A question about the Mormon remnant movement

[jwbohrer]

A former member of this forum has his own blog now, and most of what he talks about is the sermon on the mount. He's part of the Mormon remnant movement, believes Denver Snuffer is a prophet, and has been rebaptized...

..he tells me I should be baptized by someone in the movement, and says that if I don't believe he's a messenger of God, without receiving personal revelation to the contrary, it's because I don't have Charity...

Could my old friend be right?

If any of you aren't already familiar with his blog, here's the link.

Your friend is Jared of Log's Cabin?!

He's using classic manipulation tactics on you.

How about you just follow what the Spirit/Lord is telling you to do.

Random comment but I am pretty sure I was his Home Teacher at one point...did he live in Northern Virginia?

[drtanner]

Also in regards to the early saints multiple baptisms...this is really not the same as our day. There are a couple of reasons for this and I would point them out for you. For starters, the early Israelites way back in the day had to baptize more often because they apostatized frequently! They lived in an era where their next door neighbors were practicing human sacrifice and cannibalism (ever wonder why the Jews can't mix certain foods? Well this was part of it), also a whole lot of really icky and nasty behaviors. So there was partly a reason they were re-baptized often.

We also have the fact that in more recent church history they didn't always have paperwork, and documentation of ordinances due to the church growing so fast, lack of paper, less established organization (but still organized enough to function), and less technology. This is different than today where we have a very strong organizational structure, and near infinite access to paper. So their re-baptizing people to make sure that everyone is on the same page isn't the same as us. We can at the click of a few buttons know who has what callings in our wards now. It's very simple. So there's less confusion. Can you imagine living in the 1830s and you don't know who is baptized, who is confirmed, and who has the Melchizedek priesthood? You don't have a computer to keep track of it, and you can't use your journal because you might only be able to buy paper once every 2 or 3 years and that's if you lucky because everyone is poor from escaping the mobs. It would have been a nightmare to keep track of. So no wonder, they baptized often. It's very clearly a different issue for us.

Finally, I would point out the fact that we don't need multiple baptisms if we understand the sacrament and the Atonement of Jesus Christ. If we are going to our meetings and worthily partaking of the sacrament then that IS like a baptism every week. And I would point out much of being worthy to partake of the sacrament is having a broken heart and contrite spirit. It is absolutely essential that we understand how precious and wonderful the sacrament is. The sacrament IS an ordinance. I know many of us have had thoughts of wow it'd be nice to be re-baptized but if we think about the sacrament it's absolutely taken care of. ..

You're welcome to your opinions but that is a very un-scriptural, non-prophetic, and ignorant view of baptism. I'll just stick to what I learned from Joseph Smith (prophet of the restoration) and other earlier Church leaders (and the scriptures) about baptism.

What are your thoughts on current members of the church being re-baptized? If the brethren council against it do you think members should still go forward with it?

[creator]

What are your thoughts on current members of the church being re-baptized? If the brethren council against it do you think members should still go forward with it?

I see nothing wrong with following the principle of baptism in a manner that is scriptural and was taught/practiced by Joseph Smith (and many others for almost the first 100 years of the LDS Church). It's between the person and the Lord.

[AI2.0]

On my lunch break, ,A12. Respectfully, what I have discussed with my bishop in private in his office is none of your business. My experience is not an endorsement of rebaptism, nor do I encourage anyone to just go out and do what I did or do. But if you know God's will in your own life, then go and do it.

I never asked to know what you discussed with your Bishop. I will take your huffy response to mean you have not told him.

I think you don't realize that your decision to be rebaptized WILL be viewed as an endorsement of the practice, whether you meant it to be or not.

And, since you aren't sure whether the guy who baptized you was Remnant or not.....did he claim to have been sustained by seven women? If he did, then he's Remnant.

