The Signs of the Marred Servant

[Alaris]

The rebellion may see him but they certainly don't recognize him imho.

The rebellion? Are you referring to the one-third who rebelled in heaven?

Yes.

[Alaris]

The rebellion may see him but they certainly don't recognize him imho.

The rebellion? Are you referring to the one-third who rebelled in heaven?

Yes.

My inner star wars fan may be coming out subliminally

[Rensai]

Agreed. I believe most if not all of the brethren would be on board if this were an eventuality. And if this were to happen, there would absolutely be a schism that possibly went all the way to the top. I personally feel this schism would be a microcosm of how rebellions are created, but that's just my deep personal feeling on the matter.

Welp, if such a thing does happen and there's a schism, hopefully the 12 doesn't evenly split for and against, as JS counseled to follow the majority of the 12 in such an event.

I'm not a follower of Denver, but one of his supporters, Adrian Larsen, did a really good job researching that quote and I remember it came up on this forum some time ago. That quote is almost certainly false. Don't bank on something like that. Stick to the signs the Lord gave us to recognize the marred servant and don't worry what others are doing. What if the church leadership goes the way of the pharisees and decides to cling to their own power and prestige rather than follow the marred servant? Would you really want to stick with them then? What if that is a test we have to face just like the ancient israelites did? Do you stick with the leaders of the church or follow the homeless guy performing miracles while flaunting the man made rules of the church (That's what Christ did)?

http://www.totheremnant.com/2014/07/his ... art-2.html

What do you think of the Farnsworth Vision?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=29181&hilit=The+Farnsworth+Vision

Hmm, I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you know when that was recorded? Do we know for sure it was actually written in Nauvoo before Joseph died? Anyway, a few things sound like they could be talking about a future event, but Brigham is clearly mentioned in that event and his time has passed, so if its applicable to this discussion I guess I'm not really seeing it. How do you see it applying to this discussion?

[Rensai]

As for the marring, my understanding is that this scripture refers to the Josephite:

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. (3 Nephi 21:10)

and indicates a physical marring, which I have taught will merely be that the man will be circumcised. So, this marring won't be something we can normally see. (Seeing a man walking around naked isn't normal, after all.) And when he is released from his box, he will either be immediately healed, or will heal himself immediately afterward, becoming intact, so again, this won't be something we will see.

No way its circumcision.

44 As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—

Thats 3 Nephi 20, Visage and form are marred or face and body.

[SmallFarm]

Welp, if such a thing does happen and there's a schism, hopefully the 12 doesn't evenly split for and against, as JS counseled to follow the majority of the 12 in such an event.

I'm not a follower of Denver, but one of his supporters, Adrian Larsen, did a really good job researching that quote and I remember it came up on this forum some time ago. That quote is almost certainly false. Don't bank on something like that. Stick to the signs the Lord gave us to recognize the marred servant and don't worry what others are doing. What if the church leadership goes the way of the pharisees and decides to cling to their own power and prestige rather than follow the marred servant? Would you really want to stick with them then? What if that is a test we have to face just like the ancient israelites did? Do you stick with the leaders of the church or follow the homeless guy performing miracles while flaunting the man made rules of the church (That's what Christ did)?

http://www.totheremnant.com/2014/07/his ... art-2.html

What do you think of the Farnsworth Vision?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=29181&hilit=The+Farnsworth+Vision

Hmm, I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you know when that was recorded? Do we know for sure it was actually written in Nauvoo before Joseph died? Anyway, a few things sound like they could be talking about a future event, but Brigham is clearly mentioned in that event and his time has passed, so if its applicable to this discussion I guess I'm not really seeing it. How do you see it applying to this discussion?

Just a second witness that there is safety in sticking it out. This version came from my Book of Remembrance and I would assume is the original passed on through the generations (I'm a direct descendant of SM Farnsworth). It differs somewhat from the more widely presented version. Also, while it lists Brigham and the other Apostles that were around then, I think they symbolize the apostleship in general, but that is my interpretation =)

[Rensai]

I'm really late to this discussion and haven't been following it closely, so excuse me if I missed something, but if the church is one day "fulfilled," one would assume the declaration would come through the church itself and not someone from outside it, right? I wouldn't blame anyone for disregarding someone who suddenly rose up and said the church is fulfilled and we didn't need it anymore. I sure wouldn't pay any attention.

