Denver Snuffer's Remnant scripture project and covenant

[underdog]

Thank you. I'll need time to read the references you gave and to ponder your responses.

Sincerely,

Underdog

[Baurak Ale]

There are three prime witnesses against Denver Snuffer's claims: (1) God the Father, (2) the Savior Jesus Christ, and (3) the prophet Joseph Smith.

(1) God the Father calls Himself in the Bible, "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob" (for example, Exodus 3:6; see [a]), all of whom practiced polygyny (b). Denver Snuffer has rejected polygamy and thus polygyny (c). A person who truly believes the Bible as long as it has been translated correctly will not condemn polygyny, even though its practice may be suspended by His authorized servants (d).

(2) The Savior Jesus Christ warned: "If any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe him not; for in those days there shall also arise false Christs, and false prophets.... Wherefore, if they shall say unto you: Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: Behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not" (Joseph Smith—Matthew 1:21-22,25). There will be many false prophets; not denouncing Christ or His doctrine is no sure sign that a person isn't being deceived. So, to answer the question, "What teaching or practice of Denver opposes Jesus Christ and 'persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God'?" Possibly none, but that doesn't make him any better than the "certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination" (e).

(3) The prophet Joseph Smith gave the infallible guide to detecting an apostate: "I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives. The principle is as correct as the one that Jesus put forth in saying that he who seeketh a sign is an adulterous person; and that principle is eternal, undeviating, and firm as the pillars of heaven; for whenever you see a man seeking after a sign, you may set it down that he is an adulterous man" (f).


-------------
(a) The Lord calls those who receive the Melchizedek Priesthood "the seed of Abraham" (D&C 84:34) and "the sons of Jacob" (D&C 109:58); should it be asked "yes, but through which of their wives?"
(b) Though Isaac's first wife is never mentioned specifically; see http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2013 ... riage.html.
(c) "Let me be clear, again, that I denounce polygamy, adultery, fornication and sexual impurity" (http://denversnuffer.com/2017/08/sexual-fidelity/).
(d) God does not recognize any marriage in this world not performed by His authority—monogamous or polygynous (see D&C 132:15). Thus it stands to reason that polygyny cannot be wrested into practice by just anyone who sees the light of it, for even their first marriage is null and void without its having been done by proper authority. In the same vein, one such as Denver Snuffer cannot denounce polygyny in favor of monogamy since the number of wives is not the Biblically important aspect to the Lord—it's the authority to perform marriage at all. In other words, one claiming authority and an understanding of scripture (in this case the Bible) cannot endorse the one form of marriage and denounce the other.
(e) "A certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: the same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour" (Acts 16:16-18).
(f) Joseph Smith as quoted by Galbraith, The Scriptural Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith [STPJS], pp. 156-57. See also D&C 112:20: "Whosoever receiveth my word receiveth me, and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth those, the First Presidency, whom I have sent, whom I have made counselors for my name’s sake unto you" (emphasis added).

[Seek the Truth]

By the LDS mainstream? No they aren't. True prophets are hated and reviled by those whom they call to repentance, but who think they need no repentance (like you). Think Jesus. Think Lehi. Think Nephi. Think Abinadi. Think Samuel. Think Joseph. Think Denver. In short, true prophets are reviled by people who do not want to repent, especially the leaders of the day, whose status and income and craft are threatened by the message of the prophet.[/color]

Do Snufferites revile Denver Snuffer.

Where did I say I don't need repentance. Find the citation immediately or issue a retraction and an apology.

As even Shadow apparently recognizes as he has ceased and desisted, you cannot bring your own tradition / assumptions as evidence.

We didn't. We used scripture and the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. I guess you could say those are my traditions, and I'm not giving them up.

If you could, talk about stacking the deck in your favor! Jesus called the Jewish leaders corrupt. So you can plainly see the sheer silliness of them whining and complaining and murmuring, "He said we are corrupt! THAT'S the reason he's of the devil!" Seek the Truth, I'm explaining this in plain language to you in a respectful manner.

You are confused beyond words. In plain language.

What more can be done? But you above all else on this forum continue to repeat your same illogic.

There is nothing illogical about scripture and the teachings of Joseph Smith.

Nothing.

Maybe Mosiah 17 will help you.

Even the wicked court that tried Abinadi knew they had to bring him up on some specific charge. I've asked you for something specific. Let's compare what you said above to what they (with King Noah as voice here) accused Abinadi of:

17 And he said unto him: Abinadi, we have found an accusation against thee, and thou art worthy of death.

18 For thou hast said that God himself should come down among the children of men; and now, for this cause thou shalt be put to death unless thou wilt recall all the words which thou hast spoken evil concerning me and my people.

The king stretched for something specific and finally said that Abinadi said Christ would "come down among the children of men" (hmmm, that sounds a lot like Denver teaching about Christ coming down to visit him (not to mention the book, The Second Comforter)!!). But then the REAL reason spills out in crystal clarity:

They will kill (literally in Abinadi's case or metaphorically by exing Denver) Abinadi "UNLESS" he "recalls" the negative things he's said about them.

This has a STUNNING parallel to the Church demanding that Denver recall his book "which speaks evil" of the Church and that he not go out on his speaking tour.

Excommunication is a part of the Church going back to New Testament times. We didn't make it up just to persecute Snuffer. He knew the rules and broke them

The similarities are so glaringly obvious that you might almost conclude this is fulfillment of an 'embedded prophesy'. Like Mormon may have actually seen our day and plucked and singled this story out of the thousands of pages of Nephite history for a reason!

Just in case some readers aren't aware, let me quote the actual words of the Church demands of Denver, which were put in writing by President Truman Hunt and addressed to Denver in August 2013:

"To avoid the disciplinary counsel (my words in parenthesis: i.e., the death penalty), I ask you, again:

1) To remove PTHG from publication;
2) To acknowledge to those who follow your blog that PTHG contains content that needs to be withdrawn; and
3) To cancel your plan speaking tour..."

