Remnant General Conference this weekend

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
Post Reply
underdog
captain of 100
Posts: 495

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by underdog »

shadow wrote: September 8th, 2017, 3:36 pm Denver refused to attend his court. Arguing otherwise is silly. We all know it, even Denver knows it. He was there at the church but he refused to enter the room. What a spoiled brat. Talk about prideful- that's Snuffer to a "T".
Okay, I'll let you have the last word. I rest on my comments above.

User avatar
lemuel
Operating Thetan
Posts: 993

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by lemuel »

inho wrote: September 8th, 2017, 2:44 pm
underdog wrote: September 8th, 2017, 2:31 pm Okay gang, here you go
The most straightforward interpretation of the dream would be that there is no allegorical message hidden in it and Joseph just dreamt about his old farm in Kirtland. (I'm not saying this interpretation is the correct one, nor that I necessarily interpret it that way.) In your interpretation, is there any significance that the farm was in Kirtland? That seems to be an unnecessary detail.
I suppose a reason why Kirtland might be the scene is because some good stuff happened there--a temple was built and visited by Jesus.

Somewhere before Nauvoo, something was lost:
D&C 124:28 For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.
It's possible that this fulness of the priesthood was had in Kirtland. And, depending on your point of view, this was regained in 1846 with the Nauvoo temple, or it wasn't.

Anyway, that's one possible reason why Kirtland was the scene of the dream.

User avatar
inho
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3286
Location: in a galaxy far, far away

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by inho »

underdog wrote: September 8th, 2017, 3:26 pm They simply ignore the prophecies.

One example out of hundreds:
10 And the blood of the saints (Joseph and Hyrum Smith's) shall cry from the ground against them.

11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.

12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
The reason that we have focused on the last dream so much is that at least I cannot remember that it would have been discussed on the forum thoroughly before. Some of the other points you have bring up, such as Poelman's talk, have been discussed ad nauseam here. I think that the passage from 2 Ne 28 has been discussed before, but let me still point out verse 3:
For it shall come to pass in that day that the churches which are built up, and not unto the Lord, when the one shall say unto the other: Behold, I, I am the Lord’s; and the others shall say: I, I am the Lord’s; and thus shall every one say that hath built up churches, and not unto the Lord
When Joseph Smith founded the church, was it built unto the Lord or not? Can you apply that chapter to LDS church?

underdog
captain of 100
Posts: 495

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by underdog »

inho wrote: September 9th, 2017, 2:15 am
underdog wrote: September 8th, 2017, 3:26 pm They simply ignore the prophecies.

One example out of hundreds:
10 And the blood of the saints (Joseph and Hyrum Smith's) shall cry from the ground against them.

11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.

12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
The reason that we have focused on the last dream so much is that at least I cannot remember that it would have been discussed on the forum thoroughly before. Some of the other points you have bring up, such as Poelman's talk, have been discussed ad nauseam here. I think that the passage from 2 Ne 28 has been discussed before, but let me still point out verse 3:
For it shall come to pass in that day that the churches which are built up, and not unto the Lord, when the one shall say unto the other: Behold, I, I am the Lord’s; and the others shall say: I, I am the Lord’s; and thus shall every one say that hath built up churches, and not unto the Lord
When Joseph Smith founded the church, was it built unto the Lord or not? Can you apply that chapter to LDS church?
Inho,

That's a good question you ask.

Real quick, could you clarify this sentence. I don't understand what you're saying: "The reason that we (Who? People on this blog?) have focused on the last dream so much (you HAVE focused on it?) is that at least I cannot remember that it would have been discussed on the forum thoroughly before."

