The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

For discussion of secret combinations (political, economic, spiritual, religious, etc.) (Ether 8:18-25.)
totsuzen
captain of 50
Posts: 64

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by totsuzen »

Perhaps my wording is more intense for some. For me - what I described IS a broken heart and contrite spirit. It’s Jesus or nothing. It’s giving everything, including my life. No longer desiring the self but the Savior.

jdt
captain of 100
Posts: 354

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by jdt »

Now that was direct and plain! I have a much better understanding of you. And we agree in many ways.
I have been previously stated that I have thought the movement is more likely to fail than succeed (and received ridicule from one on this forum for saying that while being part of it). Simply put history proves mankind not very good at establishing Zion. I don't see why we would be any different, me least of all. But in spite of all that I will try.
I think we are in a transition period too. We have received an incredible amount of information, but now we kind of have a quiet period where we have to decide what to do with it all. Will we seek the Lord? Will we find peace one with another? I am not quite ready to write us off yet. I think there is still time to repent.
Our track record to date is problematic for sure. The guide and standard is a complete debacle. But I have hopes that we may learn something out of it. It is a wise thing the Lord asked and shows just how un-Zion-like we are. I hope that there will be a people (even if it is just a few) who finally understand how to work and live with others. I think the fellowships, conferences, and such are ways the Lord is using to humble us and break us, so that more are ready receive Him. This is speculative. I have not received the Second Comforter, so I can't say for sure. But I can say that in my fellowship, I have been able to increase in love, show greater mercy, have compassion on the poor, and gain a greater understanding of the scriptures through joint study than I had been able to without them. I do feel a greater desire to repent, though I am still a weak and fallen person.
God bless.

totsuzen
captain of 50
Posts: 64

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by totsuzen »

I think we do agree in a lot of ways too. I think you will be a perfect example of Christlike service among any you serve with. What I have learned is that many are trying to rise up in the church and out of the church and I hope the best for all of us. They are blessed to have you.

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

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by AI2.0 »

I've read people say that the Denver Snuffer who wrote 'The Second Comforter' was not the same Denver Snuffer who gave the last lecture in Mesa. I believe it. I would say also that the Denver Snuffer who gave the lectures is not the same Denver Snuffer today. He's evolving. He's not a prophet, he's a would-be reformer, who is now trying to make people believe he's a prophet. If you read his writings you can see it. He's also a lawyer and knows how to be cagey in what he says so it's hard for people to pin him down.

Some are unsure if he claimed to have wrested keys--that's because he implied it in his writings but never said it plainly. Some are now unsure if he's claiming to be the Davidic Servant--that's because again, he's being cagey in the way he states things. This allows those who are not ready or are uncomfortable for these messages to pretend that he isn't actually saying things.

If you ask me, the reason you can't find straight, plain, clear answers, is because of a deliberate choice on Denver Snuffer's part to NOT be plain and direct. And, this bad habit has infected many of his followers as well.

All I can say is, if you are unsure about him(and you should be), you are way smarter not to throw away the true church for a mirage. The Snuffer fruits will begin to show soon enough....they already are. The John Doe incident is an example of problems, the Scripture committee and their work of blasphemy on the scriptures is another. And there will be more, just way and see. I'd bet some may already know of things that are bubbling under the surface but are being kept hidden until they can't be hidden any longer.

jdt
captain of 100
Posts: 354

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by jdt »

AI2.0 wrote: November 5th, 2017, 5:04 pm I've read people say that the Denver Snuffer who wrote 'The Second Comforter' was not the same Denver Snuffer who gave the last lecture in Mesa. I believe it. I would say also that the Denver Snuffer who gave the lectures is not the same Denver Snuffer today. He's evolving. He's not a prophet, he's a would-be reformer, who is now trying to make people believe he's a prophet. If you read his writings you can see it. He's also a lawyer and knows how to be cagey in what he says so it's hard for people to pin him down.

