Passing the Heavenly Gift by Denver Snuffer

[iamse7en]

New book announced and explained. I'm very interested in reading it. Paperback at 528 pages. Here is the Amazon description:

Mormonism has undergone four distinct phases. The first began in 1820 and ended with Joseph Smith’s death in 1844. The second began upon Joseph Smith’s death and ended with abandonment of plural marriage, publicly in 1890 and privately in 1904. In the third phase Mormonism denounced as apostasy its practice of plural wives, marking the first time an orthodox practice became grounds for excommunication. The fourth phase began with David O. McKay and is still underway. In it Mormonism has adopted corporate management techniques to consolidate and direct central church decision-making. The first phase was innovative and expansive, continually adding doctrine, scripture, teachings and ordinances. Subsequent phases have curtailed, abandoned, even denounced earlier teaching and doctrine. Phases two through four have all abandoned doctrine. Growth in these subsequent phases has been defined in terms of political influence, financial gains, cultural inroads, and population growth; while the underlying religion has been curtailed. Today, marketing the institution has become more important to Mormon success than preserving the original religious content. The changes from phase to phase have completely transformed Mormonism, sharing a vocabulary but redefining the terms. Modern Mormonism has now institutionalized change. For the first time in this book Mormonism is candidly described in terms which track the changes by examining doctrine, teachings and practices. Interestingly, the passing of the heavenly gift was anticipated by Joseph Smith’s prophecies and the Book of Mormon.

Also read his blog post as a preface. Although I ordered it, don't think I'll get to reading this one for a couple months.

[HeirofNumenor]

I'm not...how can he call this book faith-promoting, when the description provided (assuming it is accurate) is nothing but how far the Church (presumably led by God's prophets) has abandoned what Joseph Smith set up? Oh that's right...in his other works he says only Joseph Smith was a prophet (maybe includes Brigham Young), and the rest were just administrators... this guy really is on the way to apostasy if this is how he really feels...

[BigMomma]

That is exactly what I thought reading the description.... No good here. sorry

[Like]

The amazon book's description is what I have thought for years, although I have not put it in stages like he has and I really have not put too much deep thought into it. The book maybe interesting but it does not look like the spiritual feast I have come to enjoy from Denver. Thanks for the heads up, I will most likely check it out at some point.

[Rand]

I have long observed the historical transformations in the church. Just because DS speaks candidly about it will probably be enlightening, but doesn't have to be negative. God may want a transformation for reasons of His own.
I have seen this historical transformation more from a personal revelatory standpoint. In the early church, members needed to seek personal revelation if they wanted to know almost anything. They had a very near and almost raw relationship with God. The next generation learned what they had done and mimicked their approach. The third generation lost some of the nearness and the raw revelational experience. The next generation, ours just follows what has been given before, losing so much of the personal revelatory privilege we have, but seem to have lost the will and faith to use.

This commentary is true not of all members, but of the "culture" of the church as a whole. To me, this is why sacrament meetings are so much of a "and then he said", reporting rather than, "this is what this principle means to me", or This is what the spirit has taught me on this topic.

I hope as a people and as Saints we recover the revelatory privilege we, as members, have drifted away from.

[HeirofNumenor]

That may well be it Rand...

However, when I see statements similar to what DS wrote...the words (or at least the veiled underlying meanings hinted at) almost always seems to be similar to this:

"And let us here remind the reader that as long as belief in the Patriarchal order of marriage and other advanced principles of the Gospel was maintained, the minds of the Saints were open and receptive. . . . But with the surrender of the glorious principle of Celestial Marriage -- a union for time and eternity -- came darkness, mental drowsiness, a detour from the Gospel path, until all sorts of speculation pertaining to the plan of Salvation was indulged in.

- Musser, Joseph W. Michael, Our Father and Our God. Salt Lake City: Truth Publishing Company, 1963.

Who is Joseph Muesser?

