Passing the Heavenly Gift by Denver Snuffer

[JasonI am a nobody!]

No....but an Apostle of the Lord stated it over the pulpit at General Conference....so what's the point???? Unless you are stating that Elder Faust isn't an apostle and doesn't speak for God - is that the case?

Jason,
I think that it is safe to assume in this church(according to the Lord anyway)that if it is a direct revelation from God we will be told so. Like Joseph did so often in the D&C...thus saith the Lord....Surely we are not to take everything that an apostle says to be Gods own words! For example I just read a talk by BRM who as an apostle spoke at BYU and said some thigs that I will NEVER believe are Gods words. I think the Lord has made it clear that if it is from Him we will be told so. And it will be cannonized as part of the scriptures, like it has been done in the past.

I think this will be what separates the wheat and tares and deceives the elect. Conference is to the world and there is unanimous consent on the talks (my understanding). They also get further light and knowledge as Elder Bruce R. McConkie pointed out. That said this was with respect to a fundamental instruction on how leadership functions. Either he was lying (and never corrected - as well as Joseph F Smith)....to which you are basically inferring an apostasy of the entire church leadership (which is the basis for my question to Amore on that).....or he's telling the truth.

Obviously you can take away whatever you want....and it will be pertinent to your endpoint. To each their own and the guidance of the Spirit.....

[JasonI am a nobody!]

No....but an Apostle of the Lord stated it over the pulpit at General Conference....so what's the point???? Unless you are stating that Elder Faust isn't an apostle and doesn't speak for God - is that the case?

While most things taught in Gen. Conf. are true, the Church does not consider 'Gen. Conf.' part of the 'Standard Works', (for even Prophets & Apostles contradict each other at times in Gen. Conf.). Leaders of the Church & especially Joseph Smith have taught that everything that a Prophet or Apostle says must square with the scriptures & never contradict them, The Bible, BoM, D&C & PoGP.

The Church teaches that Apostles cannot declare new doctrine & that we are to prove all 'teachings' by even Prophets with what the scriptures say, that's how we know if they are true or not. There always has to be a 'standard' to judge all other teachings by.

Joseph Smith or the New Test. would have taught this doctrine 'of the senior member of the apostles becoming the next President', but I just can't find it yet in the D&C.

Sorry I don't subscribe to those constraints....specifically bold and underline.

Did Adam have scriptures to judge all other teachings by???

[Randcaptain of 1,000]

Easy.....Elder James E. Faust Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the 1994 October Conference[/quote]

Does he give a reference in the D&C where this teaching is found?[/quote]

yes, DC1: 38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." Do you not sustain the Prophet and Apostles as Prophets, Seers and revelators? Does Denver? I get different views on this, and no I haven't read the book, as I stated earlier.

[Amore Verocaptain of 100]

Joseph Smith warned the Saints before he died that they must judge everything that anyone teaches by what the scriptures say, & if what is taught does not square with the scriptures or contradicts them, then we can know for sure it's wrong.

Thus, according to Joseph Smith, it's vital to have scriptural backing for 'the doctrine of succession'.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

Amore Vero, like a lute with one string,
plays but one note,
but how truly that note doth sing!



edit: apologies for the further derailment.

[Amore Verocaptain of 100]

Amore you should start a new thread on this topic instead of derailing this one

I didn't mean by asking for a scriptural reference that it would turn into a discussion. But if I post again on this subject I will start a new thread on it.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Joseph Smith warned the Saints before he died that they must judge everything that anyone teaches by what the scriptures say, & if what is taught does not square with the scriptures or contradicts them, then we can know for sure it's wrong.

Thus, according to Joseph Smith, it's vital to have scriptural backing for 'the doctrine of succession'.

Where's your source?