God works in patterns. He's done it once, why not again?

The Greatness and Mission of John the Baptist

The question arose from the saying of Jesus--"Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist; but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he." How is it that John was considered one of the greatest prophets? His miracles could not have constituted his greatness.

First. He was entrusted with a divine mission of preparing the way before the face of the Lord. Whoever had such a trust committed to him before or since? No man.

Secondly. He was entrusted with the important mission, and it was required at his hands, to baptize the Son of Man. Whoever had the honor of doing that? Whoever had so great a privilege and glory? Whoever led the Son of God into the waters of baptism, and had the privilege of beholding the Holy Ghost descend in the form of a dove, or rather in the sign of the dove, in witness of that administration? The sign of the dove was instituted before the creation of the world, a witness for the Holy Ghost, and the devil cannot come in the sign of a dove. The Holy Ghost is a personage, and is in the form of a personage. It does not confine itself to the form of the dove, but in sign of the dove. The Holy Ghost cannot be transformed into a dove; but the sign of a dove was given to John to signify the truth of the deed, as the dove is an emblem or token of truth and innocence.

Thirdly. John, at that time, was the only legal administrator in the affairs of the kingdom there was then on the earth, and holding the keys of power. The Jews had to obey his instructions or be damned, by their own law; and Christ Himself fulfilled all righteousness in becoming obedient to the law which he had given to Moses on the mount, and thereby magnified it and made it honorable, instead of destroying it. The son of Zacharias wrested the keys, the kingdom, the power, the glory from the Jews, by the holy anointing and decree of heaven, and these three reasons constitute him the greatest prophet born of a woman.

Who says this can't be done again?

I wondered why this kept being emphasized by posters on the forum (Joseph Smith's quote about John the Baptist wresting keys) and I wasn't at all surprised when I found where it came from in Denver Snuffer's writings--it's one of the things he's brought out and emphasized to bolster his claims and I see the Snuffer followers do know their 'talking points'. It's clear you all are reading Denver Snuffer's writings, though I'm not so sure you all are reading the scriptures as well.

You want to know why it can't be done again? Because this IS the last dispensation and we're still in it. I don't care what Snuffer says, he's wrong and he's clearly falling into the trap so many of these kinds find themselves in as they being to come up with all kinds of grandiose beliefs about themselves. The phrase 'for the last time' means exactly what it says--for the last time, not 'for the most recent time'. Denver Snuffer's parsing on these words reminds me of Bill Clinton opining on what 'is' means.

I've been meaning to say the following. Here seems as an appropriate place as any. Here are the problems with Snuffer:

A. He's sold books. That sounds silly, but there's no way the Lord would ever risk his end times servant profiting off his knowledge. Not ever. Not before he's called. Not after. Nope.
B. Pride. Pride, imho, is why 90 percent never return to the church who are excommunicated and pride is why Denver Snuffer never returned.

I do not want to derail this thread - the point clarkkent14 made is a valid one but does not make Denver Snuffer a profit nor does it necessarily mean the Davidic Servant will wrest the keys from the church.

Despite clarkkent14's nearly 2,000 posts I've only seen what he has posted recently, and he has only been respectful in his replies I've seen today. The fruits of other snufferites and fundamentalists who come here are sometimes these:

A. Bullying. Down deep they know they are wrong. They aren't here to convert us LDS but to destroy our beliefs to make them feel better about their apostasy. This is essentially bullying. Bullies were almost always bullied first by someone else - usually a family member. That deep hurt becomes a cycle of bullying until someone stands up to them firmly.
B. They are irrational. There are leaps of logic and false conclusions and all sorts of red flags that are fruits of the spirit of confusion not the Spirit of the Lord.

So I do appreciate your efforts to do this AI 2.0. I kindly suggest that perhaps your zeal in punching down the bullying sometimes creeps into shutting down conversations that don't need such protection.