The Apostolic United Brethren (sometimes nicknamed the AUB), a Fundamentalist Mormon group accepts the Adam-God teaching, and one of their leaders Joseph W. Musser was the first to write a book on it (called "Michael, Our Father and Our God") in the 1930s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%E2%80%93God_doctrine

[iamse7en]

I love how DS is already being dumped on for a book nobody here as even read yet. I guess you can judge a book by its "description." I will say that most of the time in the history of the Church (from Adam 'til today), changes in doctrine/policy usually occurred due to the Saints' stubbornness and disobedience. Not every change or development is because God is initiating it. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some faithful Saints in Moses' day that wished they had the higher law, and those who were happy with the lesser law said, "these doctrines and policies are what GOD wants for us! Don't question the living prophet! Be happy with what is taught to you now! Don't believe anything he isn't instructing us about! Ignore what Enoch or Noah or Abraham taught!" It isn't being critical of Moses to mourn the loss of and study the truths and celestial principles that were contained in the higher law.

[HeirofNumenor]

I love how DS is already being dumped on for a book nobody here as even read yet. I guess you can judge a book by its "description." I will say that most of the time in the history of the Church (from Adam 'til today), changes in doctrine/policy usually occurred due to the Saints' stubbornness and disobedience. Not every change or development is because God is initiating it. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some faithful Saints in Moses' day that wished they had the higher law, and those who were happy with the lesser law said, "these doctrines and policies are what GOD wants for us! Don't question the living prophet! Be happy with what is taught to you now! Don't believe anything he isn't instructing us about! Ignore what Enoch or Noah or Abraham taught!" It isn't being critical of Moses to mourn the loss of and study the truths and celestial principles that were contained in the higher law.

That...especially when the author either writes the description himself, or has to approve what his publisher wrote for his book...

And you have the right to say what you think...and we also have the right to reject that, and the feelings behind it - especially when it is used so much by Fundamentalists and others to demonstrate that the Church has fallen away...

[Like]

As for me, no matter what has happened or will happen in the future, the LDS Church is still the Lord's house, and I will not leave the Lord's house:

Verily, verily, I say unto you, darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face.

Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.

And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;

First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord. (D&C 112:23-26)

[HeirofNumenor]

That may well be it Rand...

However, when I see statements similar to what DS wrote...the words (or at least the veiled underlying meanings hinted at) almost always seems to be similar to this:

"And let us here remind the reader that as long as belief in the Patriarchal order of marriage and other advanced principles of the Gospel was maintained, the minds of the Saints were open and receptive. . . . But with the surrender of the glorious principle of Celestial Marriage -- a union for time and eternity -- came darkness, mental drowsiness, a detour from the Gospel path, until all sorts of speculation pertaining to the plan of Salvation was indulged in.

- Musser, Joseph W. Michael, Our Father and Our God. Salt Lake City: Truth Publishing Company, 1963.

Who is Joseph Muesser?

The Apostolic United Brethren (sometimes nicknamed the AUB), a Fundamentalist Mormon group accepts the Adam-God teaching, and one of their leaders Joseph W. Musser was the first to write a book on it (called "Michael, Our Father and Our God") in the 1930s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%E2%80%93God_doctrine

I think this was a stretch to make this comparison......

Both quotes are from the same source...

[Like]

I have ordered the book. I re read the blog post and I am looking forward to reading the book...I wish his books were available in e-book and audio

I wonder if he will address Blacks and Priesthood and his thoughts about that subject also?

Denver Snuffer's views typically are in line with Spirit I feel and squares with doctrine I have testimony about.

The key for me is not putting my trust in the arm of flesh no matter what someone's "calling" is. My testimony has always been based on the Spirit not some man and their calling. The Lord is awesome, my faith and total trust is in Him.

