate, er...dialog on this very subject to be conducted before thousands of our friends on my Facebook wall. Don't know if this link will work, but here it is:

https://www.facebook.com/tim.malone/posts/10202028243974034?notif_t=like

Maybe I can run some practice responses with you in the days to come. Just to be clear, the two questions to which you would like a response are 1) what authority or power from God does Denver hold? and 2) How can anyone claim that priesthood power given by God cannot be removed by man? Is that a correct summary?
SteveF said…
Thanks for the reply. No, those are not quite accurate rephrasings of the questions.

Question 1 is only about authority, not personal power.

Question 2 is likewise about authority. And as per the Joseph Smith quotation from the Millennial Star that I've shared a few times now, we know that post-Joseph Smith with the priesthood already established with the ability to ordain others, priesthood authority/ordination will not come by way of heavenly messenger - they will not interfere (or if you feel I'm misunderstanding that quote, you can let me know your interpretation). So my question is why do you think authority in the Priesthood, that comes by way of ordination in the Church, cannot likewise be revoked by the Church? (Or please clarify if you don't believe that).
Always Pondering said…
Hi Tim, thanks for posting this reflection on recent DS talks. I look forward to reading them when they're up on his blog. My take on the 16 stones is that whether BofJ held them or not, he saw them filled with light. If he held them, I'm not sure he would have felt the finger of the Lord upon them or not. But I would imagine whether he held them or felt the touch of the Savior or not, he was thinking, "Lord, how is it done?" What must have been going through his mind? How it was done in this case was not by God's word, but by His touch. He showed Jared's brother that His touch is as powerful as His word. It strengthened the BofJ's faith to the point of receiving the Lord in fullness.

As to the latter part of your post, if I were one of the Brethren, I'd rather you try to persuade me by gentleness, meekness, long suffering and love unfeigned. Not saying your remarks aren't true, but how you expressed them felt harsh, not humble, nor long suffering, inviting, nor persuading. Just my take.
jenheadjen said…
I was going to comment on your FB thread but did not wish to appear disrespectful. (Hope you didn't mind my popcorn joke. I truly did enjoy the thread, minus the contention and CAPS that KEPT COMING UP! I wonder if he knows that's "yelling"?) Your "duel" was exactly what came to mind when I read it. A spiritual duel, surely involving spiritual weapons and defenses, resembling Sherem vs. Jacob, Korihor vs. Alma, and the adversary to Jesus, daring him to cast himself off the mount to prove he was God - to show the world a sign - three in fact, just as you have been challenged. I am surprised you accepted, as that was one of the most controlling, obtuse displays of aggression and attempts at unrighteous dominion I have seen in a semi-public forum, despite all the preceding comments above. Many will be watching, LDS and non. I hope and pray he understands his "priesthood" is on display. The Book of Mormon is alive and repeating itself in our day. May God grant you peace and inspiration in the endeavor. As always, God bless.
kt said…
If you read Samuel 3 you will not think that it is wrong for someone who is under a prophet to receive revelation about the prophet. IS that not what happened when Samuel was told by the Lord that Eli would have his house ended and that He would loose his position? Samuel, not Eli was told these things. Is that not backwards according to church policy? Just wondering... Maybe sometimes there are things the Lord would like the prophet to hear something from someone besides those who hail and say they love him.
Tim Malone said…
I always appreciate when someone points out where I have been overbearing or overly critical. Thanks for inviting me to temper my passion. As I reread what I wrote in the last four paragraphs, I had to agree with your assessment. It was harsh. I could have done better. Carol hinted the same when she read my post, although she didn't come out and say it. Men are clueless sometimes - it helps to be direct. Thanks for helping me work on my "tone" as my bishop has asked.
johnD said…
Tim/SteveF
I tend to keep things simple, for me, his authority, his errand of the Lord, is to return our hearts an allegiance back to the Lord and to reacquaint ourselves with Joseph and the restoration he led.
Whatever that authority is or keys it provides to fulfill that mission!.
Karl said…
I hold no animosity or resentment towards Denver Snuffer. Personally, I believe that he has been ministered to by the Lord. His first doctrinal book Second Comforter was great. Evidently, even seeing visions, angels and being in the Lord's presence does not create immunity from error, even gross error. I believe his last book, PTHG, which I read very carefully (3 times), contains gross error. Now, I don't think the church should have booted him out over this. I think the authorities should have kindly taken him aside and asked him to tone down the offensive anti-authoritarian rhetoric. In PTHG Snuffer posits: 1. The Saints were "rejected" for failing to complete the Nauvoo temple "on time." 2. A "fulness" of authority was not passed to Brigham Young (and hence his successors in office) 3. the term "gentiles" in the Book of Mormon always refers to the small inner circle of Saints that belong to the LDS denomination. Snuffer defends these attacks by stating he has merely quoted the original source material. While true, one must understand that any historian must select from a huge mound of material, to support a preexisting historical theory. To select a tiny amount of material and then to ignore a mountain of countervailing material is to be either disingenous, incompetent or dishonest. My judgment is that Snuffer failed to establish any of his major 3 theses. I fully recognize problems in the current leadership and organization of the church, but I do not think they are as desperate as Snuffer insists them to be. Comments on this blog are increasingly insisting that each must take a stand on Denver Snuffer. Well, I don't feel any obligation to do so. I think Denver Snuffer has a very important message for the leadership of the church; and that leadership will be forced to face up to the history and doctrine of the church in an honest approach, rather than the evasive approach of the past 80 years. To the degree this gets leadership's attention, good can come out of all of this. For those of you who are getting heated up emotionally over Denver Snuffer, I advise: please exercise caution. Denver has repeatedly requested that this is not about him, he does not request any following, and he wants you to make your contact with heaven individually. As for authority, Snuffer may insinutate he has authority, but until he explicitly claims it, this issue is moot. If and when Snuffer steps it up and crosses the line by competing with the Brethren over Authority or claims He has Authority (or Keys or whatever) and the Brethren do not, then that will take the controversy to a whole new level. Much of this blog is going back and forth on an issue that really isn't current (not yet) since Snuffer has nowhere claimed to have keys or authority. Many on this blog are critical, rightly so, of our idolatry towards the Brethren; let's just be careful that we are not simply trading our idolatry from church leaders to our idolatry to Denver Snuffer. Peace to all.
SteveF said…
The Church does not have the Melchizedek priesthood? Are you hearing yourself Tim? I'm assuming you have read the Doctrine and Covenants, but you have me wondering at this point.