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

That's not really what I got out of the book. The part about Nauvoo and everything for sure. By the way...the evidence there is pretty conclusive in my opinion that we certainly did not receive of the fulness as a church. That doesn't mean we can't still go on to receive a fulness on an individual basis. And that is to me what the message of the book was. To me these were the key points in the book: A - A call to repentance and to awake others to our truly awful situation and remind us not to think too high and mighty of ourselves as a "chosen" people, otherwise we are just the same as the Israelites were. B. To point out the one way to Christ and how dangerous it is to become complacent and put our salvation on someone else. I dont think that Denver has rejected the church at all. In the book he talked about how no one really gets to a point where they get passed needing the church and that it still contains much truth and ordinances that are necessary to our exaltation. Just because someone may have some disagreements about some things it doesnt mean they have rejected the church. But really, its not about the institution. Its about Christ. The institution helps to lead us to Christ but the institution is not what saves. That was his message and I thought it was very powerful and true. I also, for one thought that it was a breath of fresh air that he came out and talked about how the brethren are not perfect and infallible. But thats not really even the point. Either way, they do not save us. They are supposed to point us to Christ and we should all be followers of Christ and not any prophet not matter who they are.



I am not a follower of apollos, or paul, or president Monson. I am a follower of Christ. And that is what we all should be and that was the theme through out the book. To seek Christ for ourselves and not lean on anyone else. I thought the book was a sober look at reality and also an uplifting message filled with reminders and hope. You also said people who believe in the church are not his intended audience. Perhaps you are right. I understand what you mean there. But, I also think that was kind of part of the point. Is it the institution "the church" we are to "believe" in? Or Christ and the Gospel?

Also as far as the sealing powers go I felt there was a lot of evidence to support that we did not receive the fulness but not much to support that we did just based on scriptures alone. The temple was never fully finished even two years after Joseph's death and even after that a tornado and fire brought the rest of it to the ground. Christ did not visit it. It was not made a holy ground. It was destroyed. And the saints were moved out of their place and had to endure many hardships.

As I went back and read the scriptures...the scriptures are really what got my attention. Based purely on the scriptures there is much evidence to support that it did not happen the way it was supposed to and therefore we were rejected.

Also, he is correct I believe about the sealing powers only being conferred on an individual by Christ. But, to me when I was reading I felt like the spirit of the message was to get people to see not all is well in zion but that it doesn't matter because as long as we are not under false pretenses then we can approach the Lord and receive all we are intended to receive personally from Him. When I was reading the book I felt he wrote it because he cares for the welfare of his fellow saints and that he doesnt want anyone to be left out of the marriage feast. I am glad he wrote it. I have grown tired of all of the feel good stuff. Sometimes a reality check is just what I need. He certainly knew that writing this book was not going to bring him popularity. Sobering messages of the need to repent never bring that. As I have prayed on these things I have felt that his intentions were honorable in-spite of what his words may provoke or cause others to feel. I can certainly understand why some people might struggle with what they read because its not the norm of what we usually hear in church and sometimes that can be scary when you feel like everything is not always what you thought. Its like having the rug pulled out from under you. In essence his message is one that leads to Christ and Christ alone and to me that also proves his true intent. But that is my own personal feelings. Everyone must get their own answer.

Those are my thoughts. I respect others opinions and everyone has their own interpretation. Thats good. I just thought I would add mine for what ever it may be worth. I really hope that those who haven't read the book will do so for themselves and then make your own judgement. If you end up thinking he is wrong or evil that's ok but at least you would have given it a full hearing and decided for yourselves. I wouldn't want anyone to miss out on a message that could really be instrumental in helping them to seek the Lord. One thing I have learned is that you can't always take someone elses word for things. If I had done that I never would have read the book of mormon because I was taught it was evil and would lead me to worship Satan but as I read it I lead me to Christ. This book may not be as important as the book of mormon but the same rule applies. If it tesitfy's and leads a person to Christ then you know where the message comes from.

Excellent post. I haven't finished the book yet, but so far I have a similar perspective on what he wrote.

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

I liked Snuffer's book. Actually I loved it. The last three of four chapters were nothing short of inspiration. You quoted him stating that the church has essentially "dumbed down" the gospel. I think that is true. I have been a member my whole life and have never been taught anything about the 2nd Comforter, or calling and election, or even being baptized by the holy ghost and fire. It was not until I started reading outside of "church published and approved" information that I learned anything about this stuff. And yet I read Joseph Smiths comments and teachings and he was ALWAYS teaching these things. What does that mean? Why have I never heard the words "recieving the 2nd Comforter or having your calling and election made sure" spoken in any general conference? Have any of you, have I just missed it? I don't see there being much of a point to the gospel if these things are not the aim or point of it. But then again I am slightly idealist, maybe others are happy to settle for less.

I have posted on this in the past, and I can tell you this is absolutely true. The Correlation committee HAS dumbed it down.

