Upwardthought blog on the Denver Snuffer movment;

[Jonesy]

Laman and Lemeul had a testimony as well. Here it is:

22 And we know that the people who were in the land of Jerusalem were a righteous people; for they kept the statutes and judgments of the Lord, and all his commandments, according to the law of Moses; wherefore, we know that they are a righteous people; and our father hath judged them, and hath led us away because we would hearken unto his words; yea, and our brother is like unto him. And after this manner of language did my brethren murmur and complain against us.

Do you suppose the people of Jerusalem were all just so stupid that they couldn't see the obvious? Only two families listened to Lehi and decided to repent and some of them not willingly. Why do you suppose that is? It is because they thought they were righteous. These were the tithing paying, temple attending, religious people. These were the ones doing their home teaching and attending their meetings on a regular basis. God's chosen people who had leaders, called of God. Why would they listen to some nobody when they had leaders to guide them.

This is how it happens, every time. Very few ever heed the true prophets. The same story happens over and over throughout the scriptures. It is happening now. Will you be among the few that heed the true prophet or will you be like Laman and lemeul, having a testimony of how righteous you, your fellow church members and leaders are?

Thomas,

Good points. Thanks.

How do you respond to / explain the lack of public miracles or powerful manifestations of the Spirit surrounding Denver?

Wouldn't you expect some great and marvelous works to be performed by Denver to leave people without excuse? Why no such public miracles up to now?

When I had crossed back over to the church from the DS movement, one thing that really convinced me even more so was the writings of LDS Anarchist; in particular, his writings on the Davidic servant. I realized I knew nothing about what to look for in this "Josephite", as he calls him. If you read up on who this servant is, you'll realize it is definitely not Denver Snuffer. There's ample scripture to attest to that. And as Denver has already begun work reserved for the Josephite, he should be under scrutiny.

I know I've provided some links before. Have you read them? It's worth it, I promise.

https://ldsanarchy.wordpress.com/category/joseph-nephi/

[Thomas]

I have read some of his blog but you have to understand that the greatest scriptural minds of the time rejected Christ. They got all the signs wrong and they thought they knew them inside and out.

The Holy Spirit has shown me what Denver's role is and has used the scriptures to do it.

[Thomas]

I would also like to point out that Denver has published some prophecy back in 2006 that has already seen a partial fulfillment. He predicted that Europe would willingly surrender their homelands to the Muslims. Happening right before our eyes now but who knew back in 06?

That prophecy can be found in the book Nephi's Isaiah.

[Jonesy]

I would also like to point out that Denver has published some prophecy back in 2006 that has already seen a partial fulfillment. He predicted that Europe would surrender their homelands to the Muslims. Happening right before our eyes now but who knew back in 06?

So, you believe Denver Snuffer is the Davidic servant? You believe Denver matches what the scriptures prophecy about the servant?

[Thomas]

I would also like to point out that Denver has published some prophecy back in 2006 that has already seen a partial fulfillment. He predicted that Europe would surrender their homelands to the Muslims. Happening right before our eyes now but who knew back in 06?

So, you believe Denver Snuffer is the Davidic servant? You believe Denver matches what the scriptures prophecy about the servant?

I am not sure what to call him. Like I said, the experts thought they knew Christ didn't match up to the prophecies.

[Thomas]

Perhaps you can elaborate on why you think Denver doesn't match up. I don't have time to read that whole post right now. Its bedtime.

[Thomas]

So I read a little bit of it. I think there are some leaps of logic going on. I will read the rest tomorrow.

[Seek the Truth]

Thomas, you should do a little more research. Joseph & Hurum were President & VP/AP, Sidney was 1stC, Amasa Lyman 2ndC, when J & H were killed. This was a legitimate succession crisis with Hyrum dead too. Lyman felt the FP was dissolved and supported the Twelve with BY as President leading. He went West with his 7 wives. Sidney did not have the right to assume leadership by himself as 1stC. With the Twelve intact and the FP shattered by half, it makes sense they would preside, also since JS had given them the keys of the kingdom. Lyman's support says A LOT too. Hence the vote/common-consent, including Lyman's vote. Your choosing a Denver interpretation of the history that doesn't fit all the evidence.