Sounds like he should have listened to him.

To review, when pressed for a specific reason as to why Denver is guilty of apostasy against Christ, you are saying the SAME thing King Noah and his wicked priests are saying! This should give you pause. It's undeniable. To quote your specific reason stated above, "That the LDS Church is apostate." This angered the Church just as you are angry. This angered and bothered them so much that they formally, in writing, asked Denver to recall his words, just as Abinadi was asked to "recall all the words which thou hast spoken evil concerning me and my people." They threatened Denver with the "death penalty" (Let's call a spade a spade. We all know that's what excommunication means. You lose your temple blessings and miss out on the prospects of exaltation unless the Church restores them later) if he didn't comply with their demands.

Bro, the Church has excommunicated countless people who have criticized the Church. There is literally nothing special about Denver Snuffer in this regard. We've been excommunicating people like this all the way back to Joseph Smith. Denver is literally insignificant in this regard.

That is a chilling parallel to Denver's case.

So I ask you again, if you kindly will, to share a specific teaching or practice (that is NOT rooted in tradition or assumptions of yours) of Denver's that show how he opposes Christ, that he is in apostasy, that he "persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God." So far you all have shared nothing.

In your imagination, yes. Very chilling.

The Jewish leaders KNEW (like you "know") they were "of God", that they were "right", that they were "chosen," that they were "authorized." They knew it. And so they felt justified in killing their Messiah, the Son of God. They said Jesus was guilty of blasphemy. And they would have been right if their assumptions were true. But they were wrong. Could you be wrong in your assumptions possibly? That's a great question. Will you answer that question? Is there even a remote chance your assumption could be wrong? Could "the Brethren" actually be leading you astray? Could Jesus want to talk to them, but they aren't listening? Could they be, in fact, in apostasy themselves, just as the Sanhedrin was? I predict you will not answer that question either.

If you get to be certain with your assumptions regarding Denver Snuffer then you have to let other people be certain of their beliefs.

And to answer your question yes I am certain that God lives, Jesus is the Christ, Joseph Smith was a Prophet called of God and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the only true Church on the face of the earth. Thank you for the opportunity to express my certainty which has been made known unto me by the Holy Ghost many many times. Beyond doubt.

I call upon you to repent and repair your status with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

[Seek the Truth]

Specifically state how Denver opposes Christ!

He rejects his teachings.

[Arenera]

Might I suggest:

1. Change a bad habit. Singular

At one time we have all felt as if our lives are a constellation of bad habits. You get home from work, you’re exhausted and you go from one “I should not be doing this” to the next.

It’s like you need to change everything. And you need to do it tomorrow… No. Bad. Wrong. Does not compute.

Do less. Just focus on fixing one thing at a time. When I spoke to Power of Habit author Charles Duhigg, he said that’s the key to lasting change. Here’s Charles:

If you try to transform everything at once, it tends to be very, very destabilizing. In general, what people should do, is they should think of change as a project. It’s a project that takes a while… Now, it might feel frustrating to say, “If you have ten habits you want to change, that means it’s going to take eight months or nine months.” The truth of the matter is if this is a behavior that’s really important, changing it will have this huge impact on your life. It’s worth spending a month to change one behavior permanently. You’re going to be reaping the benefits of that for the next decade.
You don’t need to overhaul your life. Just kill one bad habit. Give it a month and then move on to the next.

(To learn the four rituals neuroscience says will make you happy, click here.)

Okay, you’re focused on one thing. What’s a painless way to start?

2. Don’t stop. Just count

Whatever it is you shouldn’t be doing, you don’t have to stop yet. (Doesn’t that sound nice?) Don’t try to reduce the habit, reduce the variability in the habit.

In other words, don’t even try to quit smoking; try to smoke the exact same number of cigarettes each day. Or only check Facebook your usual 90 times an hour.

This tiny effort toward self-control can lead to a decrease in bad habits over time, unconsciously.

Via The Willpower Instinct: How Self-Control Works, Why It Matters, and What You Can Do To Get More of It:

Behavioral economist Howard Rachlin proposes an interesting trick for overcoming the problem of always starting a change tomorrow. When you want to change a behavior, aim to reduce the variability in your behavior, not the behavior itself. He has shown that smokers asked to try to smoke the same number of cigarettes every day gradually decrease their overall smoking— even when they are explicitly told not to try to smoke less.
Just paying attention to those numbers can make a big difference. Merely looking at the calorie counts on food labels before eating was more effective for weight loss than exercise:

Label users who did not exercise displayed a slightly greater likelihood of weight loss than those who exercised but did not read food labels. Additionally, those who only read labels were more likely to improve their chances of weight loss by adding exercise to their routines rather than abandoning label usage in favor of exercise.
You don’t have to deny yourself at first. Just notice the numbers and continue to behave badly — but consistently.

(To learn what Harvard research says will make you happier and more successful, click here.)

That’s not hard. You don’t have to change. How else can you beat bad habits without changing yourself at all?

3. Don’t change you. Change your world

Every day I download Instagram on my iPhone and every day I delete Instagram off my iPhone. Does it sound like I have a problem? Nope. It’s a great way to make sure I only check it once a day.

The app isn’t there tempting me to check it 600 times. And it’s a pain to keep downloading it. And this is a big secret to beating bad habits.

Don’t change yourself. Change your context. We engage in habits because of “triggers” in our environment. Remove the triggers or make them more difficult to reach and you’re less likely to engage in the behavior.

