[Deleted]

[justkeepswimming]

Did something happen? How did people recently realize DS doesn't have keys?

My heart aches tonight for those in the Remnant movement who (like myself) have recently realized that Denver Snuffer lacks priesthood keys. It must be so difficult and heart-wrenching for them to realize the implications of that.

Many of them took a leap of faith and gave up their membership in the church. Even those who haven't resigned or been excommunicated have spent months (if not years) looking for and highlighting the flaws in the LDS church. They had to in order to make their choice seem justified. Now they realize that they have been wholly misled.

I find it incredibly sad that those who were trying so hard not to "trust in the arm of flesh" have suddenly realized that's exactly what they did. They trusted in Denver Snuffer without verifying that the baptism he offered was actually binding. They believed him without asking directly and receiving the confirmation that he held those all-essential keys.

Now they're at a crossroad. I believe it will take men and women of extreme humility, faith, and courage to come back to the church. I remember jonesy (sp?) talking about how difficult it is to trust again after feeling so betrayed. However, I hope and pray that they will follow his example and return.

Most Remnant followers have impressed me as people who are seeking to do the Lord's will. And we need them. Not only are they bastions of testimony in Jesus Christ, but their experience has taught them important lessons about deception. We need men and women like that to teach others, so more of our brothers and sisters will not have to walk those difficult and dark paths of apostasy.

[silk]

Did something happen? How did people recently realize DS doesn't have keys?

It's the conclusion of this discussion thread. You're welcome to read it entirely, but be forewarned that it meanders a bit. That's because I had no idea that keys were what was missing at the beginning. I was just trying to figure out why the Remnant organization was so different than the usual scriptural pattern. Thomas helped me to understand things from the Remnant point of view, and I turned to the scriptures, pondering, and prayer for the rest.

But in quick summation:
1. Denver Snuffer doesn't act like a keyed steward. He seems to want the rights (like offering baptism), without the responsibilities (like organization and discipline).
2. He never claimed to have keys. In fact, he said he didn't realize that the LDS church had lost theirs for almost a month. If he'd been given keys, he would have been aware of it.
3. Months after he should have received keys, he said, "If 'keys' were essential to the fullness of the Gospel, we should expect a great deal more to be said in the Book of Mormon on the topic." If he truly had them, I don't think he would have been so dismissive of them.

I was initially unsettled by the lack of response from the Remnant followers on this forum. But I think they have realized that Denver Snuffer holds no keys, and that they prayed and had it confirmed as I did. I can only imagine how difficult this time must be for them, as they wrestle with the ramifications and what they should do now.

[jdt]

jdt,

I appreciate your comment. It's a good thought, but Denver Snuffer's own words disagree with you. This quote is from August of 2014, several months after he should have received the keys.

The Book of Mormon has a great deal to say about “keys” because of what is NOT there. The book contains the “fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ” but only mentions the word “keys” a single time. That mention is to the servant of Laban who had the keys to the treasury where the brass plates were stored. (1 Ne. 4: 20.) If “keys” were essential to the fullness of the Gospel, we should expect a great deal more to be said in the Book of Mormon on the topic.

That doesn't sound like the words of a priesthood steward to me, one currently holding keys. In fact, it seems that Denver doesn't feel that keys are essential to the fullness of the Gospel at all. I think it's because he's looking at things too narrowly. It's true that The Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But I believe that the Doctrine and Covenants contains the fullness of the priesthood. And they are two separate things. There is certainly a lot said about priesthood in the Doctrine and Covenants -- how it is organized, how to use it, and examples of how it is used. The two books have two separate purposes. And to "Preserve the Restoration", you know that both of them are essential.

For my part, it is not clear to me how you quote from Denver disagrees with what I said.
Could you be more specific?
In my own mind, this is exactly what I was saying he would say. In other words, the LDS church talks about keys constantly and make them more or less the pinnacle of their claims. Denver points out that indeed they do not occupy so central a role in the Gospel and uses the Book of Mormon as evidence. This takes people where they are, and gently tries to point them in the right direction.