About 2 Nephi 28:3, my thoughts would be this:

1) First, when the Lord prophecies, he doesn't speak linearly. Truth is circumscribed in one great whole. In other words, He bounces around between past, present and future (which makes perfect sense if your reality is past/present/future, thus making it hard for us "linear" humans to grasp, who live in the 'present'.
2) That being said, we know that almost IMMEDIATELY the Church was condemned by the Lord. It was founded April 6, 1830, and then in Sept 1831 the Lord said the Church was under condemnation, stating it was because of vanity and unbelief (DC 84:55). And who knows when the condemnation actually started because he says in verse 54 "in times past" your "minds...have been darkened because of unbelief and because" the members treated lightly His commandments and the BoM (which was not received ever as a covenant...until this past Sunday).
3) Verse 2 from 2 Nephi 28 states that the "book" will be of great worth esp to the remnant of the house of Israel. When verse 3 comes along, it's a safe bet to assume the Lord is NOT talking about the brief period between 4/6/1830 and 9/22/1831. That would be obnoxiously arrogant to think He's referring to that narrow window of time.
Last edited by underdog on September 9th, 2017, 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
inho
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3286
Location: in a galaxy far, far away

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by inho »

underdog wrote: September 9th, 2017, 8:11 am
Real quick, could you clarify this sentence. I don't understand what you're saying: "The reason that we (Who? People on this blog?) have focused on the last dream so much (you HAVE focused on it?) is that at least I cannot remember that it would have been discussed on the forum thoroughly before."
At one time, you listed 8 points, and the last dream was just one of them. At least I found the dream more interesting topic than the others since there hasn't been much, if all, discussion about it. I believe this is the reason why there have been so many posts about the dream in this thread.

User avatar
inho
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3286
Location: in a galaxy far, far away

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by inho »

underdog wrote: September 9th, 2017, 8:11 am About 2 Nephi 28:3, my thoughts would be this:
I thought your interpretation would be something like that. As you can guess, mine is different.

User avatar
investigator
captain of 100
Posts: 689

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by investigator »

AI2.0 wrote: September 8th, 2017, 2:20 pm My responses in blue: My responses in red to your blue responses.
investigator wrote: September 7th, 2017, 11:26 am AI2 Wrote the following. I will respond in red but I will support what I say with scripture.
I tuned into the conference to see what was going on, listened to a couple of talks, watched their sacrament service. Here's some things that I think are 'pleasing to the carnal mind' which Denver Snuffer and joining his Remnant offer to LDS.
First, everyone is dressed like they are at a picnic, shorts, t-shirts, many women in short shorts and tank tops. Very casual. It is pleasing to the carnal mind to no longer have to worry about dressing modestly by hiding garments (they don't wear them) and no need to be oncomfortable in a suit and tie or a dress. Does the Lord require a shirt and tie for proper worship or is that a tradition of men? 2 Nephi 28:13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.

Do you think that dressing as if you are going to play frisbie, soccer or paint a fence--when you have more appropriate clothing for taking part in worship services, is the way to prove to God that you aren't vain and materialistic? One reason why, when you were LDS, you were encouraged to dress in your better clothing(no one said expensive, just 'better' than what we might wear for a casual day at the beach, if we have this. If not, then we come in whatever we can) for church was as a sign of respect to our Heavenly Father. We try to bring a spirit of reverence into the Chapel with us, that will help us remember whose house we are in and invites the spirit. I'm certain the people in the Remnant group had 'better' clothing, but they chose not to wear it because I think that they are childishly throwing off every teaching that they felt constrained them or that they did not like when they were LDS. And, please don't accuse the LDS people of 'robbing the poor' when they pay tithing, fast offering, temple fund, humanitarian aid, perpetual education fund, etc. while the Remnant people have rejected these things instead leaving to the individual to decide if they feel like throwing a couple of bucks into the fellowship kittie every once in awhile.

Why do you insist on name calling? Can't you engage in an adult conversation without stooping to that. You know not of what your speak. "Remnant people" pay tithing in accordance with the same revelations that you do. Has anyone in the remnant chastised you for how you pay tithing. No, because how can anyone but you know how much tithing you pay, but you. Just as you don't know how much tithing "remnant people" pay.


Then there is their version of Sacrament with it big hunks of Artisan bread and a healthy serving of wine to go with it. No more having to worry about the word of wisdom. They can drink all they want, it's no longer a commandment. That's definitely pleasing to the carnal mind. Did the Lord break the bread into tiny pieces or did they eat until they were full? "3 Ne 18:3-4 And when the disciples had come with bread and wine, he took of the bread and brake and blessed it; and he gave unto the disciples and commanded that they should eat. 4 And when they had eaten and were filled, he commanded that they should give unto the multitude. 5 And when the multitude had eaten and were filled, he said unto the disciples:" Is the partaking of wine prescribed in the word of wisdom? Why yes it is ... D&C 89: 5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him. 6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.