Some are unsure if he claimed to have wrested keys--that's because he implied it in his writings but never said it plainly. Some are now unsure if he's claiming to be the Davidic Servant--that's because again, he's being cagey in the way he states things. This allows those who are not ready or are uncomfortable for these messages to pretend that he isn't actually saying things.

If you ask me, the reason you can't find straight, plain, clear answers, is because of a deliberate choice on Denver Snuffer's part to NOT be plain and direct. And, this bad habit has infected many of his followers as well.

All I can say is, if you are unsure about him(and you should be), you are way smarter not to throw away the true church for a mirage. The Snuffer fruits will begin to show soon enough....they already are. The John Doe incident is an example of problems, the Scripture committee and their work of blasphemy on the scriptures is another. And there will be more, just way and see. I'd bet some may already know of things that are bubbling under the surface but are being kept hidden until they can't be hidden any longer.
People also said that Joseph evolved from the pre-Kirtland to Kirtland and Kirtland to Nauvoo eras. And they are right. The things Joseph emphasized did change over time. And that's okay.
And I would claim that Denver is only evasive in the domains of titles, offices, priesthoods, and visitations. If you look at the message he has shared since the beginning, it is about preparing a people for the establishment of Zion. The message has been incredibly consistent and detailed.

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

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by AI2.0 »

jdt wrote: November 6th, 2017, 1:48 pm
AI2.0 wrote: November 5th, 2017, 5:04 pm I've read people say that the Denver Snuffer who wrote 'The Second Comforter' was not the same Denver Snuffer who gave the last lecture in Mesa. I believe it. I would say also that the Denver Snuffer who gave the lectures is not the same Denver Snuffer today. He's evolving. He's not a prophet, he's a would-be reformer, who is now trying to make people believe he's a prophet. If you read his writings you can see it. He's also a lawyer and knows how to be cagey in what he says so it's hard for people to pin him down.

Some are unsure if he claimed to have wrested keys--that's because he implied it in his writings but never said it plainly. Some are now unsure if he's claiming to be the Davidic Servant--that's because again, he's being cagey in the way he states things. This allows those who are not ready or are uncomfortable for these messages to pretend that he isn't actually saying things.

If you ask me, the reason you can't find straight, plain, clear answers, is because of a deliberate choice on Denver Snuffer's part to NOT be plain and direct. And, this bad habit has infected many of his followers as well.

All I can say is, if you are unsure about him(and you should be), you are way smarter not to throw away the true church for a mirage. The Snuffer fruits will begin to show soon enough....they already are. The John Doe incident is an example of problems, the Scripture committee and their work of blasphemy on the scriptures is another. And there will be more, just way and see. I'd bet some may already know of things that are bubbling under the surface but are being kept hidden until they can't be hidden any longer.
People also said that Joseph evolved from the pre-Kirtland to Kirtland and Kirtland to Nauvoo eras. And they are right. The things Joseph emphasized did change over time. And that's okay.
And I would claim that Denver is only evasive in the domains of titles, offices, priesthoods, and visitations. If you look at the message he has shared since the beginning, it is about preparing a people for the establishment of Zion. The message has been incredibly consistent and detailed.
Joseph is very different from Denver Snuffer in that he never waivered from the understanding of his calling and the authority he'd been given to translate the Book of Mormon and restore the true church of Jesus Christ to the earth. The 'changes' he made were consistent with his claim to be the Lord's anointed and his call to receive continuing revelation in order to restore all things.

Compare him to Denver Snuffer, the reluctant pseudo leader of a smattering of groups that insist they are not a church and have no leader. He also does not claim to have come to this position by a call from God, but rather because of the mess up of the true prophets of God who lead and guide the Lord's true church. His message in the beginning was to teach others how to receive the second comforter. His message in 'Passing the Heavenly Gift' was to tell the world that the Lord's true church was rejected about a decade after it was restored! And, NOW his message in his 'covenant' for the establishment of Zion. But, he still doesn't come out and tell anyone plainly what his position in all of this is. You don't even know what he means by claiming the Lord changed his name to 'David'-- I believe you admitted that. So, how can Denver Snuffer be compared to Joseph Smith?

