Identifying and Coping with "Unrighteous Dominion"

[underdog]

Arenera,

Thank you.

Could a better question be: Regardless of the existence of any allegation, if there is evidence of apostasy should we as members examine it to see if it's true? Or should we turn a blind eye? Esp if the truth, even if it's inconvenient, brings us closer to Christ.

Will you kindly answer that question?

Actually, I don't see your approach helping anyone come closer to Christ. You just rail on dead leaders, current leaders and members.

You don't preach Christ, that is a way to know your message is bunk.

You didn't answer the question. As usual.

If not "railing on" people is your requirement, then don't read Matthew 23, because that will dissuade you from accepting Christ's message.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/matt/23.39?lang=eng

What was the fruit that Jesus offered? His message. The miracles. Agreed!

What was the fruit that Joseph Smith offered? The Book of Mormon. Agreed!

What is the fruit that you offer? Nothing, just railing. Sorry I perceived that way. If you knew me you'd know that is not my reputation. I'm the type that will go the extra mile to call some company's employee's boss and formally compliment the employee for a job well done. So please know I'm a positive person who holds back on criticism and is overflowing with praise. Obviously, I have room to improve. And I think I'll make it a point to say something positive to each of my kids today. I think you said you served a mission. What approach were you taught? I was taught to lead with the BoM. Flood the earth with the BoM. In the last 6 months of my mission a light came on. I started to preach Jesus Christ and Him crucified and found the key to successful missionary work. Did you try to logic investigators? Reason and logic is how I came to the table to meet with the missionaries. Because of reason, let's call it that, I came to realize that I hoped that there was a God. After I became converted by the Spirit, I had quite the learning curve in every regard. I suppose it's accurate to say that I frequently used reason, in combo with the scriptures. In the end, I used my testimony to bring in the Spirit. So bearing testimony was a powerful tool. I shared my testimony briefly in a comment just above. I hope that was received well. Lectures on Faith (Lecture 5th at http://lecturesonfaith.com/5/) teach that the Holy Spirit is the mind of God. And we know God is reason. We become one with God by obtaining His mind. One thing that the remnant movement has done is reconnect me with reason, but man's reasoning is different from God's reasoning. I do seek to have the mind of Christ and to be at one with Him. I fail miserably at this. I feel a fool before God, truth be told.

Today our missionaries give their message, which includes a living prophet, and also invite the investigators to read the Book of Mormon. Investigators who become converts usually have a spiritual experience and know the message is true, so they join the church. This is exactly what happened to me. Well, what happened is the missionaries first recommended Alma 32, which I ate up. I had been thinking about those things already for months, and to see them in writing was a witness. They taught me Moroni's promise in Moroni 10. That made perfect sense -- the part which when the witness comes you will know the BoM is true and Joseph was true and Jesus was truly the Son of God and Savior of the world. They also taught me, and I accepted without reservation, that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would also be true. I accepted this at face value down until just recently when I realized that is absolutely EXCLUDED FROM Moroni's promise. That's fine -- because the promise AS GIVEN still worked a miracle in my life. I tested it, and the power of the Holy Ghost came upon me, as promised. So I know. The fruit of that promise is that I know Jesus is my Savior, the BoM is true, and Joseph was chosen of God! That's priceless knowledge. It's more precious than life. I thank God for this spiritual knowledge and for the missionaries who were instruments in the hands of God to bring me this precious testimony.

You are trying to logic the forum into your belief set. That doesn't work. Perhaps you are right. So I've shared my testimony. I suspect the closet remnants are watching to see how successful you will be. You've forgot the main ingredient, good fruit. See Alma 32. I love Alma 32, and I recommend the principles contained therein to you. Plant the good word that I've brought to you. Let it take root. See if begins to grow and becomes delicious to you. You say that I'm focusing on too much on "railing." At your suggestion, let me try doing it in a way that is "preaching Jesus Christ and Him crucified."

I can phrase it like this. Lamoni's father (Alma 22) was willing to give away all his sins to know the Lord. "If there is a God, and if thou art God, wilt thou make thyself known unto me, and I will give away all my sins to know thee..." Sin stands in the way of us knowing God. In essence, let's not mince words, I have called you all to repentance. You asked for me to preach Christ. Let me do it then. I pray for the Holy Ghost to guide my words and to bear witness to your spirit that the truth of what I say will be carried unto your heart (2 Nephi 33:1). I pray you receive it. Please pay attention to the Holy Ghost as you read this.

I invite you to give away your sins of idolatry to know the Lord. You may object and say you're not guilty of idolatry. Let me call it "tradition". How many times does the BoM say it's imperative to be "convinced concerning the wicked traditions of [our] fathers"? In our conversations, the main sin (sacred cow) you must let go of to come closer to Christ is to let go of any wicked tradition that stands in the way of coming to "know Christ." Knowing Christ is eternal life. So I humbly ask you to consider that it is indeed a sin to put faith in man or men who claim that they can't lead you astray because the Lord won't permit it. This is priestcraft. If the Lord will never permit the prophet to lead you astray, then the Lord is abrogating the prophet’s free agency. The prophet has to be free to mislead you, just as you have to be free to be misled. Otherwise, the Lord would be compelling the prophet’s actions, making him nothing but a puppet. Our Father in Heaven "permitted" (to use WW's word from OD1) Lucifer to mislead BILLIONS of His children. The cost was catastrophic. That was WITH Jesus personally lobbying for Heavenly Father's plan. Obviously, Satan's pitch sounded very appealing, enough to deceive billions of spirits. I testify that we must let go of this LDS false tradition that has taken deep root (since 1981 especially). This heresy has been repeated and taught so much (Alma 30:53) that many of us actually believe it, even though it destroys the prophet's own agency and has created an "all is well in Zion" culture.

Things are moving very rapidly now. This sin should be repented of immediately. Do not wait. Do not procrastinate. "All is not well in Zion." Those words were spoken by Nephi TO US and FOR US. It was a warning to us. Christ wants us to come to him. Have faith in HIM, believe in HIM, repent (esp of the sin I have highlighted), be baptized by water and of the spirit, and always become as a little child that He may teach you of His ways.

The "good seed", the word (Alma 32), that I testify anew to you is that Christ will never lead you astray. We can trust Him. He employs no servant at the gate (2 Nephi 9:41). We can plug directly into the True Vine and have Him reveal His will to us by the Holy Ghost. The good word is that He's no respecter of persons and any of us can come unto Him and partake of eternal life.

I know these things are true. I leave this with you, believing He would have me say these things, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

The question of Denver Snuffer is a whole other question. I'm amazed at how the tables have been turned. For missionary-mind Mormons reading this, you will understand the irony. How many Christians (active in their own denomination) have you encountered who could not accept the principles of the apostasy and the testimony of Joseph Smith. Some very few can. Some can admit that apostasy occurred throughout Biblical history. But most of them go bat-crap crazy when you bring up Joseph Smith and read to them his testimony that Christian ministers are apostate. I read this to my loving Grandmother who has a great love for Jesus (active in her church, even till this day) years ago, that Jesus told Joseph "that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”"

She exploded in anger. I had never seen her angry like that before and never since. But at that moment she lost her cool. That was decades ago. But for years, I've seen similar reactions as Joseph's testimony of modern day apostasy is applied to people's beloved ministers/ prophets. To say slaughtering a sacred cow is a sensitive topic is the understatement of the year. It doesn't matter if a Christian minister or Mormon apostle is sincere in believing they are God's spokesman. They must actually be sent. It doesn't matter if WE are sincere but ignorant in our belief that a certain man is God's spokesman. What matters is what is true. We can't be saved in ignorance.

As for 'closet remnant' people, that's an interesting term. Coming to a unity of faith I suppose may be impossible, which means Zion isn't possible. So for Zion to even take root, there needs to be a remnant gathered who believe Jesus is King and requires no mediator for He is the Great Mediator, and they ultimately must all agree who His legal administrator is. In Enoch's day, that was Enoch. In our day, that is a question mark in the minds of many. In my humble opinion, a smart way to analyze it is the process of elimination. Whomever is found guilty of practicing unrighteous dominion can be eliminated from the list. I honestly and sincerely beg for evidence that Denver is practicing UD. I'm not aware of any, which means I can't cross him off the list. Others who are guilty can be crossed off the list.

Arenera,

Yes, you make some good points here which I mostly agree with. See blue text above.

[Arenera]

“I shall never forget the occasion, when a friend appealed to me, upon learning that the doctor had announced that his daughter, stricken with diphtheria, would die before morning. He asked me to pray for that daughter, and after leaving his office I prayed with all the earnestness of my soul that God would heal that girl. While praying, the inspiration came to me: ‘The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here. Hurry! Hurry! … Go and rebuke the power of the destroyer, and the girl shall live.’

“The doctor waiting upon that girl, said she could not live till morning; but when morning came he explained that he could not comprehend it, and that he believed the girl was going to get well. He could not refrain from expressing his surprise at the change in the girl’s condition over night. The power of the living God rebuked the destroyer.

The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here.”

Heber J. Grant

That was in 1925. Sorry, no apostasy then...