[drtanner]

“The Lord conferred authority on some of his chosen servants and gave them exceptional powers. … In this manner Elijah obtained the keys of power in the priesthood to raise the dead, heal the sick, close the heavens that it did not rain only by his word, and for more than three years there was no rain, and moreover he had the power to call down fire from heaven to destroy the enemies of the Church. …

“The Lord gave similar authority to Nephi, son of Helaman, who likewise had authority to close the heavens and perform other mighty works, simply by his faith and the commandment from the Lord [see Helaman 10:7]. This wonderful power has been bestowed on but a few of the servants of the Lord” (Answers to Gospel Questions, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., 5 vols. [1957–66], 4:95).

Gotta have the authority. Those who follow someone out of Christ's church have not taken the actual spirit for thier guide and are deceived. Praying they will recognize the danger they are in, but also that we can do our part to receive them back with open arms.

[silk]

jdt,

I appreciate your comment. It's a good thought, but Denver Snuffer's own words disagree with you. This quote is from August of 2014, several months after he should have received the keys.

The Book of Mormon has a great deal to say about “keys” because of what is NOT there. The book contains the “fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ” but only mentions the word “keys” a single time. That mention is to the servant of Laban who had the keys to the treasury where the brass plates were stored. (1 Ne. 4: 20.) If “keys” were essential to the fullness of the Gospel, we should expect a great deal more to be said in the Book of Mormon on the topic.

That doesn't sound like the words of a priesthood steward to me, one currently holding keys. In fact, it seems that Denver doesn't feel that keys are essential to the fullness of the Gospel at all. I think it's because he's looking at things too narrowly. It's true that The Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But I believe that the Doctrine and Covenants contains the fullness of the priesthood. And they are two separate things. There is certainly a lot said about priesthood in the Doctrine and Covenants -- how it is organized, how to use it, and examples of how it is used. The two books have two separate purposes. And to "Preserve the Restoration", you know that both of them are essential.

For my part, it is not clear to me how you quote from Denver disagrees with what I said.
Could you be more specific?
In my own mind, this is exactly what I was saying he would say. In other words, the LDS church talks about keys constantly and make them more or less the pinnacle of their claims. Denver points out that indeed they do not occupy so central a role in the Gospel and uses the Book of Mormon as evidence. This takes people where they are, and gently tries to point them in the right direction.

I appreciate your asking for clarification. Sometimes I forget that others haven't been neck-deep in this for weeks, trying to puzzle it out. And I don't always write everything I'm thinking because it would be too long and no one would ever want to read it.

So here's a question for you. I think we can agree that John the Baptist had priesthood authority. Why then did he need to wrest the keys from the Jews at all? Why wasn't it enough just to have priesthood authority?

One more question to think about. I assume that you believe in the Great Apostasy and Restoration. What has to be lost for apostasy to occur (meaning across the entire world, not just individually)?

[Rose Garden]

There's a quote by Joseph Smith in which he defines keys as signs that a person gives the angels in order to pass by them. It's been posted on this forum before though I can't go back and find it now. Since the church recognizes Joseph as the originator of the keys, his definition of them might be important to understand in order to understand what keys are.

[jdt]

I appreciate your asking for clarification. Sometimes I forget that others haven't been neck-deep in this for weeks, trying to puzzle it out. And I don't always write everything I'm thinking because it would be too long and no one would ever want to read it.

So here's a question for you. I think we can agree that John the Baptist had priesthood authority. Why then did he need to wrest the keys from the Jews at all? Why wasn't it enough just to have priesthood authority?

One more question to think about. I assume that you believe in the Great Apostasy and Restoration. What has to be lost for apostasy to occur (meaning across the entire world, not just individually)?

That is not a trivial question. As I thought about it for a couple of minutes, I came to appreciate how you have been thinking about it for weeks (neck-deep at that). I am going to need a couple of days to study in order to respond.

[justkeepswimming]

Thanks for the explanation. I've read some of DSs books but never really followed the 'keys' dialogue.