I don't want to derail this either, but I think its worth highlighting what you said.

A. He's sold books. That sounds silly, but there's no way the Lord would ever risk his end times servant profiting off his knowledge. Not ever. Not before he's called. Not after. Nope.

Its not Silly at all, its exactly right! I think this is one of, if not the most obvious pieces of evidence against Denver. I actually read his 2nd comforter book and I thought it had a lot of good info in it. I have no problem believing he learned much if not all of that through the Spirit as he claims. So lets say his claim on that book is 100% correct. That means he SOLD the mysteries of the gospel for money, or in other words, is practicing priestcraft. Now if Denver had said it was entirely his own thoughts and work, then I think he'd be OK to sell it. Everyone has a right to earn a living from their work, but in this case, by his own words, its not his work, its Gods and it all came from the spirit. If that were the case and if God wanted it released to the public, he would not charge money for it. He never has and never will.

1 Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.

[Rensai]

I'm not a follower of Denver, but one of his supporters, Adrian Larsen, did a really good job researching that quote and I remember it came up on this forum some time ago. That quote is almost certainly false. Don't bank on something like that. Stick to the signs the Lord gave us to recognize the marred servant and don't worry what others are doing. What if the church leadership goes the way of the pharisees and decides to cling to their own power and prestige rather than follow the marred servant? Would you really want to stick with them then? What if that is a test we have to face just like the ancient israelites did? Do you stick with the leaders of the church or follow the homeless guy performing miracles while flaunting the man made rules of the church (That's what Christ did)?

http://www.totheremnant.com/2014/07/his ... art-2.html

What do you think of the Farnsworth Vision?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=29181&hilit=The+Farnsworth+Vision

Hmm, I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you know when that was recorded? Do we know for sure it was actually written in Nauvoo before Joseph died? Anyway, a few things sound like they could be talking about a future event, but Brigham is clearly mentioned in that event and his time has passed, so if its applicable to this discussion I guess I'm not really seeing it. How do you see it applying to this discussion?

Just a second witness that there is safety in sticking it out. This version came from my Book of Remembrance and I would assume is the original passed on through the generations (I'm a direct descendant of SM Farnsworth). It differs somewhat from the more widely presented version. Also, while it lists Brigham and the other Apostles that were around then, I think they symbolize the apostleship in general, but that is my interpretation =)

Could be, or maybe it really was about some trouble they faced in Brighams day. Its hard to know. Thanks for sharing.

[SmallFarm]

What do you think of the Farnsworth Vision?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=29181&hilit=The+Farnsworth+Vision

Hmm, I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you know when that was recorded? Do we know for sure it was actually written in Nauvoo before Joseph died? Anyway, a few things sound like they could be talking about a future event, but Brigham is clearly mentioned in that event and his time has passed, so if its applicable to this discussion I guess I'm not really seeing it. How do you see it applying to this discussion?

Just a second witness that there is safety in sticking it out. This version came from my Book of Remembrance and I would assume is the original passed on through the generations (I'm a direct descendant of SM Farnsworth). It differs somewhat from the more widely presented version. Also, while it lists Brigham and the other Apostles that were around then, I think they symbolize the apostleship in general, but that is my interpretation =)

Could be, or maybe it really was about some trouble they faced in Brighams day. Its hard to know. Thanks for sharing.

I don't recall any heavenly visitors coming to the aid of the saints in Utah and then leading them on to Missouri. You're welcome

[Rensai]

Everyone has a right to earn a living from their work, but in this case, by his own words, its not his work, its Gods and it all came from the spirit. If that were the case and if God wanted it released to the public, he would not charge money for it. He never has and never will.

Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, which was the absolute word of God, printed 5000 copies of it, I think, and then sold them to the public.

That was to recover some of the costs of printing, not to make a profit. Once they had the means, they started giving the books freely.

[Rensai]

As for the marring, my understanding is that this scripture refers to the Josephite:

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. (3 Nephi 21:10)

and indicates a physical marring, which I have taught will merely be that the man will be circumcised. So, this marring won't be something we can normally see. (Seeing a man walking around naked isn't normal, after all.) And when he is released from his box, he will either be immediately healed, or will heal himself immediately afterward, becoming intact, so again, this won't be something we will see.