So am I to understand that you believe that while baptism, offering the sacrament, ordaining priests, teachers, and deacons are authorized and accepted of the Lord as legally binding; there is no heaven-recognized laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost in the Church? There are no true Elders, no authorized consecrating of oil and anointing of the sick at the hands of the Elders of the Church, no true High Priests, no legally authorized endowment ordinances, no recognized or legally authorized temple ordinances, no true patriarchs by office, no true office of apostle in the Church? And President Monson's highest ordination from the Church actually recognized by heaven is the office of Priest (since it can't be High Priest as that is a MP office, and he is not a known descendant of Aaron, so he can't even be a Bishop)? In short, the Melchizedek Priesthood or keys of the kingdom restored by Peter, James, and John are no longer here because according to you they can't be passed on from person to person (never mind that Peter, James, and John are personages, that are not God, who passed them on to Joseph Smith, and the D&C records Joseph giving these very keys to others)?

You really believe all this?

When you try to prove the teachings and paradigm of Denver Snuffer by quoting the teachings and paradigm of Denver Snuffer, I guess this is where it lands you.

I would recommend judging his words against the standard works and the words of those who you know have held authority from God, instead of judging Denver by his own doctrine. Many to most of the claims you propose are both unscriptural and unfounded (I can list them if you'd like). Yes it seems Denver Snuffer has invented a whole world of doctrine that unsurprisingly supports his own claims and actions, unfortunately it is incompatible with the revelations of Joseph Smith, whose mission he claims to support.
Lynn Bernhard said…
Not sure what paper it was. One page, printed text with lots of blue pen notes written on it. When he mentioned his contact with other priesthood leaders he moved it from plain view to a place under his leather executive folder. I must be on the "Do Not Recommend List". Because I said I want to go to the temple, he smiled and changed the subject. I said again, "If you want to give me a recommend I will go the temple, if not I'll go to the mountain to see the LORD." He rocked back in the chair wringing his hands and nervously laughing "Heh Heh I guess you can..."

The voice of the LORD tells me to be long suffering. Read Luke 6: 22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.
23 Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is
great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.

I proclaimed that I follow Christ only and not a man. I guess I should leap for joy when I am cast out. A fist pump and a "Heck Yeah!" might be misunderstood by "men", so I smile, slip my scripture backpack on my back and pedal into the warm light of another beautiful Sabbath afternoon smiling and whistling the tune to "in Humility (My) Savior"...

"Fill (my) heart with sweet forgiving,
Teach (me) tolerance and Love.
Let (my) prayers find access to thee
in thy Holy Courts above.
Then when (I) have proven worthy of thy sacrifice divine,
Lord, Let (me) regain thy presence...
Let thy Glory round (me) shine."

Peace brother Geoff. Thx. lb
Lynn Bernhard said…
Thanks Tim. Your prayers and a prophet's love is felt. One interesting emotion I have experienced is the desire to be noticed, acknowledged, embraced. I resisted a public display when gathered with the Saints last weekend, the Holy Ghost moved me to remain alone in that time and place. I like many others must be very cautious about replacing our desire for "oneness" with GOD with the emotion of "belongingness". Belonging is cheap and fleeting, oneness bears a heavy price but remains when the crowds have withdrawn or worse yet turn to stone you. It has been curious to have those feelings as I cling to the WORD. Respectfully, lb
Jim said…
On the issue of a person losing their priesthood upon being excommunicated I would cite how the Book of Mormon treated those who had their names crossed out of their church records. They had to be re-baptized. Now I will admit that the baptism used in the time of Alma was used as a sign for a Covenant, but it still sets the precedent that after a person repents they are again admitted to the fold and church of God only after baptism according to the Book of Mormon.

Secondly, Priesthood authority is not some magical power but is authority (access) to the Holy Spirit. Therefore if a person needs to be re-baptized to be considered back in the fold, by what strain of logic or reason do we think God will allow that man to access the Holy Spirit when they have been removed from the fold?

Finally all priesthood authority in THIS CHURCH flows from a covenant established by God with this Church. Thus if the church strikes you from its records you are removed from "its" covenant. You have no access codes, passwords, administrator rights, or such, no right to the priesthood granted by the church.

Another example is where you are released from a calling simply by a vote of thanks. Do you have any right to the former keys and authority, even though they were bestowed by the laying on of hands? No it returns to the source which issued the calling. And I know what you are thinking Bishops and Patriarchs. True they keep the keys but they become dormant.