Did something happen? How did people recently realize DS doesn't have keys?

It's the conclusion of this discussion thread. You're welcome to read it entirely, but be forewarned that it meanders a bit. That's because I had no idea that keys were what was missing at the beginning. I was just trying to figure out why the Remnant organization was so different than the usual scriptural pattern. Thomas helped me to understand things from the Remnant point of view, and I turned to the scriptures, pondering, and prayer for the rest.

But in quick summation:
1. Denver Snuffer doesn't act like a keyed steward. He seems to want the rights (like offering baptism), without the responsibilities (like organization and discipline).
2. He never claimed to have keys. In fact, he said he didn't realize that the LDS church had lost theirs for almost a month. If he'd been given keys, he would have been aware of it.
3. Months after he should have received keys, he said, "If 'keys' were essential to the fullness of the Gospel, we should expect a great deal more to be said in the Book of Mormon on the topic." If he truly had them, I don't think he would have been so dismissive of them.

I was initially unsettled by the lack of response from the Remnant followers on this forum. But I think they have realized that Denver Snuffer holds no keys, and that they prayed and had it confirmed as I did. I can only imagine how difficult this time must be for them, as they wrestle with the ramifications and what they should do now.

[AGStacker]

Possibly they will fade into obscurity once they realize they have created more doctrinal and organizational problems than they had pronounced as present in the LDS church. I think Underdog and Thomas will still be HERE though.

I'm still here...never left. The LDS church is not currently seeking Zion but seeking to build its wealth. Zion wont magically appear but it will appear. It is prophesied to come. It will only come when people who believe, have faith in Christ, repent of their sins, are baptized according to the baptism in the Book of Mormon, then baptized with fire by God and seek to live as equals. The church's organization is a typical pyramid that exists everywhere and inevitably produces corruption and inequality. All churches are corrupt before God. They are more concerned with 501 c 3 laws than declaring the truth without reservation.

[sushi_chef]

it seems church did not fully recover from the fallen state, condemnation, and yet the lord allowed fallen church to keep going on one condition....

"for their Father's kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.
59 For shall the children of the kingdom pollute my holy land? Verily, I say unto you, Nay.
60 Verily, verily, I say unto you who now hear my words, which are my voice, blessed are ye inasmuch as you receive these things;
61 For I will forgive you of your sins with this commandment that you remain steadfast in your minds in solemnity and the spirit of prayer, in bearing testimony to all the world of those things which are communicated unto you.
62 Therefore, go ye into all the world; and unto whatsoever place ye cannot go ye shall send, that the testimony may go from you into all the world unto every creature.
63 And as I said unto mine apostles, even so I say unto you, for you are mine apostles, even God's high priests; ye are they whom my Father hath given me; ye are my friends;
64 Therefore, as I said unto mine apostles I say unto you again, that every soul who believeth on your words, and is baptized by water for the remission of sins, shall receive the Holy Ghost....
" d$c 84

[marc]

In fact, according to my understanding, the following is true.

It is more important for us to be baptized in this life, under proper authority and priesthood keys, than it is to see the face of the Savior.

Let me repeat that in other words.

Even if you see the Savior in this life, if you do not have a valid baptism, under proper authority and priesthood keys, you cannot be saved.

"In fact, according to my understanding..." Interesting juxtaposition of words.

Those who receive the Savior (The Other Comforter) in the flesh are those who received the Holy Ghost (The Comforter). Those who received the Holy Ghost, or in other words, the baptism of fire are those who received the baptism of water. Of course, those who rend the veil of unbelief (Ether 4) are those whose baptisms (water and fire) were recognized by God who gave authority to those who administered said ordinances.

D&C 84:21 And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh;

22 For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live...

May I recommend a thorough analysis of section 84 to all diligent seekers of Jesus Christ?

[drtanner]

Possibly they will fade into obscurity once they realize they have created more doctrinal and organizational problems than they had pronounced as present in the LDS church. I think Underdog and Thomas will still be HERE though.