When I spoke to behavioral economist Dan Ariely he said context affects your behavior much, much more than you think. Here’s Dan:

One of the big lessons from social science in the last 40 years is that environment matters. If you go to a buffet and the buffet is organized in one way, you will eat one thing. If it’s organized in a different way, you’ll eat different things. We think that we make decisions on our own but the environment influences us to a great degree. Because of that we need to think about how to change our environment.
So get the tempting stuff away from you. Bestselling author Shawn Achor recommends “the 20 second rule.” Make bad habits 20 seconds harder to begin and you’re far less likely to engage in them. Here’s Shawn:

Watching too much television? Merely take out the batteries of the remote control creating a 20 second delay and it dramatically decreases the amount of television people will watch.
You don’t need to change yourself just yet. Change the things around you.

(To learn an FBI behavior expert’s secrets for getting people to like you, click here.)

Pretty simple, right? Good. And let’s keep it that way. Do you need to put pressure on yourself and be a demanding taskmaster to eliminate bad habits? Nope. Neuroscience says do the exact opposite…

4. Chill, dudette

What makes you more likely to engage in bad habits? Stress.

UCLA neuroscientist Alex Korb says staying relaxed helps your brain make the right choices. Here’s Alex:

I have a friend who always says, “Stress takes the prefrontal cortex offline.” Stress changes the dynamics of that conversation. It weakens the prefrontal cortex. That part of your brain doesn’t have infinite resources. It can’t be eternally vigilant and so while it’s not paying attention, your striatum is like, “Let’s go eat a cookie. Let’s go drink a beer.” Anything that you can do to reduce stress can help strengthen the prefrontal cortex’s control over your habits.
Don’t pressure yourself. Stay calm and you’ll behave better.

(To learn how to stop being lazy and get more done, click here.)

Alright, the tips so far have been plenty easy. Time for some black belt methods. And we also need to correct some myths. How do you really eliminate those bad habits? It’s easy: Don’t.

5. Don’t eliminate bad habits. Replace them.

Ironically, studies show saying, “I’ll never do that again” makes you even more likely to do that again.

Charles Duhigg wrote the book on habits. And he says the research is clear: you can’t eliminate bad habits but you can replace them. Want to stop shoving donuts in your mouth?

When you feel the urge, put some sugarless gum in your piehole. The “trigger” stays the same and you still get a nice reward but you’re replacing the bad behavior with a good one.

From The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business:

We know that a habit cannot be eradicated— it must, instead, be replaced. And we know that habits are most malleable when the Golden Rule of habit change is applied: If we keep the same cue and the same reward, a new routine can be inserted.
Notice what triggers your bad behavior and then replace your usual response with a new one that gives you a different (but still pleasurable) reward.


Am I making this all sound too easy? Don’t worry — I know you’re gonna screw up. We all do. In fact, I bet you know when you’re most likely to screw up. So here are the two words that can make sure you don’t blow it…

6. “If” and “then”

Plans are good. And with a very simple one you can resist temptation. When do you always perform that bad habit? For instance, “Whenever I sit on the couch I surf the internet endlessly.”

Okay, now use two words to make a teensy weensy little plan:

If I sit on the couch, then I will pick up a book.

From Nine Things Successful People Do Differently:

It’s called if-then planning, and it is a really powerful way to help you achieve any goal. Well over a hundred studies, on everything from diet and exercise to negotiation and time management, have shown that deciding in advance when and where you will take specific actions to reach your goal (e.g., “If it is 4 p.m., then I will return any phone calls I should return today”) can double or triple your chances for success.
Sound too simple to be true? Wrong.

From Nine Things Successful People Do Differently:

The results were dramatic: weeks later, 91 percent of if-then planners were still exercising regularly, compared to only 39 percent of nonplanners! Similar results have been shown for other health-promoting behaviors, like remembering to do monthly breast self-exams (100 percent of planners, 53 percent of nonplanners), and getting cervical cancer screenings (92 percent of planners, 60 percent of nonplanners).
Two words. Big changes

But what happens if you still blow it? Don’t worry, buddy. I got you covered . . .

7. Forgive yourself

You’re going to screw up. And that’s okay. In Richard Wiseman’s study of people who achieved their goals he realized we should:

Expect to revert to your old habits from time to time. Treat any failure as a temporary set-back rather than a reason to give up altogether.
So you say you’re not going to eat cookies. Then you accidentally eat a cookie. That’s not when the diet is blown.

The diet is blown when you eat the one cookie and say, “I give up” — and then devour the rest of the bag.

What does science say we should do when we lose self-control or procrastinate? Forgive yourself and move on.

Via The Willpower Instinct: How Self-Control Works, Why It Matters, and What You Can Do To Get More of It:

Study after study shows that self-criticism is consistently associated with less motivation and worse self-control. It is also one of the single biggest predictors of depression, which drains both “I will” power and “I want” power. In contrast, self-compassion— being supportive and kind to yourself, especially in the face of stress and failure— is associated with more motivation and better self-control.
In trying to do anything to better your life, it’s okay to stumble. It takes time. You learn.

(To learn how to be more compassionate with yourself, click here.)

Okay, we’ve covered a lot. Let’s round it up and learn the eighth tip — which is the easiest and most fun of them all…

Sum up

Here’s how to get rid of those awful bad habits:

One at a time. Beat one bad habit per month and in a year you’ll be awesome.
Don’t stop. Just count. Don’t eliminate the bad behavior just yet. First, be consistent in your awfulness.
Don’t change you. Change your world. 20 second rule. Make it harder to engage in bad habits.
Chill, dude. Stress makes the bad stuff tempting. Relax and you’ll behave better.
Don’t eliminate. Replace. You can’t kill bad habits but you can swap them out for new ones.
“If” and “Then.” A simple plan for how you’ll beat temptation helps you beat temptation.
Forgive yourself. Beating yourself up makes you behave worse. Self-compassion keeps you going.
And what’s the final tip?

