Denver Snuffer's Remnant scripture project and covenant

[AI2.0]

For those who may not have been following this, an event in the Remnant movement has the potential to seriously damage it's credibility and it's found Denver Snuffer. This link will give insight on this;

https://bringingtolighthiddenthings.wor ... blog-post/

Below are a couple of comments from the blog:

Denver and Adrian Larsen have responded to your statements with what is effect a firm denial of your narrative of what happened. Who is telling the complete story here ? In my view the denials exacerbate the problems greatly. Previously the question was a conflict in inspiration. Now the issue is who is less than truthful. Can someone knowledgeable speak to the conflict between the two narratives ?.They both can not be true. In addition why isn’t the malefactor’s name disclosed. If he was guilty and unrepentant as the OP said what is to keep him from misleading others in the future. What kind of Shepard sees the wolf enter the sheepfold and refuses to tell the sheep where he is or how to identify him. I understand the need for confidentiality in some circumstances but in this case we already have (between the 15 sitting in judgement and the several witnesses ) dozens of people who know the identity of said John Doe but the average vulnerable little ewe does not. Don’t those who know bear responsibility to those he may deceive in the future if they remain silent ?

I think both parties feel they are truthful. If it helps, Denver was approached to help resolve this before it escalated to a court. He only listened to one of the witnesses although two others emailed him personally with evidence and facts. At the court he denied having received those emails.

Denver attended the Women’s council for the very first 45 minutes. During that time he spoke in defense of John Doe. When he finished, he was encouraged to stay for the entire trial. He declined to stay. He never heard any of the witnesses testimonies nor did he hear John Doe’s confession of guilt for recent immoral misconduct. Denver’s perspective is limited to John Doe’s side and a few other women who he referenced in his email.

Denver’s latest post only focused on bonded soulmates as the main issue. Had Denver stayed for the entire trial he would have seen bonded soulmates was something John Doe did at one time and was only a portion of the trial. The trial showed a consistent pattern of deception and manipulation which involved priestcraft, which eventually showed he was not using his priesthood righteously.

The name has not been disclosed because that was the decision of the Women’s Council (not the witnesses decision). You are right that those who do know bear the responsibility and it is a source of concern for me and many others right now. We are saying as much as we feel we can. Everything is still in process. I share the same concern for the sheepfold and the little ewe. And it keeps me awake nightly. We are exposing as much as we can and questions have really helped the process. So thank you for this comment.

I think this will come down to whether the Remnant members are 'converted' to Denver Snuffer's position as a prophet, sharing his revelations from God or whether they see him as simply another 'enlightened' person, a teacher who is sharing his own personal 'revelations' and views.

It's obvious that Denver Snuffer has treated the remnant groups as not his responsibility and he uses them when they are of use to him. He doesn't want to be involved or take control--until he finds it necessary, as in this instance. Now that he sees that his scripture project is in jeopardy of being tainted by John Doe's involvement, he's trying to protect it. That's why he's protecting John Doe, because it's in his best interests.

Some have wondered about Snuffer's motivations and I think we can see that his motivations are to create 'scripture', just as he created his books, before his break with the church. His writings must be preserved, they must be protected, and if he has to turn a blind eye to obvious, serious sin and deception, he will do so and he will undermine the women of the council, who only followed his directions in passing judgement based on the evidence they received. If they'd only come to the decision Snuffer wanted them to, the crisis would have been averted, but they didn't and then they had the audacity to go public and defy him further.

Now it has the potential to cause schism.

The schism will be between those who have no trouble following a 'prophet'--they just replaced Pres. Monson with Denver Snuffer and there are many in the Remnant who fit this category--they are ones who hang on his words, who study his writings etc. Then there are those who like his writings and what he stands for, but they aren't lockstep with Snuffer on all his teachings. They are the ones who will take John Doe's side if they share his fringe beliefs in rationalizing promiscuous sexual behavior or possibly take his side if they question why Snuffer is able to decide what is 'revelation' on a personal basis and what is not. Some of them may wonder how the movement which was so open and fluid is now jelling into a code of orthodox beliefs--and this one of marital fidelity Snuffer proposes may not align with their own individual interests. It also clearly calls out the polygamists and polygamy sympathizers within the group(they exist)--they won't find a comfortable home in the Remnant any more than they were accepted in the mainstream LDS church.

I know there are still a number of Remnant folks on this forum, if they are even aware of this situation which has arisen, do they see the changes which have come about in the remnant and Snuffer's teachings? There were some insightful comments on the blog from those who weren't afraid to admit it. I wonder if many within the movement are willing to recognize and admit the changes which have taken place over the years.

I wonder if many of them have lost faith in the 'covenant' which is associated with Snuffer's scriptures?