[underdog]

“I shall never forget the occasion, when a friend appealed to me, upon learning that the doctor had announced that his daughter, stricken with diphtheria, would die before morning. He asked me to pray for that daughter, and after leaving his office I prayed with all the earnestness of my soul that God would heal that girl. While praying, the inspiration came to me: ‘The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here. Hurry! Hurry! … Go and rebuke the power of the destroyer, and the girl shall live.’

“The doctor waiting upon that girl, said she could not live till morning; but when morning came he explained that he could not comprehend it, and that he believed the girl was going to get well. He could not refrain from expressing his surprise at the change in the girl’s condition over night. The power of the living God rebuked the destroyer.

The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here.”

Heber J. Grant

That was in 1925. Sorry, no apostasy then...

Assuming that story is true, and I hope and expect it is, it is a great story of a miracle. That miracle was performed in the name of Jesus Christ. Jesus healed that person.

But of course, that miracle has nothing to do with institutional church apostasy.

Let me ask you, would you rather have priesthood without faith, or faith without priesthood?

I'm sure you'd pick the latter. Faith in Christ is what counts. Besides, the powers of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven and can only be controlled or handled upon the principles of righteousness. FAITH would be one of the governing principles. The girl was healed by Pres Grant's faith, or the parents' faith, or the girl's, or a combination. Faith is what counts.

In the midst of worldwide apostasy, Joseph didn't have the priesthood, but had the faith to see within the veil in 1820. That didn't mean there wasn't an apostasy going on all around him. In fact, even when true legal administrators have been here, the rest of the world has been in a state of apostasy. Only those who seek true messengers from Father find them. The rest are left to do according to their own wills and desires.

[Rensai]

“I shall never forget the occasion, when a friend appealed to me, upon learning that the doctor had announced that his daughter, stricken with diphtheria, would die before morning. He asked me to pray for that daughter, and after leaving his office I prayed with all the earnestness of my soul that God would heal that girl. While praying, the inspiration came to me: ‘The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here. Hurry! Hurry! … Go and rebuke the power of the destroyer, and the girl shall live.’

“The doctor waiting upon that girl, said she could not live till morning; but when morning came he explained that he could not comprehend it, and that he believed the girl was going to get well. He could not refrain from expressing his surprise at the change in the girl’s condition over night. The power of the living God rebuked the destroyer.

The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here.”

Heber J. Grant

That was in 1925. Sorry, no apostasy then...

I don't think its that black and white, at least not in general. Nephi, seeing us in the last days says:

14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.

I read that as him saying that none of us in the last days are very good, we're all somewhat confused and follow some precepts of men, we're all trying to follow Christ, but we all have some apostate ideas that are incorrect. It also shows that its a matter of where you are personally. You can't say because Heber J Grant's prayer or blessing worked that it means the church as a group is fine. I'm not saying the church was in apostasy either, just that your story in and of itself does not refute the claim really. In the BoM there are several examples where the church was apostate and their were only a few good people exercising priesthood, following Christ, etc. Does that make sense?

Judging the entire church is really only something God can do anyway. There is a perfect example of this in D&C. D&C 1 states that it is a revelation from November 1, 1831 and:

30 And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually

So in Nov 1831 Christ says some individuals need to repent, but collectively, he is pleased with the church.

However, fast forward not even a full year to September 22 and 23, 1832 and D&C section 84 and we read:

54 And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—

55 Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

56 And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

57 And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—

What a difference in only 1 year! We go from the Lord being well pleased to condemning the whole church, which is still in effect today. You can see similar judgments about the Nephites or Israelites in the scriptures where in just a short time they go from being praised for doing well to being condemned for sinning and back and forth.

I guess I'm just saying that I don't think any of us can really say one way or another how God feels about the church or how we are doing as a group or prove the church's standing as a group one way or the other without a revelation. All we can really do is worry about our own individual standing and try to help others where we can. Only God can Judge how apostate we are as a group. As individuals though, he will give us indicators and information about how we're doing if we pray and ask.

[Arenera]

Friend underdog, this may help you:

How to Share the Gospel Effectively

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-ge ... 4?lang=eng

Our efforts to share the gospel are most effective if we love our brothers and sisters and have the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

From the Life of George Albert Smith
In his tireless efforts to share the gospel with others, George Albert Smith followed this statement from his personal creed: “I would not seek to force people to live up to my ideals but rather love them into doing the thing that is right.”1 He felt that the most effective way to share the gospel was to look for the good virtues in people of other faiths and then, with boldness but kindness, offer to share the additional truths of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. He related the following experience he had while presiding over the European Mission:

“I was riding on the train one day. My companion in the compartment was a Presbyterian minister, a very pleasant, fine gentleman, and when he gave me the opportunity to do so, I told him I was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He was amazed and he looked at me with astonishment. He said, ‘Aren’t you ashamed of yourself to belong to such a group?’

“I smiled at him and said, ‘My brother, I would be ashamed of myself not to belong to that group, knowing what I know.’ Then that gave me the opportunity I desired to talk to him and explain to him some of the things we believe. …

“There was a good man who had no conception of what we were trying to do. We were not there to give him sorrow nor distress; we were trying to help him. And as we talked the situation through I said to him: ‘You have a misconception of the purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in this land. I am here as one of its representatives, and if you will just let me tell you a few things, I think you will feel better towards us.’ I said, ‘First of all, we are asking all you fine people over here to keep all the glorious truths that you have acquired in your churches, that you have absorbed from your scriptures, keep all that, keep all the fine training that you have received in your educational institutions, all the knowledge and truth that you have gained from every source, keep … everything that is good in your character that has come to you as a result of your lovely home; keep all the love and the beauty that is in your heart from having lived in so beautiful and wonderful a land. … That is all a part of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Then let us sit down and share with you some of the things that have not yet come into your lives that have enriched our lives and made us happy. We offer it to you without money and without price. All we ask you to do is hear what we have to say, and if it appeals to you, accept it freely. …’

That is the attitude of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

Still cooking with oil...

[Rensai]

“I shall never forget the occasion, when a friend appealed to me, upon learning that the doctor had announced that his daughter, stricken with diphtheria, would die before morning. He asked me to pray for that daughter, and after leaving his office I prayed with all the earnestness of my soul that God would heal that girl. While praying, the inspiration came to me: ‘The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here. Hurry! Hurry! … Go and rebuke the power of the destroyer, and the girl shall live.’

“The doctor waiting upon that girl, said she could not live till morning; but when morning came he explained that he could not comprehend it, and that he believed the girl was going to get well. He could not refrain from expressing his surprise at the change in the girl’s condition over night. The power of the living God rebuked the destroyer.

The power of the living God is here on the earth. The Priesthood is here.”

Heber J. Grant

That was in 1925. Sorry, no apostasy then...

Assuming that story is true, and I hope and expect it is, it is a great story of a miracle. That miracle was performed in the name of Jesus Christ. Jesus healed that person.

But of course, that miracle has nothing to do with institutional church apostasy.

Let me ask you, would you rather have priesthood without faith, or faith without priesthood?

I'm sure you'd pick the latter. Faith in Christ is what counts. Besides, the powers of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven and can only be controlled or handled upon the principles of righteousness. FAITH would be one of the governing principles. The girl was healed by Pres Grant's faith, or the parents' faith, or the girl's, or a combination. Faith is what counts.

In the midst of worldwide apostasy, Joseph didn't have the priesthood, but had the faith to see within the veil in 1820. That didn't mean there wasn't an apostasy going on all around him. In fact, even when true legal administrators have been here, the rest of the world has been in a state of apostasy. Only those who seek true messengers from Father find them. The rest are left to do according to their own wills and desires.

You're right that it doesn't have anything to do with institutional church apostasy, but it does show something about president Grant.

8 For I am God, and mine arm is not shortened; and I will show miracles, signs, and wonders, unto all those who believe on my name.

9 And whoso shall ask it in my name in faith, they shall cast out devils; they shall heal the sick; they shall cause the blind to receive their sight, and the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak, and the lame to walk.

10 And the time speedily cometh that great things are to be shown forth unto the children of men;

11 But without faith shall not anything be shown forth except desolations upon Babylon, the same which has made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.

12 And there are none that doeth good except those who are ready to receive the fulness of my gospel, which I have sent forth unto this generation.

and

1 And now it came to pass that according to our record, and we know our record to be true, for behold, it was a just man who did keep the record—for he truly did many miracles in the name of Jesus; and there was not any man who could do a miracle in the name of Jesus save he were cleansed every whit from his iniquity—

Yes its Christ who performs the miracle, but those who he works through have to show worthiness so this is evidence that president Grant must have been doing pretty good, at least at that time.

[Finrock]

This is an interesting thread. I'll just add a couple quick points I think might be worth considering.

First, I somewhat agree and disagree with underdog about WW's declaration. I agree that WW does seem to be using the same kind of false promise Satan did, its dishonest at best. I do not agree that it is violating anyone's agency because unlike Satan, WW or any other church president, can't actually make any of us follow him. We still have agency to follow the church leaders or not as we see fit regardless of what they preach. If the members choose to believe that, then they aren't studying history or reading their scriptures like they should. That's on them.

Secondly, I'll just point out that I can think of at least 3 issues off the top of my head that WW himself misled the church on, so the statement is clearly false and should not be treated as prophetic in any way. There are probably more, but WW promised polygamy would never be taken from the church at conferences prior to OD1, he upheld the priesthood ban on blacks, and he openly taught the false doctrine of BY that Adam is God. All 3 of those things have since been thoroughly discredited and he definitely misled the church on them in his day. He also perjured himself in a court of law during the temple lot case.