Denver used to seem to want to move things back to the way they were when Joseph was the Prophet--but that's obviously not his message anymore--he's creating his own pseudo 'Mormon' Religion by picking and choosing what to keep and what to throw out(as his scripture committee is also doing)--he's thrown out the whole church structure/priesthood organization of Apostles, Prophets, Bishops, which should have been a clear big red flag to any active, devout LDS member, that Snuffer was creating a break off sect, not 'correcting' apostasy in his teachings.

Sometimes I'm incredulous that as of today, LDS members are still being deceived by him. The fruits are there for those who will actually look clearly.

jdt
captain of 100
Posts: 354

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by jdt »

AI2.0 wrote: November 7th, 2017, 9:30 am Joseph is very different from Denver Snuffer in that he never waivered from the understanding of his calling and the authority he'd been given to translate the Book of Mormon and restore the true church of Jesus Christ to the earth. The 'changes' he made were consistent with his claim to be the Lord's anointed and his call to receive continuing revelation in order to restore all things.
David Whitmer would disagree with you, in more or less the same way you are disagreeing with me.
Compare him to Denver Snuffer, the reluctant pseudo leader of a smattering of groups that insist they are not a church and have no leader. He also does not claim to have come to this position by a call from God, but rather because of the mess up of the true prophets of God who lead and guide the Lord's true church. His message in the beginning was to teach others how to receive the second comforter. His message in 'Passing the Heavenly Gift' was to tell the world that the Lord's true church was rejected about a decade after it was restored! And, NOW his message in his 'covenant' for the establishment of Zion.
Denver's message has shown problems with the LDS church since the beginning. People simply read into things what they want read into it. When I taught Gospel Doctrine, I made sure we read any verse in the Book of Mormon that condemns paying priests (which are many). You know what the reaction was everytime? (Paraphrased) Yeah that is a big problem for Catholics and Baptists. If most LDS even know that General Authorities are paid salaries that put them in the top 5% of Americans, they don't connect this with those scriptures. Same goes with scriptures about priestcraft and unrighteous dominion, taking care of the poor, costly apparel and fine sanctuaries, and so on. Denver pointed out those issues from the beginning. Now Passing the Heavenly Gift did not just read and expound those same scriptures it finally tied names and events together to show things for people who did not look inward. When it was finally presented in a way that folks could no long pretend things were talking about other people, then he gets the boot.
But, he still doesn't come out and tell anyone plainly what his position in all of this is. You don't even know what he means by claiming the Lord changed his name to 'David'-- I believe you admitted that. So, how can Denver Snuffer be compared to Joseph Smith?
If we learn much from history it is that we ought to let things play out a little before declaring we understand things with certainty. Early on everyone thought that the Church was the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy of the stone cut out of the mountain without hands. By 1844, everyone abandoned that thought in favor of the Council of Fifty being the fulfillment. Well that did not pan out either, so the modern interpretation has put it back on the Church. I would claim that people have the problem of looking to claim a fulfillment first, and then try to fit the history to that prophecy, rather than looking at the prophecy and asking what it means, and then looking to history to see if there is a possible fulfillment. So me, I take things at face value, if the Denver says the Lord gave him a new name of David, I go with that. If I read the prophecies about the Davidic Servant, I don't jump ahead and say well how does Denver fulfill this. If the prophecy is fulfilled by Denver great, if he does not great. It does not impact the message he has shared to date.
Please try to open your mind for just a moment to this way of thinking. Even if you disagree with my conclusions on Denver and the current state of the LDS Church, you can at least understand how many in the remnant think and how they are motivated. We don't care about claimed titles, priesthoods, offices, lineages, and so on. We care about a message from the Lord. Many in the LDS church immediately ascribe those titles and offices upon ordination and then raise every message to match the office of the speaker. That is fine, that is their right. But we don't do that. We take the message first and evaluate that. Then if we find it to be prophetic, then we can say the speaker may have been a prophet. Same goes with ancient prophecy. Don't start with the premise that event X is the fulfillment.
Denver used to seem to want to move things back to the way they were when Joseph was the Prophet--but that's obviously not his message anymore--he's creating his own pseudo 'Mormon' Religion by picking and choosing what to keep and what to throw out(as his scripture committee is also doing)--he's thrown out the whole church structure/priesthood organization of Apostles, Prophets, Bishops, which should have been a clear big red flag to any active, devout LDS member, that Snuffer was creating a break off sect, not 'correcting' apostasy in his teachings.