I did not know that about Lyman. Thanks for sharing.
I see the succession as a mess, it seems that everyone accepted Hyrum as next in line (in accordance with the D&C that allows the President to pick his successor). With both gone (and Samuel too within a month), and just given the whole situation, it must have been a distressing and chaotic, a very emotional time. I can't imagine how I would have reacted had I been there.
I will point out one thing, the "last charge meeting", "the keys of the kingdom", and "Council of Fifty" deserve a proper place in regards to the succession discussion.

It's pretty easy. You just pray.

[Seek the Truth]

Unfortunately, Joseph didn't actually say that...

Lets see what joseph smith said:

That man who rises up to condemn other, 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. TPJS pg 157

Joseph Smith is a prophet. Denver Snuffer did exactly as Joseph predicted would happen. He started finding fault with the Church, and apostasized. It sounds like you are in the process or already did. Joseph Smith gave me this great key to thwart the devil and it has served me well.

This particular quote is cited as follows:

History of the Church, 3:385; from a discourse given by Joseph Smith on July 2, 1839, in Montrose, Iowa; reported by Wilford Woodruff and Willard Richards.

Therefore, this quote is cited from three sources:
History of the Church by B.H. Roberts;
Wilford Woodruff
Willard Richards

The quote does indeed appear in Source 1, History of the Church, but that's not the original source. History of the Church simply lifted the quote from the other two sources, as follows:

First is Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, where we find the lengthy notes Woodruff took during the meeting in question. Trouble is, Woodruff's Journal completely omits this quote, though it directly (and without interruption) supplies the rest of the sermon used in History of the Church.

The other source is Willard Richards' Pocket Companion, which does contain this quote.

OK, so got that so far? Woodruff omits this paragraph from the sermon. Richards has this paragraph in the middle of the sermon. Woodruff, no. Richards, yes.

Woodruff, who was present at the meeting in question, is considered the most reliable source because he recorded the notes of the meeting while in attendance. But this quote does not appear in that record. The sermon before and after this quote appears there uninterrupted, but the quoted paragraph is completely absent.

Richards' Pocket Companion is actually a collection of material Willard Richards copied from other sources. Therefore, though this material appears there, Richards was not actually present when Joseph gave this sermon, and Richards copied the material from elsewhere, most likely Wilford Woodruff’s journal. As to how the quote in question got into Richards' Pocket Companion while NOT appearing in the original record is a mystery. Nobody knows where it came from. It is therefore hearsay and not a historical record.

We are left to wonder where Richards obtained the quote and why he stuck it in the middle of a sermon he didn’t hear Joseph give. There is no original source that contains this quotation, and Richards was on a mission in England when Joseph was supposed to have said it.

The quote's dubious provenance is not helped by its doctrinal difficulties. For example, scripture is replete with true prophets, called of God, who did indeed "rise up to condemn others, finding fault with the church, saying they are out of the way." Some obvious examples are as follows:
Noah
Abraham
Moses
Lehi
Jacob
Benjamin
Abinadi
Alma the Younger
Samuel the Lamanite
John the Baptist
Jesus Christ
Joseph Smith

In fact, you can pretty much summarize the mission of any true prophet as calling people to repentance. (D&C 11:9) How is this not "condemn[ing] others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way?"

Therefore, since Joseph Smith himself was "on the high road to apostasy" if this quote were true, it is utterly preposterous that Joseph Smith ever said this. Nobody quite knows where this quote came from, but it wasn't Joseph Smith. Adrian Larsen.

Nice deception. By not including the source of this you have engaged in sleight of hand.

The fact is Willard Richards is a legitimate historical source and President Smith's statement is consistent with all scripture wherein murmuring against the leadership is negative and punished. Calling a people to repentance is not the same as criticizing Church leadership, steadying the ark with your own hand.

So another loss for Snufferism.

[Seek the Truth]

And once again, for those caught up with this last time issue, there has been no new dispensing of the priesthood. It has remained much like it remained with Alma. He did not need a new dispensing.