[Sariel]

I love how DS is already being dumped on for a book nobody here as even read yet. I guess you can judge a book by its "description." I will say that most of the time in the history of the Church (from Adam 'til today), changes in doctrine/policy usually occurred due to the Saints' stubbornness and disobedience. Not every change or development is because God is initiating it. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some faithful Saints in Moses' day that wished they had the higher law, and those who were happy with the lesser law said, "these doctrines and policies are what GOD wants for us! Don't question the living prophet! Be happy with what is taught to you now! Don't believe anything he isn't instructing us about! Ignore what Enoch or Noah or Abraham taught!" It isn't being critical of Moses to mourn the loss of and study the truths and celestial principles that were contained in the higher law.

I agree with what you said here. In his blog post he basically says you have to read the book from beginning to end to catch the spirit of the book. If the people are disobedient and God reveals a lesser law to the prophets, who is really fallen? I don't think we automatically have to say it's the prophets.

[Sariel]

I wish his books were available in e-book and audio

Most of his books are available in Kindle format; I assume in the future this book will be too.

[Like]

I wish his books were available in e-book and audio

Most of his books are available in Kindle format; I assume in the future this book will be too.

Ok, I will check that out. Thanks

[Like]

A fair and full hearing

The new book has hardly become available to anyone. However, I did receive some feedback from a friend who has not attended church for many years. He was one of the more conscientious saints. He learned and studied and reflected for several decades as an active member. He served in several bishoprics, high priest group leaderships and as a gospel doctrine teacher. His study led him to a number of unfavorable conclusions about the church and its history. He read the new book, Passing the Heavenly Gift, and called to tell me he had returned to sacrament meeting a week ago, and for the first time in nearly a decade took the Sacrament.

I've already been called "apostate," as well as "on the road to apostasy" from some who have not read the book and have no intention to do so. I suppose there will be a great deal of that. But it is a small thing. The truth is that this book, as all I've written, testifies to the truth as I understand it. It has already done some good in one reader's life. If the only price to be paid for reclaiming another's faith is to endure some evil speaking about myself, it is truly only a small thing.

Another person's ignorance can never define your own faith. Some people do not study our faith, but claim to practice it. If Mormonism truly is of God (as I believe), then it is important enough to warrant the closest of study. When any matter is studied with great care, issues will surface. Quandaries will arise. There will be gaps, problems and failings. Human weaknesses will be exposed. Some things will get quite messy.

The underlying truth, however, deserves a fair and full hearing. Study of Mormonism which goes only far enough to discover the quandaries has not proceeded far enough. It should search into it deeply enough, prayerfully enough, and searchingly enough to find the answers.

When one person has sought deeply and another has not, there is a gap between the understanding of the two which makes a common understanding problematic. The one in possession of less is really not in a position to correctly judge the one in possession of more. Oddly, however, the one who has less is altogether more likely to judge the one with more, while the one with more is equipped to look more kindly upon the other. After all, the one with more has struggled from the lesser position.

I understand the criticism I've received. I expected it. No one needs to defend me. No one needs to argue the point, get angry or deal unkindly with people who have not yet studied enough to form an appropriate conclusion. Only a fool judges a matter before they hear it. Such souls warrant our kindly efforts to persuade, not our censure or condemnation. We all carry foolishness, learning year by year, struggling to overcome the many things we've neglected in our study, prayers and contemplation. God does not grade on a curve. Therefore, when you begin to think you've outshone your fellow man, you should reflect again on Moses' reaction to seeing the Man of Holiness: "Now for this cause I know man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed." (Moses 1: 10.) None of us have anything to boast of, even if you know more than your fellow man. We all know less than He who is "more intelligent than them all." (Abr. 3: 19.)

Whenever I contemplate the gulf between He who is Holiness and myself, and the great charity required from Him to condescend for me, I can hardly bear the thought of feeling triumph because of the ignorance of my fellow saints. How unkind. How foolish. How uncharitable. More than that, how very unlike the Lord whom we all claim to serve.

I teach the Priests in my Ward. I love the calling and love their openness, their eagerness and desire to learn. The last lesson I taught was about sex, based in the scriptures, and candidly covered the topic in a way which I hoped would both inform and edify. I was genuinely thanked by these 16 to 18 year old young men afterwards. I hope their lives will be better for the lesson.