The end result is if you are out of the church you no longer have legal claim to the priesthood you once had because you are now out side that covenant. The ONLY way to have that returned is either return to the fold via the requirements of the Covenant or establish your own Covenant with the Lord.

And that creates a whole new conversation about what is going on.
Lynn Bernhard said…
Geoff, you revealed a mystery of godliness that is before us with the scientific evidence of the electric universe. GOD's prophets have been teaching this for 1000's of years. It is our turn to understand the truth as it is.
Good Will said…
Lynn,

I commend you for your valiance! You will stay true to following Christ.

However, I would recommend, in your case, to "follow the Brethren" inasmuch as they do not counsel you to sin. If they lead you sin, give them no heed! And suffer the consequences (for Christ's sake!). But if they do not lead you sin, then do as they say, as it is their "right" to lead the Church (and you would want to be shown the same deference if you were thus "called to serve"). That is my counsel.

Even so, they should NEVER lead by compulsion, control or dominion "in any degree of unrighteousness". (Note that there must be "righteous" forms of these actions, too, or that modifying clause would not have been included in the scripture.) Only by persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness and meekness, and love unfeigned, kindness and pure knowledge. (This is a GREAT "rule" by which we ought to govern our households, as well.)
Good Will said…
In all case, do what Christ commands you to do.

Otherwise, it is well to "follow the Brethren"...until you are told otherwise.
Jim said…
But that is the Point. When a true messenger comes he announces his errand. Moroni, Abinidi, Alma Amulek the list goes on and on. Never does the person obfuscate his commission. He is either sent by God or not. If he is just a guy then why are you throwing away your Covenants? Look at the discord and contention that has been caused by this and other teachings by DS. Correct me if I'm wrong but what does the Book of Mormon say about contention, what fruit is being created by those who follow DS.

I do not see the fruits of DS having the sealing priesthood, I hear words but no traces of that endowment. I am not looking for a sign but the lord through the scriptures has taught me what to look for in a true messenger. It feels like a flaxen cord to me. I have so many red flags going off I feel like I am at May Day parade.

We can talk all we want but the core teaching I have been seeing from DS is that the Lord is displeased with us and has sent DS to help us.

Help us do what?

If he has received his errand from the Lord and an endowment to enable him to do it, why all the pretense of I don't want to be here. The only messenger I know who took that position was Jonah. And we all know how that one turned out.

A true messenger from the Lord stands boldly as Abinidi and confounds the wicked. He stretches for his hand stops them from touching him till he delivers his message. Samuel did the same thing, but he was sent to a city not the Prophet Nephi.

DS for all his talk tries not to be accountable for his doctrine. If its the Lord he will stand tall and take ownership.

I can say unequivocally by using the standard of the Book of Mormon and prayer too. Denver Snuffer is NOT a Prophet, but is a man who teaches the philosophies of men mingled with scripture. When you get down to the root of the entire series of talks his main purpose is contention.

I follow no man, and I include church leaders. I follow the Savior and sustain those he has called with all their faults. I know my Savior and I am not running out to the desert or the Mountains to find him. Lo here Lo there type stuff. I have gone through my own personal Gethsemane in this life and I know this is not the path, so either DS is following the wrong spirit or I am. No two ways about it. There are Only two churches.

We each must make a choice and live with the ramifications of that choice.
Good Will said…
In my case, quite frankly, they left me no other choice. As far as "false doctrine" is concerned, I admitted that I believe the same things Snuffer believes, more or less. (Is that a "sin"? Apparently so, but in what way, they wouldn't say.)

The real "kicker" came, apparently, when one of them announced that Christ does not personally save us. They (practically) demanded that I renounce that He does! (Apparently, Denver's claim that Christ "saved" him personally is was what got him "booted" from the Church, as well. Apparently, only General Authorities get to meet (and be saved by) Christ...and if they haven't, you can't either!)

Well, I couldn't do that! I COULDN'T say that! (Didn't anyone in that meeting remember the scripture saying that those who deny Christ before men He will deny before His Father? Apparently not.)

Anyway, the proper course, in my opinion, is to stay in the Church until they boot you out! In that, there can be no sin (if you keep the commandments). I would urge you to not "contend" with them. I got upset, raised my voice in anger, practically berated my bishop in his office for his condemning me unrighteously. I should have just "taken it" meekly. I guess the shock that a bishop would do that was just too much for me. Now I know. When we know what's coming, it's a lot easier to take.

Be of good cheer. (It won't be fun. It will hurt a lot! But you will be closer to the Lord, in the end.)
Jim said…
I agree most heartily with your comments Karl. And for any one whom I may have offended with my earlier comments I am sorry.

We are all brothers and sisters of an Eternal God and as such we should love one another.
Good Will said…
Jim,

There are only two churches (according to 1 Nephi 14:10): those who repent and come unto Christ (D&C 10:67) and those who don't.

Members of the LDS Church (and its leadership) are not necessarily included among the former group.

Snuffer's ministry is apparently not intended for you. That does not make him a follower of a "wrong spirit" nor does it mean that you are wicked. It may simply mean that his "commission" does not involve you.

Go in peace.
grip said…

If he has received his errand from the Lord and an endowment to enable him to do it, why all the pretense of I don’t want to be here. The only messenger I know who took that position was Jonah. And we all know how that one turned out.


Yes, we do.


5 ¶So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

6 For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.

7 And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:

8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.

9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?

10 ¶And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.