Yeah not really. Historically Snufferites have claimed the Priesthood is lost. That Priesthood can only be obtained by the voice of God, which doesn't happen to anyone in the gentile Church that relies on a phony laying on of hands. Now when confronted with the overwhelming statements that Joseph Smith taught there would be a last dispensation that would not fail, the narrative changes, the goal posts shift, or some people call it lying.

Either way by your own words you have destroyed Snufferism with an enterprise destroying contradiction. You used to say the priesthood was lost, now you are saying it wasn't. You have contradicted yourself.

But the bigger problem you have is whether you know it or not you have you guys are claiming that the keys of office of the President are lost. If this is the case Denver cannot obtain them unless God gives them to him, and he has not claimed that and indicated otherwise. In fact he has indicated that such things are not necessary. He teaches a gospel foreign to the scriptures.

So you have a prophet/President with no keys. You guys are setting out to build temple with no keys and no President, and surely the Lord God will do nothing without a Prophet. Good job.

[Seek the Truth]

I would also like to point out that Denver has published some prophecy back in 2006 that has already seen a partial fulfillment. He predicted that Europe would willingly surrender their homelands to the Muslims. Happening right before our eyes now but who knew back in 06?

The entire conservative movement in the USA :)) :)) :)) :)) .

[Seek the Truth]

It is all about Christ Arenera. That is Denver's message and my message. You must know Christ to have eternal life.

Also the message of the Catholic Church. And the LDS Church. And Baptists. Lutherans too. Etc.

[Seek the Truth]

Nice try but historical evidence doesn't back that up as we can see the body of the priesthood did choose until Brigham. How could the quorum choose themselves?

You have posted no historical evidence.

At all.

[Seek the Truth]

I'm guessing "the humble followers of Christ" will be plucked from among all peoples, including LDS and remnant.

The contenders be damned.

Not according to D&C 76.

[Seek the Truth]

Can something really be called a "coup d'etat" if that person or body has the most legitimate claim on the board? The Twelve had the numbers (at least 9/13), the quorum equal in authority & power (per D&C 107, the 1835 D&C version), the keys, support from 1 of the 2 surviving FP members, and then the common consent vote. Sidney was unable to persuade the body. How is that a coup?

Jesef,

Do you hear what you're arguing? The insanity? The gross unrighteous Dominion?

You are attempting to claim your side is right because you have the badge. That is so evil and disgusting, I cannot believe you are trying to make that argument.

No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. Those are the Lord's words. You know that. You should know better.

Do you have a learning disability?

[Seek the Truth]

It quite interesting that you and Finrock seem to cling to this scripture and use it out of context, while ignoring a mountain of other scriptures.

What do you think it means? If it means what you seem to be implying it means than explain to me how the priesthood wasn't lost when Brigham Young refused to allow the First Presidency to run the church.

Err, just above you claim the Church does indeed have the priesthood and there is no need for a new dispensation. Here you say the opposite.

You have contradicted yourself. Fatally.

[Seek the Truth]

That man who rises up to condemn other, 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. TPJS pg 157

Even if you don't allow yourself to believe Joseph never said that, it turns out that when you read the full context, the Writer was warning apostles and seventies and leaders in general that “when they rise up in the church” (in its ranks) and “find fault with the church” (its lowly lay members), they (the leaders) are on the high road to apostasy. What a difference this makes. And yet this quote has been used to teach the exact opposite intended meaning for many years.

Nope

[Seek the Truth]

I doubt many LDS have ever paid close attention to this bit of scripture. What it being said here is that Isaiah is a prophecy directed at us, the modern LDS people and Christ commands us to study it.

Isaiah 28:
1 Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower, which are on the head of the fat valleys of them that are overcome with wine!

7 ¶ But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.

8 For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean.

9 ¶ Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Isaiah compares us to drunkards that eat vomit and excrement. Why? Because there is no fresh spiritual food. We listen to general conference where they regurgitate past conferences. Nothing new is ever revealed. They just quote each other and past members of the 15. Never any fresh food from God. No one quotes God. Then we are expected to base sacrament talks, priesthood and relief society lessons on the regurgitated conference talks. In other words vomit and excrement. Food that has already been eaten and spit back out a hundred times.