My former stake pres. was in the CES. For the last major revision in the Church materials he wrote a substantial amount at their behest. After he submitted it they told him to re-write it because it was written at too high a reading level at a 12th grade level. They wanted it at an 8th grade level. So he re-wrote it. They rejected it again because he included things like Calling & Election Made sure & the Second Comforter, etc. They didn't want the 'advanced' topics. He withdrew all his work in disgust.

So what we have is Gospel-Lite written on an 8th-grade reading level. It was very intentional.

BTW, great post reese.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

I say WOW, because I dont understand why they want it that way. I can't say what their purposes are. Only they know but personally it makes me feel like they don't have much of a high standard for the individual to understand and receive greater knowledge. What that must say about the church as a whole. OUCH. All the more reason to seek those things out and not settle for less.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

I liked Snuffer's book. Actually I loved it. The last three of four chapters were nothing short of inspiration. You quoted him stating that the church has essentially "dumbed down" the gospel. I think that is true. I have been a member my whole life and have never been taught anything about the 2nd Comforter, or calling and election, or even being baptized by the holy ghost and fire. It was not until I started reading outside of "church published and approved" information that I learned anything about this stuff. And yet I read Joseph Smiths comments and teachings and he was ALWAYS teaching these things. What does that mean? Why have I never heard the words "recieving the 2nd Comforter or having your calling and election made sure" spoken in any general conference? Have any of you, have I just missed it? I don't see there being much of a point to the gospel if these things are not the aim or point of it. But then again I am slightly idealist, maybe others are happy to settle for less.

I have posted on this in the past, and I can tell you this is absolutely true. The Correlation committee HAS dumbed it down.

My former stake pres. was in the CES. For the last major revision in the Church materials he wrote a substantial amount at their behest. After he submitted it they told him to re-write it because it was written at too high a reading level at a 12th grade level. They wanted it at an 8th grade level. So he re-wrote it. They rejected it again because he included things like Calling & Election Made sure & the Second Comforter, etc. They didn't want the 'advanced' topics. He withdrew all his work in disgust.

So what we have is Gospel-Lite written on an 8th-grade reading level. It was very intentional.

BTW, great post reese.

Of course in a wicked world on the verge of destruction with a primary goal of missionary work and more than 50% of the church consisting of new converts.....with a worldwide focus and audience with all its translation issues....

disgust or pride???

[shadowcaptain of 1,000]

It is my personal opinion that before Zion is built a Prophet will arise outside of the church. We know of two who will arise and preach in Jerusalem. But I think one will arise here and he will not be within the hierarchy of the church. Maybe they will be a part of it possibly but I definitely don't think they will be in a high position. In the scriptures those who were charged to lead the saints and especially from destruction were never a part of the church Hierarchy. They received their powers directly from Heaven as it is always done. It is God's pattern as I have noticed. Christ Himself was not of an esteemed position in the church. This is one of the reason's the pharisees would not listen to Him. It is the pride of others to always think they know everything. We all have a tendency to think that way. I think this will take place and that it will test the faith of many saints and that it will be one of those things that separates the wheat from the tares. It will be up to the individual to seek their own revelation and whether they will hear His voice or not. But one is always sent before hand to prepare the way before Him. Just some of my thoughts. What are your thoughts on this Reese? If you are inclined to share that is.

Your personal opinion would be incorrect according to revelation given through the prophet Jospeh Smith found in D&C 42-
11 Again I say unto you, that it shall not be given to any one to go forth to preach my gospel, or to build up my church, except he be ordained by some one who has authority, and it is known to the church that he has authority and has been regularly ordained by the heads of the church.

And then there's this-
"We do not consider ourselves bound to receive any revelation from any one man or woman without his being legally constituted and ordained to that authority, and given sufficient proof of it. ...It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, OR ANYONE, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves; therefore you will see the impropriety of giving heed to them; but if any person have a vision or a visitation from a heavenly messenger, it must be for his own benefit and instruction; for the fundamental principles, government, and doctrine of the church are vested in the keys of the kingdom."