Peer pressure is a good thing — when you use it strategically. Mom wanted you to hang out with the smart kids in school because they provided good examples. Mom was right.

It’s simple, really. Hang out with people who you want to be. Procrastinate a lot? Spend more time with uber-productive friends. Want to get in shape? Hang around those healthy-eating gym addicts.

When I spoke to Carlin Flora, author of Friendfluence: The Surprising Ways Friends Make Us Who We Are, she said:

Research shows over time, you develop the eating habits, health habits and even career aspirations of those around you. If you’re in a group of people who have really high goals for themselves you’ll take on that same sense of seriousness. And conversely, if you’re in a group of friends who are not that ambitious, then you too will lower your standards.
Okay, enough talk. Right now, email or text one of those friends you want to be and set a time to hang out.

Friends don’t just make us happy. They can also make us better people.

[lemuel]

Brigham Young received the sealing power: “by the calling of [God’s] own voice” (citing JST-Gen. 14:29). Orson Hyde described a heavenly manifestation given to all the Twelve.

In the month of February, 1848, the Twelve Apostles met at Hyde Park, Pottawattamie County, Iowa, where a small Branch of the Church was established…. We were in prayer and council, communing together; and what took place on that occasion? The voice of God came from on high, and spake to the Council. Every latent feeling was aroused, and every heart melted. What did it say unto us? “Let my servant Brigham step forth and receive the full power of the presiding Priesthood in my Church and kingdom.” This was the voice of the Almighty unto us at Council Bluffs, before I removed to what was called Kanesville. It has been said by some that Brigham was appointed by the people, and not by the voice of God. I do not know that this testimony has often, if ever, been given to the masses of the people before; but I am one that was present, and there are others here that were also present on that occasion, and did hear and feel the voice from heaven, and we were filled with the power of God. This is my testimony; these are my declarations unto the Saints—unto the members of the kingdom of God in the last days, and to all people.
Orson Hyde, in Journal of Discourses 8:233–34 (7 October 1860)

Unhallowed hands can't stop God's work.

Not only that, Orson Hyde said there was an earthquake in the surrounding buildings:

We said nothing about the matter in those times, but kept it still. . . . Men, women, and children came running together where we were, and asked us what was the matter. They said their houses shook, and the ground trembled, and they did not know but that there was an earthquake. We told them that there was nothing the matter—not to be alarmed; the Lord was only whispering to us a little, and that he was probably not very far off. We felt no shaking of the earth or of the house, but were filled with the exceeding power and goodness of God. 1

Elder Hyde related this incident, in public, on 7 October 1860. On the same day Brigham Young verified the content of the story. “Brother Hyde, in his remarks, spoke about the voice of God at a certain time. I could tell many incidents relating to that circumstance, which he did not take time to relate. We were in his house, which was some ten or twelve feet square. The houses in the neighborhood shook, or, if they did not, the people thought they did, for they ran together and enquired whether there had been an earthquake. We told them that the voice of God had reached the earth- that they need not be afraid; it was the power of God.”

[Jesef]

The Snufferites dismiss all of these post-1844 accounts & testimonies on the assumption/assertion that BY & Twelve were corrupt power/whore-mongers, and because they are "conveniently" belated. They consider these tainted non-evidences. They even try to incriminate them in the deaths of Joseph & Hyrum. But the irony is that Joseph trusted BY & Twelve completely, with the most sacred things, including the keys of the kingdom and the higher ordinances and the second anointing. So more than good enough for Joseph, but not for Snuffer & his followers.

[Seek the Truth]

Yes. In the past I've referred to them as Dan Brown Mormons, people constantly trying to rewrite history to fit their agenda. It doesn't work in the end.

[Baurak Ale]

There are three prime witnesses against Denver Snuffer's claims: (1) God the Father, (2) the Savior Jesus Christ, and (3) the prophet Joseph Smith.

(1) God the Father calls Himself in the Bible, "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob" (for example, Exodus 3:6; see [a]), all of whom practiced polygyny (b). Denver Snuffer has rejected polygamy and thus polygyny (c). A person who truly believes the Bible as long as it has been translated correctly will not condemn polygyny, even though its practice may be suspended by His authorized servants (d).

(2) The Savior Jesus Christ warned: "If any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe him not; for in those days there shall also arise false Christs, and false prophets.... Wherefore, if they shall say unto you: Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: Behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not" (Joseph Smith—Matthew 1:21-22,25). There will be many false prophets; not denouncing Christ or His doctrine is no sure sign that a person isn't being deceived. So, to answer the question, "What teaching or practice of Denver opposes Jesus Christ and 'persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God'?" Possibly none, but that doesn't make him any better than the "certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination" (e).

(3) The prophet Joseph Smith gave the infallible guide to detecting an apostate: "I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives. The principle is as correct as the one that Jesus put forth in saying that he who seeketh a sign is an adulterous person; and that principle is eternal, undeviating, and firm as the pillars of heaven; for whenever you see a man seeking after a sign, you may set it down that he is an adulterous man" (f).


-------------
(a) The Lord calls those who receive the Melchizedek Priesthood "the seed of Abraham" (D&C 84:34) and "the sons of Jacob" (D&C 109:58); should it be asked "yes, but through which of their wives?"
(b) Though Isaac's first wife is never mentioned specifically; see http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2013 ... riage.html.
(c) "Let me be clear, again, that I denounce polygamy, adultery, fornication and sexual impurity" (http://denversnuffer.com/2017/08/sexual-fidelity/).
(d) God does not recognize any marriage in this world not performed by His authority—monogamous or polygynous (see D&C 132:15). Thus it stands to reason that polygyny cannot be wrested into practice by just anyone who sees the light of it, for even their first marriage is null and void without its having been done by proper authority. In the same vein, one such as Denver Snuffer cannot denounce polygyny in favor of monogamy since the number of wives is not the Biblically important aspect to the Lord—it's the authority to perform marriage at all. In other words, one claiming authority and an understanding of scripture (in this case the Bible) cannot endorse the one form of marriage and denounce the other.
(e) "A certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: the same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour" (Acts 16:16-18).
(f) Joseph Smith as quoted by Galbraith, The Scriptural Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith [STPJS], pp. 156-57. See also D&C 112:20: "Whosoever receiveth my word receiveth me, and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth those, the First Presidency, whom I have sent, whom I have made counselors for my name’s sake unto you" (emphasis added).