Sometimes I'm incredulous that as of today, LDS members are still being deceived by him. The fruits are there for those who will actually look clearly.
Joseph did not establish Zion in his lifetime and neither has anyone else in the 170 years now since his death. (That's okay, the earth's history proves this difficult and rare.) The things he did were based on the times and needs of people in New England. (Why do you think the Book of Mormon uses King James english?) We are in a different time now. And as you personally demonstrate in this very post, the biggest hangup LDS have now is with priesthood and offices. Just like the Pharisees in Christs day were stuck on being descendants of Abraham. Well, God sent the Gospel to the gentiles after the house of Israel rejected it, so why can't He further His work in a non-hierarchical manner after His message was rejected by the most hierarchical church? We should pick up where Joseph left off, but it is not an exact duplicate and it never was intended to be.

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

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by AI2.0 »

My responses in blue;
jdt wrote: November 7th, 2017, 2:04 pm
AI2.0 wrote: November 7th, 2017, 9:30 am Joseph is very different from Denver Snuffer in that he never waivered from the understanding of his calling and the authority he'd been given to translate the Book of Mormon and restore the true church of Jesus Christ to the earth. The 'changes' he made were consistent with his claim to be the Lord's anointed and his call to receive continuing revelation in order to restore all things.
David Whitmer would disagree with you, in more or less the same way you are disagreeing with me.Yes, David Whitmer would disagree, he came to believe Joseph was a fallen prophet and that he should be the prophet. I think David Whitmer was wrong.
Compare him to Denver Snuffer, the reluctant pseudo leader of a smattering of groups that insist they are not a church and have no leader. He also does not claim to have come to this position by a call from God, but rather because of the mess up of the true prophets of God who lead and guide the Lord's true church. His message in the beginning was to teach others how to receive the second comforter. His message in 'Passing the Heavenly Gift' was to tell the world that the Lord's true church was rejected about a decade after it was restored! And, NOW his message in his 'covenant' for the establishment of Zion.
Denver's message has shown problems with the LDS church since the beginning. People simply read into things what they want read into it. When I taught Gospel Doctrine, I made sure we read any verse in the Book of Mormon that condemns paying priests (which are many). You know what the reaction was everytime? (Paraphrased) Yeah that is a big problem for Catholics and Baptists. If most LDS even know that General Authorities are paid salaries that put them in the top 5% of Americans, they don't connect this with those scriptures.I think your class might bring up Presbytarians and Lutherans--those who attend theological college to get a job as a minister. General Authorities are not paid a salary, with job reviews, bonuses etc. which they were trained for. They are paid a stipend so that they don't have to rely on others to pay their living expenses while they serve. Same goes with scriptures about priestcraft and unrighteous dominion, taking care of the poor, costly apparel and fine sanctuaries, and so on. Denver pointed out those issues from the beginning.If Denver is criticizing the paying of stipends for full time church service that a man is called to, then he's wrong to do so, IMO. Now Passing the Heavenly Gift did not just read and expound those same scriptures it finally tied names and events together to show things for people who did not look inward. When it was finally presented in a way that folks could no long pretend things were talking about other people, then he gets the boot.Snuffer misrepresented events in history and he's engaged in false accusations and criticisms that fit his revisionist history. But, he validated a lot of people's critical views of early church leaders and events, so they also listen to his other teachings.
But, he still doesn't come out and tell anyone plainly what his position in all of this is. You don't even know what he means by claiming the Lord changed his name to 'David'-- I believe you admitted that. So, how can Denver Snuffer be compared to Joseph Smith?
If we learn much from history it is that we ought to let things play out a little before declaring we understand things with certainty. Early on everyone thought that the Church was the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy of the stone cut out of the mountain without hands. By 1844, everyone abandoned that thought in favor of the Council of Fifty being the fulfillment.Is this another revisionist version Snuffer has taught you? Well that did not pan out either, so the modern interpretation has put it back on the Church. I would claim that people have the problem of looking to claim a fulfillment first, and then try to fit the history to that prophecy, rather than looking at the prophecy and asking what it means, and then looking to history to see if there is a possible fulfillment.Most people are not trying to figure out how to fit prophecy in to their own speculations--though it's a favorite pastime here at LDSFF. So me, I take things at face value, if the Denver says the Lord gave him a new name of David, I go with that. If I read the prophecies about the Davidic Servant, I don't jump ahead and say well how does Denver fulfill this. If the prophecy is fulfilled by Denver great, if he does not great. It does not impact the message he has shared to date.You're ignoring the point that Denver is presenting himself as head of a dispensation, when this was never a part of his message,
ever.