And to all others who follow the same line of thought-
“The very step of apostasy commenced with losing confidence in the leaders of this church and kingdom” Joseph Smith

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

Also, on another subject that kind of has to do with this. I will share my thoughts. I'm sure many will disagree but this is something I have thought for quite sometime now. Before ever reading Denver's book but after reading it..those ideas were solidified for me. He does not say this in his book. Just to make that clear. It is my personal opinion that before Zion is built a Prophet will arise outside of the church. We know of two who will arise and preach in Jerusalem. But I think one will arise here and he will not be within the hierarchy of the church. Maybe they will be a part of it possibly but I definitely don't think they will be in a high position. In the scriptures those who were charged to lead the saints and especially from destruction were never a part of the church Hierarchy. They received their powers directly from Heaven as it is always done. It is God's pattern as I have noticed. Christ Himself was not of an esteemed position in the church. This is one of the reason's the pharisees would not listen to Him. It is the pride of others to always think they know everything. We all have a tendency to think that way. I think this will take place and that it will test the faith of many saints and that it will be one of those things that separates the wheat from the tares. It will be up to the individual to seek their own revelation and whether they will hear His voice or not. But one is always sent before hand to prepare the way before Him. Just some of my thoughts. What are your thoughts on this Reese? If you are inclined to share that is.

I have also posted on this in the past. In the BoM this pattern is revealed in Abinadi and Samuel the Lamanite. They follow the same pattern set with Elijah, the forerunner. The forerunner is the one who runs ahead of the King announcing his arrival. John the Baptist did this. StL did this. It makes sense there will be one before Christ returns. They will come again.

In this day, there will probably be more than 1 but that's not important. They will come from the church membership, but they will NOT be general authorities. They will have the priesthood - the fullness - because they are commissioned of the Lord. They will be unknowns, but they will have power to call the church to repentance. They will be a voice of warning. They will be just like Samuel the Lamanite.

My thought yesterday as I read Snuffer's book is that he is warming the waters for them. How Snuffer is treated will be similar to how these men will be treated.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Also, on another subject that kind of has to do with this. I will share my thoughts. I'm sure many will disagree but this is something I have thought for quite sometime now. Before ever reading Denver's book but after reading it..those ideas were solidified for me. He does not say this in his book. Just to make that clear. It is my personal opinion that before Zion is built a Prophet will arise outside of the church. We know of two who will arise and preach in Jerusalem. But I think one will arise here and he will not be within the hierarchy of the church. Maybe they will be a part of it possibly but I definitely don't think they will be in a high position. In the scriptures those who were charged to lead the saints and especially from destruction were never a part of the church Hierarchy. They received their powers directly from Heaven as it is always done. It is God's pattern as I have noticed. Christ Himself was not of an esteemed position in the church. This is one of the reason's the pharisees would not listen to Him. It is the pride of others to always think they know everything. We all have a tendency to think that way. I think this will take place and that it will test the faith of many saints and that it will be one of those things that separates the wheat from the tares. It will be up to the individual to seek their own revelation and whether they will hear His voice or not. But one is always sent before hand to prepare the way before Him. Just some of my thoughts. What are your thoughts on this Reese? If you are inclined to share that is.

I have also posted on this in the past. In the BoM this pattern is revealed in Abinadi and Samuel the Lamanite. They follow the same pattern set with Elijah, the forerunner. The forerunner is the one who runs ahead of the King announcing his arrival. John the Baptist did this. StL did this. It makes sense there will be one before Christ returns. They will come again.

In this day, there will probably be more than 1 but that's not important. They will come from the church membership, but they will NOT be general authorities. They will have the priesthood - the fullness - because they are commissioned of the Lord. They will be unknowns, but they will have power to call the church to repentance. They will be a voice of warning. They will be just like Samuel the Lamanite.

My thought yesterday as I read Snuffer's book is that he is warming the waters for them. How Snuffer is treated will be similar to how these men will be treated.

Or its a deception of the very elect....

Choose wisely!!!

[Randcaptain of 1,000]

quote Jason"Of course in a wicked world on the verge of destruction with a primary goal of missionary work and more than 50% of the church consisting of new converts.....with a worldwide focus and audience with all its translation issues....

disgust or pride???"

Hmmm. sounds like it could be a factor. I have felt the same things in the past, felt a frustration with the "dumbed down version of the doctrine." But as I have been in the Temple on a weekly basis, the spirit has taken over my education. It has been a great experience for me. Maybe it would work with others.