Jonah 3:5-10
mjcunningham said…
so, for anyone who is interested, there is a new kids on the block lol. Her name is Julie Rowe. she claims to have had a near death experience and to have been shown a vision very similar to what we read in the book, Visions of Glory. She was told not to discuss what she saw with anyone until now. Anyway, if what she says is true, everything is coming to a head very soon.
mjcunningham said…
Dang! Accidentally hit the post button before I had a chance to edit. Anyway y'all should look for her book. She talks about a man who comes as a false prophet who leads a ton of people from the church away. And she described what the guy looks like. I am a believer in Denver snuffer's message, and I worried for a minute if she was talking about him. I certainly don't want to be one of those who is led away. But she describes him looking totally different than the DS. Very fascinating to me though. The whole thing.
kathryn said…
Karl

Thank you so much for your comments. I agree! I think there are those who are putting Denver in a position, by insinuation, that he has stated over and over that he does not care to be. It feels like a game of "Button, Button, whose got the Button?" I don't see that it is necessary to give him a "Title" of any kind to validate his message.

The leadership of the church is certainly in a tight position right now with history and doctrinal differences and it will be interesting to see how they handle it. They need to be honest and upfront and perhaps it will stem the tide of those who are leaving the membership right now. The lack of upfront dialogue is one of the issues that has disappointed so many and has put the brethren in a perceived dishonorable position.

This disconnection trend use to be "out there" but now it has crept in to my own family and so many of the families of my ward. I can count 5 in my immediate neighborhood that have children who are facing challenges of belief in this church. (And that's just who I know about.)

In my findings, there is so much conflict in the history it's really hard to determine what is true original source and what is not. So much history has been altered to meet the standards of the time in which it was re-written.

Apparently is it's common for historians to change interpretation to fit what they think should be said to meet the present day's opinions. This undertaking is called "retoactive continuity or "retcon. It makes for a poor understanding of what actually happened or was said in source or done in the original event.

We see this approach in American and World history all the time and it is usually influenced by the acting political system. The history books our children are reading are certainly not what I learned in school.
It was a common practice in the 1800's with our church history writers and we are certainly affected by it now. (I have examples...that I could share and perhaps I will in a later post.) The brethren are in a "Fix" and need our prayers and support.

Even though there are differences of opinion and doctrine between Denver and some of the theology the Church is teaching, we are held together by more commonality than just three issues or four unconfirmed issues, as you specified in your post. Thank goodness!

It is a testimony to me that it's more important than ever to stick to scriptures and hang on to the "Iron Rod." Our testimonies cannot be based on historical evidences that are shaky at best.

Even though I do not agree with everything, I love what Denver is sharing in his lectures in regards to the Lord. My testimony of Christ is strengthen by each lecture. St. George was wonderful. It has been "Good" for me. (Alma 5:40.) Until I feel or am told differently by the spirit, I will continue to enjoy his words. I will also continue to sustain the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and it's intended mission to spread the gospel that allow others to participate in the saving covenants.

As always... "Go to the Lord for confirmation."
kathryn said…
Mjcunningham

Apparently you enjoyed the book. I tread tenderly on discrediting another person's experience. However, I have read about 15 near death experience books through the years and this is the first one I though was not as convincing as the others I have read.

First of all, the book was filled with gospel lectures. I do not want to be taught the story of Joseph of old... nor all the other scriptural accounts. I can learn directly from the scriptures. I didn't see how all of that had any really baring on her personal experience unless it was to try and validate her experience in some way.

I find that near death experiences that are soooo LDS seem less credible. (With the exception of Visions of Glory and perhaps that is because I trust John Pontius, who was the author who put Spencer's experience into words.)

Again... I'm not in a position to judge her experience but it just did not persuade me as the others have done. However, the part about the false prophet was interesting. My very favorite of all time is "Return from Tomorrow" by George Ritchie. Another favorite was "Proof of Heaven" by Eben Alexander, a medical Dr. And of course, Heaven is for Real by Todd Burpo is wonderful. "Out of the mouths of babes..."

Just my "book report" point of view.
mjcunningham said…
I ordered the book. I have only heard the radio show she was on up to this point and I was curious. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt and do not take other's opinions personally, so I will have to see how I feel when I read her book

Another really great one is, There is No Death. I love reading about people's experiences. They fascinate me and I would LOVE to have one of my own, but I don't want to get hurt or be so sick that I die. LOL I'm not that desperate.

Referring to the heated discussions above... remember, we don't have to agree. There's nothing wrong with SteveF saying he got a "no" answer to the DS question. We can't take other people's opinions personally. Getting angry, telling someone "You're wrong!" is the quickest way to turn people off to anything and it certainly isn't how the Lord wants us to treat each other. Having to be "right" is the most dangerous emotion. We have to let go of that need and just share our hearts. That's just my two cents.

Tim has done this so well and so openly. I could not talk as openly as he does. I have loved this post and the conversation it has generated. This is what it's for. To get us talking and communicating. This is wonderful!
Geoff said…
Karl, thank you for your comments and perspective, do you mind sharing your list of the "gross errors" you noticed in Passing The Heavenly Gift? Denver stated upfront that PTHG was not a historical work, in the traditional sense, but rather an interpretation of the history from a prophetic and scriptural perspective. I think that was the key to the historical sources he selected as evidence, which from a academic/historian perspective would seem completely biased and not up to snuff :).
Geoff said…
Some of Denver’s latest declarations are very clear and bold:

Ephraim, p.49-50
If you will receive it, faith in Him comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10: 17). Not by a
pretender, not by someone guessing, not by someone offering up their theory of how the
scriptures ought to be understood. Faith does not come by hearkening to someone citing you a
bibliography. Faith comes only by hearing the word of God delivered as He would have it
delivered, by whomever it is that He may choose to deliver it (Romans 10: 14-17).