I did not mean to be huffy-please forgive me. A12.0, I am acutely aware of everything I have done and do and I have weighed everything and do weigh everything carefully and by the Spirit. You keep taking me to task and I'm beginning to feel like you are stalking me. I am thankful that you are concerned about me, though. I am not going to argue with you about authority except to say that when God directly tells you to do something, He is authorizing you to do it, even if it challenges your beliefs, or is contrary to His commandments to everyone else. It is not beneath God to test you in this manner as He has done a number of times in scripture.

I'm sorry if you felt I was stalking you, I'm certainly not meaning to. I'm afraid my concern is seen as badgering, so I will stop. I'm sorry, I'm just surprised, I didn't think you had gone that far down the rabbit hole of fringe LDS society. I truly was shocked to find that out about you after reading your posts for as long as I have.

Please take this as my concern, for what it's worth and then I'll say no more; you think that God directly tells you to do something that will cost you your membership in his church, cause you to violate sacred covenants and cut you off from access to his temple and most likely lead you to wandering in strange paths that will end in misery for you and loved ones....I don't think you are listening to 'God'. It is not in his nature to lead you or others astray in such a manner, but it is exactly Satan's M.O. God doesn't test us by teasing, manipulating and lying to us. This is NOT the way an Abrahamic test comes, these Mormon Gnostic beliefs some have been seduced into following, are the same kind of games Satan has used on Saints before through the ages many many times. We poor humans are so easy to read for the demons around us, they don't waste time coming up with new stuff, they don't have to, they just recycle the stuff that worked in the past--and it's working great again. Please be very careful in the path you are headed and please pray about sharing this with your Bishop or other church leader you trust.

[marc]

Thank you, A12. I know what I am doing. For what it's worth for your information, the Lord spoke to me and explicitly told me not to participate in their upcoming covenant. As I have repeatedly said, I do precisely what the Lord requires of me. No more, no less. My journey is my own.

[AI2.0]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

[FTC]

Has Snuffer had as many prophecies as I have made come true? Just sayin'. B-)

[Finrock]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

[shadow]

Was Joseph Smith baptized more than once?

Twice that we're aware of. However,-
1 Behold, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this is a new and an everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning.

2 Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses, neither by your dead works.

3 For it is because of your dead works that I have caused this last covenant and this church to be built up unto me, even as in days of old.

4 Wherefore, enter ye in at the gate, as I have commanded, and seek not to counsel your God. Amen.

Only one baptism is required so long as it's done by someone authorized to do it.
The D&C further clarifies-
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.

Also of importance to note is that anyone going about baptizing will have need to conform to verse 11. Oh, and there's more. There's actually a system to the Priesthood.
64 Then comes the High Priesthood, which is the greatest of all.

65 Wherefore, it must needs be that one be appointed of the High Priesthood to preside over the priesthood, and he shall be called President of the High Priesthood of the Church;

66 Or, in other words, the Presiding High Priest over the High Priesthood of the Church.

67 From the same comes the administering of ordinances and blessings upon the church, by the laying on of the hands.

Since baptism is an ordinance it has to be administered via the presiding High Priest which is the Prophet. He delegates to others, but not to unknowns like the guy who baptized Marc. His rebaptism was done outside the proper authority according to the D&C which makes it null and void or about as effective as being baptized by the Baptists. But the Baptists also truly believe their baptisms are valid. Lots of work to be done during the millennium.

[drtanner]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

I have several dear friends that have been derailed and entire families destroyed under this premise. Let me explain from my perspective and where I believe faithful latter day saints go wrong.

First let me say that if the "Lord" tells you to do something there is not question you should do it regardless of the consequence and you will be blessed.

Matthew 19:29
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

The problem is many latter day saints are not told by the "Lord".... it is a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit or will of the Lord. Many do not understand what revelation really feels like and my heart goes out to them because sometimes they genuinely believe it is the Holy Ghost telling them to do something. This makes it difficult because when you disagree and it is something really important the counter is "the Lord told me to do it." For their souls sake I sure hope they are right, but would be extremely cautious about the reality of that statement. It has been my sad experience that many times it is not the "Lord" that ended up telling them to do it and from reading the scriptures and church history I would have to say this is not just my own experience.