Why are you all so hung up on drinking wine? Just what is this about? More teenage rebellion on the part of some of you? And why quote me scripture when I can quote it right back at you! 'For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattererth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory..." (D&C 27:2) It doesn't matter. Did you get that???? Since it's obvious that water was just fine, why do you all have to break the word or wisdom so you can drink wine? In my opinion, it's just another example of the nature of break off sects that they are similar to rebellious teenagers in thumbing their noses at their parent church. Are you all going to go out and get tattoos now too?One of the mormon leaked documents said that some fellowship groups were drinking the 'sacrament' wine till they were drunk, something that is warned of in 1 Corinthians 11:20-22. It's obvious that the LDS version of Sacrament is honoring the cautions given by Paul, while some Remnant followers, quick to throw off the shackles of what they felt was a too strict prohibition against alcohol, are now over doing it like rebellious teens out partying since they are no longer under their parent's thumb.

Well the Lord was an is pretty hung up on having wine for the sacrament. Every time he taught it He instructed to use wine. In the limited instance that you mention Section 27. The Lord was warning Joseph so he and his friends did not get poisoned. He did not intend for the perpetual use of water for the sacrament. If fact, he informs us in the same revelation that when he comes again and partakes of the sacrament it will be with wine. Why did he include that statement if he didn't care what we use for the sacrament. Additionally, we can be further informed by what Joseph actually did in response to the revelation. Did they have water for the sacrament that day? Is there any recorded instance when Joseph had water for the sacrament? No. Here is the account from the Joseph Smith Papers.

Date: August, September 1830
Place: Harmony, Pennsylvania
JosephSmithPapers.org
Several times during summer 1830, Joseph Smith attempted to confirm recently baptized church members at Colesville, New York, without success [due to persecution in Colesville]. In August, Newel and Sally Knight traveled from Colesville to visit Joseph Smith and Emma Smith in Harmony, Pennsylvania. Joseph Smith decided to perform their confirmation and partake of the Lord’s Supper at the same time. When he set out to obtain wine for the sacrament service, he reported an encounter with a heavenly messenger that resulted in this revelation. (Revelation, circa August 1830 [D&C 27], JosephSmithPapers.org)
Joseph Smith (President)
Early in the month of August Newel Knight and his wife paid us a visit at my place in Harmony, Pennsylvania; and as neither his wife nor mine had been as yet confirmed, it was proposed that we should confirm them, and partake together of the Sacrament, before he and his wife should leave us. In order to prepare for this I set out to procure some wine for the occasion, but had gone only a short distance when I was met by a heavenly messenger, and received the following revelation, the first four paragraphs of which were written at this time [vs. 1-4, and parts of 5, 14, 15 and 18], and the remainder in the September following. (History of the Church, 1:106)
Joseph Smith (President)
In obedience to the above commandment, we prepared some wine of our own making, and held our meeting, consisting only of five, viz., Newel Knight and his wife, myself and my wife, and John Whitmer. We partook together of the Sacrament, after which we confirmed these two sisters into the Church, and spent the evening in a glorious manner. The Spirit of the Lord was poured out upon us, we praise the Lord God, and rejoiced exceedingly. (History of the Church, 1:108)

Further more, did the church under the "prophets" from 1830 until prohibition use water for the sacrament. No. In fact Brigham Young called church members to establish a wine mission to provide wine for the sacrament in the church. You can read all about it here https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/003-74-84.pdf . Evidently from Brigham until Heber the church was pretty hung up on wine for the sacrament as well. You opine that partaking of wine for the sacrament is against the word of wisdom. However, as you conveniently ignore, the word of wisdom, Section 89, tells us to use wine for the sacrament, there is much to learn about the atonement symbolism by making wine. Lastly, but there are certainly more reasons. When the Lord comes again there will be a wedding feast. Served at that wedding feast will be "wine on the lees well refined" served (See D&C 58:8). If you intend on being part of that feast you should be prepared to drink that type of wine. I would wager you don't know what lees are.