No way its circumcision.

44 As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—

Thats 3 Nephi 20, Visage and form are marred or face and body.

I don't necessarily equate Isaiah 52:13-15 --->

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

or 3 Nephi 20:43-45 ---->

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high. As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

with 3 Nephi 21:10

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil.

The 3 Nephi 21:10 scripture is talking about the Josephite. That much I know. And I teach that his physical marring will be a circumcision, which will later be healed, after he is empowered.

But as for the Isaiah scripture, (and I'll use the Book of Mormon scripture from here on), there can be more than one person being spoken of:

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently [one guy]; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high [same guy or different guy?]. As many were astonished at thee [at who? the one guy or a different guy?]—his visage [whose visage? the one guy or a different guy?] was so marred, more than any man, and his form [whose form?
the one guy or a different guy?] more than the sons of men—so shall he [who? the one guy? or a different guy?] sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him [at who? the one guy or a different guy?], for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

Those who believe that the above scripture applies to one person, whether that person is Christ or a Davidic Servant, apply each part of it to that one person. But I don't read it that way. This passage does not strike me as if every part of it is speaking of just one person. So, until I learn who each part is speaking of, I'm not ready to make the call as to exactly who this scripture is referring to. I certainly haven't received any revelation concerning this passage, like I did with the 3 Nephi 21 passage. Has anyone claimed to have received revelation about this passage? I'm gonna guess that no one has received revelation on this passage. And yet people quote this passage as if it absolutely refers to either Christ or the David Servant, applying the entire passage to one or the other of these people. Without revelation.

Now, if someone comes forward and says, "The Holy Ghost said such and such about this passage," well, then that's different. And those claims can be tested. But so far, it seems to me that people are just engaging in guessing about its meaning.

Well, if you want to take the view its 2 guys you can, but the evidence is pretty strong that its the same guy.

43 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high.

44 As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—

45 So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

8 And when that day shall come, it shall come to pass that kings shall shut their mouths; for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

9 For in that day, for my sake shall the Father work a work, which shall be a great and a marvelous work among them; and there shall be among them those who will not believe it, although a man shall declare it unto them.

10 But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil.

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

Both are marred, both talk about kings shutting their mouths, sure looks like the same guy to me. What are the chances its talking about 2 different marred guys who both get kings to shut their mouths and both appear at the same time in the last days?

[Rensai]

Hmm, I'm not sure what to make of that. Do you know when that was recorded? Do we know for sure it was actually written in Nauvoo before Joseph died? Anyway, a few things sound like they could be talking about a future event, but Brigham is clearly mentioned in that event and his time has passed, so if its applicable to this discussion I guess I'm not really seeing it. How do you see it applying to this discussion?

Just a second witness that there is safety in sticking it out. This version came from my Book of Remembrance and I would assume is the original passed on through the generations (I'm a direct descendant of SM Farnsworth). It differs somewhat from the more widely presented version. Also, while it lists Brigham and the other Apostles that were around then, I think they symbolize the apostleship in general, but that is my interpretation =)

Could be, or maybe it really was about some trouble they faced in Brighams day. Its hard to know. Thanks for sharing.

I don't recall any heavenly visitors coming to the aid of the saints in Utah and then leading them on to Missouri. You're welcome

Well sometimes things are symbolic or maybe it was conditional and it didn't happen. There are several revelations in D&C about the early saints and Zion with great promises that they lost because of their sins. I dunno, just doesn't make any sense that its talking about the movement west, then jumps hundreds of years into the future with the same leaders, etc.

[Alaris]

As for the marring, my understanding is that this scripture refers to the Josephite:

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. (3 Nephi 21:10)

and indicates a physical marring, which I have taught will merely be that the man will be circumcised. So, this marring won't be something we can normally see. (Seeing a man walking around naked isn't normal, after all.) And when he is released from his box, he will either be immediately healed, or will heal himself immediately afterward, becoming intact, so again, this won't be something we will see.

No way its circumcision.