[Serragon]

Was Joseph Smith baptized more than once?

Twice that we're aware of. However,-
1 Behold, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this is a new and an everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning.

2 Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses, neither by your dead works.

3 For it is because of your dead works that I have caused this last covenant and this church to be built up unto me, even as in days of old.

4 Wherefore, enter ye in at the gate, as I have commanded, and seek not to counsel your God. Amen.

Only one baptism is required so long as it's done by someone authorized to do it.
The D&C further clarifies-
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.

Also of importance to note is that anyone going about baptizing will have need to conform to verse 11. Oh, and there's more. There's actually a system to the Priesthood.
64 Then comes the High Priesthood, which is the greatest of all.

65 Wherefore, it must needs be that one be appointed of the High Priesthood to preside over the priesthood, and he shall be called President of the High Priesthood of the Church;

66 Or, in other words, the Presiding High Priest over the High Priesthood of the Church.

67 From the same comes the administering of ordinances and blessings upon the church, by the laying on of the hands.

Since baptism is an ordinance it has to be administered via the presiding High Priest which is the Prophet. He delegates to others, but not to unknowns like the guy who baptized Marc. His rebaptism was done outside the proper authority according to the D&C which makes it null and void or about as effective as being baptized by the Baptists. But the Baptists also truly believe their baptisms are valid. Lots of work to be done during the millennium.

Verse 11 is interesting. My personal belief is that at the time of the revelation it simply meant that you had to have been ordained to the priesthood by someone who already had the priesthood. By virtue of having this priesthood you also had the authority to baptize and preach as you saw fit. Most early missionaries were baptizing and preaching without ever asking permission from anyone.

Since our current practice is to require priesthood holders to seek permission to perform ordinances, our interpretation of verse 11 has changed along with it.

I prefer the earlier custom, but practice the latter with the hope that we will begin moving more in that direction in the future.

[e-eye2.0]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

I have several dear friends that have been derailed and entire families destroyed under this premise. Let me explain from my perspective and where I believe faithful latter day saints go wrong.

First let me say that if the "Lord" tells you to do something there is not question you should do it regardless of the consequence and you will be blessed.

Matthew 19:29
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

The problem is many latter day saints are not told by the "Lord".... it is a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit or will of the Lord. Many do not understand what revelation really feels like and my heart goes out to them because sometimes they genuinely believe it is the Holy Ghost telling them to do something. This makes it difficult because when you disagree and it is something really important the counter is "the Lord told me to do it." For their souls sake I sure hope they are right, but would be extremely cautious about the reality of that statement. It has been my sad experience that many times it is not the "Lord" that ended up telling them to do it and from reading the scriptures and church history I would have to say this is not just my own experience.

Agreed - When we think the Lord is telling us to do something that breaks our covenants we may want to give pause and study out in our mind a little more as I think that would have helped a lot of people who have left the church. When my family left the church and jumped on the Denver Snuffer movement they were already having issues with the church, the prophet and local leaders. It would seem that these family members were strong in the faith as they really were for years but if you knew them like I did the writing was on the wall, the spirit was not with them and the transition was simple.

I recently read on mormonleaks the notes from Bruce R McConkie on what he said about apostate religions and how they form. He had them so nailed down it fits this current movement to a T. It's as Mark often says here about Snuffer and Harmston group - they are one and the same, nothing new just different players.

You can use a lot of past precedence to justify current actions but when it comes down to it if you believe this is Gods church the actions of re baptism into another church or idea is where you faith and testimony lye, which in my opinion is an act of rebellion regardless of if that person thinks they have been told to do it.

[Mark]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. It is apparent here that many on this forum do not believe that the LDS church is in fact directed by the Savior thru His Prophet and First Presidency. Its just as simple as that. They are willing to go contrary to the revealed word of the Lords Prophet/President of the High Priesthood today because they dont really believe he is just that. This verse in section 42 is critical to this point:
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.