So if I could ask some questions about OD1 to the leaders I'd want to ask why OD1 is in the scriptures at all after at least parts of it are demonstrably false, and why do they continue to reiterate this false promise that the prophet cannot lead us astray, when BY, WW himself, and several others have done exactly that at times and were not removed. In fact, God gives us a process to remove the presiding high priest (president of the church) in D&C. Why did he give us this process if he was going to do all the work and take care of it himself? Did he just give us this process to waste everyone's time with a revelation we would never need to use? Or, have we simply become so lazy we would rather ignore that responsibility and not have to do the work it entails to compare the leaders' words and actions to the scriptures and determine if they are leading us astray or not.

I think there is a difference between a prophet not being infallible and sharing gospel opinions that are speculations and turn out not to be correct, and one who leads the Church into apostasy. I fully accept that Prophets can share gospel speculation that is not correct. Peter had the opinion that their preaching should only go to the Jews, even though Paul tried to convince him otherwise. However, once the Lord revealed his will, Peter didn't question it. He moved the Church forward. Likewise, I believe the bretheren thought polygamy was going to be the rule for the Church as part of the restoration, instead of recognizing it for what it really was, the exception to the rule of monagamy. No one was lead into apostasy by following the prophets. Even the Adam-God theory, which is of dubious origin, could simply be classified as gospel speculation, which many of the early bretheren of the Church were prone to do. Joseph himself did not claim to be free from error. I believe that is why the Church came out with the statement that not every statement made by someone in authority is considered Church doctrine, but only those statements that are made repeatedly and commonly accepted by those in authority or found in the scriptures are considered the Doctrine of the Church. Notice how the General Authorities today do much less gospel speculating than in the past? With the advent of the internet and the fodder it becomes for the anti-mormon crowd, I have no doubt that the Lord calls men who are a little more circumspect in what they say from the pulpit, ensuring that it is grounded in doctrine and not speculation.

Where does that lead us? I draw three conclusions:
1. By being lead astray, it is meant lead into apostasy, not simple errors of gospel speculation or policy.
2. Prophets, apostles, and other GA's are not infallible, nor does our doctrine state they are infallible. They can make mistakes in gospel speculation, or in other issues, but those mistakes do not lead the Church into apostasy, meaning the Lord takes his keys from the Church. He is most patient with his fallible servants.
3. If ever a prophet was going to lead the Church into apostasy, that person would be removed.

Anyway, that is how I feel about the matter. Prophets speak for the Lord when they speak for the Lord, not everything that comes from their mouth. And I don't believe they are shown everything, so they wonder and speculate like the rest of us do. More recent prophets tend to speculate less from the pulpit, however. And for that I am grateful. I have a hard enough time keeping up with what the doctrine already is.

Yeah in the past I would have agreed with you but there are some problems. First, your changing WW words from astray to apostasy, second, there is D&C 107. In addition, we have statements from Joseph Smith, scriptural examples, etc.

82 And inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;

83 And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.

84 Thus, none shall be exempted from the justice and the laws of God, that all things may be done in order and in solemnity before him, according to truth and righteousness.

Why talk about removing the president of the High priesthood (president of the church) for transgressions if God isn't going to let them lead anyone astray ever?

I don't think the two quotes are talking about the exact same thing. The first talks about leading astray, the second talks about a prophet's transgressions. A prophet can have incorrect gospel speculation that is not considered a transgression worthy of removal. So, we have to interpret astray to mean something. When is someone lead astray? I think just because a person in authority states an opinion that is not correct does not mean that those who hear, and maybe even believe it are lead astray? Being lead astray, to me, requires some action beyond mere belief of incorrect statements, some change that would cause a person's salvation to be in peril. That is why I think astray is referring to apostasy, not simply an incorrect statement that some might believe. The Lord is not going to judge us on the number of incorrect statements we believed. He will judge us on how we acted in accordance with our knowledge. If my father tells me the earth is flat, fine. If I start acting on it to my detriment, then I think he would have lead me astray. But I have never acted on it at all. Nothing I have done has depended on the earth being flat or round...at least, not to my knowledge. So just because the Bretheren may have an incorrect opinion does not mean they have lead anyone astray when there is no action that comes from it. Otherwise, all parents are leading their kids astray anytime we have a wrong opinion we share with our kids. I think there has to be more to it than that, which is why I think astray really means leading the Lord's children in a way that puts their salvation in peril or in other words apostasy from the correct path. I don't think the Lord will ever let his prophet lead the Church into apostasy. I think a prophet could engage in other transgression that would require his removal, as Section 107 indicates, but I don't think it is in the Lord's program to let them lead the Church into apostasy. There is no scriptural basis where that has ever happened, and while we have been warned about false prophets, we have never been warned that our true prophets could turn and lead the Church into apostasy.

People wholeheartedly and completely believed these doctrines which are being spoken about and they acted and lived their lives based on these beliefs. Lets consider another teaching that meets the criteria that you have mentioned in that it was widely taught by President's of the Church and apostles, it was found in publications, and many provided scriptures in support of this doctrine. The Church today has denounced the racist doctrine that the "negro" race was less valiant in the spirit world, however, before this teaching was denounced, hundreds of thousands of Mormons accepted that teaching, lived their lives based on that belief, made decisions based on that belief, and even today you have Mormons who believe that people of "color" are inferior to "Caucasians" or that they are not the "sweet and noble spirits" because they are "black" or brown skinned. This belief is most certainly a stumbling block towards having a Zion people. These people were lead astray by the Church leaders. They were lead to believe in something that if they don't reject, it will damn them, meaning, it will prevent them from progressing further.

Apostasy means to fall away from the truth. There are various levels of apostasy. There can be complete apostasy or partial apostasy. Honestly all of us live in some degree or another in apostasy, to the extent that we believe in falsehoods whether it is false doctrine, tradition, culture, whatever. Perhaps you are saying that the Church will not ever fall in to complete apostasy (a complete falling away), but it is hard to deny that the Church can be living in a state of apostasy to some degree or another or that our leaders can lead us astray to the extent that we believe and accept apostate (apostate from the truth) teachings.

-Finrock

[Arenera]

Revelation: “A Continuous Melody and a Thunderous Appeal”

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-sp ... 2?lang=eng

Continuing revelation is the lifeblood of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

President Spencer W. Kimball once spoke at a press conference held at the Arizona Temple Visitors’ Center. A news reporter asked him: “You were introduced as the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and also as a prophet. My question is: Does God speak to you? And if so, how?” President Kimball responded: “Yes. God speaks to his prophets today, just as he spoke to his prophets yesterday and just as he will speak to them tomorrow. You will remember that Amos wrote, ‘Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.’ (Amos 3:7.) Sometimes he speaks with an audible voice. Sometimes he sends his angels, as he did to Joseph, the stepfather of Jesus. Usually it is by the still small voice of God to the spirit within. Yes. Have I answered your question, young man?”

Throughout his service as President of the Church, he received revelations to guide the Saints. The most well known of all these revelations came in June 1978, when the Lord revealed to him and also to his brethren in the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles that the blessings of the priesthood, which had been restricted to some, could now be available to all worthy members of the Church (see Doctrine and Covenants, Official Declaration 2). This revelation came after a period of years in which other Presidents of the Church had pondered and prayed about the matter

“I knew that something was before us that was extremely important to many of the children of God. I knew that we could receive the revelations of the Lord only by being worthy and ready for them and ready to accept them and put them into place. Day after day I went alone and with great solemnity and seriousness in the upper rooms of the temple, and there I offered my soul and offered my efforts to go forward with the program. I wanted to do what he wanted. I talked about it to him and said, ‘Lord, I want only what is right. We are not making any plans to be spectacularly moving. We want only the thing that thou dost want, and we want it when you want it and not until.’”

“Those of us today who are sustained by you as prophets, seers, and revelators came to feel in the spring of 1978 much as the early brethren did when the revelation came to the effect ‘that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs … and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel’ (Eph. 3:6). This was a thing, Paul said, ‘which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto the holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit’ (Eph. 3:5).

“We had the glorious experience of having the Lord indicate clearly that the time had come when all worthy men and women everywhere can be fellowheirs and partakers of the full blessings of the gospel. I want you to know, as a special witness of the Savior, how close I have felt to him and to our Heavenly Father as I have made numerous visits to the upper rooms in the temple, going on some days several times by myself. The Lord made it very clear to me what was to be done. We do not expect the people of the world to understand such things, for they will always be quick to assign their own reasons or to discount the divine process of revelation.”

Rolling along...

[BackBlast]

I too have had prayers answered and I know WITHOUT A DOUBT God had just communicated to me.

Obviously a testimony like you describe nobody can argue with. Would you mind sharing the details of this experience? Had you just asked a question? What was the question? Are there any assumptions involved? Was it an audible voice, or just a feeling? Did the Lord speak to you face to face?

I have come to a point that, from time to time, I can hear His voice through the Spirit so distinctly as to recognize it and understand it clearly enough that the most accurate concept of how I understand it is an audible voice. It is not though, but by the Spirit.