44 As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—

Thats 3 Nephi 20, Visage and form are marred or face and body.

I don't necessarily equate Isaiah 52:13-15 --->

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

or 3 Nephi 20:43-45 ---->

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high. As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

with 3 Nephi 21:10

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil.

The 3 Nephi 21:10 scripture is talking about the Josephite. That much I know. And I teach that his physical marring will be a circumcision, which will later be healed, after he is empowered.

But as for the Isaiah scripture, (and I'll use the Book of Mormon scripture from here on), there can be more than one person being spoken of:

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently [one guy]; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high [same guy or different guy?]. As many were astonished at thee [at who? the one guy or a different guy?]—his visage [whose visage? the one guy or a different guy?] was so marred, more than any man, and his form [whose form?
the one guy or a different guy?] more than the sons of men—so shall he [who? the one guy? or a different guy?] sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him [at who? the one guy or a different guy?], for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

Those who believe that the above scripture applies to one person, whether that person is Christ or a Davidic Servant, apply each part of it to that one person. But I don't read it that way. This passage does not strike me as if every part of it is speaking of just one person. So, until I learn who each part is speaking of, I'm not ready to make the call as to exactly who this scripture is referring to. I certainly haven't received any revelation concerning this passage, like I did with the 3 Nephi 21 passage. Has anyone claimed to have received revelation about this passage? I'm gonna guess that no one has received revelation on this passage. And yet people quote this passage as if it absolutely refers to either Christ or the David Servant, applying the entire passage to one or the other of these people. Without revelation.

Now, if someone comes forward and says, "The Holy Ghost said such and such about this passage," well, then that's different. And those claims can be tested. But so far, it seems to me that people are just engaging in guessing about its meaning.

My advanced writing course ruined me with pronouns. He who?

I'll have a closer look but there is a shift from he to thee and back to he.

[Rensai]

Now, there are nine days left before this shadow sign takes place. So, what can those who believe that there really is a servant about to be empowered do? After all, although this is between him and his God (with Satan on the side trying to mess things up), there might be other factors involved, as well. The saints can, and should, pray for this man to be taken out of his box. We ought to be praying day and night for his faith to be made unshaken and empowered, and for him to be delivered from his box. It may be that this process has been going on for a very long time, for all we know, but God's been looking out at the population, and sees that no one's praying for His servant, therefore, perhaps He has said "They are not worthy to have him, yet." But if God sees that the saints are praying mightily for His servant's release, it might appear to God that the church (the woman) is sort of travailing to be delivered of her child (the Josephite), and so He might say, "His prayers are enough; and now their prayers are also enough. I will release him now."

This I like. Surely this guy needs all the prayers and help he can get with the burdens he will have to take up. I don't know why I haven't thought of praying for him before. Thanks.

[Rensai]

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

Both are marred, both talk about kings shutting their mouths, sure looks like the same guy to me. What are the chances its talking about 2 different marred guys who both get kings to shut their mouths and both appear at the same time in the last days?

Was Christ marred, would you say? Think that scourging he got with the cat-o-nine tails marred him a bit?

Notice that the scripture above says "my words." Are the kings going to shut their mouths at the guy who declares the words, or at the words of Christ that he declares? Or both? Will the guy who declares be marred? Or just Christ? Or both?

Notice "the redundancy" in the above scripture: "which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles"? You think those two "hims" are the same guy?

What you're saying isn't making sense to me I guess. The way I read it is, yes, he will deliver Christs words, ALL real prophets deliver Christs words. The person saying the "my words" part is Christ, he is the speaker here. When he references "him," he means the servant. It seems very straight forward to me. Let me try explaining my thinking a little more in context.

8 And when that day shall come, it shall come to pass that kings shall shut their mouths; for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

9 For in that day, for my sake shall the Father work a work, which shall be a great and a marvelous work among them; and there shall be among them those who will not believe it, although a man shall declare it unto them.

Kings will shut their mouths. God is going to do a marvelous work for Christs' sake (he is the speaker) and it shall be declared to the world by a MAN.

Next verse continues talking about that man.