This isnt rocket science here. Some guy on the internet cant go around rebaptizing or reconfirming or performing temple ordinances at their home made alters or whatever other ordinance you want to discuss here unless he has the necessary Priesthood keys and authority given him by the heads of the church to do so. This is for the protection of the Saints to guard against wolves entering the flock etc.

4 Wherefore I, the Lord, command and revoke, as it seemeth me good; and all this to be answered upon the heads of the rebellious, saith the Lord.

The Lord commands His Saints and revokes those commands thru His spokesman the Prophet who has been given that authority and exercises those Priesthood keys that have been given him. Why are people trying to redefine or change how the Lord works and has done so since the restoration? Sounds like a bad idea to me.. :-ss

[Arenera]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. It is apparent here that many on this forum do not believe that the LDS church is in fact directed by the Savior thru His Prophet and First Presidency. Its just as simple as that. They are willing to go contrary to the revealed word of the Lords Prophet/President of the High Priesthood today because they dont really believe he is just that. This verse in section 42 is critical to this point:
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.

This isnt rocket science here. Some guy on the internet cant go around rebaptizing or reconfirming or performing temple ordinances at their home made alters or whatever other ordinance you want to discuss here unless he has the necessary Priesthood keys and authority given him by the heads of the church to do so. This is for the protection of the Saints to guard against wolves entering the flock etc.

4 Wherefore I, the Lord, command and revoke, as it seemeth me good; and all this to be answered upon the heads of the rebellious, saith the Lord.

The Lord commands His Saints and revokes those commands thru His spokesman the Prophet who has been given that authority and exercises those Priesthood keys that have been given him. Why are people trying to redefine or change how the Lord works and has done so since the restoration? Sounds like a bad idea to me.. :-ss

If his name is John Doe, be very careful... ;)

[Mark]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

I have several dear friends that have been derailed and entire families destroyed under this premise. Let me explain from my perspective and where I believe faithful latter day saints go wrong.

First let me say that if the "Lord" tells you to do something there is not question you should do it regardless of the consequence and you will be blessed.

Matthew 19:29
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

The problem is many latter day saints are not told by the "Lord".... it is a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit or will of the Lord. Many do not understand what revelation really feels like and my heart goes out to them because sometimes they genuinely believe it is the Holy Ghost telling them to do something. This makes it difficult because when you disagree and it is something really important the counter is "the Lord told me to do it." For their souls sake I sure hope they are right, but would be extremely cautious about the reality of that statement. It has been my sad experience that many times it is not the "Lord" that ended up telling them to do it and from reading the scriptures and church history I would have to say this is not just my own experience.

Indeed. Just ask the broken and fractured lives of those conned by the likes of Jim Harmston and many many others who seem to come and go with regularity. The Lord gives us revelation we can access through His Prophet/Presidency of the High Priesthood and through the scriptures and through His Holy Spirit. If those feeling or voices we are hearing are contrary or dont line up with those 3 critical sources united together then chances are alternative spirits are hard at work to try and deceive us.

14 And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—

15 Wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.

16 He that speaketh, whose spirit is contrite, whose language is meek and edifieth, the same is of God if he obey mine ordinances.

17 And again, he that trembleth under my power shall be made strong, and shall bring forth fruits of praise and wisdom, according to the revelations and truths which I have given you.

18 And again, he that is overcome and bringeth not forth fruits, even according to this pattern, is not of me.

19 Wherefore, by this pattern ye shall know the spirits in all cases under the whole heavens.

[Mark]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

Very much a slippery slope toward deception. See my posts above. The Lord does command and He also does revoke. He speaks through His Prophets in doing so. He has done so many times through the ages. Thats why we dont live the law of Moses or practice polygamy or live the United Order today. This is just common sense.

“Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the written oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day.’ ‘And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles [living prophets] those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation: ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth’” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1897, 22–23; emphasis added).

[Finrock]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

I have several dear friends that have been derailed and entire families destroyed under this premise. Let me explain from my perspective and where I believe faithful latter day saints go wrong.