This experience was quite unmistakeable in meaning enough so that I use the word voice, not feeling. Feelings are much much more common for me to get by the Spirit. But when that is the case, I use the word that best describes it.

I had not asked specifically on the matter at that moment, but over the previous 9 months I had spent approximately 250-400 hours studying material by various sources in a quest for truth. Some of it was critical of current practices and teachings within the church, some of it had a neutral voice and simply sought to speak truth, others were directly supportive. I had prayed various times to know where the church actually stands, what of the various materials is right. In my search I held very little in the way of assumptions, mostly just questions. During general conference, the information was spoken to me and confirmed by a rather powerful spiritual witness of it's truth.

This wasn't my only answer to my quest and questions. But it was very clear as regards the leadership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

[underdog]

Revelation: “A Continuous Melody and a Thunderous Appeal”

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-sp ... 2?lang=eng

Continuing revelation is the lifeblood of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

President Spencer W. Kimball once spoke at a press conference held at the Arizona Temple Visitors’ Center. A news reporter asked him: “You were introduced as the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and also as a prophet. My question is: Does God speak to you? And if so, how?” President Kimball responded: “Yes. God speaks to his prophets today, just as he spoke to his prophets yesterday and just as he will speak to them tomorrow. You will remember that Amos wrote, ‘Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.’ (Amos 3:7.) Sometimes he speaks with an audible voice. Sometimes he sends his angels, as he did to Joseph, the stepfather of Jesus. Usually it is by the still small voice of God to the spirit within. Yes. Have I answered your question, young man?”

Throughout his service as President of the Church, he received revelations to guide the Saints. The most well known of all these revelations came in June 1978, when the Lord revealed to him and also to his brethren in the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles that the blessings of the priesthood, which had been restricted to some, could now be available to all worthy members of the Church (see Doctrine and Covenants, Official Declaration 2). This revelation came after a period of years in which other Presidents of the Church had pondered and prayed about the matter

“I knew that something was before us that was extremely important to many of the children of God. I knew that we could receive the revelations of the Lord only by being worthy and ready for them and ready to accept them and put them into place. Day after day I went alone and with great solemnity and seriousness in the upper rooms of the temple, and there I offered my soul and offered my efforts to go forward with the program. I wanted to do what he wanted. I talked about it to him and said, ‘Lord, I want only what is right. We are not making any plans to be spectacularly moving. We want only the thing that thou dost want, and we want it when you want it and not until.’”

“Those of us today who are sustained by you as prophets, seers, and revelators came to feel in the spring of 1978 much as the early brethren did when the revelation came to the effect ‘that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs … and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel’ (Eph. 3:6). This was a thing, Paul said, ‘which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto the holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit’ (Eph. 3:5).

“We had the glorious experience of having the Lord indicate clearly that the time had come when all worthy men and women everywhere can be fellowheirs and partakers of the full blessings of the gospel. I want you to know, as a special witness of the Savior, how close I have felt to him and to our Heavenly Father as I have made numerous visits to the upper rooms in the temple, going on some days several times by myself. The Lord made it very clear to me what was to be done. We do not expect the people of the world to understand such things, for they will always be quick to assign their own reasons or to discount the divine process of revelation.”

Rolling along...

Pres Kimball: Sometimes he speaks with an audible voice. Sometimes he sends his angels, as he did to Joseph, the stepfather of Jesus. Usually it is by the still small voice of God to the spirit within.

Notice he didn't say the Lord spoke audibly TO HIM (Pres Kimball). He insinuates (the listener draws own presumptions). He carefully chooses his words (at least in this example).

Kimball: The Lord made it very clear to me what was to be done.

Details please!

Contrast that with Joseph Smith or Denver Snuffer. "Thus saith the Lord", as Joseph said countless times. "The Lord told me", as Denver has said countless times. Both testify to talk with Him face to face. Denver says he's spent more face-to-face time with the Lord than Joseph, to give you an idea of who he may be.

[Finrock]

I wrote this a year ago and I stand by this statement. This reflects my feelings regarding apostasy in the Church and my feelings about Denver Snuffer.

I completely agree that the LDS Church members (speaking generally) are in a state of apostasy from what was restored. It is time for the members and leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to get with the program and to stop hanging off the coattail of Joseph Smith.

However, Denver Snuffer is not called to lead God's Church and Denver's, not God's, but Denver's movement is his (Denver's) own and he is the leader of that. My mind and my heart confirm to me after reading and pondering over many writings from Denver, that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts. It is a movement based on the vainglory of Denver. I recognize these things because I have seen them in myself.

Do not ask me to defend my statement because I will not. It is a spiritual confirmation. Take it for what it is worth.

-Finrock

[underdog]

I wrote this a year ago and I stand by this statement. This reflects my feelings regarding apostasy in the Church and my feelings about Denver Snuffer.

I completely agree that the LDS Church members (speaking generally) are in a state of apostasy from what was restored. It is time for the members and leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to get with the program and to stop hanging off the coattail of Joseph Smith.

However, Denver Snuffer is not called to lead God's Church and Denver's, not God's, but Denver's movement is his (Denver's) own and he is the leader of that. My mind and my heart confirm to me after reading and pondering over many writings from Denver, that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts. It is a movement based on the vainglory of Denver. I recognize these things because I have seen them in myself.

Do not ask me to defend my statement because I will not. It is a spiritual confirmation. Take it for what it is worth.

-Finrock

Thanks for sharing.

I understand when you say, "that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts." If he didn't want to come out of the closet (as Abinadi came out of disguise) and, in "disguise" was trying to persuade the Lord to not work through him but the Church leaders, he would find himself in a situation where he knew "too much" and had to keep his mouth shut (as prophets frequently are commanded), and do this at the same time he prolifically wrote books and posted blog entries, and taught in the Church.

So, as a "good member", he could never come out and say certain things. That would leave him two things -- asking questions (to get people to think) and subtle innuendo pretty much as the only way to communicate with people. In other words, it's hard to find fault with him.

I find it really hard to find vanity or vainglory in Denver. He shoots down any attempt to follow him. I don't know what else can be expected of him.

I'm not asking you to defend anything, but I honestly don't know how I could have done it any better if I were a man talking with Christ face to face and at the same time in the Church of God that bears His name.

[underdog]

I too have had prayers answered and I know WITHOUT A DOUBT God had just communicated to me.

Obviously a testimony like you describe nobody can argue with. Would you mind sharing the details of this experience? Had you just asked a question? What was the question? Are there any assumptions involved? Was it an audible voice, or just a feeling? Did the Lord speak to you face to face?

I have come to a point that, from time to time, I can hear His voice through the Spirit so distinctly as to recognize it and understand it clearly enough that the most accurate concept of how I understand it is an audible voice. It is not though, but by the Spirit.

This experience was quite unmistakeable in meaning enough so that I use the word voice, not feeling. Feelings are much much more common for me to get by the Spirit. But when that is the case, I use the word that best describes it.

I had not asked specifically on the matter at that moment, but over the previous 9 months I had spent approximately 250-400 hours studying material by various sources in a quest for truth. Some of it was critical of current practices and teachings within the church, some of it had a neutral voice and simply sought to speak truth, others were directly supportive. I had prayed various times to know where the church actually stands, what of the various materials is right. In my search I held very little in the way of assumptions, mostly just questions. During general conference, the information was spoken to me and confirmed by a rather powerful spiritual witness of it's truth.

This wasn't my only answer to my quest and questions. But it was very clear as regards the leadership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

BackBlast, thank you for sharing. Did that parable from Daymon Smith give you any wisdom, and what was it, may I ask?

I too have been investing a ton of time pondering and reading. I estimate 10-15 hours a week for 18 months. That's probably close to 1,000 hours, including regular scripture study. Let me be conservative and say half that. Point is that, I like you, have been seeking God's will.

I am not as developed as you are as far as "hearing" the "voice" of God. I hope to be, and to even go beyond that. A few days ago, I thought the Lord spoke to me. It wasn't audible, but he called me by name (in my mind) and told me something that ended up being prophetic to me personally, as it materialized later that night, and was 100% fulfilled Monday of this week (today is Wed). That experience is very unusual for me, unfortunately. I tend to walk by faith. However I do "feel" the Spirit quite often.

I sincerely have a few more questions, if you don't mind:

• You said, "I understand it is an audible voice. It is not though, but by the Spirit." So it's not literally audible. But it's so real and clear it's "as if" it's audible? Perhaps like I experienced last Friday?

• You weren't asking anything specific at that moment, but to me that doesn't seem to be important. Because of your 9 months of considerable pondering. What was your "quest for truth"? What specific question(s) did you have?

• You mentioned you wanted to know where "the church" stands. I believe "the Church" is a very vague term. You ask a fellow Mormon what "the Church" means and you will get many different responses. "The Church" can mean any number of things individually or collectively: the priesthood, the Brethren, the ordinance, the church building, the church law, the covenants, a corporation (Corporate Sole)...to the remnant "the church" means what the Lord says it is in DC 10:67-68. What does "the Church" mean to you? How you define this or don't define it can really mess up getting a clear answer from the Lord

• You said "information was spoken to you". What was that? It pertained to current Church leadership? What specifically was the communication?

Thank you.

[Arenera]

Details please!