10 But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil.

His life is in God's hand, he's protected even though he is marred because of THEM. Them who? The only them it can be referring to are the kings and people he declares God's marvelous work to. Men will marr him, the servant.

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

My words, who am Jesus Christ, clarifying that he's the speaker again, but the words are brought forth by HIM, him being the servant. If Christ meant himself he would have said I, instead of him. The servant brings the words to the gentiles and any who will not listen will be cut off.

Still seems very straight forward and clearly uses the same wording to describe this guy's work as the previous chapter does. I don't understand why you're getting hung up on 11th verse.

[Rensai]

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

Both are marred, both talk about kings shutting their mouths, sure looks like the same guy to me. What are the chances its talking about 2 different marred guys who both get kings to shut their mouths and both appear at the same time in the last days?

Was Christ marred, would you say? Think that scourging he got with the cat-o-nine tails marred him a bit?

Notice that the scripture above says "my words." Are the kings going to shut their mouths at the guy who declares the words, or at the words of Christ that he declares? Or both? Will the guy who declares be marred? Or just Christ? Or both?

Notice "the redundancy" in the above scripture: "which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles"? You think those two "hims" are the same guy?

ok, on further thought I think I see what you are saying, and to answer the question, yes, the word him absolutely refers to the same guy. when you use the word him/her it always refer's to the last identifiable person mentioned or one about to be mentioned. If Christ were speaking about himself he would have said I, not him. So who is the last identified person Christ is speaking about?

10 But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil.

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

Every instance of Him or He in these verses refer back to the servant because he is the last person identified that Christ is speaking about.

[Alaris]

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

Both are marred, both talk about kings shutting their mouths, sure looks like the same guy to me. What are the chances its talking about 2 different marred guys who both get kings to shut their mouths and both appear at the same time in the last days?

Was Christ marred, would you say? Think that scourging he got with the cat-o-nine tails marred him a bit?

Notice that the scripture above says "my words." Are the kings going to shut their mouths at the guy who declares the words, or at the words of Christ that he declares? Or both? Will the guy who declares be marred? Or just Christ? Or both?

Notice "the redundancy" in the above scripture: "which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles"? You think those two "hims" are the same guy?

ok, on further thought I think I see what you are saying, and to answer the question, yes, the word him absolutely refers to the same guy. when you use the word him/her it always refer's to the last identifiable person mentioned or one about to be mentioned. If Christ were speaking about himself he would have said I, not him. So who is the last identified person Christ is speaking about?

10 But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil.

11 Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

Every instance of Him or He in these verses refer back to the servant because he is the last person identified that Christ is speaking about.

In verse 11 it sounds like the last call to the gentiles. Perhaps this last call is in conjunction with Matthew 24 where the Lord says the gospel will be preached to the whole world before the second coming. I believe this will be done in relatively short order, though I could be wrong on that account.

[Z2100]

I'm starting to believe that the Davidic Servant, or the this guy we're currently talking about, will come/return on September 23. IF the Second Coming is in 2033, then I expect to see HUGE changes come about in the church and the world. I would fully expect to live to see the sealed portion of the BoM revealed!

I also believe that Denver Snuffer is one of those false prophets" that would come to influence before the real one came.

[Rensai]

In verse 11 it sounds like the last call to the gentiles. Perhaps this last call is in conjunction with Matthew 24 where the Lord says the gospel will be preached to the whole world before the second coming. I believe this will be done in relatively short order, though I could be wrong on that account.

This part speaks of Joseph-Nephi, whose ministry is spoken of as being in the spirit of power:

Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

This part does not speak of Joseph-Nephi. It speaks of either Joseph Smith, or of John the Relevator. I am not, yet, sure, but I am leaning more towards it being John these days:

Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

The two hims here are two different people. The Savior was possibly using his hands and showing a vision of the men while he said these words, pointing to the one with one hand and saying "the Father shall cause him..." and then pointing to the other man seen in vision with the other hand and saying "and shall give unto him power..."

That's ridiculous. You have to throw out the rules of the English language and it would then be a false, flawed translation. The two Him's have to be referring to the same servant previously mentioned. That is the only way to read that. You're wresting the scriptures and they just don't support what you're saying at all.