First let me say that if the "Lord" tells you to do something there is not question you should do it regardless of the consequence and you will be blessed.

Matthew 19:29
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

The problem is many latter day saints are not told by the "Lord".... it is a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit or will of the Lord. Many do not understand what revelation really feels like and my heart goes out to them because sometimes they genuinely believe it is the Holy Ghost telling them to do something. This makes it difficult because when you disagree and it is something really important the counter is "the Lord told me to do it." For their souls sake I sure hope they are right, but would be extremely cautious about the reality of that statement. It has been my sad experience that many times it is not the "Lord" that ended up telling them to do it and from reading the scriptures and church history I would have to say this is not just my own experience.

I get it. Your sociocentric paradigm doesn't allow for spiritual experiences that don't validate your bias. If the revelation a person receives is, for instance, that "President Monson" is God's prophet, neither you nor anyone else who shares your paradigm would think twice whether the revelation is authentic, true, real, good, or from God. Of course your spiritual experiences which are the foundation for your faith can't be denied and are true without question. When you received an answer to your prayer there is no question in your mind that what was communicated to you is from God and that you are not deceived.

Without appealing to your sociocentric bias, how do you justify the claim that "many latter day saints are not told by the Lord" but it is instead just "a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit"? Better yet, I actually agree with this statement that many LDS don't know what true revelation is and that quite often when people say they "know" something is true they don't really know but they just believe it or they are just saying what is acceptable to say within the social group of their choice. But without appealing to your sociocentric bias, how do you know which group of individuals are confused or are being deceived?

-Finrock

[Finrock]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

Very much a slippery slope toward deception. See my posts above. The Lord does command and He also does revoke. He speaks through His Prophets in doing so. He has done so many times through the ages. Thats why we dont live the law of Moses or practice polygamy or live the United Order today. This is just common sense.

“Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the written oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day.’ ‘And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles [living prophets] those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation: ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth’” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1897, 22–23; emphasis added).

Not a slippery slope towards deception at all. The living oracles are the pure revelations of the Holy Spirit, not a man or a group of men. I would rather live by the living oracles of God any day as well. As I said, if the President of the Church has received a true oracle from God then let him speak this oracle, the living words of the Holy Spirit, so that we may hear and accept. The Handbook of Instructions, policy letters, agenda items, correlated dictations, PR messages, official websites, and other such things do not constitute the living oracles of God. If these things are oracles (a thing, not a person) from God, then let it be clearly known in the manner in which it has been established that these oracles from God may be known and given to the body of the Church. If the Head wishes to speak to the Body as the Lord God Himself speaks to His people, then let the Head declare that these are pure oracles, received by revelation by the power of the Holy Ghost and that they constitute the very mind and will of the Lord and let freedom, agency, and love unfeigned reign and let God's word distill upon us without compulsory means.

-Finrock

[drtanner]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

Truth doesn't change. The gospel is not provisional. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If the President of the Church wants to provide a true oracle from God that gives us the mind and will of the Lord, then let him do so. No such thing has been received or announced in a very, very long time. Church Handbook of Instructions are not scripture and they don't constitute oracles of God given to man by His prophets.

We can rely on God and on His Spirit to guide and to direct us. Ultimately true prophets stand only to bring people to Christ. They don't stand to prescribe how people need to live, what they should believe, how they need to worship, or what they should do. They teach, they warn, and they most importantly invite people to come to Jesus Christ. Not some Jesus Christ that changes with tenure or a Jesus that believes one way yesterday but this could change in the next decade or next century. We are to come to the very same Jesus Christ that has existed forever. It is the priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is the Church of Jesus Christ. It is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the gospel of president A, president B, president C, president D, etc.

-Finrock

I have several dear friends that have been derailed and entire families destroyed under this premise. Let me explain from my perspective and where I believe faithful latter day saints go wrong.

First let me say that if the "Lord" tells you to do something there is not question you should do it regardless of the consequence and you will be blessed.