[Mark]

The Snufferites dismiss all of these post-1844 accounts & testimonies on the assumption/assertion that BY & Twelve were corrupt power/whore-mongers, and because they are "conveniently" belated. They consider these tainted non-evidences. They even try to incriminate them in the deaths of Joseph & Hyrum. But the irony is that Joseph trusted BY & Twelve completely, with the most sacred things, including the keys of the kingdom and the higher ordinances and the second anointing. So more than good enough for Joseph, but not for Snuffer & his followers.

You are absolutely spot on here J. There were no men more committed to Joseph and his mission of being this dispensational head other than Hyrum than Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball. Anyone who bothers to do their research and read from their words will see that to be the case. They loved Joseph deeply and He loved them. Snuffer and co wants to rewrite historical fact like Seek said to fit their own self serving agenda. Their foundation will crumble and fall to pieces just like all the other apostates before them have done. Just give it time. They will not prosper.

[jdt]

The Snufferites dismiss all of these post-1844 accounts & testimonies on the assumption/assertion that BY & Twelve were corrupt power/whore-mongers, and because they are "conveniently" belated. They consider these tainted non-evidences. They even try to incriminate them in the deaths of Joseph & Hyrum. But the irony is that Joseph trusted BY & Twelve completely, with the most sacred things, including the keys of the kingdom and the higher ordinances and the second anointing. So more than good enough for Joseph, but not for Snuffer & his followers.

I do admit that I noticed the account was over a decade after the proposed event. And when I looked at the source footnote, a disagreement on the timing of the event of over a month between sources (Dec 5, 1847 vs Feb 1848).
Might I ask this question: would you be willing to stand by every choice Joseph made for a church leadership position, seeing as they were "good enough for Joseph" at the time?

[Jesef]

I think it is extremely difficult to reconcile Joseph's very historically evident strong relationship and trust with BY & Twelve, particularly at the end of his life - he spent more time with them (the ones who weren't out on missions), according to his contemporary journals, than anyone else. And the ones who were out on missions were proving, in a most sacrificial manner, how dedicated and true they were to Joseph and the cause by the very act of being abroad and fulfilling their missions.

Snuffer's historical rewrite attempts to attach the betrayals of guys like the Laws and FG Williams and other apostates to BY & Twelve - to also classify them as traitors. Also, Denver's attempt to blame polygamy on BY and to exonerate Joseph and Hyrum is completely untenable from a historical perspective. They are believing and buying into a complete historical fantasy that tries to remove all controversy from Joseph and put it all on Brigham. They're borrowing a lot of the RLDS stuff from that era, too. But the evidence that Joseph taught "the principle" of plural marriage to the Twelve directly and administered it to them and their wives is very solid. They try to leverage the fact that it was kept secret to present that it was not practiced at all (by JS/HS, or endorsed by them). Too many of these folks, whose private journals testify solidly of the fact, had no reason to "smear" Joseph - they considered themselves his most loyal followers/believers. Even Denver has had to admit that Joseph was practicing some form of "kingly" sealing of women to himself (spiritual plurality) as a way to craftily use the sealing power to connect as many families to himself as possible. Why did he have to seal the young women then (to save the whole families)? Why not just craftily use the sealing power to seal all the individuals to him as sons, daughters, etc. - why wives?

So there's too much evidence for them to get away with a comprehensive re-contextualization of all the history. There's too many contemporary journals coming to light, from people who were obviously loyal to Joseph (not enemies trying to destroy him). Plus, look at how Brigham and all the Twelve continue, consistently and unwaveringly, to applaud and uphold Joseph & Hyrum, the First Vision, the Book of Mormon, Temples - everything Joseph revealed, they honored. So much ridiculousness - it amounts to a massive conspiracy theory and coverup - I have to stop right here.

[Thomas]

So, you all suppose Joseph trusted and loved BY more than his own wife and children?

You think numbers equal God's approval. So why not join the Catholics or better yet the Muslims?

[Thomas]

"

Joseph Smith was the greatest victim of fraud and conspiracy of the last 500 years. Nothing like it in recorded history. He was simply lied about when something had to be done to justify ... Utah Mormon polygamy."

—President Israel A. Smith, grandson of Joseph the Martyr (Letter to Pamela Price,
September 17, 1956)

[Thomas]

"I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives.... I am innocent of all these charges.... What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers."

—Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6:410–411

[Thomas]

Here is a statement from one of the twelve apostles. Joseph Smith's own brother.

That the church funds have been misapplied, I have no hesitation in asserting, for of necessity I have been made acquainted with the fact, that several houses have been tilled up with women who have been secretly married to Brigham Young, H. C. Kimble [Heber C. Kimball], and Willard Richards—women with little children in their arms, who had no means of support except from the tithing funds.... I heard my brother Joseph declare before his death, that Brigham Young was a man, whose passions, if unrestrained, were calculated to make him the most licentious man in the world, and should the time ever come, said he, that this man should lead the church, he would certainly lead it to destruction. (William Smith, A Proclamation, Warsaw Signal, Warsaw, Illinois [October 1845], page 1, column 4; italics added)

[jdt]

I think it is extremely difficult to reconcile Joseph's very historically evident strong relationship and trust with BY & Twelve, particularly at the end of his life - he spent more time with them (the ones who weren't out on missions), according to his contemporary journals, than anyone else. And the ones who were out on missions were proving, in a most sacrificial manner, how dedicated and true they were to Joseph and the cause by the very act of being abroad and fulfilling their missions.