Contrast that with Joseph Smith or Denver Snuffer. "Thus saith the Lord", as Joseph said countless times. "The Lord told me", as Denver has said countless times. Both testify to talk with Him face to face. Denver says he's spent more face-to-face time with the Lord than Joseph, to give you an idea of who he may be.

What's happened with your faith?

While you say that members are idol worshippers, I suggest that you and the remnants are idol worshippers. Hanging off everything that Denver Snuffer says, just because he says he has met Christ.

Here is something that Christ said:

24 ¶ But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

26 ¶ And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

You aren't any more blessed because you have seen Christ.

What about those that claim to have seen Christ? How do we know?

Christ said to look at the fruits.

Do they show love? Do they show charity?

That is why you and Denver have a problem, your message doesn't have love and charity.

[Finrock]

I wrote this a year ago and I stand by this statement. This reflects my feelings regarding apostasy in the Church and my feelings about Denver Snuffer.

I completely agree that the LDS Church members (speaking generally) are in a state of apostasy from what was restored. It is time for the members and leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to get with the program and to stop hanging off the coattail of Joseph Smith.

However, Denver Snuffer is not called to lead God's Church and Denver's, not God's, but Denver's movement is his (Denver's) own and he is the leader of that. My mind and my heart confirm to me after reading and pondering over many writings from Denver, that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts. It is a movement based on the vainglory of Denver. I recognize these things because I have seen them in myself.

Do not ask me to defend my statement because I will not. It is a spiritual confirmation. Take it for what it is worth.

-Finrock

Thanks for sharing.

I understand when you say, "that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts." If he didn't want to come out of the closet (as Abinadi came out of disguise) and, in "disguise" was trying to persuade the Lord to not work through him but the Church leaders, he would find himself in a situation where he knew "too much" and had to keep his mouth shut (as prophets frequently are commanded), and do this at the same time he prolifically wrote books and posted blog entries, and taught in the Church.

So, as a "good member", he could never come out and say certain things. That would leave him two things -- asking questions (to get people to think) and subtle innuendo pretty much as the only way to communicate with people. In other words, it's hard to find fault with him.

I find it really hard to find vanity or vainglory in Denver. He shoots down any attempt to follow him. I don't know what else can be expected of him.

I'm not asking you to defend anything, but I honestly don't know how I could have done it any better if I were a man talking with Christ face to face and at the same time in the Church of God that bears His name.

Like I said, it is where the Holy Spirit lead me. There were and are many things from Denver Snuffer that I agree with. I read his material in an open minded fashion. I was praying and asking God to lead me and to help me to know and to understand whatever truth it is He wanted me to know and to understand. I have/had no ill feelings towards Denver. I didn't think he was apostate, etc. But, I received the impressions that I received and I've learned from my experiences in life that the impressions I was feeling, the thoughts that I was getting, were from God, as that is how He has communicated with me before. It was a feeling and a thought. God told me that Denver Snuffer did not "wrest" the keys from the "Brethren". God told me that Denver Snuffer does not represent Jesus Christ and I should not look to him as someone who speaks for the Church, etc. I clearly see the markings of vainglory and subtle manipulation in the workings of Denver Snuffer. He is a learned man, trained in all the skills of Babylon, and I can see that.

I don't condemn him and I certainly don't wish him any ill will. I've appreciated many of the things he has said and there is no doubt that many of the things he has taught is enlightened and those portions that are enlightened I agree with and I accept and incorporate in to my life. And, its completely possible that other people's journey requires them to venture down the Denver Snuffer path, but God has clearly communicated to me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is where I ought to be. My labor is within the Church and I will not abandon the Church despite its many flaws, imperfect people, and imperfect leaders. God worked with me and helped me without regard to my apostate state and He was able to deliver me, save me, and rescue me through His mighty power. God has not abandoned the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and He has not abandoned the leaders.

-Finrock

[underdog]

I wrote this a year ago and I stand by this statement. This reflects my feelings regarding apostasy in the Church and my feelings about Denver Snuffer.

I completely agree that the LDS Church members (speaking generally) are in a state of apostasy from what was restored. It is time for the members and leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to get with the program and to stop hanging off the coattail of Joseph Smith.

However, Denver Snuffer is not called to lead God's Church and Denver's, not God's, but Denver's movement is his (Denver's) own and he is the leader of that. My mind and my heart confirm to me after reading and pondering over many writings from Denver, that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts. It is a movement based on the vainglory of Denver. I recognize these things because I have seen them in myself.

Do not ask me to defend my statement because I will not. It is a spiritual confirmation. Take it for what it is worth.

-Finrock

Thanks for sharing.

I understand when you say, "that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts." If he didn't want to come out of the closet (as Abinadi came out of disguise) and, in "disguise" was trying to persuade the Lord to not work through him but the Church leaders, he would find himself in a situation where he knew "too much" and had to keep his mouth shut (as prophets frequently are commanded), and do this at the same time he prolifically wrote books and posted blog entries, and taught in the Church.

So, as a "good member", he could never come out and say certain things. That would leave him two things -- asking questions (to get people to think) and subtle innuendo pretty much as the only way to communicate with people. In other words, it's hard to find fault with him.

I find it really hard to find vanity or vainglory in Denver. He shoots down any attempt to follow him. I don't know what else can be expected of him.

I'm not asking you to defend anything, but I honestly don't know how I could have done it any better if I were a man talking with Christ face to face and at the same time in the Church of God that bears His name.

Like I said, it is where the Holy Spirit lead me. There were and are many things from Denver Snuffer that I agree with. I read his material in an open minded fashion. I was praying and asking God to lead me and to help me to know and to understand whatever truth it is He wanted me to know and to understand. I have/had no ill feelings towards Denver. I didn't think he was apostate, etc. But, I received the impressions that I received and I've learned from my experiences in life that the impressions I was feeling, the thoughts that I was getting, were from God, as that is how He has communicated with me before. It was a feeling and a thought. God told me that Denver Snuffer did not "wrest" the keys from the "Brethren". God told me that Denver Snuffer does not represent Jesus Christ and I should not look to him as someone who speaks for the Church, etc. I clearly see the markings of vainglory and subtle manipulation in the workings of Denver Snuffer. He is a learned man, trained in all the skills of Babylon, and I can see that.

I don't condemn him and I certainly don't wish him any ill will. I've appreciated many of the things he has said and there is no doubt that many of the things he has taught is enlightened and those portions that are enlightened I agree with and I accept and incorporate in to my life. And, its completely possible that other people's journey requires them to venture down the Denver Snuffer path, but God has clearly communicated to me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is where I ought to be. My labor is within the Church and I will not abandon the Church despite its many flaws, imperfect people, and imperfect leaders. God worked with me and helped me without regard to my apostate state and He was able to deliver me, save me, and rescue me through His mighty power. God has not abandoned the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and He has not abandoned the leaders.

-Finrock

Fair enough, Finrock. You've investigated. What more could be asked?

You said, "God told me that Denver Snuffer did not "wrest" the keys from the "Brethren". God told me that Denver Snuffer does not represent Jesus Christ and I should not look to him as someone who speaks for the Church, etc."

Denver does not testify that he's wrested the keys from the Brethren. Many probably believe that though. But he doesn't talk like that. Time will tell. Once the work has been completed by the Mighty and Strong One (assuming that's not Christ), THEN people will know. So Denver makes no such claims. He also doesn't pretend to or make claims to speak for the Church. Again, the Church is a Corporate Sole (see http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2010/ ... d-and.html). All assets belong to one man and one man only -- Thomas S. Monson -- or his successors. That's how Corporate Soles are set up legally -- you can read the charter for yourself. I would expect the Lord to work outside a pre-planned order of succession such as the corporate church has set up. Saul of Tarsus would be another example of how the Lord is inclined to work. Perhaps it's wise to expect the unexpected with the Lord because His ways are not our ways. Perhaps a perfect system of orderly succession to the presidency of the Church may not what the Lord intends to happen. Also, a new idea to some -- but perhaps being president of the corporate Church is not equivalent in any way to being a true prophet, chosen by the Lord.

Good quote from Joseph that Brethrenites accept until it's applied to an apostate leadership.

“It is in the order of heavenly things that God should always send a new dispensation into the world when men have apostatized from the truth and lost the priesthood.”

It makes too much sense. But there are always ways to spin this quote so it doesn't apply.

[Finrock]

I wrote this a year ago and I stand by this statement. This reflects my feelings regarding apostasy in the Church and my feelings about Denver Snuffer.



-Finrock

Thanks for sharing.

I understand when you say, "that Denver uses subtle innuendo and implication to attack and assassinate characters, ideas, and thoughts." If he didn't want to come out of the closet (as Abinadi came out of disguise) and, in "disguise" was trying to persuade the Lord to not work through him but the Church leaders, he would find himself in a situation where he knew "too much" and had to keep his mouth shut (as prophets frequently are commanded), and do this at the same time he prolifically wrote books and posted blog entries, and taught in the Church.

So, as a "good member", he could never come out and say certain things. That would leave him two things -- asking questions (to get people to think) and subtle innuendo pretty much as the only way to communicate with people. In other words, it's hard to find fault with him.

I find it really hard to find vanity or vainglory in Denver. He shoots down any attempt to follow him. I don't know what else can be expected of him.

I'm not asking you to defend anything, but I honestly don't know how I could have done it any better if I were a man talking with Christ face to face and at the same time in the Church of God that bears His name.