So, also, I hope any who read Passing the Heavenly Gift will find their lives better for having read it. If you find yourself upset by it, I'd hope you would realize at least one person has returned to church after many years of absence because it restored in him a desire to fellowship with the saints, and again partake of the Sacrament. That one soul's renewal was to me, worth any petty or foolish reactions that may now come from others.

[p51-mustang]

People in the church grow by learning line upon line, precept upon precept. The church is like people in this regard. The church started at ground zero with Joseph Smith. It then went through a hyper growth period when masses of revelations came forward. Then after the initial hyper growth (through revelation) period there wasnt as much truth doctrinally that needed to be revealed. The church then went through a period of gradual growth (revelation wise). Could it be that Denver is just pointing out that the church - like a person goes through several growth phases, line upon line? President Hinckley one time remarked that there wasn't much left to say because everything had already been said over the years.

[HeirofNumenor]

People in the church grow by learning line upon line, precept upon precept. The church is like people in this regard. The church started at ground zero with Joseph Smith. It then went through a hyper growth period when masses of revelations came forward. Then after the initial hyper growth (through revelation) period there wasnt as much truth doctrinally that needed to be revealed. The church then went through a period of gradual growth (revelation wise). Could it be that Denver is just pointing out that the church - like a person goes through several growth phases, line upon line? President Hinckley one time remarked that there wasn't much left to say because everything had already been said over the years.

That is a good concept and likely true...the problem is with Denver's own description of the book reveals his whole feeling - that the Church is regressing/failing....notice the NEGATIVE statements I have underlined from his description - how can these be applied to line upon line, moving FORWARD?

Mormonism has undergone four distinct phases. The first began in 1820 and ended with Joseph Smith’s death in 1844. The second began upon Joseph Smith’s death and ended with abandonment of plural marriage, publicly in 1890 and privately in 1904. In the third phase Mormonism denounced as apostasy its practice of plural wives, marking the first time an orthodox practice became grounds for excommunication. The fourth phase began with David O. McKay and is still underway. In it Mormonism has adopted corporate management techniques to consolidate and direct central church decision-making. The first phase was innovative and expansive, continually adding doctrine, scripture, teachings and ordinances. Subsequent phases have curtailed, abandoned, even denounced earlier teaching and doctrine. Phases two through four have all abandoned doctrine. Growth in these subsequent phases has been defined in terms of political influence, financial gains, cultural inroads, and population growth; while the underlying religion has been curtailed. Today, marketing the institution has become more important to Mormon success than preserving the original religious content. The changes from phase to phase have completely transformed Mormonism, sharing a vocabulary but redefining the terms. Modern Mormonism has now institutionalized change. For the first time in this book Mormonism is candidly described in terms which track the changes by examining doctrine, teachings and practices. Interestingly, the passing of the heavenly gift [i.e., diminishing, removal, loss] was anticipated by Joseph Smith’s prophecies and the Book of Mormon.

BTW, for those of you who think that this is because of the wickedness or otherwise inability of the members to keep up...think again...the changes that he laments here can only be instituted from the top down, and most cannot be tied simply to members short-comings, but rather imply some sort of capriciousness/desire to accommodate the world, at the top.

[Sariel]

How about we just read the book

[Jason]

From Denver Snuffer's blog today regarding this book:

Friday, September 9, 2011
A fair and full hearing
The new book has hardly become available to anyone. However, I did receive some feedback from a friend who has not attended church for many years. He was one of the more conscientious saints. He learned and studied and reflected for several decades as an active member. He served in several bishoprics, high priest group leaderships and as a gospel doctrine teacher. His study led him to a number of unfavorable conclusions about the church and its history. He read the new book, Passing the Heavenly Gift, and called to tell me he had returned to sacrament meeting a week ago, and for the first time in nearly a decade took the Sacrament.