And then, in the Remnant, you don't have to pay one tenth of your income to the church--just throw in a couple of bucks if you decide to attend a fellowship meeting. That's pleasing to the carnal mind, not having to give the Lord any of your money. These people just covenanted to obey the scriptures in which this is included...D&C 119:5 Verily I say unto you, it shall come to pass that all those who gather unto the land of Zion shall be tithed of their surplus properties, and shall observe this law, or they shall not be found worthy to abide among you. And this... JST Genesis 14: 36 And this Melchizedek, having thus established righteousness, was called the king of heaven by his people, or, in other words, the King of peace.37 And he lifted up his voice, and he blessed Abram, being the high priest, and the keeper of the storehouse of God;38 Him whom God had appointed to receive tithes for the poor.

So are you suggesting that you don't have to pay tithing until Zion is established? Sorry, but that's not how it works, if you aren't a tithe paying people now, how can you ever expect to establish Zion. I can't believe I'm actually having to argue the Commandment of Paying Tithing with a supposed LDS member/former member. " I just quoted the same scripture that establishes how you pay tithing. I did no say they do not pay tithing. "Will a man rob Gob?
Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say: Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
Ye are cursed with a curse, for ye have robbed me, even this whole nations. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse that there may be meat in my house;" (3 Ne 24:8-10). Those were the Lord's words to the Nephites--he made sure they had them since they did not have the writings of Malachi. If you all still follow the book of Mormon (and Snuffer hasn't excised that part) you should know that you all need to pay a proper tithing. One of the most egregious things that Denver Snuffer has done is teach people to ROB GOD and feel justified in doing so. But, I don't think it will be on Denver's head for those who know better. Those who were LDS members and lived the commandment of Tithing at one time and yet, stopped paying it and instead donate money to their fellowship and rationalize that it's the same thing-they will be held accountable. It's not the same thing and deep down, they know it and will be judged accordingly.
Snuffer teaches to pay tithing in accordance with revelation.


And of course, there is the relaxed situation of the fellowships and no organized church, I bet a lot of those former LDS enjoy not having to fulfill callings, not having to do visiting and hometeaching, not having to worry about missionary work or service projects or even having to take time away from recreating to attend the Temple and of course, not having to live worthily to enter the temple. I bet they enjoy not having to worry about going to church on Sundays. It's a pretty casual, relaxed 'church' that they can take on their terms. That's pleasing to the carnal mind. The standard of obedience for these "remnant" people is much higher than for those who trust in the arm of the flesh and wait upon a man to assign the what to do. They are required to connect with the Lord and do what he tells them to do. D&C 84:44 For you shall live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God.

You're kidding right? So, their 'standards' are high like John Doe's standards? A man who believed he received personal revelation that he could commit adultery and fornication at will? Those standards? Was it 'the Lord' who told Doe to do that? I'm sure he thought so. How about the woman who claimed that she was told to have an affair? You think her standards were higher than LDS because she's listening to the voices in her head? Really, you are going to go there. Perhaps we should discuss all of the bishops who have been imprisoned for child molestation>
Sorry, but so far, the bar has been set pretty low among Remnant people and until they start to show how their 'religion' is so much harder to live than the one they abandoned, the answer is obvious. Their standards of conduct are lower. Their level of sacrifice is lower. Perhaps you should read the Lectures on Faith, which has been re-canonized, and all have covenanted to obey, regarding sacrifice and then tell me thier standard of sacrifice is lower. and then Their need to discipline themselves, live by the Lord's commandments (they've already thrown out one of them...how many more will it be?) and serve others, is lower.