[Arenera]

This is going to be a tough pill to swallow.

I believe it was hard to leave the church, and to now see what is going on, how can they admit they made a mistake?

It's also interesting that Denver has written his books and bibles, but when people use them it puts Denver in a pickle. He should have been patient with the John Doe court and seen the final determination, but I agree with you, that he saw damage to his scripture covenant and his true intentions came out.

It's hard to make your own church, or organization, or community. So many different opinions!

[inho]

This Scripture project and covenant is really an effort to create a more coherent movement. It also really puts Denver to the top of the "organization". His revelations are going to be canonized. He receives the covenant. There has been others in the movement that claimed to have had the second comforter experience, but they have not received any revelations for everybody.

However, I think that the whole John Doe incident is not that important. One can find false revelations and sexual sins among the members of the true church, too. This incident just brought to light the centralization of the power around Denver.

[jdt]

As a self-identifying member of the remnant movement, I can provide my perspective:
1. We are likely going to fail at the establishment of Zion. We have tons of scriptures of good people and very few recorded instances of Zion. We are no better and will likely fail too. But for me the attempt is worth my time and efforts. But to my own mind, I expect to see major failings along the way, even if against the odds we succeed.
2. It is interesting to see your views on what the scripture projects purposes are. I have never thought it was about canonizing Denver's words as scripture. The thought never entered into my mind until you said it. From my thinking, we have all of Denver's words readily available in other locations, so bringing it together with the other scriptures is a trivial part of the project. What we don't have nearly so readily available, is the effort to bring together A. every Joseph Smith translation, B. the earliest extant text of the Book of Mormon and C. going back to the earliest extant text for the revelations from Joseph Smith. Bringing all these together into a singular set of scriptures is essentially unprecedented. Do you guys want the printer's errors from the Book of Mormon? Would you prefer Sidney Rigdon's "clarifications" over what Joseph dictated? I would think everyone with a Mormon background would be interested in this. Sure if you think Denver is a false prophet lay his words aside, but wouldn't you want the rest?
3. As for the covenant, are you familar with the details:

First: Do you believe all the words of the Lord which have been read to you this day, and
know them to be true and from the Lord Jesus Christ who has condescended to provide
them to you, and do you covenant with Him to cease to do evil and to seek to continually do
good?
Second: Do you have faith in these things and receive the scriptures approved by the Lord as
a standard to govern you in your daily walk in life, to accept the obligations established by
the Book of Mormon as a covenant and to use the scriptures to correct yourselves and to
guide your words, thoughts and deeds?
Third: Do you agree to assist all others who covenant to likewise accept this standard to
govern their lives to keep the Lord’s will, to succor those who stand in need, to lighten the
burdens of your brothers and sisters whenever you are able, and to help care for the poor
among you?
Fourth: And do you covenant to seek to become of one heart with those who seek the Lord
to establish His righteousness?

Obviously at this point we don't know what will be said for point 1, so I have to withhold judgment until the day of on that one. What about the other 3? Who among you object to accepting the scriptures and committing to guide your actions by them? What about helping your other Brothers and Sisters in Christ (however you define it)? Seeking to become of one heart? Who among you would not agree to those terms? To me these are things you likely can have a general Christian background to and find no fault with.
4. So when I look at what the scripture project and covenant represent: how is this derailed by anyone? Much less by some guy I don't know and likely never will. I don't get where the controversy is... So Denver spoke out and said in his opinion he thought that the man's ability to minister in fellowships should not be rescinded and the women adjudged differently. This was the first such council and there was a lot that was learned about the process. Personally, from the descriptions given to me, I saw at least 5 procedural issues with the way the council was conducted. Granted I am male and hold no sway over how women decide to run these, but I definitely think there are some lessons to be learned from the experience.
5. Now granted I was likely never typical as a Latter Day Saint and do not represent the norm amongst the remnant movement.

[Arenera]

As a self-identifying member of the remnant movement, I can provide my perspective:
1. We are likely going to fail at the establishment of Zion. We have tons of scriptures of good people and very few recorded instances of Zion. We are no better and will likely fail too. But for me the attempt is worth my time and efforts. But to my own mind, I expect to see major failings along the way, even if against the odds we succeed.
2. It is interesting to see your views on what the scripture projects purposes are. I have never thought it was about canonizing Denver's words as scripture. The thought never entered into my mind until you said it. From my thinking, we have all of Denver's words readily available in other locations, so bringing it together with the other scriptures is a trivial part of the project. What we don't have nearly so readily available, is the effort to bring together A. every Joseph Smith translation, B. the earliest extant text of the Book of Mormon and C. going back to the earliest extant text for the revelations from Joseph Smith. Bringing all these together into a singular set of scriptures is essentially unprecedented. Do you guys want the printer's errors from the Book of Mormon? Would you prefer Sidney Rigdon's "clarifications" over what Joseph dictated? I would think everyone with a Mormon background would be interested in this. Sure if you think Denver is a false prophet lay his words aside, but wouldn't you want the rest?
3. As for the covenant, are you familar with the details:

First: Do you believe all the words of the Lord which have been read to you this day, and
know them to be true and from the Lord Jesus Christ who has condescended to provide
them to you, and do you covenant with Him to cease to do evil and to seek to continually do
good?
Second: Do you have faith in these things and receive the scriptures approved by the Lord as
a standard to govern you in your daily walk in life, to accept the obligations established by
the Book of Mormon as a covenant and to use the scriptures to correct yourselves and to
guide your words, thoughts and deeds?
Third: Do you agree to assist all others who covenant to likewise accept this standard to
govern their lives to keep the Lord’s will, to succor those who stand in need, to lighten the
burdens of your brothers and sisters whenever you are able, and to help care for the poor
among you?
Fourth: And do you covenant to seek to become of one heart with those who seek the Lord
to establish His righteousness?

Obviously at this point we don't know what will be said for point 1, so I have to withhold judgment until the day of on that one. What about the other 3? Who among you object to accepting the scriptures and committing to guide your actions by them? What about helping your other Brothers and Sisters in Christ (however you define it)? Seeking to become of one heart? Who among you would not agree to those terms? To me these are things you likely can have a general Christian background to and find no fault with.
4. So when I look at what the scripture project and covenant represent: how is this derailed by anyone? Much less by some guy I don't know and likely never will. I don't get where the controversy is... So Denver spoke out and said in his opinion he thought that the man's ability to minister in fellowships should not be rescinded and the women adjudged differently. This was the first such council and there was a lot that was learned about the process. Personally, from the descriptions given to me, I saw at least 5 procedural issues with the way the council was conducted. Granted I am male and hold no sway over how women decide to run these, but I definitely think there are some lessons to be learned from the experience.
5. Now granted I was likely never typical as a Latter Day Saint and do not represent the norm amongst the remnant movement.

We already made a covenant when we were baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:

8...as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, and are willing to bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light;

9 Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death, that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal life—

10 Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?

[Seek the Truth]

As a self-identifying member of the remnant movement, I can provide my perspective:
1. We are likely going to fail at the establishment of Zion. We have tons of scriptures of good people and very few recorded instances of Zion. We are no better and will likely fail too. But for me the attempt is worth my time and efforts. But to my own mind, I expect to see major failings along the way, even if against the odds we succeed.

This is of course hilarious because one of the original planks of Snufferism is the SLCLDS were fallen because they failed to become Zion. What's the point of having 2 failed churches. The rationalization you have provided was scoffed at by Snufferites when real LDS would use it.

2. It is interesting to see your views on what the scripture projects purposes are. I have never thought it was about canonizing Denver's words as scripture. The thought never entered into my mind until you said it. From my thinking, we have all of Denver's words readily available in other locations, so bringing it together with the other scriptures is a trivial part of the project. What we don't have nearly so readily available, is the effort to bring together A. every Joseph Smith translation, B. the earliest extant text of the Book of Mormon and C. going back to the earliest extant text for the revelations from Joseph Smith. Bringing all these together into a singular set of scriptures is essentially unprecedented. Do you guys want the printer's errors from the Book of Mormon? Would you prefer Sidney Rigdon's "clarifications" over what Joseph dictated? I would think everyone with a Mormon background would be interested in this. Sure if you think Denver is a false prophet lay his words aside, but wouldn't you want the rest?

I don't need the Snufferites to do any research for me, thanks.

3. As for the covenant, are you familar with the details:

First: Do you believe all the words of the Lord which have been read to you this day, and
know them to be true and from the Lord Jesus Christ who has condescended to provide
them to you, and do you covenant with Him to cease to do evil and to seek to continually do
good?
Second: Do you have faith in these things and receive the scriptures approved by the Lord as
a standard to govern you in your daily walk in life, to accept the obligations established by
the Book of Mormon as a covenant and to use the scriptures to correct yourselves and to
guide your words, thoughts and deeds?
Third: Do you agree to assist all others who covenant to likewise accept this standard to
govern their lives to keep the Lord’s will, to succor those who stand in need, to lighten the
burdens of your brothers and sisters whenever you are able, and to help care for the poor
among you?
Fourth: And do you covenant to seek to become of one heart with those who seek the Lord
to establish His righteousness?