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

Why have I never heard the words "recieving the 2nd Comforter or having your calling and election made sure" spoken in any general conference?

Joseph Smith taught that we only receive our 'calling & election made sure' when we have acquired 'perfect unconditional love'. From what I have seen most members don't want to hear or do what it takes to have 'perfect love', so that's why I believe they rarely talk about it in Gen. Conf.

JS taught that when the Lord has thoroughly proved a person and found that he will serve the Lord in all hazards with all his heart that is when he can have C&EMS. Perfect unconditional love is a god attribute which may be unatainable in this life. What the Lord really wants to know is if we are 100% committed to Him more than anything. There is no reason this can't be taught openly, just as JS did.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

Everyone is going to be tried to the extreme, the refiner's fire is going to cleanse some that already consider themselves pure. I hope to pass the test, but I have grave doubts. Much to digest on this rapidly developing discussion.

I'm with you Rand, I think what is taught by men will continue to diminish and those that won't take the Spirit and the Spirit alone as their guide, will fall.

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

Also, on another subject that kind of has to do with this. I will share my thoughts. I'm sure many will disagree but this is something I have thought for quite sometime now. Before ever reading Denver's book but after reading it..those ideas were solidified for me. He does not say this in his book. Just to make that clear. It is my personal opinion that before Zion is built a Prophet will arise outside of the church. We know of two who will arise and preach in Jerusalem. But I think one will arise here and he will not be within the hierarchy of the church. Maybe they will be a part of it possibly but I definitely don't think they will be in a high position. In the scriptures those who were charged to lead the saints and especially from destruction were never a part of the church Hierarchy. They received their powers directly from Heaven as it is always done. It is God's pattern as I have noticed. Christ Himself was not of an esteemed position in the church. This is one of the reason's the pharisees would not listen to Him. It is the pride of others to always think they know everything. We all have a tendency to think that way. I think this will take place and that it will test the faith of many saints and that it will be one of those things that separates the wheat from the tares. It will be up to the individual to seek their own revelation and whether they will hear His voice or not. But one is always sent before hand to prepare the way before Him. Just some of my thoughts. What are your thoughts on this Reese? If you are inclined to share that is.

I have also posted on this in the past. In the BoM this pattern is revealed in Abinadi and Samuel the Lamanite. They follow the same pattern set with Elijah, the forerunner. The forerunner is the one who runs ahead of the King announcing his arrival. John the Baptist did this. StL did this. It makes sense there will be one before Christ returns. They will come again.

In this day, there will probably be more than 1 but that's not important. They will come from the church membership, but they will NOT be general authorities. They will have the priesthood - the fullness - because they are commissioned of the Lord. They will be unknowns, but they will have power to call the church to repentance. They will be a voice of warning. They will be just like Samuel the Lamanite.

My thought yesterday as I read Snuffer's book is that he is warming the waters for them. How Snuffer is treated will be similar to how these men will be treated.

Or its a deception of the very elect....

Choose wisely!!!

The elect will recognize these guys. They do not seek their own following as false prophets generally do, but will point the way to Christ. The Elect will hear the voice of the Shepherd in their words.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

I have also posted on this in the past. In the BoM this pattern is revealed in Abinadi and Samuel the Lamanite. They follow the same pattern set with Elijah, the forerunner. The forerunner is the one who runs ahead of the King announcing his arrival. John the Baptist did this. StL did this. It makes sense there will be one before Christ returns. They will come again.

In this day, there will probably be more than 1 but that's not important. They will come from the church membership, but they will NOT be general authorities. They will have the priesthood - the fullness - because they are commissioned of the Lord. They will be unknowns, but they will have power to call the church to repentance. They will be a voice of warning. They will be just like Samuel the Lamanite.

My thought yesterday as I read Snuffer's book is that he is warming the waters for them. How Snuffer is treated will be similar to how these men will be treated.

Or its a deception of the very elect....

Choose wisely!!!

The elect will recognize these guys. They do not seek their own following as false prophets generally do, but will point the way to Christ. The Elect will hear the voice of the Shepherd in their words.

So how are even the very elect deceived???

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

So how are even the very elect deceived???