And there's the doctrines. No need to worry about what the Prophet teaches (of course this is changing--as Denver Snuffer starts to exert more control, I believe Remnant people are going to have to be more inclined to follow what Snuffer says), since Snuffer used to teach that you go directly to Christ and only concern yourself with what you personally receive. That's pretty pleasing to the carnal mind, IMO. You attribute things to Snuffer that he does not teach. There has been no revocation of the requirement to connect with the Lord and become a Zion people/person. None who have not done that will be admitted to Zion. Snuffer teaches to heed the words of the Prophets who direct you to Christ. There is a prophesied third Zion that will be brought about prior to the Second Coming of the Lord. There has not been a Zion that was not lead by a true messenger i.e. Enoch, the city of Enoch, Melchizedek, the city of Salem. Heeding true messengers and conversing with the Lord through the veil are still requirements to ascend back into the presence of the Lord.

Denver Snuffer is changing his teachings as he goes along. And it remains to be seen if the Remnant even want to be a Zion people.
So far, it seems to be something...in the future. Also, Denver Snuffer is now teaching to heed HIS WORDS. Maybe someone needs to remind the Remnant people that they don't need Snuffer to teach them how to connect with the Lord. They don't need him. But, he needs them now, because with his new ambitions--to be a 'Davidic Servant' and lead a people, he now needs them to follow his teachings and requirements. And he got a bunch of them to 'covenant' that they'd do that this last weekend.


And the lies Snuffer has taught have to do with his revisionist versions of Church history and his accusations against those he has snidely called 'the proud descendants of Nauvoo'. Our own scriptures testify of the wickedness of Nauvoo progenitors which the church refuses to address or explain. Here are a couple of verses describing our "blessed honored pioneers" 6 Behold, I say unto you, there were jarrings, and contentions, and envyings, and strifes, and lustful and covetous desires among them; therefore by these things they polluted their inheritances. 7 They were slow to hearken unto the voice of the Lord their God; therefore, the Lord their God is slow to hearken unto their prayers, to answer them in the day of their trouble.8 In the day of their peace they esteemed lightly my counsel; but, in the day of their trouble, of necessity they feel after me....For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.

FYI, this is how the "lord' supposedly through Denver SNuffer, described the 'blessed, honored' Remnant 'pioneers' of this movement in his 12 page prelude to covenant:

For you to unite I must admonish and instruct you, for my will is to have you love one
another. As people you lack the ability to respectfully disagree among one another. You are
as Paul and Peter whose disagreements resulted in jarring and sharp contentions.
Nevertheless they both loved me and I loved them. You must do better.
I commend your diligent labor, and your desire to repent and recover the scriptures
containing the covenant I offer for the last days. For this purpose I caused the Book of
Mormon to come forth. I commend those who have participated, as well as those who have
offered words of caution, for I weigh the hearts of men and many have intended well,
although they have spoken poorly. Wisdom counsels mankind to align their words with their
hearts, but mankind refuses to take counsel from Wisdom.
Nevertheless, there have been sharp disputes between you that should have been avoided. I
speak these words to reprove you that you may learn, not to upbraid you so that you mourn.
I want my people to have understanding.
Yes, thank you for quoting that.


Maybe people who live in glass houses should be careful about throwing stones.
[/color]

There's a starter for you.
There is a starter for you.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Remnant General Conference this weekend

Post by AI2.0 »

I'm going to use green to respond, your use of red again made it hard for me to see your newer responses.
investigator wrote: September 9th, 2017, 11:20 am
AI2.0 wrote: September 8th, 2017, 2:20 pm My responses in blue: My responses in red to your blue responses.
investigator wrote: September 7th, 2017, 11:26 am AI2 Wrote the following. I will respond in red but I will support what I say with scripture.
I tuned into the conference to see what was going on, listened to a couple of talks, watched their sacrament service. Here's some things that I think are 'pleasing to the carnal mind' which Denver Snuffer and joining his Remnant offer to LDS.
First, everyone is dressed like they are at a picnic, shorts, t-shirts, many women in short shorts and tank tops. Very casual. It is pleasing to the carnal mind to no longer have to worry about dressing modestly by hiding garments (they don't wear them) and no need to be oncomfortable in a suit and tie or a dress. Does the Lord require a shirt and tie for proper worship or is that a tradition of men? 2 Nephi 28:13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.