Obviously at this point we don't know what will be said for point 1, so I have to withhold judgment until the day of on that one. What about the other 3? Who among you object to accepting the scriptures and committing to guide your actions by them? What about helping your other Brothers and Sisters in Christ (however you define it)? Seeking to become of one heart? Who among you would not agree to those terms? To me these are things you likely can have a general Christian background to and find no fault with.

I don't need Snufferism to follow what's already prevalent in scripture.

4. So when I look at what the scripture project and covenant represent: how is this derailed by anyone?

Personally I wouldn't want an adulterer handling my scriptures.

[jdt]

...

We already made a covenant when we were baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:

8...as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, and are willing to bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light;

9 Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death, that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal life—

10 Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?

Exactly. We agree that this is an important covenant. We each have our own ways making it and renewing it.

[jdt]

This is of course hilarious because one of the original planks of Snufferism is the SLCLDS were fallen because they failed to become Zion. What's the point of having 2 failed churches. The rationalization you have provided was scoffed at by Snufferites when real LDS would use it.

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.

I don't need the Snufferites to do any research for me, thanks.

I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

I don't need Snufferism to follow what's already prevalent in scripture.

Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.

Personally I wouldn't want an adulterer handling my scriptures.

A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

[e-eye2.0]

For all those who say that they will take any truth. What gospel truth have you found not found in the LDS church.

[Seek the Truth]

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.

I think we can run some odds.

I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

you wouldn't believe the stuff I'm into.

Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.

No kidding. Another man can bring you closer to God. That there are cases where some people struggle to tap into divine revelation themselves so they rely on others for as a go between. Revolutionary idea.

A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

TBH I've seen these kinds of issues regurgitated more times than I can count on this forum, no bombshells ever uncovered. I'm more interested in the Septuagint vs the Masoretic text.

[jdt]

For all those who say that they will take any truth. What gospel truth have you found not found in the LDS church.

For starters, let's go with the account of Gethsemane:
http://scriptures.info/Home/Downloads
Get the PDF of the D&C go to page 314, you can read it in 15 minutes.
I know of other record or account that gives anywhere near this level of detail of what the act of the atonement consisted of.
We can discuss more if interested after that.

[jdt]

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.

I think we can run some odds.

I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

you wouldn't believe the stuff I'm into.

Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.

No kidding. Another man can bring you closer to God. That there are cases where some people struggle to tap into divine revelation themselves so they rely on others for as a go between. Revolutionary idea.

A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

TBH I've seen these kinds of issues regurgitated more times than I can count on this forum, no bombshells ever uncovered. I'm more interested in the Septuagint vs the Masoretic text.

I don't think there are any bombshells to be found either. In both the scripture committee or the correlation committee. I was just trying to give my answer to AI2.0's question about the recent events and my response. Elder Hamula's excommunication is likewise noteworthy just for how infrequent something like this occurs, but I would not think it concerning for Latter Day Saints.
Switching subjects: would you be willing to list some of the things you have learned re: Septuagint vs Masoretic text in another thread or something? This sounds fascinating.

[Rose Garden]

For all those who say that they will take any truth. What gospel truth have you found not found in the LDS church.

There are a great many gospel truths not available in the church. The Book of Mormon is only one-third of what Joseph Smith was given. I personally would say that not a single gospel truth is found "in the church" but all are found through the Spirit. If you are not in tune with the Spirit, you will not really find truth anywhere, including in the church. But if you are, you begin to see it everywhere. That is actually the central message of what Joseph Smith did. Truth was not limited to the learned scholars or higher ups in the churches, but to anyone who would sincerely ask if God, including a 14 year old boy. Do you know any 14 year old boys? :))

The church is a rich source of truth. For those who will look, the LDS church has powerful spiritual truths that can inspire a person to make their journey in life an epic spiritual adventure. But many content themselves with only a small portion of what's available and miss out on the full potential. They claim priesthood power and then excuse the lack of actual power in their lives. They claim charity and still embrace practices which strangle charity to death. They have accounts of people performing miracles and are content with the Spirit leading them to their lost keys or helping them get the kids to school on time, never taking the time to develop the faith that would move mountains and heal the sick.

The church itself accepts that it doesn't have all the gospel truths available when they accept the Book of Mormon as true. But many close their eyes to that fact, insisting they have it all without taking time to actually acquaint themselves with what they have. Those who have it all don't look for anything more.

[inquirringmind]

Did Jesus say "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak," or did the disciples say that to Him?

And he cometh unto the disciples and findeth them asleep, and saith
unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray that ye enter not into
temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

http://scriptures.info/Downloads/NT%20a ... ,%20RE.pdf

And they said unto him, The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is
weak.

http://scriptures.info/Downloads/NT%20a ... ,%20RE.pdf
(The first quote is from the new scripture version of Matthew, and the second is from the new scripture version of Mark.)

[inquirringmind]

This was posted by Melonie Turley today.