I'm still here...never left. The LDS church is not currently seeking Zion but seeking to build its wealth. Zion wont magically appear but it will appear. It is prophesied to come. It will only come when people who believe, have faith in Christ, repent of their sins, are baptized according to the baptism in the Book of Mormon, then baptized with fire by God and seek to live as equals. The church's organization is a typical pyramid that exists everywhere and inevitably produces corruption and inequality. All churches are corrupt before God. They are more concerned with 501 c 3 laws than declaring the truth without reservation.

“Come to Zion” Elder Christofferson, great talk on the importance of seeking Zion.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... n?lang=eng

[silk]

In fact, according to my understanding, the following is true.

It is more important for us to be baptized in this life, under proper authority and priesthood keys, than it is to see the face of the Savior.

Let me repeat that in other words.

Even if you see the Savior in this life, if you do not have a valid baptism, under proper authority and priesthood keys, you cannot be saved.

"In fact, according to my understanding..." Interesting juxtaposition of words.

Those who receive the Savior (The Other Comforter) in the flesh are those who received the Holy Ghost (The Comforter). Those who received the Holy Ghost, or in other words, the baptism of fire are those who received the baptism of water. Of course, those who rend the veil of unbelief (Ether 4) are those whose baptisms (water and fire) were recognized by God who gave authority to those who administered said ordinances.

D&C 84:21 And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh;

22 For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live...

May I recommend a thorough analysis of section 84 to all diligent seekers of Jesus Christ?

I appreciate your words. Some examples I was thinking of were the people at the time of Christ's mortal sojourn in mortality, those in the Americas who saw him after his Resurrection, and Joseph Smith Jr. They all saw the Savior, and yet still had to receive valid ordinances in order to be saved. But I agree with you that in this current day, it usually happens in reverse.

[marc]

True. Even Nephi who had been baptizing before Christ's visitation was baptized again and baptized again.

3 Nephi 19:11 And it came to pass that Nephi went down into the water and was baptized.

12 And he came up out of the water and began to baptize. And he baptized all those whom Jesus had chosen.

13 And it came to pass when they were all baptized and had come up out of the water, the Holy Ghost did fall upon them, and they were filled with the Holy Ghost and with fire.

14 And behold, they were encircled about as if it were by fire; and it came down from heaven, and the multitude did witness it, and did bear record; and angels did come down out of heaven and did minister unto them...

Which sheds light on Moroni 6:

1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it...

[silk]

I appreciate your asking for clarification. Sometimes I forget that others haven't been neck-deep in this for weeks, trying to puzzle it out. And I don't always write everything I'm thinking because it would be too long and no one would ever want to read it.

So here's a question for you. I think we can agree that John the Baptist had priesthood authority. Why then did he need to wrest the keys from the Jews at all? Why wasn't it enough just to have priesthood authority?

One more question to think about. I assume that you believe in the Great Apostasy and Restoration. What has to be lost for apostasy to occur (meaning across the entire world, not just individually)?

That is not a trivial question. As I thought about it for a couple of minutes, I came to appreciate how you have been thinking about it for weeks (neck-deep at that). I am going to need a couple of days to study in order to respond.

Feel free to take all of the time that you need. It's comforting to me to think of someone else pacing the floors, trying to figure everything out. May I also express my gratitude that you are taking this seriously. I appreciate that you are honestly seeking truth, no matter the source.

[Silver Pie]

I was initially unsettled by the lack of response from the Remnant followers on this forum. But I think they have realized that Denver Snuffer holds no keys, and that they prayed and had it confirmed as I did. I can only imagine how difficult this time must be for them, as they wrestle with the ramifications and what they should do now.

I just barely saw this thread tonight. I don't care if Denver has keys. All I know is that he is a true messenger from God, because God told me so (he was an answer to a prayer I prayed soon after the 9/11 disaster, according to God's own words to me). Anything I do within this movement is because I get confirmation from God that it is what I should do, or what I should be part of.

I will say, though, that if Denver needs keys to do what he's doing, he has them.