Do you think that dressing as if you are going to play frisbie, soccer or paint a fence--when you have more appropriate clothing for taking part in worship services, is the way to prove to God that you aren't vain and materialistic? One reason why, when you were LDS, you were encouraged to dress in your better clothing(no one said expensive, just 'better' than what we might wear for a casual day at the beach, if we have this. If not, then we come in whatever we can) for church was as a sign of respect to our Heavenly Father. We try to bring a spirit of reverence into the Chapel with us, that will help us remember whose house we are in and invites the spirit. I'm certain the people in the Remnant group had 'better' clothing, but they chose not to wear it because I think that they are childishly throwing off every teaching that they felt constrained them or that they did not like when they were LDS. And, please don't accuse the LDS people of 'robbing the poor' when they pay tithing, fast offering, temple fund, humanitarian aid, perpetual education fund, etc. while the Remnant people have rejected these things instead leaving to the individual to decide if they feel like throwing a couple of bucks into the fellowship kittie every once in awhile.

Why do you insist on name calling?I never called anyone names, but this is a ploy some of you use to undermine others' responses. It's annoying. Can't you engage in an adult conversation without stooping to that.As I said, why do you say such a thing to dismiss and undermine what I've said when I did not call you names. You know not of what your speak. "Remnant people" pay tithing in accordance with the same revelations that you do. Has anyone in the remnant chastised you for how you pay tithing. No, because how can anyone but you know how much tithing you pay, but you. Just as you don't know how much tithing "remnant people" pay.
REmnant people who do not pay a proper tithing to the LDS church do NOT pay tithing. If they are giving money to the Remnant, then they are giving charitable offerings. They are not the same thing. Don't try to rationalize this, they don't have a real church, they don't have an authorized leader whom they pay to (such as Melchizedek) and they are not required to give a 10th of their increase. That's what tithing is and they don't pay that.

Then there is their version of Sacrament with it big hunks of Artisan bread and a healthy serving of wine to go with it. No more having to worry about the word of wisdom. They can drink all they want, it's no longer a commandment. That's definitely pleasing to the carnal mind. Did the Lord break the bread into tiny pieces or did they eat until they were full? "3 Ne 18:3-4 And when the disciples had come with bread and wine, he took of the bread and brake and blessed it; and he gave unto the disciples and commanded that they should eat. 4 And when they had eaten and were filled, he commanded that they should give unto the multitude. 5 And when the multitude had eaten and were filled, he said unto the disciples:" Is the partaking of wine prescribed in the word of wisdom? Why yes it is ... D&C 89: 5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him. 6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.

Why are you all so hung up on drinking wine? Just what is this about? More teenage rebellion on the part of some of you? And why quote me scripture when I can quote it right back at you! 'For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattererth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory..." (D&C 27:2) It doesn't matter. Did you get that???? Since it's obvious that water was just fine, why do you all have to break the word or wisdom so you can drink wine? In my opinion, it's just another example of the nature of break off sects that they are similar to rebellious teenagers in thumbing their noses at their parent church. Are you all going to go out and get tattoos now too?One of the mormon leaked documents said that some fellowship groups were drinking the 'sacrament' wine till they were drunk, something that is warned of in 1 Corinthians 11:20-22. It's obvious that the LDS version of Sacrament is honoring the cautions given by Paul, while some Remnant followers, quick to throw off the shackles of what they felt was a too strict prohibition against alcohol, are now over doing it like rebellious teens out partying since they are no longer under their parent's thumb.

Well the Lord was an is pretty hung up on having wine for the sacrament. Every time he taught it He instructed to use wine. In the limited instance that you mention Section 27. The Lord was warning Joseph so he and his friends did not get poisoned. He did not intend for the perpetual use of water for the sacrament. If fact, he informs us in the same revelation that when he comes again and partakes of the sacrament it will be with wine. Why did he include that statement if he didn't care what we use for the sacrament. Additionally, we can be further informed by what Joseph actually did in response to the revelation. Did they have water for the sacrament that day? Is there any recorded instance when Joseph had water for the sacrament? No. Here is the account from the Joseph Smith Papers.