MELONIE TURLEY
August 19, 2017 at 5:16 am
John Doe was able to also bring someone in his defense. One of the people he brought (unbeknownst to anyone) was Denver. That was unexpected. Some in the room said that had they known Denver was coming they, would have not showed up that day. (See SIDENOTE) He made an opening statement -which was supposed to be at the end, and so did John Doe. He then said he had to go, but was invited to stay so he could hear the evidence, but declined. He DID NOT hear any evidence.

SIDENOTE: (To clarify that this was not a “more the merrier”….For the reason of a “no show” and others, is why we had 15 women on the counsel. We had 3 alternates in case someone was sick, unavailable, or if after evidence, was undecided. It required a unanimous vote of 12. If someone did not show, we would have had to cancel, because requirements were not met. People would have called it a violation then too!! Witnesses had flown in from Missouri and others traveled up to 11 hours to come from Arizona, Colorado and Idaho. It was fair to all involved to make sure we had the required and some alternates for the unexpected. It still ended up a unanimous vote of all 15)

I would not presume to say that they were deceived, but rather, that since they did not attend, they only had limited evidence from one side, and did not have all the information. He lied many times during the counsel and at the very end was caught in his lies. Does that seem repentant? John Doe had given Denver limited and false information to make a statement for him. That became obvious. Evidence proved that Denver’s statement of him repenting and saying he had not had any recent indiscretions was wrong. Had Denver stayed, he would have seen a different attitude at the end. One of the 15 women even made a statement to that affect. Not ANY of the 7 witnesses have ever had John Doe contact them to try and apologize for any harm, confess any wrongdoing or to correct his teachings. We all only saw him at each event with other women, and were concerned for them. He had been contacted in person 2 times by several witnesses to try and persuade him of deception and cautioned him. The pattern continued. The council needed to happen.

https://bringingtolighthiddenthings.wor ... blog-post/

[e-eye2.0]

For all those who say that they will take any truth. What gospel truth have you found not found in the LDS church.

There are a great many gospel truths not available in the church. The Book of Mormon is only one-third of what Joseph Smith was given. I personally would say that not a single gospel truth is found "in the church" but all are found through the Spirit. If you are not in tune with the Spirit, you will not really find truth anywhere, including in the church. But if you are, you begin to see it everywhere. That is actually the central message of what Joseph Smith did. Truth was not limited to the learned scholars or higher ups in the churches, but to anyone who would sincerely ask if God, including a 14 year old boy. Do you know any 14 year old boys? :))

The church is a rich source of truth. For those who will look, the LDS church has powerful spiritual truths that can inspire a person to make their journey in life an epic spiritual adventure. But many content themselves with only a small portion of what's available and miss out on the full potential. They claim priesthood power and then excuse the lack of actual power in their lives. They claim charity and still embrace practices which strangle charity to death. They have accounts of people performing miracles and are content with the Spirit leading them to their lost keys or helping them get the kids to school on time, never taking the time to develop the faith that would move mountains and heal the sick.

The church itself accepts that it doesn't have all the gospel truths available when they accept the Book of Mormon as true. But many close their eyes to that fact, insisting they have it all without taking time to actually acquaint themselves with what they have. Those who have it all don't look for anything more.

Spirit - hat teaches all truth. The gift of the Holy Ghost is only found in the LDS church. I know people will split hairs on the definition of church; but I am not going to. So in fact all that God has revealed is found in his church through the gift of the Holy Ghost. - we do believe god will yet reveal more that's pretty obvious but salvation is found through Christ and Christ has established the church. There is no other way except through Christ.

I feel sorry for those who leave the church looking for more. It's all here, you may have to work for it, it may not be easy but it's here.

[Silver Pie]

34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;

35 And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.

36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.

37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.

38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

(New Testament | Acts 5:34 - 39)

[AI2.0]

This was posted by Melonie Turley today.

MELONIE TURLEY
August 19, 2017 at 5:16 am
John Doe was able to also bring someone in his defense. One of the people he brought (unbeknownst to anyone) was Denver. That was unexpected. Some in the room said that had they known Denver was coming they, would have not showed up that day. (See SIDENOTE) He made an opening statement -which was supposed to be at the end, and so did John Doe. He then said he had to go, but was invited to stay so he could hear the evidence, but declined. He DID NOT hear any evidence.