Snuffer's historical rewrite attempts to attach the betrayals of guys like the Laws and FG Williams and other apostates to BY & Twelve - to also classify them as traitors. Also, Denver's attempt to blame polygamy on BY and to exonerate Joseph and Hyrum is completely untenable from a historical perspective. They are believing and buying into a complete historical fantasy that tries to remove all controversy from Joseph and put it all on Brigham. They're borrowing a lot of the RLDS stuff from that era, too. But the evidence that Joseph taught "the principle" of plural marriage to the Twelve directly and administered it to them and their wives is very solid. They try to leverage the fact that it was kept secret to present that it was not practiced at all. Too many of these folks, whose private journals testify solidly of the fact, had no reason to "smear" Joseph - they considered themselves his most loyal followers/believers. Even Denver has had to admit that Joseph was practicing some form of "kingly" sealing of women to himself (spiritual plurality) as a way to craftily use the sealing power to connect as many families to himself as possible. Why did he have to seal the young women then (to save the whole families)? Why not just craftily use the sealing power to seal all the individuals to him as sons, daughters, etc. - why wives?

So there's too much evidence for them to get away with a comprehensive re-contextualization of all the history. There's too many contemporary journals coming to light, from people who were obviously loyal to Joseph (not enemies trying to destroy him). Plus, look at how Brigham and all the Twelve continue, consistently and unwaveringly, to applaud and uphold Joseph & Hyrum, the First Vision, the Book of Mormon, Temples - everything Joseph revealed, they honored. So much ridiculousness - it amounts to a massive conspiracy theory and coverup - I have to stop right here.

I absolutely do not want to be seen as heaping sins of others onto the Twelve. Each person should stand on their own. I was merely pointing out that Joseph's record of calling people into leadership positions shows several "misses" and so that I would question the "good enough for Joseph" as being compelling in and of itself.
Question: have more contemporary journals come out in the last couple years? I was somewhat trusting of Brian Hales' work which he listed only 8 sources, half of which he listed as antagonistic: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/a-resp ... ment-16493

[Arenera]

"

Joseph Smith was the greatest victim of fraud and conspiracy of the last 500 years. Nothing like it in recorded history. He was simply lied about when something had to be done to justify ... Utah Mormon polygamy."

—President Israel A. Smith, grandson of Joseph the Martyr (Letter to Pamela Price,
September 17, 1956)

Review these points:

1. The Power of God bringing forth the Book of Mormon in the dispensation of the fulness of times

The Book of Mormon was a project guided by God starting in 600BC. Plates were gathered, prophets were guided and commanded to keep the plates and write spiritual information on more plates. A prophet historian and his son abridged the plates and sealed them up in the earth. These plates were destined to come forth by the power of God during the dispensation of the fulness of times. Joseph, an unlearned but spiritual giant was selected in the pre-existence to translate the plates to the Book of Mormon, and to start the restoration and begin the dispensation of the fulness of times. Brigham Young was selected in the pre-existence to continue the restoration and dispensation when Joseph was killed.

2. People can't take away Joseph's dispensation

This is Joseph's dispenstation, as told in his own words a few days before he was killed:

The old Catholic church traditions are worth more than all you have said. Here is a principle of logic that most men have no more sense than to adopt. I will illustrate it by an old apple tree. Here jumps off a branch and says, I am the true tree, and you are corrupt. If the whole tree is corrupt, are not its branches corrupt? If the Catholic religion is a false religion, how can any true religion come out of it? If the Catholic church is bad, how can any good thing come out of it? The character of the old churches have always been slandered by all apostates since the world began.

I testify again, as the Lord lives, God never will acknowledge any traitors or apostates. Any man who will betray the Catholics will betray you; and if he will betray me, he will betray you. All men are liars who say they are of the true Church without the revelations of Jesus Christ and the Priesthood of Melchisedek, which is after the order of the Son of God.

It is 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; but when men come out and build upon other men's foundations, they do it on their own responsibility, without authority from God; and when the floods come and the winds blow, their foundations will be found to be sand, and their whole fabric will crumble to dust.

Did I build on any other man's foundation?"

8. Brigham Young was approved of God

Brigham Young received the sealing power: “by the calling of [God’s] own voice” (citing JST-Gen. 14:29). Orson Hyde described a heavenly manifestation given to all the Twelve.

In the month of February, 1848, the Twelve Apostles met at Hyde Park, Pottawattamie County, Iowa, where a small Branch of the Church was established…. We were in prayer and council, communing together; and what took place on that occasion? The voice of God came from on high, and spake to the Council. Every latent feeling was aroused, and every heart melted. What did it say unto us? “Let my servant Brigham step forth and receive the full power of the presiding Priesthood in my Church and kingdom.” This was the voice of the Almighty unto us at Council Bluffs, before I removed to what was called Kanesville. It has been said by some that Brigham was appointed by the people, and not by the voice of God. I do not know that this testimony has often, if ever, been given to the masses of the people before; but I am one that was present, and there are others here that were also present on that occasion, and did hear and feel the voice from heaven, and we were filled with the power of God. This is my testimony; these are my declarations unto the Saints—unto the members of the kingdom of God in the last days, and to all people.
Orson Hyde, in Journal of Discourses 8:233–34 (7 October 1860)

God has this all figured out. The power of bringing the Book of Mormon forth surely shows the power of God in the restoration moving forward, a stone cut without hands.