I've already been called "apostate," as well as "on the road to apostasy" from some who have not read the book and have no intention to do so. I suppose there will be a great deal of that. But it is a small thing. The truth is that this book, as all I've written, testifies to the truth as I understand it. It has already done some good in one reader's life. If the only price to be paid for reclaiming another's faith is to endure some evil speaking about myself, it is truly only a small thing.

Another person's ignorance can never define your own faith. Some people do not study our faith, but claim to practice it. If Mormonism truly is of God (as I believe), then it is important enough to warrant the closest of study. When any matter is studied with great care, issues will surface. Quandaries will arise. There will be gaps, problems and failings. Human weaknesses will be exposed. Some things will get quite messy.

The underlying truth, however, deserves a fair and full hearing. Study of Mormonism which goes only far enough to discover the quandaries has not proceeded far enough. It should search into it deeply enough, prayerfully enough, and searchingly enough to find the answers.

When one person has sought deeply and another has not, there is a gap between the understanding of the two which makes a common understanding problematic. The one in possession of less is really not in a position to correctly judge the one in possession of more. Oddly, however, the one who has less is altogether more likely to judge the one with more, while the one with more is equipped to look more kindly upon the other. After all, the one with more has struggled from the lesser position.

I understand the criticism I've received. I expected it. No one needs to defend me. No one needs to argue the point, get angry or deal unkindly with people who have not yet studied enough to form an appropriate conclusion. Only a fool judges a matter before they hear it. Such souls warrant our kindly efforts to persuade, not our censure or condemnation. We all carry foolishness, learning year by year, struggling to overcome the many things we've neglected in our study, prayers and contemplation. God does not grade on a curve. Therefore, when you begin to think you've outshone your fellow man, you should reflect again on Moses' reaction to seeing the Man of Holiness: "Now for this cause I know man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed." (Moses 1: 10.) None of us have anything to boast of, even if you know more than your fellow man. We all know less than He who is "more intelligent than them all." (Abr. 3: 19.)

Whenever I contemplate the gulf between He who is Holiness and myself, and the great charity required from Him to condescend for me, I can hardly bear the thought of feeling triumph because of the ignorance of my fellow saints. How unkind. How foolish. How uncharitable. More than that, how very unlike the Lord whom we all claim to serve.

I teach the Priests in my Ward. I love the calling and love their openness, their eagerness and desire to learn. The last lesson I taught was about sex, based in the scriptures, and candidly covered the topic in a way which I hoped would both inform and edify. I was genuinely thanked by these 16 to 18 year old young men afterwards. I hope their lives will be better for the lesson.

So, also, I hope any who read Passing the Heavenly Gift will find their lives better for having read it. If you find yourself upset by it, I'd hope you would realize at least one person has returned to church after many years of absence because it restored in him a desire to fellowship with the saints, and again partake of the Sacrament. That one soul's renewal was to me, worth any petty or foolish reactions that may now come from others.

(emphasis added)

That post should be required reading prior to LDS FF membership.....as it applies to this like nothing else I've ever read. Wise words....for both parties!

[HeirofNumenor]

His whole description - meant to be taken at face value and to intrigue people to buy his book - is incredibly slanted towards how the Church has fallen - how else should we be taking this?

The problem is with Denver's own description of the book reveals his whole feeling - that the Church is regressing/failing....notice the NEGATIVE statements I have underlined from his description - how can these be applied to line upon line, moving FORWARD?