Matthew 19:29
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

The problem is many latter day saints are not told by the "Lord".... it is a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit or will of the Lord. Many do not understand what revelation really feels like and my heart goes out to them because sometimes they genuinely believe it is the Holy Ghost telling them to do something. This makes it difficult because when you disagree and it is something really important the counter is "the Lord told me to do it." For their souls sake I sure hope they are right, but would be extremely cautious about the reality of that statement. It has been my sad experience that many times it is not the "Lord" that ended up telling them to do it and from reading the scriptures and church history I would have to say this is not just my own experience.

I get it. Your sociocentric paradigm doesn't allow for spiritual experiences that don't validate your bias. If the revelation a person receives is, for instance, that "President Monson" is God's prophet, neither you nor anyone else who shares your paradigm would think twice whether the revelation is authentic, true, real, good, or from God. Of course your spiritual experiences which are the foundation for your faith can't be denied and are true without question. When you received an answer to your prayer there is no question in your mind that what was communicated to you is from God and that you are not deceived.

Without appealing to your sociocentric bias, how do you justify the claim that "many latter day saints are not told by the Lord" but it is instead just "a thought in their head that they confuse or label as the spirit"? Better yet, I actually agree with this statement that many LDS don't know what true revelation is and that quite often when people say they "know" something is true they don't really know but they just believe it or they are just saying what is acceptable to say within the social group of their choice. But without appealing to your sociocentric bias, how do you know which group of individuals are confused or are being deceived?

-Finrock

Has nothing to do with my paradigm. I am speaking from experiences of those who have lost everything going down this road, only coming back to admit that what they thought was divine communication was in the perfect clarity of hindsight their own idea combined with the pride of holding on to a perceived spiritual transmission advertised to the world. Unfortunately once that advertisement has gone out calling it into question is viewed by those in question as more painful than living out the nightmare that it actually creates.

Are latter day saints guilty of sometimes declaring truths they have actually never had a spiritual confirmation of? Certainly, they just happen to be right, and thank goodness the side effects from following true prophets has proven through scripture and history to equate to the reception of more light and love from Heavenly Parents hopefully leading the initiated testimony to the destination of a conversion to Christ.

[inquirringmind]

Also here's a thought;

"...He also tells me that if I don't believe he's a messenger of God, its because I don't love him, and I don't have Charity or eternal life abiding in my heart. And right now he's washed his hands of me, and won't answer any questions...."

This is classic child behavior. The child CONFRONTS the parent, not edifies them. The child then has the behavior of, if you really loved me you'd buy me that toy. Any parent can confirm this. And that's what he just did. Also the not answering messages or talking to him. That's classic child tantrum behavior too. So when my family members get offended that I represent the church and have told my parents they can't have anarchy in the house, they then all gang up and give me the silent treatment. This is the same thing he's doing, while withholding love to force you to be conquered under him.

Thank you, and that may be true, but I haven't seen anyone explain what 1 Corinthians 13:7 means.

It does say that Charity believes all things.

Does that mean that I should believe the denial that Denver Snuffer wrote on his blog today, unless I receive some personal revelation to the contrary?

And if that's not what it means, what does it mean?

[drtanner]

Also here's a thought;

"...He also tells me that if I don't believe he's a messenger of God, its because I don't love him, and I don't have Charity or eternal life abiding in my heart. And right now he's washed his hands of me, and won't answer any questions...."

This is classic child behavior. The child CONFRONTS the parent, not edifies them. The child then has the behavior of, if you really loved me you'd buy me that toy. Any parent can confirm this. And that's what he just did. Also the not answering messages or talking to him. That's classic child tantrum behavior too. So when my family members get offended that I represent the church and have told my parents they can't have anarchy in the house, they then all gang up and give me the silent treatment. This is the same thing he's doing, while withholding love to force you to be conquered under him.

Thank you, and that may be true, but I haven't seen anyone explain what 1 Corinthians 13:7 means.