If you receive God’s word sent by someone He sends, then you might have faith, and that
too in the Son of God. Then you also might receive Him. But if you will not, if you will harden
your hearts, if you will blind your minds, if you will not receive what He offers from His mouth in your day, then you do not have faith in Him. You will fall short of that faith required to
become His son and His daughter.

It is that way, it has always been that way, it will always be that way. There is no other
test.

Therefore, either I am a liar and you ought to forget everything I've said, or I have been
sent by someone greater than I am. If I have been sent and you reject and quibble over the things
I declare to you, it is at your peril!

It ought to be that way. I ought to be damned if I'm a pretender, and I ought to be damned
and rejected by God if I'm saying things about which I know nothing! But I bear witness to you I
know what I'm talking about. I have no reason to lie to you. I have no reason to pay to reserve a
place to speak to you, and ask nothing of you but to listen. It requires a sacrifice to do what I am
doing. I have no other reason to do this than to tell you the truth. Joseph Smith testified to these
things and I am come as a second witness. Therefore you now have two proclaiming the same
doctrine.
Geoff said…
Sorry, previous post was poorly formatted. Some of Denver’s latest declarations are very clear and bold:

Ephraim, p.49-50
If you will receive it, faith in Him comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10: 17). Not by a pretender, not by someone guessing, not by someone offering up their theory of how the scriptures ought to be understood. Faith does not come by hearkening to someone citing you a bibliography. Faith comes only by hearing the word of God delivered as He would have it delivered, by whomever it is that He may choose to deliver it (Romans 10: 14-17).

If you receive God’s word sent by someone He sends, then you might have faith, and that too in the Son of God. Then you also might receive Him. But if you will not, if you will harden your hearts, if you will blind your minds, if you will not receive what He offers from His mouth in your day, then you do not have faith in Him. You will fall short of that faith required to become His son and His daughter.

It is that way, it has always been that way, it will always be that way. There is no other test.

Therefore, either I am a liar and you ought to forget everything I've said, or I have been sent by someone greater than I am. If I have been sent and you reject and quibble over the things I declare to you, it is at your peril!

It ought to be that way. I ought to be damned if I'm a pretender, and I ought to be damned and rejected by God if I'm saying things about which I know nothing! But I bear witness to you I know what I'm talking about. I have no reason to lie to you. I have no reason to pay to reserve a place to speak to you, and ask nothing of you but to listen. It requires a sacrifice to do what I am doing. I have no other reason to do this than to tell you the truth. Joseph Smith testified to these things and I am come as a second witness. Therefore you now have two proclaiming the same doctrine.
SteveF said…
Geoff, if you are really serious about studying these things out in your mind to the best of your abilities to get answers to your questions, I would recommend reading and studying in full each of the following sources:

- Words of Joseph Smith by Ehat and Cook (I would recommend finding a printed copy from someone, but if not you can find an inexpensive electronic version if you look)
- The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power by Michael Quinn
- Part 1 and Part 2 of Greg Smith's PtHG review (also see the comment section of Part 2 for further discussion on time needed to build the Nauvoo temple)
- David Buerger Thesis on the Fulness of the Priesthood in LDS theology
- Andrew Ehat Thesis on the introduction of temple ordinances and the 1844 succession crisis.

I believe together these will give you the information needed to study it out in your mind and heart as you let the Spirit guide you and reveal the answers to you in the Lord's due time. It will be a lot to take in, many people (I would think maybe even a majority of people in the Church) are probably not ready for such an intensive study and the information found in these sources, so it may also be good to pray and ask God if you are prepared for the information you will find. I wish you the best in journey, feel free to email me any time.
Tim Malone said…
As always, I am amazed at the open dialog that ensues on these posts. It feeds both my mind and my soul. I thank each of you, my friends, for your civil and thoughtful contributions. What I am about to share is mainly in response to SteveF, whose comments I have been pondering all day. I also write this with my Bishop and Stake President in mind. I do not want to defend myself against apostasy again.

I simply cannot adequately explain the difference between what we know in the church to be Melchizedek Priesthood and what the Lord has taught me about the higher priesthood. So I will refer solely to the priesthood we call the Melchizedek and leave the higher or patriarchal priesthood out of my comments. It just seems to upset people. It is something you apparently have to be taught directly from the Lord.

The only one who has come close to explaining it that I have been able to ascertain is Denver Snuffer and that is because of his claims to have been taught directly by the Lord - after much study and crying mightily as did the Brother of Jared and as did Enos and other prophets. I hope the main message of my post has not been overlooked. There is an answer to parting the veil contained in that phrase - to cry mightily.

To clarify: SteveF, your response is warranted. If someone were to claim the LDS Church does not have the Melchizedek priesthood then that would seriously undermine the position of the Church, wouldn't it? To openly teach such a doctrine would be heresy or apostasy as we call it in our church today. I am not teaching this doctrine. I am simply presenting it for your consideration as I have understood it from Denver.

I am still trying to understand it. I continue to fast and pray about what I have been taught about priesthood and what I am learning from both the writings of Denver Snuffer and from the ministrations of the Lord. I have not stood in the Heavenly Councils and discussed this with any angels or Gods. But I have studied and pondered it for hours on end. It takes long, solemn, serious and ponderous thought to know truth.