Like I said, it is where the Holy Spirit lead me. There were and are many things from Denver Snuffer that I agree with. I read his material in an open minded fashion. I was praying and asking God to lead me and to help me to know and to understand whatever truth it is He wanted me to know and to understand. I have/had no ill feelings towards Denver. I didn't think he was apostate, etc. But, I received the impressions that I received and I've learned from my experiences in life that the impressions I was feeling, the thoughts that I was getting, were from God, as that is how He has communicated with me before. It was a feeling and a thought. God told me that Denver Snuffer did not "wrest" the keys from the "Brethren". God told me that Denver Snuffer does not represent Jesus Christ and I should not look to him as someone who speaks for the Church, etc. I clearly see the markings of vainglory and subtle manipulation in the workings of Denver Snuffer. He is a learned man, trained in all the skills of Babylon, and I can see that.

I don't condemn him and I certainly don't wish him any ill will. I've appreciated many of the things he has said and there is no doubt that many of the things he has taught is enlightened and those portions that are enlightened I agree with and I accept and incorporate in to my life. And, its completely possible that other people's journey requires them to venture down the Denver Snuffer path, but God has clearly communicated to me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is where I ought to be. My labor is within the Church and I will not abandon the Church despite its many flaws, imperfect people, and imperfect leaders. God worked with me and helped me without regard to my apostate state and He was able to deliver me, save me, and rescue me through His mighty power. God has not abandoned the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and He has not abandoned the leaders.

-Finrock

Fair enough, Finrock. You've investigated. What more could be asked?

You said, "God told me that Denver Snuffer did not "wrest" the keys from the "Brethren". God told me that Denver Snuffer does not represent Jesus Christ and I should not look to him as someone who speaks for the Church, etc."

Denver does not testify that he's wrested the keys from the Brethren. Many probably believe that though. But he doesn't talk like that. Time will tell. Once the work has been completed by the Mighty and Strong One, THEN people will know. So Denver makes no such claims. He also doesn't pretend to or make claims to speak for the Church. Again, the Church is a Corporate Sole (see http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2010/ ... d-and.html). All assets belong to one man and one man only -- Thomas S. Monson -- or his successors. That's how Corporate Soles are set up legally -- you can read the charter for yourself. I would expect the Lord to work outside a pre-planned order of succession such as the corporate church has set up. Saul of Tarsus would be another example of how the Lord is inclined to work. Perhaps it's wise to expect the unexpected with the Lord because His ways are not our ways. Perhaps a perfect system of orderly succession to the presidency of the Church may not what the Lord intends to happen. Also, a new idea to some -- but perhaps being president of the corporate Church is not equivalent in any way to being a true prophet, chosen by the Lord.

I think you misunderstand me. But, I don't have time right now to address it. Let me just say that I recognize that being the President of the Church does not automatically mean one is a prophet, seer, or revelator. Or put another way, having a title and a position in the Church does not of itself make one a prophet, seer, or revelator.

Also, God and His kingdom is greater or more encompassing than the Mormon paradigm.

-Finrock

[AI2.0]

So it appears these scriptures and reasoning are unpersuasive to you.

You are sticking with: the Brethren don't need to have been chosen, and ordained and sent by the Lord to be true.

I will re-iterate one more time.

Your reasoning with me is much less persuasive than the Lord telling me with his own voice that they are His. I mean really, would you believe a random guy on the internet however logical or extensive his reasoning over that? You act like I should and in doing so it doesn't appear to be sinking in at all what I have said, which is why I intend to respectfully bow out.

Instead of advocating what I thought the remnant movement was about, attaching themselves directly to Christ (which I find quite laudable and a worthy pursuit), you insist on these long proofs that attempt to illustrate flaws in others. These are not the fruits I would like to join myself with or encourage others to seek.

Ditto.

RAB, you didn't have the benefit of the parable in the preceding comment perhaps.

My view of what has transpired is this:

1) I brought up instances of apostasy, which ALL involve unrighteous dominion (the theme of this thread).
2) Then several of you respond with spin and long-drawn out "rebuttals" with the false premise that the Church could never fall into apostasy, despite no scriptural authority or basis in reason for that to be the case, and IN THE FACE OF THE IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE I've listed.
3) Now we have a so-called "debate", when there's no reason to debate that "is" means "is". Humble acknowledgement is how we should respond. I did so back when I was an investigator, acknowledging MANY of my traditions were false, and again, just recently when I had to admit facts are facts to my utter dismay and deep disappointment and even disbelief initially.

I appreciate that even intimating that there may be apostasy now at the highest levels of the Church is a sacred cow. I appreciate the gut reaction to defend. I have spent almost my entire adult life defending the Church. I'm one of its great defenders of all time! I know all the scriptures and all the attacks. I have credibility in this regard. Plus, having been born of God at at least the baptism of fire level, I feel I am qualified to speak on what a testimony is. I have doubted not, and had God confirm His words to my soul that the BoM is true, and therefore Jesus is the Christ and Joseph Smith was a true prophet. I KNOW "these things" are true.

So you can lecture me all you want, but I am "one of you", I'm from your ranks. I'm a Mormon! However, if you're now saying that I can't put Christ over the Brethren (which you would deny in words but not your actions), if you're saying that the Brethren can't lead us astray, if you're saying the Lord won't permit that to happen, if you will not concede obvious act of apostasy / unrighteous dominion by the Brethren, then I just say shame on whomever does this. Christ has choice words for such people. You all choose to spin and debate BECAUSE of your unbelief (your false premise, your sacred cow), which is 'the Church can never apostatize'. There is no such guarantee and sacred history laughs at such a ridiculous assertion.

When discussing Unrighteous dominion, lets not forget the big picture.

You're so exercised about unrighteous dominion because you believe Denver Snuffer is a prophet and that he was falsely excommunicated from the LDS church and then the LDS 1st Presidency refused his appeal. This was the last straw for Snuffer and he turned against the church and decided to take all who would follow him, with him, into his own 'community'.

That's what this is all about.

Because of that, you MUST believe that there is apostasy at the highest level of the church. Or admit that Snuffer is wrong.

And therefore, you are false in claiming to be 'one of us', when you know you are not. Your attempt to persuade other LDS members to believe as you do, that Pres. Monson and the Quorum of 12 are all false prophets because they are in apostasy, should prove what 'spirit' motivates and influences you. It also proves that you are not what you claim to be.

You claim to put Christ over the Brethren, Where did Christ ever teach this? When he set up 12 apostles? When he called 12 among the Nephites/Lamanites and gave them power to teach the people, to baptize and give the gift of the holy ghost? How about when he called Samuel or Nephi or any of the other prophets called to this work? No, he didn't teach that we should go directly to him and reject his servants, he taught us by his own example, in reading the words of Isaiah and Malachi, etc and encouraging us to do the same, and in going to John the Baptist for the ordinance of Baptism. Because in Your belief, that our prophets are the dreaded 'arm of flesh' and we should reject them and go straight to Christ, you are essentially throwing out the need for prophets (yet you still want to believe in Snuffer as one??) it makes no sense. To anyone who knows the Scriptures and how God works, they can see that the 'Christ' you think you hear is an imposter. The REAL Jesus Christ would never tell us to turn against his servants, the Prophets, whom he has called to lead and guide us. And he never told us to reject his true messengers, but that is your message--in word rather than deed, because in your confusion and blindness, you refuse to see how you actually DO follow a prophet--Denver Snuffer.

[Arenera]

... you refuse to see how you actually DO follow a prophet--Denver Snuffer.

I would just add "false prophet".

DS also follows the Lectures on Faith, written by Sidney Rigdon....

[underdog]

I will re-iterate one more time.

Your reasoning with me is much less persuasive than the Lord telling me with his own voice that they are His. I mean really, would you believe a random guy on the internet however logical or extensive his reasoning over that? You act like I should and in doing so it doesn't appear to be sinking in at all what I have said, which is why I intend to respectfully bow out.

Instead of advocating what I thought the remnant movement was about, attaching themselves directly to Christ (which I find quite laudable and a worthy pursuit), you insist on these long proofs that attempt to illustrate flaws in others. These are not the fruits I would like to join myself with or encourage others to seek.

Ditto.

RAB, you didn't have the benefit of the parable in the preceding comment perhaps.

My view of what has transpired is this:

1) I brought up instances of apostasy, which ALL involve unrighteous dominion (the theme of this thread).
2) Then several of you respond with spin and long-drawn out "rebuttals" with the false premise that the Church could never fall into apostasy, despite no scriptural authority or basis in reason for that to be the case, and IN THE FACE OF THE IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE I've listed.
3) Now we have a so-called "debate", when there's no reason to debate that "is" means "is". Humble acknowledgement is how we should respond. I did so back when I was an investigator, acknowledging MANY of my traditions were false, and again, just recently when I had to admit facts are facts to my utter dismay and deep disappointment and even disbelief initially.

I appreciate that even intimating that there may be apostasy now at the highest levels of the Church is a sacred cow. I appreciate the gut reaction to defend. I have spent almost my entire adult life defending the Church. I'm one of its great defenders of all time! I know all the scriptures and all the attacks. I have credibility in this regard. Plus, having been born of God at at least the baptism of fire level, I feel I am qualified to speak on what a testimony is. I have doubted not, and had God confirm His words to my soul that the BoM is true, and therefore Jesus is the Christ and Joseph Smith was a true prophet. I KNOW "these things" are true.