Please try to open your mind for just a moment to this way of thinking. Even if you disagree with my conclusions on Denver and the current state of the LDS Church, you can at least understand how many in the remnant think and how they are motivated. We don't care about claimed titles, priesthoods, offices, lineages, and so on. That's fine, you can reject those things, but don't kid your self--the Lord cares about lineage, preisthood, offices etc. He set up a church and Joseph restored it--these things are foundational to the gospel of Jesus Christ.We care about a message from the Lord. Many in the LDS church immediately ascribe those titles and offices upon ordination and then raise every message to match the office of the speaker. That is fine, that is their right. But we don't do that. We take the message first and evaluate that. Then if we find it to be prophetic, then we can say the speaker may have been a prophet. Same goes with ancient prophecy. Don't start with the premise that event X is the fulfillment.You're only describing yourself--a lot of Remnant people do see Denver as a prophet and hang on his every word.
Denver used to seem to want to move things back to the way they were when Joseph was the Prophet--but that's obviously not his message anymore--he's creating his own pseudo 'Mormon' Religion by picking and choosing what to keep and what to throw out(as his scripture committee is also doing)--he's thrown out the whole church structure/priesthood organization of Apostles, Prophets, Bishops, which should have been a clear big red flag to any active, devout LDS member, that Snuffer was creating a break off sect, not 'correcting' apostasy in his teachings.

Sometimes I'm incredulous that as of today, LDS members are still being deceived by him. The fruits are there for those who will actually look clearly.
Joseph did not establish Zion in his lifetime and neither has anyone else in the 170 years now since his death. (That's okay, the earth's history proves this difficult and rare.) The things he did were based on the times and needs of people in New England. (Why do you think the Book of Mormon uses King James english?) We are in a different time now.I disagree with this premise completely. The teachings Jesus shared 2,000 years ago and the ones shared 200 years ago are still valid today and no, this is not a different time because people are not different--they never change. And as you personally demonstrate in this very post, the biggest hangup LDS have now is with priesthood and offices. Just like the Pharisees in Christs day were stuck on being descendants of Abraham. Well, God sent the Gospel to the gentiles after the house of Israel rejected it, so why can't He further His work in a non-hierarchical manner after His message was rejected by the most hierarchical church? We should pick up where Joseph left off, but it is not an exact duplicate and it never was intended to be.
Why? Because he doesn't act in such an out of character way. His message does not change, it is given through Prophets,
who hold priesthood authority and therefore can speak for him. They follow an organization which allows us to know we are being counseled by true messengers. Snuffer only rejected the church and it's organization when apparently, he lost his faith and then decided to help take others out of the church as well. And, God allowed for the gospel to be preached to the gentiles, at the same time that the jews were still being preached to--by a church, with an organization, which was guided by men, called of God.