[Rensai]

I'm starting to believe that the Davidic Servant, or the this guy we're currently talking about, will come/return on September 23. IF the Second Coming is in 2033, then I expect to see HUGE changes come about in the church and the world. I would fully expect to live to see the sealed portion of the BoM revealed!

I also believe that Denver Snuffer is one of those false prophets" that would come to influence before the real one came.

I agree about Denver and I think Sept 23rd will be significant for the servant, but it may not be the day he goes public either.

Its possible it'll happen on the 23rd, but it might be a little after that. I was looking at stellarium the other day because the Gileadi blog Alaris shared says:
http://www.isaiahinstitute.com/2017/09/ ... 2017s.html

To those who “fear” or reverence God, the messianic planet Jupiter’s gestation in the womb of the Virgo Constellation, and of its “birth” on September 23rd 2017,

The problem is, the Sign happens on the 23rd, but Jupiter isn't actually birthed till around the middle of October when you look at it in Stellarium, he stays put in virgo til then. So I think we may see something on the 23rd, but it may just mark something important to the servant, like Joseph getting to meet God in the grove. The whole world didn't know about that and may not know what happens on the 23rd either. One way or another though, I think he will have to go public pretty soon though.

[dafty]

I'm starting to believe that the Davidic Servant, or the this guy we're currently talking about, will come/return on September 23. IF the Second Coming is in 2033, then I expect to see HUGE changes come about in the church and the world. I would fully expect to live to see the sealed portion of the BoM revealed!

I also believe that Denver Snuffer is one of those false prophets" that would come to influence before the real one came.

I agree about Denver and I think Sept 23rd will be significant for the servant, but it may not be the day he goes public either.

Its possible it'll happen on the 23rd, but it might be a little after that. I was looking at stellarium the other day because the Gileadi blog Alaris shared says:
http://www.isaiahinstitute.com/2017/09/ ... 2017s.html

To those who “fear” or reverence God, the messianic planet Jupiter’s gestation in the womb of the Virgo Constellation, and of its “birth” on September 23rd 2017,

The problem is, the Sign happens on the 23rd, but Jupiter isn't actually birthed till around the middle of October when you look at it in Stellarium, he stays put in virgo til then. So I think we may see something on the 23rd, but it may just mark something important to the servant, like Joseph getting to meet God in the grove. The whole world didn't know about that and may not know what happens on the 23rd either. One way or another though, I think he will have to go public pretty soon though.

On my little skymap phone app, its 8/9th of Oct when Jupiter is fully out of Virgo. Whether that symbolises some sort of process of "being born' I donot know. The only thing is, since the 'pregnancy' lasted actual ~9 months(as in humans), why would labour last this long(far too long for any human)? Soon we shall see..mor not lol

[Rensai]

Strangely enough, this scripture suddenly comes to mind:

And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. (1 Corinthians 14:32)

Gee, I wonder why that passage popped into my head? It probably means nothing, though...

The problem isn't the books, its your made up revelations and interpretations and the way you present them. Are you claiming to be prophet? I've noticed in many of your posts you keep hinting that you know things, have revelation on many topics, etc.

[Rensai]

I'm starting to believe that the Davidic Servant, or the this guy we're currently talking about, will come/return on September 23. IF the Second Coming is in 2033, then I expect to see HUGE changes come about in the church and the world. I would fully expect to live to see the sealed portion of the BoM revealed!

I also believe that Denver Snuffer is one of those false prophets" that would come to influence before the real one came.

I agree about Denver and I think Sept 23rd will be significant for the servant, but it may not be the day he goes public either.

Its possible it'll happen on the 23rd, but it might be a little after that. I was looking at stellarium the other day because the Gileadi blog Alaris shared says:
http://www.isaiahinstitute.com/2017/09/ ... 2017s.html

To those who “fear” or reverence God, the messianic planet Jupiter’s gestation in the womb of the Virgo Constellation, and of its “birth” on September 23rd 2017,

The problem is, the Sign happens on the 23rd, but Jupiter isn't actually birthed till around the middle of October when you look at it in Stellarium, he stays put in virgo til then. So I think we may see something on the 23rd, but it may just mark something important to the servant, like Joseph getting to meet God in the grove. The whole world didn't know about that and may not know what happens on the 23rd either. One way or another though, I think he will have to go public pretty soon though.