It was discussed here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11321&hilit=elect

I threw in my 2 cents. The key is in the wording. The Lord is trying to convey how intense the deception will be, but the elect will not be deceived. Some may rebel, but it's not because they didn't know better.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

Darn my reply didnt post...here goes again..lol. Shadow, my opinion on that subject may very well be wrong. It's possible. My opinion is based off of the patterns I have noticed in the scriptures and how I understand it. However there are other things that must be considered and taken into account. A lay member in the church doesn't have priesthood Authority? Yes they do and they have been ordained through the same line of priestly authority which all leads back to Joseph Smith. Every member can receive this invitation and authority based on personal righteousness. Priesthood authority and priesthood power are two completely separate things however. The powers of the priesthood only come from Heaven and no man can pass that gift as Denver states in his book. This again comes from the scriptures. Once a person receives the invitation it is up to them to seek further until that ordination is made full and ratified by Heaven. Also, you mentioned keys. If the church does not posses the fulness and all of the keys. Even the sealing powers then it would also be necessary for an individual to have that conferral directly from Christ. Also, do the missionaries not go and preach repentance unto the nations? Are they putting themselves above the leaders of the church by doing so? Of course not. The leaders have the right to lead because of that authority and by the vote of common consent. No one should be taking their place to run the church but that does not mean a prophet could not come to raise a voice of warning and preach repentance. Those who came before did not come to try and take over the institution but to prepare a people for greater righteousness. Christ stated that he did not come to frustrate or take over work that was already being done. He let those who were in those positions to stay there although technically He could have taken over if He wanted but it wasn't necessary. Its not as black and white as it may appear.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

So how are even the very elect deceived???

It was discussed here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11321&hilit=elect

I threw in my 2 cents. The key is in the wording. The Lord is trying to convey how intense the deception will be, but the elect will not be deceived. Some may rebel, but it's not because they didn't know better.

Underlined is where I currently see myself - not deceived but rebellious. Which I am afraid is worse. I'm still fighting with my rebelliousness, though, and still pray to have my rebelliousness taken from me.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

So how are even the very elect deceived???

It was discussed here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11321&hilit=elect

I threw in my 2 cents. The key is in the wording. The Lord is trying to convey how intense the deception will be, but the elect will not be deceived. Some may rebel, but it's not because they didn't know better.

Underlined is where I currently see myself - not deceived but rebellious. Which I am afraid is worse. I'm still fighting with my rebelliousness, though, and still pray to have my rebelliousness taken from me.

Amen....mine as well!

[Amore Verocaptain of 100]

JS taught that when the Lord has thoroughly proved a person and found that he will serve the Lord in all hazards with all his heart that is when he can have C&EMS. Perfect unconditional love is a god attribute which may be unatainable in this life. What the Lord really wants to know is if we are 100% committed to Him more than anything. There is no reason this can't be taught openly, just as JS did.

Joseph Smith didn't seem to think it impossible to attain 'perfect unconditional love' in this life & he even taught that it is the only way to gain our calling & election made sure. If we don't have 'perfect love' we will almost surely be deceived & fall.

"Until we have perfect love we are liable to fall; and when we have a testimony that our names are sealed in the Lamb's book of life, we have perfect love, and then it is impossible for false Christs to deceive us."
Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings, by Larry E. Dahl & Donald Q. Cannon, p. 105.

I believe that God proves a person by if he possesses & practices this 'perfect love' (Charity) to see if the person is really 100% committed to him, which we prove by having 'perfect love'.

Christ said that this 'love' is the only way to know for sure if someone is truly his disciple. Gaining this 'Charity' is the greatest test of this life & is the only thing that will guarantee us Eternal Life.

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

JS taught that when the Lord has thoroughly proved a person and found that he will serve the Lord in all hazards with all his heart that is when he can have C&EMS. Perfect unconditional love is a god attribute which may be unatainable in this life. What the Lord really wants to know is if we are 100% committed to Him more than anything. There is no reason this can't be taught openly, just as JS did.

Joseph Smith didn't seem to think it impossible to attain 'perfect unconditional love' in this life & he even taught that it is the only way to gain our calling & election made sure. If we don't have 'perfect love' we will almost surely be deceived & fall.

"Until we have perfect love we are liable to fall; and when we have a testimony that our names are sealed in the Lamb's book of life, we have perfect love, and then it is impossible for false Christs to deceive us."
Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings, by Larry E. Dahl & Donald Q. Cannon, p. 105.