Also, I have really appreciated your genuine tone. Usually, I begin skipping nonremnant posts (especially long ones) because what they say is predictable, often rude, and-to me-boring, but I did not skip any of your posts.

I have also enjoyed reading the assorted predictions from everyone. I am interested to know if any of them will come to pass. I am curious as to what will be happening in this movement in ten or twenty years, or if it will even still be here.

And to whoever it was who considered it a loss if the movement didn't preach to and convert people all over the world (as in, big numbers mean success), it is being preached to the world via internet. Plus, I've no doubt that God raises up local prophets in many countries (why else would the prophets of others come, bringing their records with them?).

To tell the truth, God doesn't need a large group to accomplish Zion. All he needs are those who are willing to be humble; to not fight, attack, accuse, backbite, harm, etc., and willing to listen to him. Him, not some person who proclaims they are a leader and have God's right to boss people around. I'm talking about Denver just as much as I am LDS leaders, JW leaders, or any other man (or woman) who thinks they deserve special attention (stand when I enter a room, make up and sing songs to honor me, be evasive or give in or even lie to protect me, etc.).

We can't rely on any man, really. But God can tell us who to listen to, if we are humble enough, willing enough to lay everything on the altar. I believe it is God's voice, alone, that we can trust-but we've got to get through the mess and tangles that comprise what we think God's voice sounds like.

In any case, I don't often come on here and participate in the back and forth between the two factions. I am sure that both sides are quite entrenched in their beliefs. I'll save any preaching I'm inspired to do for those God sends me to, not to those who are convinced I'm going to hell (at worst, apostate at best) for no longer believing the paradigms I used to live and breathe.

[sushi_chef]

according to pppratt, that josephite should be, ressurected joseph,

"With these reflections and inquiries, I walked onward, weighed down as it were unto death. When I could endure it no longer, I cried out aloud, saying: O Lord! in the name of Jesus Christ I pray Thee, show me what these things mean, and what I shall say to Thy people? On a sudden the Spirit of God came upon me, and filled my heart with joy and gladness indescribable; and while the spirit of revelation glowed in my bosom with as visible a warmth and gladness as if it were fire. The Spirit said unto me: “Lift up your head and rejoice; for behold! it is well with my servants Joseph and Hyrum. My servant Joseph still holds the keys of my kingdom in this dispensation, and he shall stand in due time on the earth, in the flesh, and fulfil that to which he is appointed. Go and say unto my people in Nauvoo, ....

Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt, p. 333
"
he was also school of prophets instructor called through joseph, not brigham nor heber et al.

and seems hes going to be one of the gatekeeper with john the revelator for 144000, so, probably trustworthy.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=35581&p=526729&hilit=pratt#p526729

[drtanner]

What is the purpose of going to a pro LDS forum to bash the leaders or attempt to place doubts in its teachings or claiming contrary spiritual confirmation? I can not for the life of me imagine a true Christian who claims to love others going to a Jewish, Catholic, Remnant, Muslim or any other religious forum for that matter to do this. Is there not every reason under the same premise to go to catholic forum and attempt to persuade the participants to stop believing based on history? And yet I am grateful they come and participate in discussions and I recognize I can do a better job to show love and patience.

[sushi_chef]

"122 Appoint among yourselves a teacher, and let not all be spokesmen at once; but let one speak at a time and let all listen unto his sayings, that when all have spoken that all may be edified of all, and that every man may have an equal privilege.
" (d%c88)

every man/woman should be entitled to speak out whatever they felt want to express.
for every lds must have some spiritual gifts through holy spirit, ideally speaking.

this spiritual gift should be independent of church authority line, direct from above.

[lemuel]

Silk--

What is the more difficult task to accomplish?
1. To find a people with pure hearts
2. To give keys to one among those people
3. To baptize those people with keys


I don't know how it's all gonna play out, but 2 and 3 don't matter without 1. I can't say that any group of people has pure hearts, and I certainly can't claim it personally, but if a group ever does get pure hearts, 2 and 3 are trivial matters.