So you can lecture me all you want, but I am "one of you", I'm from your ranks. I'm a Mormon! However, if you're now saying that I can't put Christ over the Brethren (which you would deny in words but not your actions), if you're saying that the Brethren can't lead us astray, if you're saying the Lord won't permit that to happen, if you will not concede obvious act of apostasy / unrighteous dominion by the Brethren, then I just say shame on whomever does this. Christ has choice words for such people. You all choose to spin and debate BECAUSE of your unbelief (your false premise, your sacred cow), which is 'the Church can never apostatize'. There is no such guarantee and sacred history laughs at such a ridiculous assertion.

When discussing Unrighteous dominion, lets not forget the big picture.

You're so exercised about unrighteous dominion because you believe Denver Snuffer is a prophet and that he was falsely excommunicated from the LDS church and then the LDS 1st Presidency refused his appeal. This was the last straw for Snuffer and he turned against the church and decided to take all who would follow him, with him, into his own 'community'.

That's what this is all about. Denver is completely unrelated to the evidence of apostasy of the Brethren. Just as Joseph Smith is unrelated to the apostasy of the original church. Or do you pin the Great Apostasy on Joseph Smith? Please concede they are separate. Why not just look at the evidence and accept it instead of trying to find some type of incriminating motive. Why can't the search for truth be a motive? You're proving in this very comment that you are incapable of arguing against the evidence presented and instead going after my motive. Assume the best about me (and I will do the same about you) and look at the evidence please.

Because of that, you MUST believe that there is apostasy at the highest level of the church. Or admit that Snuffer is wrong. Denver could never have been born and there be nobody bearing a similar testimony and still the evidence of apostasy of the Brethren would stand.

And therefore, (There is no "therefore"...) you are false in claiming to be 'one of us', when you know you are not. Your attempt to persuade other LDS members to believe as you do, that Pres. Monson and the Quorum of 12 are all false prophets because they are in apostasy, should prove what 'spirit' motivates and influences you. It also proves that you are not what you claim to be. Sounds like you can't "tolerate" (is that the right word?) that there could be someone in the church sitting next to you in the pew that thinks the Brethren are apostate. So should I be cast out? How would you handle me? Would you accuse me? If you presided, how would you handle my court? How would you vote? What have I said that is "anti Gospel", i.e., "apostate"? I believe I'm in 100% harmony with the teachings of the gospel. Tares are among us. Indeed "an enemy hath done this," but I am the one pointing out who the tares are and why they are tares. You're saying, "Silence!, the Brethren aren't tares. Or there is no unrighteous dominion among them. All is well in Zion!" You say of me, "YOU are the tare for pointing out that there are tares!" The parable is obviously about the critical need to discern. It also teaches that Satan will be actively involved in trying to infiltrate and pollute the holy Church of God. We must guard against that. And quite OBVIOUSLY, the "tare" won't admit it, will he? The tare's number one defense is to attack those who call them to repentance. To censor them. To cast them out. To make them LOOK evil. Can you concede this point? I truly believe a humble person will concede this point. It doesn't automatically mean I'm right about the other stuff, but it does mean the tares won't go down without a fight. They will try to preserve their power and influence, and they will do this through the means of unrighteous dominion. Therefore, UD is always a symptom or a bellwether sign of apostasy.

You claim to put Christ over the Brethren, Where did Christ ever teach this? Are you seriously going that direction with your argument? You're going to argue that Christ is not above the Brethren? "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6). Do I really need to substantiate a basic tenet of Christianity and Mormonism? When he set up 12 apostles? When he called 12 among the Nephites/Lamanites and gave them power to teach the people, to baptize and give the gift of the holy ghost? How about when he called Samuel or Nephi or any of the other prophets called to this work? No, he didn't teach that we should go directly to him and reject his servants, he taught us by his own example, in reading the words of Isaiah and Malachi, etc and encouraging us to do the same, and in going to John the Baptist for the ordinance of Baptism. Yes, legal administrators are critical. That's God's pattern as Mormon teaches in Moroni 7 and throughout the DC. I'm all in with the value and vital role of legal administrators.Because in Your belief, that our prophets are the dreaded 'arm of flesh' and we should reject them and go straight to Christ, you are essentially throwing out the need for prophets (yet you still want to believe in Snuffer as one??) it makes no sense. I'm not saying that, so of course it doesn't make sense. You're not repeating what I've repeated so many times above. Step back, and rejoice, because we actually agree on this principle (which I've quoted 10 times probably): 2 Nephi 28:31.

Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost.

To anyone who knows the Scriptures and how God works, they can see that the 'Christ' you think you hear is an imposter. The REAL Jesus Christ would never tell us to turn against his servants, the Prophets, whom he has called to lead and guide us. Agreed. The false assumption you have (your unbelief) I'm pointing out to you is that "the Brethren" aren't chosen. They were called but not chosen. And neither do they even claim to be chosen. At least I'm not aware they claim this. Joseph claimed it. Because he was sent! In my family's last Family Home Evening a few days ago we studied, using the Index of the Triple and Topical Guide of the Bible, all the times the word "chosen" and "called" were used. These are loaded words. They mean something. And it's important to know the difference because "many are called and few are chosen." Now my kids know that being "called" is a simple matter. You just need to have desires to serve (DC 4), but to be "chosen" is something the Lord does. He chooses whom He will. And "the Brethren" have not been chosen, nor do they claim it. But they pretend to be, allowing naive people like you (and me at one time) to run wild with our imaginations that they meet with the Lord in the Upper Room of the Temple.And he never told us to reject his true messengers, but that is your message--in word rather than deed (that is not my message. The Scriptures are clear. If we reject His true servants, we reject Him. Thus discernment is SOOOOOO important!), because in your confusion and blindness, you refuse to see how you actually DO follow a prophet--Denver Snuffer. (Again, Denver has NOTHING to do with the Brethren apostatizing. They are accountable for their own sins. Denver didn't MAKE them apostatize. Besides Denver harshly condemns UD and priestcraft at every opportunity. 2 Nephi 28:31 is the principle we actually agree on! We can act like that and debate where we disagree. I propose to build on common beliefs. Do you agree with 2 Nephi 28:31? Please submit to that or deny it. If you will accept that teaching in verse 31, then you will see where we agree, and see more clearly on where there is disagreement.)

My response in blue text above. Thank you.

[underdog]

... you refuse to see how you actually DO follow a prophet--Denver Snuffer.

I would just add "false prophet".

DS also follows the Lectures on Faith, written by Sidney Rigdon....

Joseph was involved in writing all or a certain portion. However, the indisputable fact is that Joseph approved them and they were voted on and sustained by the church as the Church's official doctrine.

And then in 1921 usurpers of God's word took the Lectures on Faith out without a Church vote, just as WW's excerpts were added in 1981 by anonymous people with no announcement, no discussion, and certainly no church vote.

And LOL, you reject Rigdon. What about "by my voice or the voice of my servants..."? Again, Joseph APPROVED the words. The year was 1835 and Joseph was alive and well and presiding when they were added to our Canon.

Lastly, have you read the Lectures?? My gosh, you are in for a treat if you haven't. Read them and read them again and again. The removal of the LoF have had a massive negative impact on our understanding of the Godhead and how to be saved. Our understanding of correct doctrine would be so much HIGHER if members studied and memorized those lectures, but you combine that loss of spiritual understanding with the false doctrine in OD1 (from 1981) and the combination has been devastating. The result is an increased NEGATIVE influence and a decreased POSITIVE influence. Catastrophic consequences of that combination is what we are witnessing today, even in this very blog post with well-meaning Mormons.

[Arenera]

... you refuse to see how you actually DO follow a prophet--Denver Snuffer.

I would just add "false prophet".

DS also follows the Lectures on Faith, written by Sidney Rigdon....

Joseph was involved in writing all or a certain portion. However, the indisputable fact is that Joseph approved them and they were voted on and sustained by the church as the Church's official doctrine.

And then in 1921 usurpers of God's word took the Lectures on Faith out without a Church vote, just as WW's excerpts were added in 1981 by anonymous people with no announcement, no discussion, and certainly no church vote.

And LOL, you reject Rigdon. What about "by my voice or the voice of my servants..."? Again, Joseph APPROVED the words. The year was 1835 and Joseph was alive and well and presiding when they were added to our Canon.

Lastly, have you read the Lectures?? My gosh, you are in for a treat if you haven't. Read them and read them again and again. The removal of the LoF have had a massive negative impact on our understanding of the Godhead and how to be saved. Our understanding of correct doctrine would be so much HIGHER if members studied and memorized those lectures, but you combine that loss of spiritual understanding with the false doctrine in OD1 (from 1981) and the combination has been devastating. The result is an increased NEGATIVE influence and a decreased POSITIVE influence. Catastrophic consequences of that combination is what we are witnessing today, even in this very blog post with well-meaning Mormons.

You should review this: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=45913#p793587

Considering the remnants have fallen all over it, it appears to be more of a trick.

Devastating, catastrophic are good words for those who worship Snuffer and are following that strange path.