Brigham Young was approved by God to continue after Joseph was killed. Sorry but this also shows God condoned polygamy, or Celestial Marriage.

[AI2.0]

"

Joseph Smith was the greatest victim of fraud and conspiracy of the last 500 years. Nothing like it in recorded history. He was simply lied about when something had to be done to justify ... Utah Mormon polygamy."

—President Israel A. Smith, grandson of Joseph the Martyr (Letter to Pamela Price,
September 17, 1956)

Israel Smith was the president and prophet of the RLDS church. Of course he would say something like this. Many of the theories promoted by Denver Snuffer regarding LDS church history are the same things the RLDS church claimed.

[AI2.0]

Here is a statement from one of the twelve apostles. Joseph Smith's own brother.

That the church funds have been misapplied, I have no hesitation in asserting, for of necessity I have been made acquainted with the fact, that several houses have been tilled up with women who have been secretly married to Brigham Young, H. C. Kimble [Heber C. Kimball], and Willard Richards—women with little children in their arms, who had no means of support except from the tithing funds.... I heard my brother Joseph declare before his death, that Brigham Young was a man, whose passions, if unrestrained, were calculated to make him the most licentious man in the world, and should the time ever come, said he, that this man should lead the church, he would certainly lead it to destruction. (William Smith, A Proclamation, Warsaw Signal, Warsaw, Illinois [October 1845], page 1, column 4; italics added)

Thomas, why are you quoting critics/ dissidents and expecting us to ignore their agendas? William Smith was feuding with the church leadership and he was later excommunicated, he even argued/came to blows with Joseph on occasions.

He's not a reliable source.

[Arenera]

Here is a statement from one of the twelve apostles. Joseph Smith's own brother.

That the church funds have been misapplied, I have no hesitation in asserting, for of necessity I have been made acquainted with the fact, that several houses have been tilled up with women who have been secretly married to Brigham Young, H. C. Kimble [Heber C. Kimball], and Willard Richards—women with little children in their arms, who had no means of support except from the tithing funds.... I heard my brother Joseph declare before his death, that Brigham Young was a man, whose passions, if unrestrained, were calculated to make him the most licentious man in the world, and should the time ever come, said he, that this man should lead the church, he would certainly lead it to destruction. (William Smith, A Proclamation, Warsaw Signal, Warsaw, Illinois [October 1845], page 1, column 4; italics added)

Thomas, why are you quoting critics/ dissidents and expecting us to ignore their agendas? William Smith was feuding with the church leadership and he was later excommunicated, he even argued/came to blows with Joseph on occasions.

He's not a reliable source.

William didn't like Sidney either, called his teachings Rigdonism.

Doesn't matter, Brigham Young was sustained by God.

[shadow]

So, you all suppose Joseph trusted and loved BY more than his own wife and children?

You think numbers equal God's approval. So why not join the Catholics or better yet the Muslims?

You claim (from a few pages ago) the LDS church is apostate because top leaders receive a stipend. Joseph Smith was paid by the church and he made sure church leaders from Bishops up to the president were all paid. Heck, his Dad was charging money for Patriarchal blessings as were all the other Patriarchs. Why claim to follow Joseph when, according to your standards, he was apostate? Why not find a church that isn't linked to such apostate behavior?

[Jesef]

"I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives.... I am innocent of all these charges.... What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers."

—Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6:410–411

That quote is commonly understood to be legalistically literal when he refers to "adultery" and/or "wives" - since it would not be considered adultery if the wives were sealed to him by his priesthood authority, i.e. given to him of the Lord, etc. Also, he is careful in his language to say "I can find only one". All of these he could publicly claim and still say he was "innocent".

Also, William Smith at that point, October 1845, was excommunicated by BY for apostasy and certainly had an axe to grind with BY & Twelve at that point. As much as the Laws and Williams had an axe to grind with Joseph when they published the Nauvoo Expositor, which exposed Joseph's secret polygamy, and the destroying of which press led to Carthage and death.

I do think it is telling that Joseph's family did not follow Brigham: Lucy Mack, Emma (& Joseph III), and William fell out with BY & Twelve too. But Mary Fielding Smith (& Joseph F.), Hyrum's widow, did follow.

The contemporary evidence for polygamy in Nauvoo is pretty overwhelming and cannot be seriously accused of being fabricated. The conspiracy/coverup theory falls apart under the weight of people who were obviously loyal to Joseph and firmly in the LDS mainstream movement at that point. Too close to Joseph, too close to the Twelve. The level of inconsistency and conspiracy that must be adopted to separate the Twelve from Joseph, his closest confidantes, is too great to take seriously.

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-cont ... 04_221.pdf

Authors who approach Nauvoo plural marriage are faced with many ambiguities and deficits in the historical record. Joseph Smith dictated only the revelation that is now Doctrine and Covenants 132, never expounded the topic in public except to deny its practice, and does not refer to it explicitly in his personal writings.2 The only polygamy insider and journal-writer friendly to the Prophet who left a contemporary record is William Clayton.3 Four men (John C. Bennett, Oliver Olney, William Law, and Joseph H. Jackson) left contemporary writings, but all were dis- senters who had their own, hostile perspectives on Joseph Smith and polygamy. In addition to these five men, a few sources con- temporary with the three years between Joseph's 1844 death and the 1847 trek west provide additional, but also limited, insights.4 Beyond these sources, everything learned about Joseph Smith's polygamy comes from later recollections, which are subject to im- portant limitations.