Since Friday's lecture, my prayers have changed. I understand now why I have not been able to part the veil after so many prayers asking the Lord to reveal Himself to me. I know the timing is the Lords, but I now understand there is a difference between praying and crying mightily to the Lord. It's not a matter of a loud voice. It's a matter of passion and a matter of desire. It's a matter of willing submission.

In my comment above in response to your comment asking about priesthood - which I am going to append momentarily - I should not have stated the church does not have the Melchizedek priesthood. I should have said the Church does not have the higher priesthood and left it at that. It is up to you and me to determine just what the Lord means by higher priesthood. I am not trying to undermine the position of the church in this regard. Besides, this is just a discussion blog.

I know I shouldn't have to restate the obvious but if you want the official doctrine of the church, go to lds.org. This is a blog where we discuss ideas related to the gospel of Jesus Christ as well as the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I am not authorized to teach doctrine for the Church. I am only presenting ideas to discuss. Please don't be troubled by my inadequate ability to express what I had hoped would be of help to others in parting the veil to receive the Lord.

For my Bishop and Stake President: I know the position of the church as found in the scriptures in regards to the Melchizedek priesthood. If you get a call from a member of our Area Authority asking you to set me straight, please know that I already get it. I am simply soliciting an open dialog here about parting the veil and coming into the presence of the Lord. We happened to get sidetracked on discussing priesthood. I am not trying to undermine the position of the church on authority.
jeremyhoop said…
Dear brother SteveF, in sincerity I ask you, was Abinadi following that "celestial law" as you put it? Was Samuel the Lamanite? Was Lehi? Was Paul (who by the way, came to know his Lord before he had met the Apostles), was Moses? The scriptures are full of examples of the Lord calling prophets outside of the established order and hierarchy of the "church" when that order has become corrupted. When one receives an errand from the Lord, he must do as the Lord directs or be condemned. It is incumbent upon the hearer to seek the Spirit to know if that person is a true messenger and not simply to cast the messenger out because of unbelief. By the way, if the "head of the church" is never to be counseled, questioned, criticized, reprimanded (sounds a lot like a pope more than a president of the church), then why is there provision in the D&C for the President to by tried by a body of the priesthood? The Lord has an established order for his kingdom, and part of that order is, when those who lead his people err, he calls servants to go down into the vineyard (often from outside the vineyard) to dig about the trees, to prune the trees and try to preserve the good fruit for the Lord. If we have eyes to see and ears to hear, then we understand. If our necks are stiff then we cannot see nor hear.
jeremyhoop said…
@ SteveF, in response to "The answer is God sets apart authorities with the keys of the kingdom to authoritatively declare and interpret the truth, and the church can consent to have that be the binding accepted truth for that time."

It is our tradition (though demonstrably not scriptural doctrine) that the great High Priest who hold all of the keys over the House of Israel will never be permitted to lead the Church astray--this was said by Wilford Woodruff in the wake of the 1890 manifesto and we are left to judge by the Spirit whether he made that statement by the Spirit and in accordance with the Lord's revealed word and pattern. This tradition is what underpins your above statement. Therefore in the Church today we have a pervasively false doctrine that we bandy about to our peril and it is basically the same as the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope. This statement by Wilford Woodruff has no scriptural authority, has never been established as actual doctrine and defies common sense and reason. It defies agency (on the part of the person chosen to lead Israel) it defies the order of heaven. If that were true today, should that not also have been true of ancient Israel, and also of the Nephites who also had their High Priests whom we should agree led the people astray? So your point at its root is flawed because your point presumes that the "authorities" cannot err as they declare doctrine, interpret the truth, etc. As has been pointed out above, how many times do we need to point out about the a modern "prophet" declaring the "revealed truths" of a former "prophet" to be false? Bruce R. McConkie and Brigham Young can't both be right--unless of course they were both wrong. Steve, until you acknowledge that your premise is built upon the false doctrine of 'infallibility' then there likely can be no reconciliation here between those who believe that Lord can call prophets out of "stones" on the side of the road if He chooses, and those who believe that nothing with occur by the Lord's hand unless it comes through the chain of command. This I offer in humility and with love and concern for the welfare of your soul as you are concerned for Tim's.
SteveF said…
I'll take you at your word that your questioning is sincere. Yes, I believe they were following (or at least doing their best to follow) the celestial law. I don't see evidence that the people you listed were sent to call to repentance or command those most likely at their head, Abinadi was not sent to Benjamin, Samuel was not sent to command Nephi what to do, Lehi did not call Jeremiah to repentance, Moses was called to be the head of his day/time, and Paul showed his knowledge of this principle when he discovered the position of the High Priest, and in his position of authority he worked with and next to Peter (where perhaps in the heat of some moments, Paul did overstep his bounds a couple of times, for which I do not doubt reconciliation was eventual made).

The order and organization of the kingdom in these times and places are not clearly outlined, but I am confident all these prophets held proper authority and keys, and I see no evidence that they went out of bounds of their respective stewardships.