Mormonism has undergone four distinct phases. The first began in 1820 and ended with Joseph Smith’s death in 1844. The second began upon Joseph Smith’s death and ended with abandonment of plural marriage, publicly in 1890 and privately in 1904. In the third phase Mormonism denounced as apostasy its practice of plural wives, marking the first time an orthodox practice became grounds for excommunication. The fourth phase began with David O. McKay and is still underway. In it Mormonism has adopted corporate management techniques to consolidate and direct central church decision-making. The first phase was innovative and expansive, continually adding doctrine, scripture, teachings and ordinances. Subsequent phases have curtailed, abandoned, even denounced earlier teaching and doctrine. Phases two through four have all abandoned doctrine. Growth in these subsequent phases has been defined in terms of political influence, financial gains, cultural inroads, and population growth; while the underlying religion has been curtailed. Today, marketing the institution has become more important to Mormon success than preserving the original religious content. The changes from phase to phase have completely transformed Mormonism, sharing a vocabulary but redefining the terms. Modern Mormonism has now institutionalized change. For the first time in this book Mormonism is candidly described in terms which track the changes by examining doctrine, teachings and practices. Interestingly, the passing of the heavenly gift [i.e., diminishing, removal, loss] was anticipated by Joseph Smith’s prophecies and the Book of Mormon.

BTW, for those of you who think that this is because of the wickedness or otherwise inability of the members to keep up...think again...the changes that he laments here can only be instituted from the top down, and most cannot be tied simply to members short-comings, but rather imply some sort of capriciousness/desire to accommodate the world, at the top.

[creator]

"A fair and full hearing..." I like it, thanks for bringing that latest blog post to my attention.

Can't wait to read the book.

[Mahonri]

wow, I find both sides of this thread to be totally and completely wrong. How could that be? Perhaps because this is another version of the hegelian dialectic? I've read Denver's book on the second comforter,

Oh, and on a totally unrelated side note, I found these quotes quite interesting

"And all ye lawyers who have no business, only as you hatch it up, would to God you would go to work or run a¬way!" (Joseph Smith, T.P.J.S., p. 329)

"I think that a communing is civilized so far as it is free from contentions, law Suits and litigation of every kind. *** When I hear men and women say that they will go to a Gentile court to have their difficulties adjusted, I think they will go to hell. unless they refrain from such a spirit. *** Now, I ask every man and woman who wishes an honorable name in the Church and kingdom of God upon the earth, if they have entertained any idea of going to law, to banish it from their minds at once." (Brigham Young, J.D. 11:257-259)

"When God spoke from heaven to Joseph Smith, the peo¬ple were bound down by priestcraft, doctorcraft, kingcraft and lawyercraft, the four grand crafts that uphold Satan's kingdom." (Brigham Young, Des. News, July 12, 1863)

"It requires a lawyer--a man who is well schooled in all that men know, to make things appear what they really are not." (Brigham Young, J.D. 11:215)

"And I will give you fair warning, and I call upon Brother Peery here, who is President of this Stake, to carry it out, that when he finds any Latter-day Saint under his jurisdiction going to law with his brother before the ungodly, to bring him up and deal with him for his fellow¬ship. This is a correct principle before God; and as Saints of God we should be governed by his laws, and not by the laws of the world." (John Taylor, J.D. 20:105-106)

"Now, from the early history of this Church, almost every man, every Elder, or member that has undertaken to study or practise law was in a very short time on the high road to apostacy and destruction; and every member of this Church who has undertaken to practise law as a profession has gone neck-and-heels to the Devil." (George A. Smith, J.D. 6:160)

[HeirofNumenor]

LOL Mahonri...so we are all lawyers now? ...dang! Where'd my salary go? :p )

[2wet2burn]

Denver Snuffer is a lawyer and an author.

When I read the post on Snuffer's site about this book, I kept thinking about his mandate to read the whole thing. You remember the old adage about 1st you despise something, then you learn to look, then you get curious, finally you embrace it.

His previous books may have been wonderful, in the early days the blog was great. But slowly I could sense some venom in his posts. He has NO love for Deseret Book. He is highly critical of Boyd K Packer. He is not happy with the correlation committee. In one post he claimed that local authorities were more spiritual and receiving more revelation than the general leadership. That's when I stopped feeling the spirit there. It's not for me and my family. Maybe it is for yours, but it's not for mine. We each will have to discern for ourselves.

[Mahonri]

LOL Mahonri...so we are all lawyers now? ...dang! Where'd my salary go? :p )

wow, that is not what I was saying at all.