I think Snuffer doesn't emphasize keys because we've all been raised to think of keys a certain way. Keyholders get to tell us what to do. Keyholders are to be venerated. If we rushed to emphasize keys and fill offices, we might end up replaying all the mistakes of the LDS.

This has been argued to death in other threads, but even if keys are important it's still not clear to me that one man's priesthood authority depends on the existence of a keyholder. Alma was baptizing Helam long before he met Mosiah. He had authority even though it came from wicked king Noah.

[silk]

Silk--

What is the more difficult task to accomplish?
1. To find a people with pure hearts
2. To give keys to one among those people
3. To baptize those people with keys


I don't know how it's all gonna play out, but 2 and 3 don't matter without 1. I can't say that any group of people has pure hearts, and I certainly can't claim it personally, but if a group ever does get pure hearts, 2 and 3 are trivial matters.

I think Snuffer doesn't emphasize keys because we've all been raised to think of keys a certain way. Keyholders get to tell us what to do. Keyholders are to be venerated. If we rushed to emphasize keys and fill offices, we might end up replaying all the mistakes of the LDS.

This has been argued to death in other threads, but even if keys are important it's still not clear to me that one man's priesthood authority depends on the existence of a keyholder. Alma was baptizing Helam long before he met Mosiah. He had authority even though it came from wicked king Noah.

There is a lot that I can say, and a lot that I want to say. However, I think much of it would unduly influence jdt in his/her search to answer my questions. So I will defer for a time.

That being said, I've noticed from your posts that you seem to understand the Remnant movement well, and I'm trying to understand how they see priesthood keys. Would you mind explaining this policy to me?

There are people coming from different faiths to associate with fellowships, including RLDS or Community of Christ, fundamentalist groups, and other splinter “Mormon” denominations. Some of these have been previously ordained within their affiliations. These, like men who are Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran or other Christian faiths will need to be sustained and ordained. They should understand something about priesthood before being sustained. Once sustained, when ordaining someone to serve in these fellowships ordain no one to an office, only confer priesthood. Let everyone be equal. Keep lines of authority. It will reckon through the one who confers the priesthood. But power can only come from Christ. First time ordinations (after April 2014) should be done within a fellowship. All who are ordained in these communities should keep a record of the line of authority and pass it down. Be prepared to defend those lines of authority using the records kept.” (Preserving the Restoration, pgs. 512 – 513)

Here are questions I would especially appreciate answered.

If they've already been previously ordained in a different faith, why do they need it done again? (editing to add a clarification here -- I'm mostly interested in groups like RLDS where the men could trace their ordination back to Joseph Smith. Why then would it need to be done again?)
Why if an ordination was done after April 2014 does it need to be done again?
How does ignoring offices square with this scripture from D&C 84?

30 And again, the offices of teacher and deacon are necessary appendages belonging to the lesser priesthood, which priesthood was confirmed upon Aaron and his sons.

Thanks in advance (if you're willing, of course).

[jdt]

Silk--

What is the more difficult task to accomplish?
1. To find a people with pure hearts
2. To give keys to one among those people
3. To baptize those people with keys


I don't know how it's all gonna play out, but 2 and 3 don't matter without 1. I can't say that any group of people has pure hearts, and I certainly can't claim it personally, but if a group ever does get pure hearts, 2 and 3 are trivial matters.

I think Snuffer doesn't emphasize keys because we've all been raised to think of keys a certain way. Keyholders get to tell us what to do. Keyholders are to be venerated. If we rushed to emphasize keys and fill offices, we might end up replaying all the mistakes of the LDS.

This has been argued to death in other threads, but even if keys are important it's still not clear to me that one man's priesthood authority depends on the existence of a keyholder. Alma was baptizing Helam long before he met Mosiah. He had authority even though it came from wicked king Noah.

There is a lot that I can say, and a lot that I want to say. However, I think much of it would unduly influence jdt in his/her search to answer my questions. So I will defer for a time.

That being said, I've noticed from your posts that you seem to understand the Remnant movement well, and I'm trying to understand how they see priesthood keys. Would you mind explaining this policy to me?