I don't recall suggesting the President of the Church should not be "questioned" in the proper time and place. As you rightly point out, the President of the Church is liable to be brought before a disciplinary council, where this designated council has authority if they see fit to remove the President from his position. All done in order and according to the permissible actions of the stewardships of each priesthood holder involved.
jeremyhoop said…
@ Nonrandom Set, are you familiar with the context of Tim's "warnings against being anti-christ, admonishment to teach true doctrine, speculation about motives, claims (unsubstantiated) about them delegating their duties to the bureaucracy, etc", and why he is speaking so forcefully?
jeremyhoop said…
New wine is not grape juice. It is a fermented drink--were it not so, how could it burst "old bottles". Just sayin'.
SteveF said…
Sounds more like a response to Wilford Woodruff than to me. I'm not sure why you ascribe a position to me that I never made.
jeremyhoop said…
mjcunningham, I'm beginning to believe, that though our numbers are few, there are many of us out here that feel like you. You're definitely not alone.
jeremyhoop said…
@ SteveF, the only question that matters is, did Denver stand in the presence of the Lord, speak with Him, presumably touch Him, perhaps have Hands laid upon him, and receive instruction from Him. If so, his is "authorized". If not he is a deceiver. You seem convinced that his is the latter.
jeremyhoop said…
Actually Jim, there are not only 2 churches. There is the church of the devil, the churches of men, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and the The Church of the First Born. We are all, or were in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a church whose members are for the most part ignorant of the existence of the higher church and what is required to be a part of it. As far as I can ascertain, DS is not advocating anything but look to Christ (not to himself) and live. He is expounding doctrines (not revealing new ones) already laid out by the Lord's prophet for this generation. He is simply a second witness for the truth's already restored. He receives no compensation for his efforts, seeks to establish no church, asks for no following, and as far as I can tell, delivers his messages in meekness and humility. He encourages members to stay in the Church, work and serve within it. He simply speaks what he believes is true about the origins, development, and current state of the church--nothing new here--views that are held by MANY sincere, faithful members (as acknowledged by Pres. Uchtdorf). Above all, he advocates that you and I and any who wish to can have a personal experience with the Savior. What is the error in that? And why are you so concerned? Do you believe all is well in Zion--at least as far as the brethren are concerned?
jeremyhoop said…
@ Geoff and @ SteveF, as a paralell to your comment Geoff, a careful study of 3 Nephi 16, 20 & 21, the entire book of Isaiah--read as a single end times prophesy, and the D&C as well as myriad statements by numbers of formers prophets and apostles reveals plainly (see 3 Nephi 16: 10-15) that the latter day "gentile" church--(it is a plain case to make that the Lord is referring here, as does Isaiah in many places, to the the LDS church today) would indeed "reject" the "fulness" of the gospel by doing just as ancient Israel (see D&C 84: 19-24) and not accept the invitation to "enter the rest of the Lord". It is abundantly clear that the Latter Day Saints rejected that invitation, as a people and not necessarily individually, and that the Church remains under "condemnation" today because we still have not accepted that invitation. All is not well in Zion. Although i must add that I love the Church and I sincerely believe that there is not a better people under heaven. We simply must awake to our awful situation. It's painful, and requires a great deal of humility and patience, but it must be done if any of us are to escape the judgments that are first to be poured out on the Lord's own house.
Geoff said…
can't seem to post the rest...
jeremyhoop said…
Tim, it takes a great deal of introspection, meekness, and humility to admit what you just did. I applaud you for that, and thank you for the sincere effort you are making to explore and expound truth and expose error.
jeremyhoop said…
Sound reason and understanding, unfortunately, don't penetrate beyond people's traditions. It was true is Moses' day, true in Joseph Smith's day and remains. kt, you speak the truth, but who will hear? Not those who, out of fear of falling off the path, cling to every tradition that proceeds forth from the mouths of men as though it came from God himself. Boy Nephi said it well: "And now I, Nephi, cannot say more; the Spirit stoppeth mine utterance, and I am left to mourn because of the unbelief, and the wickedness, and the ignorance, and the stiffneckedness of men; for they will not search knowledge, nor understand great knowledge, when it is given unto them in plainness, even as plain as word can be."
Geoff said…
Tim, feel free to delete my duplicate posts, like this one. :)
Geoff said…
Tim, feel free to delete the post above, which is a poorly formatted duplicate of the one below. :)
Geoff said…
Probably the one above, since I edited the one below slightly. Sorry and thanks.
jeremyhoop said…
I appreciate you comments very much and your tone. I do believe that the Book of Mormon and Isaiah references to "gentiles" can be firmly and clearly established to mean the LDS church...it takes time to lay the case but it can be done plainly and effectively. Whether or not Brigham Young lost a "fulness" of authority, I don't know, but I do believe it can be laid out clearly that he started monkeying around with the already established order of the church and especially the priesthood, and it continued and worsened from there. Whether the saints were "rejected" simply for not completing the temple, I'm not sure, but the D&C is very clear that they were (and we remain) under condemnation for rejecting the "fulness" of the gospel: i.e. the BoM and the former commandments (as laid out in the D&C which include consecration and the invitation to enter into the rest of the Lord). DS is not alone in his critique of the Church. There are many faithful Latter Day Saints who love the Lord and love the Church who share similar if not the same views. And we are not on the road to apostasy but are seekers of light and truth. Peace to you.
Geoff said…
Thanks, Jeremy. I agree with you.

I do not want to be guilty of dismissing any true message from the Lord on the basis of institutional/traditional bias, prejudice, or fear. Orthodoxy has changed even in my lifetime and cannot be the standard of truth. I desire to proceed with faith not fear.
Jim said…
@ Goodwill I usually try to avoid the back and forth arguments but i just want to be clear. I Did not mean the LDS church and its leaders when I was referring 1 Nephi 14:10, I was referring to all people and all things that either lead to Christ or away from him. Having said that my reasons for saying beware of the Doctrine of DS is entirely personal. When I first heard him I thought it was great but as I listened their were things which did not lead ME to Christ with what was being taught.