Who will be weaned from the milk? The rotten regurgitated milk.

Of all the poor scriptural "interpretations" Ive come across on LDSFF this has to be the most ignorant.

For example do you happen to know what year Isaiah was written in? I mean, there are some bigger clues, but we'll start here.

[Seek the Truth]

You know. Jesus Christ himself preached against the High Priest of the church.

And? The jews were apostate and had no keys. Jesus Christ was the high priest on earth at that time according to TPJS.

I guess a big problem among LDS is that they know what gets taught in church but they mostly don't know scriptures.

When you point a finger 3 point back at you.

[inho]

I would also like to point out that Denver has published some prophecy back in 2006 that has already seen a partial fulfillment. He predicted that Europe would willingly surrender their homelands to the Muslims. Happening right before our eyes now but who knew back in 06?

The entire conservative movement in the USA :)) :)) :)) :)) .

And we Europeans who at that time had to deal with the refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan.

[jdt]

Can something really be called a "coup d'etat" if that person or body has the most legitimate claim on the board? The Twelve had the numbers (at least 9/13), the quorum equal in authority & power (per D&C 107, the 1835 D&C version), the keys, support from 1 of the 2 surviving FP members, and then the common consent vote. Sidney was unable to persuade the body. How is that a coup?

In my opinion, this was a reasonable approach given the situation.
I would claim that something more resembling a "coup" occurred over time. Maybe not any one of these in isolation deserve the term but combined represent real change:
Stake High Councils with authority equal to the First Presidency, 12 Apostles, and Seventy -> Gone. Definitely authority less than those quorums.
Seventy being equal in authority to the First Presidency and 12 Apostles -> Gone. Definitely authority less than those quorums. (A person could make the claim that the Seventy were to assist the Apostles in missionary work. But then again, neither the Apostles nor Seventy really lead out missionary work, but are principally involved in managing the church which was supposed to be more the role of the Stake High Councils)
An independent Relief Society (where the President of the Church and Apostles left the room during important decisions) -> Disbanded then reinstated decades later with a model where the sisters at every level report to Priesthood holders.
The office of Presiding Patriarch (sometimes seen as a greater calling than President of the Church, at least once the one to ordain the President) -> Reduced in role often then disbanded
The Kingdom of God (Council of Fifty) -> Gone
Meaningful Conferences where important items could be discussed and agreed on by upon by church members at large -> Gone. Important decisions at every level are made in closed door meetings of Priesthood key holders.

And in every case, power has been pushed to Apostles and First Presidency. Personally I would call this a coup. It took a long time for sure, but it represents a significantly different organization.

[shadow]

Can something really be called a "coup d'etat" if that person or body has the most legitimate claim on the board? The Twelve had the numbers (at least 9/13), the quorum equal in authority & power (per D&C 107, the 1835 D&C version), the keys, support from 1 of the 2 surviving FP members, and then the common consent vote. Sidney was unable to persuade the body. How is that a coup?

Jesef,

Do you hear what you're arguing? The insanity? The gross unrighteous Dominion?

You are attempting to claim your side is right because you have the badge. That is so evil and disgusting, I cannot believe you are trying to make that argument.

No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood. Those are the Lord's words. You know that. You should know better.

Do you have a learning disability?

That's Snufferism- a mental disorder. Just look at how they still try to defend Snuffer's refusal to attend his court. He was there at the church. He alone refused to attend his own court. It wasn't his families court, it was his and he refused. Joseph Smith said that reason alone will warrant an excommunication and he didn't have kind words for those who refused to attend their courts. The mental gymnastics underdog uses to defend Snuffer is quite amazing. Snuffer admits he was there. He admits that he's the one who refused to enter because it wasn't on HIS terms which included letting his mouthy daughter be a part of it. It's quite simple for most people to understand. This is foundational as this is the reason Snuffer uses to claim he wrested the keys. But even if the brethren refused to reinstate him and were wrong about it, Joseph Smith said that the revelations state that that still isn't enough to lose the keys. Then as you noted above, Thomas claims the church lost the keys with Brigham Young so how could Snuffster wrest the keys from President Monson?? What must be going on in their minds will probably require professional help. And then with Joseph's last dream- Joseph said the church gave him the barn but underdog claims the barn is the gospel. The church didn't give Joseph the gospel, if anything Joseph gave the church the gospel. And then the mental gymnastics they use to interpret scripture to mean the church and the prophet went into apostasy (Isaiah's drunkards of Ephraim) but then believe their church and prophet are somehow exempt from those prophecies?? Clearly they don't understand the scriptures. It's gotta be hard being in the Remnant church of Snufferism. No wonder why they're so bitter that they have to come here to a pro LDS site and attack us and the Lord's Church. They're not happy where they are so they attack us for it.