There are people coming from different faiths to associate with fellowships, including RLDS or Community of Christ, fundamentalist groups, and other splinter “Mormon” denominations. Some of these have been previously ordained within their affiliations. These, like men who are Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran or other Christian faiths will need to be sustained and ordained. They should understand something about priesthood before being sustained. Once sustained, when ordaining someone to serve in these fellowships ordain no one to an office, only confer priesthood. Let everyone be equal. Keep lines of authority. It will reckon through the one who confers the priesthood. But power can only come from Christ. First time ordinations (after April 2014) should be done within a fellowship. All who are ordained in these communities should keep a record of the line of authority and pass it down. Be prepared to defend those lines of authority using the records kept.” (Preserving the Restoration, pgs. 512 – 513)

Here are questions I would especially appreciate answered.

If they've already been previously ordained in a different faith, why do they need it done again? (editing to add a clarification here -- I'm mostly interested in groups like RLDS where the men could trace their ordination back to Joseph Smith. Why then would it need to be done again?)
Why if an ordination was done after April 2014 does it need to be done again?
How does ignoring offices square with this scripture from D&C 84?

30 And again, the offices of teacher and deacon are necessary appendages belonging to the lesser priesthood, which priesthood was confirmed upon Aaron and his sons.

Thanks in advance (if you're willing, of course).

Don't hold back on my account. If I am persuaded by what you say great. If not, no harm done.

Much of this conversation likely hinges on this statement from TotPJS:

Thirdly. John, at that time, was the only legal administrator in the affairs of the kingdom there was then on the earth, and holding the keys of power. The Jews had to obey his instructions or be damned, by their own law; and Christ Himself fulfilled all righteousness in becoming obedient to the law. …The son of Zacharias wrested the keys, the kingdom, the power, the glory from the Jews, by the holy anointing and decree of heaven

A lot of this hinges on what is meant by keys. We all know the modern LDS definition, but is that was Joseph meant. And mind you Joseph did not just say he wrested the keys, but also the kingdom, the power and the glory.
Curiously enough I looked up keys in the 1828 dictionary with the following results (bolding the ones I found interesting to this conversation):

KEY, noun ke. In a general sense, a fastener; that which fastens; as a piece of wood in the frame of a building, or in a chain, etc.

1. An instrument for shutting or opening a lock, by pushing the bolt one way or the other. Keys are of various forms, and fitted to the wards of the locks to which they belong.

2. An instrument by which something is screwed or turned; as the key of a watch or other chronometer.

3. The stone which binds an arch. [See Key-stone.]

4. In an organ or harpsichord, the key or finger key is a little lever or piece in the fore part by which the instrument is played on by the fingers.

5. In music, the key or key note, is the fundamental note or tone, to which the whole piece is accommodated, and with which it usually begins and always ends. There are two keys, one of the major, and one of the minor mode. key sometimes signifies a scale or system of intervals.

6. An index, or that which serves to explain a cypher. Hence,

7. That which serves to explain any thing difficult to be understood.

8. In the Romish church, ecclesiastical jurisdiction, or the power of the pope, or the power of excommunicating or absolving.

9. A ledge or lay of ricks near the surface of the water.

10. The husk containing the seed of an ash.

We all know the quote about the Book of Mormon being the keystone of the religion. So that came to my mind, though that definition may not be relevant to this conversation.
7 could apply. It would seem that the Jews of the time had a hard time understanding the intent of the scriptures, so this could be a meaningful definition.
8 seems to align well with the modern LDS definition of keys. It should be duly considered as well. And in some ways seems to be the most likely definition used in this quote in isolation, due to the statement that the Jews needed to obey John's instruction or be damned by their own law.
That's where I have gotten so far. In the end I would like to review all the instances of keys in the D&C and TotPJS for patterns (there are no such references in the Book of Mormon which is noteworthy in itself).

[silk]

jdt,

I think you're doing a great job. In fact, you're much more thorough than I was when I was starting, and I applaud you for it. I think it's interesting that I was also directed to the 1828 version of the dictionary this week. I wanted to see what Joseph Smith would have considered the meaning of "authority", and it was quite telling.