2. Two ofJoseph Smith's manuscripts deal with plural marriage but in a way that connects to polygamy only in context. The first is the ceremonial prayer that the Prophet dictated by which Newel K. Whitney united him with his daughter, Sarah Ann Whitney. H. Michael Marquardt, The Joseph Smith Revelations: Text and Commentary (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999), 315-16. The second is Joseph Smith, Letter to Nancy Rigdon, April 1842, "Happiness is the object and design of our existence" published in "Sixth Letter from John C. Bennett," SangamoJournal (Springfield Illinois), August 19, 1842; rpt., inJohn C. Bennett, The History ofthe Saints: Or an Expose of Joe Smith and Mormonism (Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842), 243-44.
3. See George D. Smith, ed., An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1995).
4. Among these are Willard Richards, Diary, 19 vols., and Brigham Young, Diary, both in LDS Church History Library. See also the Nauvoo Temple Record and Lisle Brown, ed., Nauvoo Sealings, Adoptions, and Anointings: A Comprehensive Register ofPersons Receiving LDS Temple Ordi- nances, 1841-1846 (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2006)

However, I recognize that most people are only going to see what they want to see here. Historical evidences, many of which are just hearsay now, are so easily dismissed (with a wave of the hand really). So it's easy to rewrite history or re-interpret almost any way you want, picking and choosing the evidence that fits your paradigm and invalidating historical sources based on perceived biases (e.g. dismissing all antagonists). And then argue endlessly in favor of your interpretation.

I don't know all the answers, but the weight of even the circumstantial evidence seems to favor heavily that Joseph was involved with and taught polygamy. The alternative really is a conspiracy theory - for example, "the William Clayton journals were doctored (he was in BY's pocket by then, end of story - conspiracy theory plausible)."

[underdog]

The Snufferites dismiss all of these post-1844 accounts & testimonies on the assumption/assertion that BY & Twelve were corrupt power/whore-mongers, and because they are "conveniently" belated. They consider these tainted non-evidences. They even try to incriminate them in the deaths of Joseph & Hyrum. But the irony is that Joseph trusted BY & Twelve completely, with the most sacred things, including the keys of the kingdom and the higher ordinances and the second anointing. So more than good enough for Joseph, but not for Snuffer & his followers.

Good morning, Jesef.

I apologize for not being able to respond. Busy weekend, including a whole day of special leadership training yesterday. Lunch was served! One thing I'll say I really liked about what was said, by the visiting authority, was that our sacrament meetings tend to be bereft of Jesus Christ. Often whole sacrament meetings will transpire with no reference to the Atonement. He was giving suggestions to us leaders on ways to encourage members to bring Christ and the Atonement into these meetings. Other things of note: 1) He said to read the Handbook. He said there are audio recordings of the Handbook and we should listen to it in the car. 2) He said we should address leaders by their titles so the members respect them and, 3) that if any members should speak frequently in Sacrament Meeting, it should be the EQ President and RS President, the reason given was so that members would respect them more since the EQ pres has the keys and since the RS president has delegated authority. 4) I liked that he said speakers should not read their talks. And that if they're going to quote a GC talk, it should only be a sentence or two. We have an epidemic problem of "regurgitalks" given. 5) Unfortunately he did make mention of the mandate coming from SLC that Priesthood and RS meetings the 3rd hour will be required to centers lesson on recent GC talks, which means even more regurgitalks in the future.

In summary, the main thrust of the training of the GA was to do things that would encourage members to respect leaders (by calling them by their titles and by having them speak more), to read and listen to the Handbook, to speak more of Jesus Christ in sacrament meetings ("like the Baptists do"...his words not mine), and to not read talks.

Jesef and AI2, you had some good posts, I'll plan on responding. Just haven't had time, and am working now.

You said, The Snufferites dismiss all of these post-1844 accounts & testimonies on the assumption/assertion that BY & Twelve were corrupt power/whore-mongers,

Not all, just the questionable, or hearsay, or often the belated ones. The victor writes history. Wouldn't you agree it's a much, much harder assignment to try to sift through the REWRITTEN history than it is to read and parrot the history they WANT you to read. This last sentence must seem totally wacked out to you, and yet the BoM warns of secret combinations. The BoM talks about plain and precious truths being removed from the Bible. But such "rewriting" couldn't happen to "official" church history? The lesser priesthood remained with the Church

and because they are "conveniently" belated. They consider these tainted non-evidences.

Yes, that's a good explanation. They are at least tainted.

They even try to incriminate them in the deaths of Joseph & Hyrum.

Yes, the BoM does this time and again. The warnings are replete. Enemies shall be those close to you. Tares/wheat. Wolves/wheat. The blood of the prophets shall cry against the Gentiles who are guilty of killing them. The Gentles include the Mormons. It's quite clear from Joseph's day that his enemies surrounded him. It was a constant battle. He was excommunicating left and right.

But the irony is that Joseph trusted BY & Twelve completely, with the most sacred things, including the keys of the kingdom and the higher ordinances and the second anointing. So more than good enough for Joseph, but not for Snuffer & his followers.

This is where you stake your claim - that Joseph gave his authority to people whom he trusted. And yet, did they trust and honor Joseph? Joseph has no descendants outside of Emma. He didn't practice polygamy (evidence of morality). Brigham did (evidence of strong immorality). Lots of teenage wives and lots of wives in their 20's. He married many of them in the same month. Joseph gave the priesthood to black men (evidence of no racism). But Brigham overturned this and preached against it (evidence of racism).

Those are two major black eyes for your belief/assertion that there was mutual trust. Joseph liked to think the best of others. He quickly forgave. He didn't hold grudges. He trusted others, maybe to a fault. So the supposed irony you try to point out perhaps just doesn't exist.

[Thomas]

I am not surprised by the reaction that my posts have received. Call Joseph's brother a liar, without evidence or knowledge of him. Well, you have to call a whole lot of people a liar to maintain that position. Some of them vouched for by God. Joseph Smith was the mouth piece of God, not the poligimists that followed after Brigham.

The problem is you all come from an assumption of what is true and reason everything from that assumption, instead of just looking for truth.