[underdog]

... you refuse to see how you actually DO follow a prophet--Denver Snuffer.

I would just add "false prophet".

DS also follows the Lectures on Faith, written by Sidney Rigdon....

Joseph was involved in writing all or a certain portion. However, the indisputable fact is that Joseph approved them and they were voted on and sustained by the church as the Church's official doctrine.

And then in 1921 usurpers of God's word took the Lectures on Faith out without a Church vote, just as WW's excerpts were added in 1981 by anonymous people with no announcement, no discussion, and certainly no church vote.

And LOL, you reject Rigdon. What about "by my voice or the voice of my servants..."? Again, Joseph APPROVED the words. The year was 1835 and Joseph was alive and well and presiding when they were added to our Canon.

Lastly, have you read the Lectures?? My gosh, you are in for a treat if you haven't. Read them and read them again and again. The removal of the LoF have had a massive negative impact on our understanding of the Godhead and how to be saved. Our understanding of correct doctrine would be so much HIGHER if members studied and memorized those lectures, but you combine that loss of spiritual understanding with the false doctrine in OD1 (from 1981) and the combination has been devastating. The result is an increased NEGATIVE influence and a decreased POSITIVE influence. Catastrophic consequences of that combination is what we are witnessing today, even in this very blog post with well-meaning Mormons.

You should review this: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=45913#p793587

Considering the remnants have fallen all over it, it appears to be more of a trick.

Devastating, catastrophic are good words for those who worship Snuffer and are following that strange path.

I viewed the link you referenced. I'm very familiar with the history of the LoF. It's cut and dried. Finrock at that thread did a good job of summarizing the history. This is Exhibit #6 I would offer to you as apostasy of the Brethren. It's black and white and beyond debate. It's history.

1835 -- with Joseph alive, the LoF were voted on and sustained by the Church. Joseph never had them removed even up till his death.
1921 -- in the dark of night (like WW's excerpts were added to OD1 in 1981), the LoF were removed. No vote. No explanation.

These are facts of history.

Have you read the Lectures? You will become enlightened by the Spirit of God as you read them time and again. They teach who God is and what specifically a man must do to be saved. This is priceless knowledge -- mysteries, if you will. And you esteem them as a thing of naught and trample them under your feet.

To each his own, Arenera!

[Arenera]

I would just add "false prophet".

DS also follows the Lectures on Faith, written by Sidney Rigdon....

Joseph was involved in writing all or a certain portion. However, the indisputable fact is that Joseph approved them and they were voted on and sustained by the church as the Church's official doctrine.

And then in 1921 usurpers of God's word took the Lectures on Faith out without a Church vote, just as WW's excerpts were added in 1981 by anonymous people with no announcement, no discussion, and certainly no church vote.

And LOL, you reject Rigdon. What about "by my voice or the voice of my servants..."? Again, Joseph APPROVED the words. The year was 1835 and Joseph was alive and well and presiding when they were added to our Canon.

Lastly, have you read the Lectures?? My gosh, you are in for a treat if you haven't. Read them and read them again and again. The removal of the LoF have had a massive negative impact on our understanding of the Godhead and how to be saved. Our understanding of correct doctrine would be so much HIGHER if members studied and memorized those lectures, but you combine that loss of spiritual understanding with the false doctrine in OD1 (from 1981) and the combination has been devastating. The result is an increased NEGATIVE influence and a decreased POSITIVE influence. Catastrophic consequences of that combination is what we are witnessing today, even in this very blog post with well-meaning Mormons.

You should review this: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=45913#p793587

Considering the remnants have fallen all over it, it appears to be more of a trick.

Devastating, catastrophic are good words for those who worship Snuffer and are following that strange path.

I viewed the link you referenced. I'm very familiar with the history of the LoF. It's cut and dried. Finrock at that thread did a good job of summarizing the history. This is Exhibit #6 I would offer to you as apostasy of the Brethren. It's black and white and beyond debate. It's history.

1835 -- with Joseph alive, the LoF were voted on and sustained by the Church. Joseph never had them removed even up till his death.
1921 -- in the dark of night (like WW's excerpts were added to OD1 in 1981), the LoF were removed. No vote. No explanation.

These are facts of history.

Have you read the Lectures? You will become enlightened by the Spirit of God as you read them time and again. They teach who God is and what specifically a man must do to be saved. This is priceless knowledge -- mysteries, if you will. And you esteem them as a thing of naught and trample them under your feet.

To each his own, Arenera!

Let me give you the fact.

I didn't live in those days. I live in these days. You keep spouting these items that the church is in apostasy. You are up to 6 now.

I received a testimony of a living prophet in these days. I received a testimony of the Book of Mormon. I received a testimony of Joseph Smith. I've lived Alma 32. I know what tastes good and what tastes bad. My life has been enriched by the church, leaders, covenants, callings, and other members.

Why are you trying so hard to take disaffected members down the path you have gone? This is not love or charity.

Your fruit isn't good. Neither is Denver's.

I'm just an average mormon. With the rebuttals you are getting on this topic, I'm not the only one who has had spiritual experiences that debunk your message.

Time will show. I hope you find out sooner than later.

[underdog]

Joseph was involved in writing all or a certain portion. However, the indisputable fact is that Joseph approved them and they were voted on and sustained by the church as the Church's official doctrine.

And then in 1921 usurpers of God's word took the Lectures on Faith out without a Church vote, just as WW's excerpts were added in 1981 by anonymous people with no announcement, no discussion, and certainly no church vote.

And LOL, you reject Rigdon. What about "by my voice or the voice of my servants..."? Again, Joseph APPROVED the words. The year was 1835 and Joseph was alive and well and presiding when they were added to our Canon.

Lastly, have you read the Lectures?? My gosh, you are in for a treat if you haven't. Read them and read them again and again. The removal of the LoF have had a massive negative impact on our understanding of the Godhead and how to be saved. Our understanding of correct doctrine would be so much HIGHER if members studied and memorized those lectures, but you combine that loss of spiritual understanding with the false doctrine in OD1 (from 1981) and the combination has been devastating. The result is an increased NEGATIVE influence and a decreased POSITIVE influence. Catastrophic consequences of that combination is what we are witnessing today, even in this very blog post with well-meaning Mormons.

You should review this: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=45913#p793587

Considering the remnants have fallen all over it, it appears to be more of a trick.

Devastating, catastrophic are good words for those who worship Snuffer and are following that strange path.

I viewed the link you referenced. I'm very familiar with the history of the LoF. It's cut and dried. Finrock at that thread did a good job of summarizing the history. This is Exhibit #6 I would offer to you as apostasy of the Brethren. It's black and white and beyond debate. It's history.

1835 -- with Joseph alive, the LoF were voted on and sustained by the Church. Joseph never had them removed even up till his death.
1921 -- in the dark of night (like WW's excerpts were added to OD1 in 1981), the LoF were removed. No vote. No explanation.

These are facts of history.

Have you read the Lectures? You will become enlightened by the Spirit of God as you read them time and again. They teach who God is and what specifically a man must do to be saved. This is priceless knowledge -- mysteries, if you will. And you esteem them as a thing of naught and trample them under your feet.

To each his own, Arenera!

Let me give you the fact.

I didn't live in those days. I live in these days. You keep spouting these items that the church is in apostasy. You are up to 6 now.

I received a testimony of a living prophet in these days. I received a testimony of the Book of Mormon. I received a testimony of Joseph Smith. I've lived Alma 32. I know what tastes good and what tastes bad. My life has been enriched by the church, leaders, covenants, callings, and other members.

Why are you trying so hard to take disaffected members down the path you have gone? This is not love or charity.

Your fruit isn't good. Neither is Denver's.

I'm just an average mormon. With the rebuttals you are getting on this topic, I'm not the only one who has had spiritual experiences that debunk your message.

Time will show. I hope you find out sooner than later.

Arenera,

I could ask the same question of you, Why are you trying so hard to defend apostasy? It's a good question.

Which is full of love and charity? Allow a cancer to spread till the whole body is killed by saying "I don't have cancer and I'm not going to look at the MRI scan", or after examining the evidence of cancer you exclaim, "Holy crap, I'd gotta get that stuff out of me before it spreads and then eat healthy and live healthy so it doesn't come back!"

Now what if you were the physician, and you got the MRI scan showing the cancer. What would a loving and charitable doctor do? Say nothing to the patient, as her body got sicker and sicker, or might the doc sound the warning? What doctor would you prefer? Based on your actions, and those here

As a reminder, there have been no rebuttals that were not based on the false premise that the Brethren can't lead us astray. Remove that false premise, and attempted rebuttals disappear because it's circular reasoning.

Now, it is true that spiritual experiences are what they are. The thing is, those experiences are being reported on both sides. I believe, since I'm one of you and know how you/we think, that oftentimes a spiritual experience can be misinterpreted. I'm not denying a spiritual experience happened, but what I'm saying is that we may feel the spirit, but assign incorrect meaning to it. The best example I've offered is Moroni's promise, where anonymous Brethren added the Church to Moroni's promise in the Introduction to the BoM in the front of the book. No, "the Church" was not part of that promise. The promise involved strictly the BoM. So if it's true, then Jesus is the Christ, and Joseph was a true prophet. It stops there. Any spiritual experience associated with that does NOT mean B.Y. down to Monson were "true" in any way.