I'm not sure that "[w]e all know the modern LDS definition" of keys. I for one didn't have a clue, just a vague idea. I would be interested to know what you think the LDS definition is.

We know that the Book of Mormon was written for our day, but it was never meant to be used by itself. I have wondered if Mormon wanted to include more on keys and such, but was informed that it wasn't necessary. It's similar to the lack of information on temples. We know they are very important, but they are only mentioned in passing in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants are meant to be companions. I would look to the Doctrine and Covenants for information on keys (and priesthood, for that matter), because that seems to be one of its main areas of focus.

I'm grateful that you're willing to put in the effort to go through the verses in the D&C. For me, it was actually a Biblical verse that started my realization as to the importance of keys. One more question to consider as you continue your search. What could John the Baptist do for Jesus with keys that he couldn't do without them?

[lemuel]

My answers in blue.

There is a lot that I can say, and a lot that I want to say. However, I think much of it would unduly influence jdt in his/her search to answer my questions. So I will defer for a time.

That being said, I've noticed from your posts that you seem to understand the Remnant movement well, and I'm trying to understand how they see priesthood keys. Would you mind explaining this policy to me?

First, I'd note that there probably isn't a unified way that remnant folk understand keys.

There are people coming from different faiths to associate with fellowships, including RLDS or Community of Christ, fundamentalist groups, and other splinter “Mormon” denominations. Some of these have been previously ordained within their affiliations. These, like men who are Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran or other Christian faiths will need to be sustained and ordained. They should understand something about priesthood before being sustained. Once sustained, when ordaining someone to serve in these fellowships ordain no one to an office, only confer priesthood. Let everyone be equal. Keep lines of authority. It will reckon through the one who confers the priesthood. But power can only come from Christ. First time ordinations (after April 2014) should be done within a fellowship. All who are ordained in these communities should keep a record of the line of authority and pass it down. Be prepared to defend those lines of authority using the records kept.” (Preserving the Restoration, pgs. 512 – 513)

Here are questions I would especially appreciate answered.

If they've already been previously ordained in a different faith, why do they need it done again? (editing to add a clarification here -- I'm mostly interested in groups like RLDS where the men could trace their ordination back to Joseph Smith. Why then would it need to be done again?)
Why if an ordination was done after April 2014 does it need to be done again?

This perplexes me too. Even if the Q15 have lost priesthood from unrighteous dominion (and that's ok if you disagree on this point),
I don't think that implies that all the rank and file members have lost priesthood too. And I imagine that priesthood ordination is valid as long as the ordinance isn't changed, which implies that the RLDS may have priesthood as well, assuming they haven't changed the ordinance.

How does ignoring offices square with this scripture from D&C 84?

30 And again, the offices of teacher and deacon are necessary appendages belonging to the lesser priesthood, which priesthood was confirmed upon Aaron and his sons.

They probably are necessary but perhaps not yet.

Thanks in advance (if you're willing, of course).

Not definitive answers by any means, but the best I've got.

[silk]

First, I'd note that there probably isn't a unified way that remnant folk understand keys.

Not definitive answers by any means, but the best I've got.

Thank you for your response. While it wasn't exactly what I was looking for, it helped me to understand more about the Remnant followers. I heard the same basic idea from Thomas -- that there's a wide variety of understanding and ideas among those in the group, even about the policies you are going to implement. (Actually, that's just conjecture on my part. I guess I don't know whether you're going to follow the policies or not. Maybe it depends on which fellowship you're in?)

I admit that it puzzles me, especially since one of the main definitions of Zion is that they were "of one heart and one mind" (Moses 7:18). But then I thought -- maybe I'm too narrow in my thinking. Could you help me to understand what it is that the Remnant is "of one heart" about? And of "one mind"? It is very difficult for me to understand what they have to offer, since most of what I see is just dissatisfaction with the way things currently are (especially regarding the LDS church).