SIDENOTE: (To clarify that this was not a “more the merrier”….For the reason of a “no show” and others, is why we had 15 women on the counsel. We had 3 alternates in case someone was sick, unavailable, or if after evidence, was undecided. It required a unanimous vote of 12. If someone did not show, we would have had to cancel, because requirements were not met. People would have called it a violation then too!! Witnesses had flown in from Missouri and others traveled up to 11 hours to come from Arizona, Colorado and Idaho. It was fair to all involved to make sure we had the required and some alternates for the unexpected. It still ended up a unanimous vote of all 15)

I would not presume to say that they were deceived, but rather, that since they did not attend, they only had limited evidence from one side, and did not have all the information. He lied many times during the counsel and at the very end was caught in his lies. Does that seem repentant? John Doe had given Denver limited and false information to make a statement for him. That became obvious. Evidence proved that Denver’s statement of him repenting and saying he had not had any recent indiscretions was wrong. Had Denver stayed, he would have seen a different attitude at the end. One of the 15 women even made a statement to that affect. Not ANY of the 7 witnesses have ever had John Doe contact them to try and apologize for any harm, confess any wrongdoing or to correct his teachings. We all only saw him at each event with other women, and were concerned for them. He had been contacted in person 2 times by several witnesses to try and persuade him of deception and cautioned him. The pattern continued. The council needed to happen.

https://bringingtolighthiddenthings.wor ... blog-post/

Thanks for posting this. I'm really impressed that this group were willing to take the criticism and anger and still share this information. I also think Denver Snuffer's hands off approach to his movement is part of the problem. Sounds like he didn't answer questions or emails, did not give guidance, but then put the women in a difficult position by being a 'witness' for John Doe and not bothering to even hear the evidence. Did he think they were just going to roll over and let Doe off because Denver Snuffer spoke up for him? I think he did.'

This doesn't even answer the concerns of exactly how much influence John Doe had on the scriptures. It seems to me there's no doubt that Doe was violating laws of chastity (that is if Remnant people believe in that anymore) while he was working on the scripture project, so as I pointed out from D&C, he did not have the spirit. How can his influence on them be ignored and the concerns about it, remain unanswered? If they are supposed to involve some kind of sacred, binding covenant, I would think this should concern those making this covenant.

[AI2.0]

This is of course hilarious because one of the original planks of Snufferism is the SLCLDS were fallen because they failed to become Zion. What's the point of having 2 failed churches. The rationalization you have provided was scoffed at by Snufferites when real LDS would use it.

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.

I don't need the Snufferites to do any research for me, thanks.

I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

I don't need Snufferism to follow what's already prevalent in scripture.

Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.

Personally I wouldn't want an adulterer handling my scriptures.

A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

So if you are seeing some kind of similarity to the LDS correlation committee and the Remnant Scripture project? I thought the Remnant people despised the correlation committee and wouldn't want anything remotely like it in their movement.

If this happened in the LDS church, then we excommunicate and I bet those who oversee a project would look into it to make sure decisions that had been made were correct ones and any uninspired policies or practices would be ended. I think that's what these people who wrote the blog are asking for--they want some kind of accountability and answers. They want someone to look at the scripture project and make sure that John Doe's contributions are identified and can be removed if they don't meet the standards of a so called God inspired work. The problem is Denver doesn't want to do this and he apparently doesn't want John Doe removed from their project.

[Rose Garden]

This is of course hilarious because one of the original planks of Snufferism is the SLCLDS were fallen because they failed to become Zion. What's the point of having 2 failed churches. The rationalization you have provided was scoffed at by Snufferites when real LDS would use it.

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.

I don't need the Snufferites to do any research for me, thanks.

I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

I don't need Snufferism to follow what's already prevalent in scripture.

Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.

Personally I wouldn't want an adulterer handling my scriptures.

A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

So if you are seeing some kind of similarity to the LDS correlation committee and the Remnant Scripture project? I thought the Remnant people despised the correlation committee and wouldn't want anything remotely like it in their movement.

If this happened in the LDS church, then we excommunicate and I bet those who oversee a project would look into it to make sure decisions that had been made were correct ones and any uninspired policies or practices would be ended. I think that's what these people who wrote the blog are asking for--they want some kind of accountability and answers. They want someone to look at the scripture project and make sure that John Doe's contributions are identified and can be removed if they don't meet the standards of a so called God inspired work. The problem is Denver doesn't want to do this and he apparently doesn't want John Doe removed from their project.

I believe he is referring to the excommunication of the head of the LDS correlation department.

[Rose Garden]

34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;

35 And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.

36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.

37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.

38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

(New Testament | Acts 5:34 - 39)

Thanks for sharing these verses. This is the same test I've been applying to my own personal decisions. Those things that I'm doing that are truly of the Lord are supported by him and I'm able to continue doing them through whatever circumstances I encounter. Those things that aren't truly of the Lord fall out of my life. Perhaps not surprisingly, the things that remain through whatever I face are things like faith, repentance, forgiveness, patience, humility, etc. Through whatever circumstances I encounter, though there are many available choices, the principles of the gospel are never inappropriate and always possible. They continue to support me no matter what.