Further more, did the church under the "prophets" from 1830 until prohibition use water for the sacrament. The church stopped using wine in about 1906, decades before prohibition. It didn't have anything to do with that. And, by 1906, many wards had already made the switch to water---BECAUSE THEY COULD, as per the D&C. No. In fact Brigham Young called church members to establish a wine mission to provide wine for the sacrament in the church. You can read all about it here https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/003-74-84.pdf . Evidently from Brigham until Heber the church was pretty hung up on wine for the sacrament as well. You opine that partaking of wine for the sacrament is against the word of wisdom. However, as you conveniently ignore, the word of wisdom, Section 89, tells us to use wine for the sacrament, there is much to learn about the atonement symbolism by making wine. Lastly, but there are certainly more reasons. When the Lord comes again there will be a wedding feast. Served at that wedding feast will be "wine on the lees well refined" served (See D&C 58:8). If you intend on being part of that feast you should be prepared to drink that type of wine. I would wager you don't know what lees are.

Sorry, but this is simply a common trait among break off sects. One of the first things they jettison is the Word of Wisdom. Remnant people are following that same pattern. So far,
they haven't embraced polygamy, which also often happens with these groups...but we'll see. Right now Snuffer is negative on polygamy but you never know, maybe he'll get another 'revelation'....


And then, in the Remnant, you don't have to pay one tenth of your income to the church--just throw in a couple of bucks if you decide to attend a fellowship meeting. That's pleasing to the carnal mind, not having to give the Lord any of your money. These people just covenanted to obey the scriptures in which this is included...D&C 119:5 Verily I say unto you, it shall come to pass that all those who gather unto the land of Zion shall be tithed of their surplus properties, and shall observe this law, or they shall not be found worthy to abide among you. And this... JST Genesis 14: 36 And this Melchizedek, having thus established righteousness, was called the king of heaven by his people, or, in other words, the King of peace.37 And he lifted up his voice, and he blessed Abram, being the high priest, and the keeper of the storehouse of God;38 Him whom God had appointed to receive tithes for the poor.

So are you suggesting that you don't have to pay tithing until Zion is established? Sorry, but that's not how it works, if you aren't a tithe paying people now, how can you ever expect to establish Zion. I can't believe I'm actually having to argue the Commandment of Paying Tithing with a supposed LDS member/former member. " I just quoted the same scripture that establishes how you pay tithing. I did no say they do not pay tithing. "Will a man rob Gob?
Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say: Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
Ye are cursed with a curse, for ye have robbed me, even this whole nations. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse that there may be meat in my house;" (3 Ne 24:8-10). Those were the Lord's words to the Nephites--he made sure they had them since they did not have the writings of Malachi. If you all still follow the book of Mormon (and Snuffer hasn't excised that part) you should know that you all need to pay a proper tithing. One of the most egregious things that Denver Snuffer has done is teach people to ROB GOD and feel justified in doing so. But, I don't think it will be on Denver's head for those who know better. Those who were LDS members and lived the commandment of Tithing at one time and yet, stopped paying it and instead donate money to their fellowship and rationalize that it's the same thing-they will be held accountable. It's not the same thing and deep down, they know it and will be judged accordingly.
Snuffer teaches to pay tithing in accordance with revelation.
Yea, 'his' revelation. WHich was to tell people not to pay a proper tithing to the LDS church, but to give money to his fellowships. FYI--that's not tithing and if the Remnant people, who were LDS at one time, would simply be honest with themselves, they'd know they aren't paying a proper tithe. But, the fact is, people like to rationalize when it's benefits them.
And of course, there is the relaxed situation of the fellowships and no organized church, I bet a lot of those former LDS enjoy not having to fulfill callings, not having to do visiting and hometeaching, not having to worry about missionary work or service projects or even having to take time away from recreating to attend the Temple and of course, not having to live worthily to enter the temple. I bet they enjoy not having to worry about going to church on Sundays. It's a pretty casual, relaxed 'church' that they can take on their terms. That's pleasing to the carnal mind. The standard of obedience for these "remnant" people is much higher than for those who trust in the arm of the flesh and wait upon a man to assign the what to do. They are required to connect with the Lord and do what he tells them to do. D&C 84:44 For you shall live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God.