On my little skymap phone app, its 8/9th of Oct when Jupiter is fully out of Virgo. Whether that symbolises some sort of process of "being born' I donot know. The only thing is, since the 'pregnancy' lasted actual ~9 months(as in humans), why would labour last this long(far too long for any human)? Soon we shall see..mor not lol

Yeah, I dunno, I just thought it was interesting that Jupiter hangs out in Virgo for several more weeks. Maybe it means something.

[Alaris]

Can we de-contention-ify this thread? Nobody agrees on all accounts as to the Davidic Servant or the end times servant. We all have personal feelings and I do absolutely believe many of us have had the spirit reveal truths to us about him. This is the model of study, pondering, and prayer. Since none of us have all the details right how about some additional humility and open ourselves to being wrong? Disagreement can foster more study and prayer and learning without insulting or contending. Free hugs for everyone.

Edit: There are things LDS Anarchist has said about the end times servant that I feel have been personally revealed to me that I have only shared with my wife. I don't agree with him on everything and I do believe he is wrong about some things, but I am deeply grateful he has shared his intimate thoughts and feelings on the end times servant.

[RAB]

It won't come from outside the Church. What Snufferites and other apostate groups forget is D&C 85, which spoke to inheritances in Zion.

"11 And they who are of the High Priesthood, whose names are not found written in the book of the law, or that are found to have apostatized, or to have been cut off from the church, as well as the lesser priesthood, or the members, in that day shall not find an inheritance among the saints of the Most High;

12 Therefore, it shall be done unto them as unto the children of the priest, as will be found recorded in the second chapter and sixty-first and second verses of Ezra."

If you apostasize or are otherwise cut off from the Church, there will not be a place for you in Zion. Plain and simple. Stay on the good ship Zion. The Lord will work within the Church He established.

I have a somewhat different take on the marred servant. In 3 Nephi, it seems to be talking about Joseph Smith, who was often protected from harm, was marred (tarred, feathered, poisoned, and imrisoned) and the Lord healed him (spiritually and ultimately physically will come). Joseph made the choice to be martyred, because the Lord had revealed to him how to avoid being killed. But he made the choice to seal his testimony with his blood. Prior to fulfilling his mission he was protected by the Lord countless times...guns being fired at him on several occasions without going off, being freed from prison, etc. Under Joseph, letters were sent to all the kingdoms of the earth announcing the restoration. He was there for the beginning of the marvelous work and wonder being taken to the Gentiles, and I believe the Hymn which says "Millions shall know Brother Joseph again" is not just talking about his story, but personally. Wouldn't Joseph's resurrection and being able to finish the work he started truly show that "my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil"?Through the devil's cunningness, he inspired men to betray and kill the prophet. But with the servant's life being in His hand, and his marring being healed, I could very easily see Joseph being the person who fulfills the prophecy with both his earthly life and his resurrected pre-millennial and millennial work. That just seems like the kind of tender mercy the Lord would grant to one who sacrificed so much for the kingdom...to be able to finish what he started in establishing Zion. But that's just my opinion.

[Alaris]

Can we de-contention-ify this thread? Nobody agrees on all accounts as to the Davidic Servant or the end times servant. We all have personal feelings and I do absolutely believe many of us have had the spirit reveal truths to us about him. This is the model of study, pondering, and prayer. Since none of us have all the details right how about some additional humility and open ourselves to being wrong? Disagreement can foster more study and prayer and learning without insulting or contending. Free hugs for everyone.

You ought to change your handle from alaris to "the reconciler."

I agree that a large dose of decontentionification is what is needed, along with that word added to the dictionary. However, I do reserve the right to defend my views when they are under attack. I also reserve the right to remain silent when under attack, as I please.

I prefer "builder"

I hear you. I'm certainly not perfect at defending my points without inviting contention but that is my aim!