In the end, I think each and every one of us will be able to look at our lives and apply this standard. Those things that are of God continue eternally while all else eventually dies off.

[AI2.0]

This is of course hilarious because one of the original planks of Snufferism is the SLCLDS were fallen because they failed to become Zion. What's the point of having 2 failed churches. The rationalization you have provided was scoffed at by Snufferites when real LDS would use it.

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.

I don't need the Snufferites to do any research for me, thanks.

I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.

I don't need Snufferism to follow what's already prevalent in scripture.

Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.

Personally I wouldn't want an adulterer handling my scriptures.

A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

So if you are seeing some kind of similarity to the LDS correlation committee and the Remnant Scripture project? I thought the Remnant people despised the correlation committee and wouldn't want anything remotely like it in their movement.

If this happened in the LDS church, then we excommunicate and I bet those who oversee a project would look into it to make sure decisions that had been made were correct ones and any uninspired policies or practices would be ended. I think that's what these people who wrote the blog are asking for--they want some kind of accountability and answers. They want someone to look at the scripture project and make sure that John Doe's contributions are identified and can be removed if they don't meet the standards of a so called God inspired work. The problem is Denver doesn't want to do this and he apparently doesn't want John Doe removed from their project.

I believe he is referring to the excommunication of the head of the LDS correlation department.

But that's a hypothetical, which I answered, as a hypothetical. It hasn't happened. What has happened is that a man working on the scripture project for Snuffer lost his priesthood certificate and some of those involved asked for clarification on what this man's contributions entailed. I think that's a fair question.

[Rose Garden]

I said likely to fail not guaranteed to fail. Obviously since I am where I am, I think it a more likely place to achieve Zion than the LDS Church, so I am trying to put myself in the best possible chance.


I hope you find what you are looking for. God bless. As for me, I try to accept truth from any source. I am greatly thankful for the LDS church and their work with the Joseph Smith Papers Project.


Good for you (not said tongue in cheek, but seriously). I do need the help and I have found the message shared by Brother Denver to be invaluable in getting to a level of understanding, obedience, and spirituality far deeper than I could attain to previously.


A fair statement to be sure. It is my understanding that the entire project has at least 4 people that perform the same work independently, as a redundant check as a protection against any one person going off the rails.
A curious thought came to mind on this subject. Are you familiar with the role of the correlation committee with the LDS Church by chance? Considering that it reviews all publications, including conference talks, which are considered by many to be modern scripture, what would be your reaction to serious sin (enough to warrant excommunication) by the head of that committee? What would you recommend happen to the work done either by him or under his watch. Perhaps our situations are not all that different.

So if you are seeing some kind of similarity to the LDS correlation committee and the Remnant Scripture project? I thought the Remnant people despised the correlation committee and wouldn't want anything remotely like it in their movement.

If this happened in the LDS church, then we excommunicate and I bet those who oversee a project would look into it to make sure decisions that had been made were correct ones and any uninspired policies or practices would be ended. I think that's what these people who wrote the blog are asking for--they want some kind of accountability and answers. They want someone to look at the scripture project and make sure that John Doe's contributions are identified and can be removed if they don't meet the standards of a so called God inspired work. The problem is Denver doesn't want to do this and he apparently doesn't want John Doe removed from their project.

I believe he is referring to the excommunication of the head of the LDS correlation department.

But that's a hypothetical, which I answered, as a hypothetical. It hasn't happened. What has happened is that a man working on the scripture project for Snuffer lost his priesthood certificate and some of those involved asked for clarification on what this man's contributions entailed. I think that's a fair question.

Where you been the last little while, AI2.0?

SALT LAKE CITY — The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church on Tuesday excommunicated a member of the Quorum of the Seventy who had been serving as the executive director of the church’s Correlation Department.

"This morning, James J. Hamula was released as a General Authority Seventy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, following church disciplinary action by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles," said Eric Hawkins, a spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[AI2.0]

So if you are seeing some kind of similarity to the LDS correlation committee and the Remnant Scripture project? I thought the Remnant people despised the correlation committee and wouldn't want anything remotely like it in their movement.

If this happened in the LDS church, then we excommunicate and I bet those who oversee a project would look into it to make sure decisions that had been made were correct ones and any uninspired policies or practices would be ended. I think that's what these people who wrote the blog are asking for--they want some kind of accountability and answers. They want someone to look at the scripture project and make sure that John Doe's contributions are identified and can be removed if they don't meet the standards of a so called God inspired work. The problem is Denver doesn't want to do this and he apparently doesn't want John Doe removed from their project.

I believe he is referring to the excommunication of the head of the LDS correlation department.