You're kidding right? So, their 'standards' are high like John Doe's standards? A man who believed he received personal revelation that he could commit adultery and fornication at will? Those standards? Was it 'the Lord' who told Doe to do that? I'm sure he thought so. How about the woman who claimed that she was told to have an affair? You think her standards were higher than LDS because she's listening to the voices in her head? Really, you are going to go there. Perhaps we should discuss all of the bishops who have been imprisoned for child molestation>Why should we? The Bishop who molests a child knows what he does is immoral, because he isn't told that whatever the 'spirit' reveals to him is 'right'. That's what REmnant people believe. They're the ones you need to worry about, listening to false spirits and getting themselves mixed up in immoral behavior and bizarre ideas.They are the ones who have no moral standard outside of their own minds to keep them in check--especially since Snuffer has taught them the art of wresting scriptures to make them say whatever you like.
Sorry, but so far, the bar has been set pretty low among Remnant people and until they start to show how their 'religion' is so much harder to live than the one they abandoned, the answer is obvious. Their standards of conduct are lower. Their level of sacrifice is lower. Perhaps you should read the Lectures on Faith, which has been re-canonized, and all have covenanted to obey, regarding sacrifice and then tell me thier standard of sacrifice is lower. and then Their need to discipline themselves, live by the Lord's commandments (they've already thrown out one of them...how many more will it be?) and serve others, is lower.


And there's the doctrines. No need to worry about what the Prophet teaches (of course this is changing--as Denver Snuffer starts to exert more control, I believe Remnant people are going to have to be more inclined to follow what Snuffer says), since Snuffer used to teach that you go directly to Christ and only concern yourself with what you personally receive. That's pretty pleasing to the carnal mind, IMO. You attribute things to Snuffer that he does not teach. There has been no revocation of the requirement to connect with the Lord and become a Zion people/person. None who have not done that will be admitted to Zion. Snuffer teaches to heed the words of the Prophets who direct you to Christ. There is a prophesied third Zion that will be brought about prior to the Second Coming of the Lord. There has not been a Zion that was not lead by a true messenger i.e. Enoch, the city of Enoch, Melchizedek, the city of Salem. Heeding true messengers and conversing with the Lord through the veil are still requirements to ascend back into the presence of the Lord.

Denver Snuffer is changing his teachings as he goes along. And it remains to be seen if the Remnant even want to be a Zion people.
So far, it seems to be something...in the future. Also, Denver Snuffer is now teaching to heed HIS WORDS. Maybe someone needs to remind the Remnant people that they don't need Snuffer to teach them how to connect with the Lord. They don't need him. But, he needs them now, because with his new ambitions--to be a 'Davidic Servant' and lead a people, he now needs them to follow his teachings and requirements. And he got a bunch of them to 'covenant' that they'd do that this last weekend.


And the lies Snuffer has taught have to do with his revisionist versions of Church history and his accusations against those he has snidely called 'the proud descendants of Nauvoo'. Our own scriptures testify of the wickedness of Nauvoo progenitors which the church refuses to address or explain. Here are a couple of verses describing our "blessed honored pioneers" 6 Behold, I say unto you, there were jarrings, and contentions, and envyings, and strifes, and lustful and covetous desires among them; therefore by these things they polluted their inheritances. 7 They were slow to hearken unto the voice of the Lord their God; therefore, the Lord their God is slow to hearken unto their prayers, to answer them in the day of their trouble.8 In the day of their peace they esteemed lightly my counsel; but, in the day of their trouble, of necessity they feel after me....For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.

FYI, this is how the "lord' supposedly through Denver SNuffer, described the 'blessed, honored' Remnant 'pioneers' of this movement in his 12 page prelude to covenant:

Yes, thank you for quoting that.


Maybe people who live in glass houses should be careful about throwing stones.


There's a starter for you.
There is a starter for you.
I'm positive I haven't changed your mind one iota, and you haven't changed mine either. This has been a spirited debate, but since we're running out of colors and I see no way either will budge, I suggest we call a truce.

Post Reply