There are some extremely subtle things Denver teaches that I feel are dangerous because they set up a false premises which people can base their understanding on. I say this again from personal experience with my own understanding. And yes I have taken it to the Lord. .And I know it is wrong.

Now is it wrong just for me and my family,or for you, and your family, or for all others? All I can say is that according to the Book of Mormon there is save one path. The trick in life is to find that path and hang on.

Even in other areas of the world where the LDS church has little influence the Lord is working to bring those who want the Living waters to the fountain.

I have no animosity toward you or DS or anyone else, you are free to choose. But I know if I fail to open my mouth after the Lord has saved me (and I don't mean that in evangelical way) both physically and spiritually. I would not be able to stand before my Lord and Savior and bear to look at him and excuse myself for failing to warn because it was not my place to open my mouth.

I don't wish to harm or denigrate anyone, but I must warn.

Good will, we have never met and we know nothing of each other but that we disagree. I hope you can understand why I have said what I have said. May the Lord Bless you.

Jim
Annalea said…
Jim, please, share what it is Denver has said that led you away from Christ, and how or why it did so. Without explanation, without shining a light into what you are saying is a dark corner, you leave everyone else in the dark as well.

As I have raised and taught my children, I quickly learned they must gain understanding and experience in order for my warnings to carry any weight. No matter how often or firmly I could warn a small child, "Don't touch the stove, it's hot and will burn!", my warning held little weight for them because the words "hot" and "burn" we're totally outside of their experience. I care for my little ones' safety, and so they had no point of experience from which to reckon the import of my warning. They had been protected from being burned, so I spoke from my own experience into their knowledge gap, and my words didn't mean anything. I could've used fear to get them to obey, "for their own good", by talking up how horrible burns are and threatening punishment if they touched the stove. But that's not a healthy way to parent. I don't want my children living in fear . . . not of me, or of anything else. I want them to walk in understanding, and make choices in confidence. And so, I would find a way to help my little child SAFELY learn what "hot" meant, so they could understand why touching something hot isn't a good idea.

As things stand, my experience with the things you state have led you away from Christ has been the polar opposite . . . and so I'm asking you, in all sincerity, to help me understand your warning. As it currently stands, it holds no weight of influence. And yet, I have a strong impression of your kind & concerned heart behind what you have written.

You have responded to others' questions about your statements, so I have good reason to believe you will see this. Please, help us understand, so if there truly is a burn danger, we can avoid it.
Eric said…
We all know that we should use the tone and wording that the Lord would have us use. Many times prophets speak boldly.

However, if He leaves it up to our own wording, it doesn't seem to hurt to err on the side of humility.

Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder [Greek presbyteros - the priesthood office]. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble. (1 Peter 5:5; see also James 4:6)

If there's any power I continually need access to, it's God's unfathomable, amazing grace. Humility goes right along with offering the broken heart and contrite spirit that He would like us to sacrifice.

Unfortunately, written words without the accompanying nonverbal communication that a face-to-face conversation has can sometimes have the feel of being a little more authoritative or blunt . . . or critical . . .
mm said…
You know, it's wonderful that people can live in an area where they can meet (or have the health to attend events)--

but not all of us do. There are people out here 'in the middle of nowhere' who are seeking Jesus. We can't attend functions in Utah; it's simply not possible for a number of reasons.

This is beginning to 'feel' like a Utah phenomenon--

But the church is all over the world, and there are people seeking Christ and wanting to restore a belief in the 'real' Mormon scriptures (Book of Mormon)--

in places far from Utah.

Just be aware of *our* existence. *I* am glad you can meet each other. But--

it really isn't a Utah church anymore.
mm said…
I should have said 'intermountain west', because it isn't just Utah--
Ref Erenc Es said…
The scripture references and citations to TPJS for the Las Vegas talk have been indexed.
Ira Krause said…
Find wisdom and understanding www.idamingle.com like share these
seeds of LIGHT and TRUTH irakrause@netzero.com 7-2-2014
mm said…
I don't understand--
Annalea said…
@Nonrandom Set:

Having different definitions of "fault finding" simply isn't useful or productive. In order for language to function at all, definitions between parties must agree. It's an integral part of legal transactions, as well as interpersonal communication.

This is an earnest plea: If parties disagree on the definition of a word or phrase, they both need to look it up and get some education. English has definitions and meanings that we all need to use, so we're not talking past one another or tilting at windmills.

Here's the definition of fault finding:

fault-find·ing
noun
noun: fault-finding; noun: faultfinding
1. continual criticism, typically concerning trivial things.
synonyms: criticism, captiousness, caviling, quibbling; complaining, grumbling, carping, moaning; informalnitpicking, griping, grousing, bellyaching
"he came to expect nothing but fault-finding from his wife"
antonyms: praise
2. the investigation of the cause of malfunction in machinery, especially electronic equipment.
(Google's definition, given at the top of the search results for "what is 'fault finding'".)

What Denver is doing is not fault finding. It is constructive criticism.

constructive criticism
Main Entry: constructive criticism
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: criticism or advice that is useful and intended to help or improve something, often with an offer of possible solutions
(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/constructive+criticism)

Let's speak the same language. It's vital to understanding one another.

Popular posts from this blog

What to Expect When You’re Excommunicated

Do This in Remembrance of Me

Facebook Discussion Group for Latter-day Commentary