It does say that Charity believes all things.

Does that mean that I should believe the denial that Denver Snuffer wrote on his blog today, unless I receive some personal revelation to the contrary?

And if that's not what it means, what does it mean?

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

How can Charity believe ALL things but ONLY rejoice in the truth? Maybe that will help answer your question.

[AI2.0]

My understanding is that at this time, in this day-- men who exercise priesthood can give blessings and healing blessings without permission of those priesthood brethren over them, but all ordinances need permission, including Baptism.

A rebaptism can be performed if permission is given. However, at this time, If men choose to do it without permission, they are wrongfully attempting to exercise priesthood, IMO and my understanding is that it could mean excommunication for the one performing the baptism and the one being baptized. If you believe the church is headed by the Lord's prophet, then you accept his authority and do not violate what he's forbidden at this time--just like you wouldn't enter a plural marriage today, even though it was allowed in the past. While you may not agree or understand--it's simple--it comes down to obedience to the laws and precepts as given to YOU, in YOUR DAY, not to the saints in Brigham Young's day or the Saint's in Peter's day or Alma's day or any one else's time.

And this is where the rubber meets the road. It is apparent here that many on this forum do not believe that the LDS church is in fact directed by the Savior thru His Prophet and First Presidency. Its just as simple as that. They are willing to go contrary to the revealed word of the Lords Prophet/President of the High Priesthood today because they dont really believe he is just that. This verse in section 42 is critical to this point:
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.

This isnt rocket science here. Some guy on the internet cant go around rebaptizing or reconfirming or performing temple ordinances at their home made alters or whatever other ordinance you want to discuss here unless he has the necessary Priesthood keys and authority given him by the heads of the church to do so. This is for the protection of the Saints to guard against wolves entering the flock etc.

4 Wherefore I, the Lord, command and revoke, as it seemeth me good; and all this to be answered upon the heads of the rebellious, saith the Lord.

The Lord commands His Saints and revokes those commands thru His spokesman the Prophet who has been given that authority and exercises those Priesthood keys that have been given him. Why are people trying to redefine or change how the Lord works and has done so since the restoration? Sounds like a bad idea to me.. :-ss

I agree, it's not rocket science and you've explained it clearly, but it doesn't seem to help. How many times has it happened that members have decided they no longer have faith in the LDS church and it's Prophet, doctrines and teachings and have broken away to start their own--more to their liking.

[lemuel]

Thank you, and that may be true, but I haven't seen anyone explain what 1 Corinthians 13:7 means.

It does say that Charity believes all things.

Does that mean that I should believe the denial that Denver Snuffer wrote on his blog today, unless I receive some personal revelation to the contrary?

And if that's not what it means, what does it mean?

I've wondered on the phrase "believe all things" too. Can I believe in A and not A simultaneously?

My best answer is, "if something isn't true, then it's not a thing".

So believe all things that are true.

[drtanner]

Thank you, and that may be true, but I haven't seen anyone explain what 1 Corinthians 13:7 means.

It does say that Charity believes all things.

Does that mean that I should believe the denial that Denver Snuffer wrote on his blog today, unless I receive some personal revelation to the contrary?

And if that's not what it means, what does it mean?

I've wondered on the phrase "believe all things" too. Can I believe in A and not A simultaneously?

My best answer is, "if something isn't true, then it's not a thing".

So believe all things that are true.

Very good insight and to add,

D&C 93: 24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;

25 And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

[inquirringmind]

Thank you, and that may be true, but I haven't seen anyone explain what 1 Corinthians 13:7 means.

It does say that Charity believes all things.

Does that mean that I should believe the denial that Denver Snuffer wrote on his blog today, unless I receive some personal revelation to the contrary?

And if that's not what it means, what does it mean?

I've wondered on the phrase "believe all things" too. Can I believe in A and not A simultaneously?

My best answer is, "if something isn't true, then it's not a thing".

So believe all things that are true.

Thank you.
I'm especially grateful for your reply here.