But that's a hypothetical, which I answered, as a hypothetical. It hasn't happened. What has happened is that a man working on the scripture project for Snuffer lost his priesthood certificate and some of those involved asked for clarification on what this man's contributions entailed. I think that's a fair question.

Where you been the last little while, AI2.0?

SALT LAKE CITY — The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church on Tuesday excommunicated a member of the Quorum of the Seventy who had been serving as the executive director of the church’s Correlation Department.

"This morning, James J. Hamula was released as a General Authority Seventy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, following church disciplinary action by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles," said Eric Hawkins, a spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Where've I been? On Vacation!!!
But I'm home now.


Okay, thanks--I now see his implication--Elder Hamula was head of the Correlation dept. before being released, correct?

So, is he suggesting that Denver Snuffer's Scripture project is the same as the LDS church correlation dept?

I'm pretty sure most Remnant people despise the correlation dept and think it was one of the examples of apostasy, yet they have their own version of correlation within their organization? Huh.

It doesn't really change my thoughts on this. I think that after Elder Hamula's release, they've probably been looking at his contributions with a find toothed comb---unlike what Snuffer wanted to do--he wanted no investigation into John Doe's contributions. I still see that as one of the biggest concerns in all this---ignoring the problem and hoping people just stop complaining about it.

[jdt]

Where've I been? On Vacation!!!
But I'm home now.


Okay, thanks--I now see his implication--Elder Hamula was head of the Correlation dept. before being released, correct?

So, is he suggesting that Denver Snuffer's Scripture project is the same as the LDS church correlation dept?

I'm pretty sure most Remnant people despise the correlation dept and think it was one of the examples of apostasy, yet they have their own version of correlation within their organization? Huh.

It doesn't really change my thoughts on this. I think that after Elder Hamula's release, they've probably been looking at his contributions with a find toothed comb---unlike what Snuffer wanted to do--he wanted no investigation into John Doe's contributions. I still see that as one of the biggest concerns in all this---ignoring the problem and hoping people just stop complaining about it.

You are on the right track but not quite there.
Look at your own thinking in regards to the Elder Hamula sitaution. What do you propose? It appears that you assume that "they" are "probably" looking into his contributions with a fine toothed comb. Who is the "they" and what is "probably"? I can only speculate on those answers, but whatever it is you personally (as far as I can tell) are not taking it upon yourself to judge the quality of any Elder Hamula's work. You are not asking for the correspondences that Elder Hamula made public, a list of the projects and specific things he worked on to be shared so that there is full disclosure on everything he could have tainted, and so on. Would it be fair to say you expect internal mechanisms to handle things? That is a fine perspective. It is perfectly defensible.
Now let's look at the John Doe situation. People are asking for everything he has touched to be made available. This too is a defensible position. I don't fault people for wanting this approach.
I am certainly not saying the scripture committee fills a similar role to the correlation department, only that both are important roles within their respective movements. My question is, if any person holds the opinion that the all the records should be opened up with regards to John Doe, should they not also hold the same opinion with regards to Elder Hamula? Is "probably" good enough for you?
Like I said both positions are defensible, so for the sake of argument, I am going to assume you switch positions with regards Elder Hamula and are going to speak with your Bishop, Stake President, write letters to headquarters, etc, so that you can personally review everything he did or touched and provide your feedback on how General Conference talks, church manuals, and so forth can be updated, so as to avoid Elder Hamula's taint and restore purity. And you would then hold the same opinon with respect to John Doe.
First off, you are directing your ire in the wrong direction, this should be directed to the scripture committee. Denver did not organize the committee, is not on the committee, and does not run the committee. Requests about the scripture committee should go to the committee itself.
Okay so let's assume you direct the same request to the committee. The committee's policy is that at least 4 people perform any given thing independently for redundancy to minimize errors and prevent the undo influence of any one person to slip in. Of course, he could have persuaded, but all decisions required unanimity. This check is already in place.
Secondly, what is there to give? All the work he did was scrapped, once new source material for the Book of Mormon was released the decision was made to start over. What are you going to do? Review discarded drafts and say we don't like it. It is not being used.
Thirdly, they have already committed to releasing all the documentation. Sure, they could have someone cull through everything and hand-pick out the things he was on. But that of course takes time, and I would rather have that time be spent finishing up the works now.
Lastly, the entire work is available online, and people have been encouraged to review it critically for the past 6 months. Encouraged to review it critically. Every thing the committee has done has been done soliciting feedback.
Put all this together and I think it is a perfectly reasonable thing for the committee to respond with silence. This is a distraction. It serves no one. John Does work has been discarded. The work he did do was reviewed independently by at least 3 people. Feedback has been asked for for 5 and a half months now. The full records will be released when the project is completed.