jdt
captain of 100
Posts: 354

Re: The questions Denver's movement can't and won't answer

Post by jdt »

My responses in red:
AI2.0 wrote: November 8th, 2017, 5:31 pm My responses in blue;
jdt wrote: November 7th, 2017, 2:04 pm
AI2.0 wrote: November 7th, 2017, 9:30 am Joseph is very different from Denver Snuffer in that he never waivered from the understanding of his calling and the authority he'd been given to translate the Book of Mormon and restore the true church of Jesus Christ to the earth. The 'changes' he made were consistent with his claim to be the Lord's anointed and his call to receive continuing revelation in order to restore all things.
David Whitmer would disagree with you, in more or less the same way you are disagreeing with me.Yes, David Whitmer would disagree, he came to believe Joseph was a fallen prophet and that he should be the prophet. I think David Whitmer was wrong. I think David Whitmer was wrong too. But the point is I think you are wrong about Denver in the same way he was wrong about Joseph.
Compare him to Denver Snuffer, the reluctant pseudo leader of a smattering of groups that insist they are not a church and have no leader. He also does not claim to have come to this position by a call from God, but rather because of the mess up of the true prophets of God who lead and guide the Lord's true church. His message in the beginning was to teach others how to receive the second comforter. His message in 'Passing the Heavenly Gift' was to tell the world that the Lord's true church was rejected about a decade after it was restored! And, NOW his message in his 'covenant' for the establishment of Zion.
Denver's message has shown problems with the LDS church since the beginning. People simply read into things what they want read into it. When I taught Gospel Doctrine, I made sure we read any verse in the Book of Mormon that condemns paying priests (which are many). You know what the reaction was everytime? (Paraphrased) Yeah that is a big problem for Catholics and Baptists. If most LDS even know that General Authorities are paid salaries that put them in the top 5% of Americans, they don't connect this with those scriptures.I think your class might bring up Presbytarians and Lutherans--those who attend theological college to get a job as a minister. General Authorities are not paid a salary, with job reviews, bonuses etc. which they were trained for. They are paid a stipend so that they don't have to rely on others to pay their living expenses while they serve. The Book of Mormon again goes to great lengths to show the distinction between salary and stipend and whatever other term you want to pick to say they are paid for their office is irrelevant. King Benjamin being a great example.Same goes with scriptures about priestcraft and unrighteous dominion, taking care of the poor, costly apparel and fine sanctuaries, and so on. Denver pointed out those issues from the beginning.If Denver is criticizing the paying of stipends for full time church service that a man is called to, then he's wrong to do so, IMO. At the source of the matter is that you take exception with the Book of Mormon.Now Passing the Heavenly Gift did not just read and expound those same scriptures it finally tied names and events together to show things for people who did not look inward. When it was finally presented in a way that folks could no long pretend things were talking about other people, then he gets the boot.Snuffer misrepresented events in history and he's engaged in false accusations and criticisms that fit his revisionist history. But, he validated a lot of people's critical views of early church leaders and events, so they also listen to his other teachings.
What can I say "nuh-uh he did not misrepresent events in history"? You did not exactly offer any examples (but then again neither did his stake president).
But, he still doesn't come out and tell anyone plainly what his position in all of this is. You don't even know what he means by claiming the Lord changed his name to 'David'-- I believe you admitted that. So, how can Denver Snuffer be compared to Joseph Smith?
If we learn much from history it is that we ought to let things play out a little before declaring we understand things with certainty. Early on everyone thought that the Church was the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy of the stone cut out of the mountain without hands. By 1844, everyone abandoned that thought in favor of the Council of Fifty being the fulfillment.Is this another revisionist version Snuffer has taught you? Want to know how I know you haven't read the Council of Fifty minutes (transcribed and published by the church historians office)? But do you even care about anything that does not fit your narrative? Here is another gem for you: there were some on the council that thought it (the Kingdom or Council of Fifty) was more important than the Church. Others agreed and the minutes do not record anyone objecting.Well that