I believe that God proves a person by if he possesses & practices this 'perfect love' (Charity) to see if the person is really 100% committed to him, which we prove by having 'perfect love'.

Christ said that this 'love' is the only way to know for sure if someone is truly his disciple. Gaining this 'Charity' is the greatest test of this life & is the only thing that will guarantee us Eternal Life.

You didn't say perfect love, you say perfect unconditional love. Not quite the same thing.

Note that in your quote that the sealed testimony comes first.

...then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure, then it will be his privilege to receive the other Comforter.

We are to be busily adding to our knowledge, virtue, charity, etc., but being perfect in those things is not a prerequisite, only being perfect in our desire to serve Him. We need His help to become perfect in love due to our fallen natures.

[kathyncaptain of 1,000]

I did read "The Second Comforter". I can't say why specifically, but it made me incomfortable at the time. I loved some parts of it, but at the same time, I had a nagging feeling that something isn't quite right. After reading the pros and cons of Snuffer's new book, I think I'll pass on this book. I guess I'm an 8th grade Mormon, because I love General Conference and the scriptures, and yes, even the lessons. Everyone wants the mysteries when we can hardly live up to what we've already been given.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

"We are to be busily adding to our knowledge, virtue, charity, etc., but being perfect in those things is not a prerequisite, only being perfect in our desire to serve Him. We need His help to become perfect in love due to our fallen natures."

Are these your words? I really needed to see this exact clarification. This was meant just for me. Thanks.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

I did read "The Second Comforter". I can't say why specifically, but it made me incomfortable at the time. I loved some parts of it, but at the same time, I had a nagging feeling that something isn't quite right. After reading the pros and cons of Snuffer's new book, I think I'll pass on this book. I guess I'm an 8th grade Mormon, because I love General Conference and the scriptures, and yes, even the lessons. Everyone wants the mysteries when we can hardly live up to what we've already been given.

I love General conference too. I was listening to some over again while cleaning today. One of my favorite things to do is listen to the scripture audio version online. Ive been doing this all day. I love doing that. And I love the lessons as well. I think most of us do. But, I think sometimes we can be like over active children in a classroom who get in trouble a lot because they are bored and need more stimulation. And personally, I think the term mysteries is often misinterpreted to mean grand secrets when really a mystery just applies to anything that you were not aware of or not understood. Anything can be a mystery to a person who doesn't know it. There is nothing wrong with wanting to gain more so those things are not mysteries anymore. Heavenly Father delights in our desires to gain more knowledge. Joseph Smith said a man is saved no faster then he gets knowledge.

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

I did read "The Second Comforter". I can't say why specifically, but it made me incomfortable at the time.

You need to figure out exactly what made you uncomfortable. Re-read D&C 93 if it helps.

In the scriptures, the most common reaction to the visitation of angels is fear, which is why they often say 'fear not'. Contact with heavenly beings (even the thought of it) has made people uncomfortable for a long, long time. The Lord wanted to present himself to all Israelites after fleeing Egypt, but they preferred to have Moses represent them.

Maybe it's something else, but it's important that you understand specifically what it is that bothered you. Growth will happen if you do that.

[gruden2.0captain of 100]

"We are to be busily adding to our knowledge, virtue, charity, etc., but being perfect in those things is not a prerequisite, only being perfect in our desire to serve Him. We need His help to become perfect in love due to our fallen natures."

Are these your words? I really needed to see this exact clarification. This was meant just for me. Thanks.

An extrapolation of JS's and Paul's words. In TPJS p. 298 where he talks about C&EMS he says "Notwithstanding the apostle exhorts them to add to their faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, etc., yet he exhorts them to make their calling and election made sure."

Thus growing in those attributes are important, but ultimately it is the determination to serve the Lord at all personal costs that ultimately makes one eligible for C&EMS, as I quoted in the previous post.

Adding to that is D&C 93:1:

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who forsaketh his sins and cometh unto me, and calleth on my name, and obeyeth my voice, and keepeth my commandments, shall see my face and know that I am;

The Second Comforter and C&EMS, while there is overlap, aren't technically the same thing. You can have one without the other.

The qualifications for the Second Comforter are to repent, come to Christ and pray to Him, and obey Him. For C&EMS you show you are willing to do all those things no matter the personal cost. I have met 2 people in my life who achieved that and it typically involves an Abrahamic test.