[Arenera]

Read Abraham and understand.

Lehi was one of many prophets at Jerusalem and the people really didn't like them and many were killed. Lehi was warned to leave and take his family into the wilderness.

A future prophet was sent back to Jerusalem with his brothers to get the scriptures. Young Nephi (see Abraham) keep trying until he got the scriptures.

Nephi was commanded of God to keep the scriptures and sacred writings safe, Nephi commanded his posterity to do the same. For 1,000 years the scriptures and writings were protected and another Prophet and Son (see Abraham) compiled plates and secured them for our day. 1,000 years.

Joseph (see Abraham) was an unlearned boy who was selected by God to translate those plates that the Nephites (God) had prepared for us. The Book of Mormon is a precious and priceless gift from God.

God knew that Joseph would be killed. What did he do? He had prepared others to continue on. Brigham Young was the first in line (see Abraham).

So yours and Denver's story need an apostasy, but guess what? It didn't happen. The Church is led by Christ, there are apostate members, there are members who have left, and there are some members who fight against the Church, leaders and members today. This is your camp.

Also, it is easy to tell where the remnants are because they don't preach Christ but fight against the Church. That is what the adversary does.

[investigator]

Seek the truth wrote...

Nice deception. By not including the source of this you have engaged in sleight of hand. If you had actually read the post you would have noted the reference to the author of the post at the end... Adrian Larson.

The fact is Willard Richards is a legitimate historical source and President Smith's statement is consistent with all scripture wherein murmuring against the leadership is negative and punished. Calling a people to repentance is not the same as criticizing Church leadership, steadying the ark with your own hand. If you had actually went to the source you would have understood that the instruction was to the leaders of the church not the members.

So another loss for Snufferism. Calling people offensive names does nothing to help you persuade anyone to your way of belief. Much like if I were to call your belief Monsonism, which, by the way, I would never do.

My response in Red.

[Thomas]

And once again, for those caught up with this last time issue, there has been no new dispensing of the priesthood. It has remained much like it remained with Alma. He did not need a new dispensing.

Yeah not really. Historically Snufferites have claimed the Priesthood is lost. That Priesthood can only be obtained by the voice of God, which doesn't happen to anyone in the gentile Church that relies on a phony laying on of hands. Now when confronted with the overwhelming statements that Joseph Smith taught there would be a last dispensation that would not fail, the narrative changes, the goal posts shift, or some people call it lying.

Either way by your own words you have destroyed Snufferism with an enterprise destroying contradiction. You used to say the priesthood was lost, now you are saying it wasn't. You have contradicted yourself.

But the bigger problem you have is whether you know it or not you have you guys are claiming that the keys of office of the President are lost. If this is the case Denver cannot obtain them unless God gives them to him, and he has not claimed that and indicated otherwise. In fact he has indicated that such things are not necessary. He teaches a gospel foreign to the scriptures.

So you have a prophet/President with no keys. You guys are setting out to build temple with no keys and no President, and surely the Lord God will do nothing without a Prophet. Good job.

Thanks for the comments. I must remark though that most of what you post is what I call strawman. You build a false narrative so you can knock it down.

I really doubt you will ever accept what's going on with all this and it is fine with me. My concern is that people who run across this should take a look for themselves and see what Snuffer actually has said and it is not what you have described.

There is a difference between priesthood and the fullness of the priesthood. Snuffer has explained it fully but I doubt you have taken to time to learn what he says because it much easier to just make up false assumptions and then destroy them.