did not pan out either, so the modern interpretation has put it back on the Church. I would claim that people have the problem of looking to claim a fulfillment first, and then try to fit the history to that prophecy, rather than looking at the prophecy and asking what it means, and then looking to history to see if there is a possible fulfillment.Most people are not trying to figure out how to fit prophecy in to their own speculations--though it's a favorite pastime here at LDSFF. LOL. Fair enough.So me, I take things at face value, if the Denver says the Lord gave him a new name of David, I go with that. If I read the prophecies about the Davidic Servant, I don't jump ahead and say well how does Denver fulfill this. If the prophecy is fulfilled by Denver great, if he does not great. It does not impact the message he has shared to date.You're ignoring the point that Denver is presenting himself as head of a dispensation, when this was never a part of his message,
ever.
So would you accept Denver's message had he not claimed to be the head of a dispensation? If not, then I just don't see where you are going with this.
Please try to open your mind for just a moment to this way of thinking. Even if you disagree with my conclusions on Denver and the current state of the LDS Church, you can at least understand how many in the remnant think and how they are motivated. We don't care about claimed titles, priesthoods, offices, lineages, and so on. That's fine, you can reject those things, but don't kid your self--the Lord cares about lineage, preisthood, offices etc. He set up a church and Joseph restored it--these things are foundational to the gospel of Jesus Christ.We care about a message from the Lord. Many in the LDS church immediately ascribe those titles and offices upon ordination and then raise every message to match the office of the speaker. That is fine, that is their right. But we don't do that. We take the message first and evaluate that. Then if we find it to be prophetic, then we can say the speaker may have been a prophet. Same goes with ancient prophecy. Don't start with the premise that event X is the fulfillment.You're only describing yourself--a lot of Remnant people do see Denver as a prophet and hang on his every word.You still don't get it. I do see Denver as a prophet and I do look forward to when he speaks or writes. The difference is in the why. I see Denver as a prophet because over the last decade he has given a great wealth of information I find valuable through discussions about the scriptures, church history, and visions he has shared. He has proven (to me at least) to be a consistent and reliable source of uplifting teachings. Teachings that I have not seen duplicated anywhere else. Teachings that have inspired me to a greater level of repentence.
Now in contrast, (assuming the normal pattern is followed) at next general conference, a new apostle is going to be named and sustained and will likely speak in the Sunday morning session. Most likely this is going to be a person that the majority of the active, temple recommend holding members really know nothing about. Those same active members are going to consider him a prophet and much more greatly consider his address at this conference. Why? Not because of anything he has done, but purely based on his office and priesthood. I say this is plainly maintaining power and influence by virtue of the priesthood and condemned by God. Denver's influence has been gained and is maintained through persuasion (as Section 121 recommends).

Denver used to seem to want to move things back to the way they were when Joseph was the Prophet--but that's obviously not his message anymore--he's creating his own pseudo 'Mormon' Religion by picking and choosing what to keep and what to throw out(as his scripture committee is also doing)--he's thrown out the whole church structure/priesthood organization of Apostles, Prophets, Bishops, which should have been a clear big red flag to any active, devout LDS member, that Snuffer was creating a break off sect, not 'correcting' apostasy in his teachings.

Sometimes I'm incredulous that as of today, LDS members are still being deceived by him. The fruits are there for those who will actually look clearly.
Joseph did not establish Zion in his lifetime and neither has anyone else in the 170 years now since his death. (That's okay, the earth's history proves this difficult and rare.) The things he did were based on the times and needs of people in New England. (Why do you think the Book of Mormon uses King James english?) We are in a different time now.I disagree with this premise completely. The teachings Jesus shared 2,000 years ago and the ones shared 200 years ago are still valid today and no, this is not a different time because people are not different--they never change. There are indeed many timeless and fixed aspects to the Gospel. But frankly the organization of believers is perhaps the most dynamic. Seriously name 2 dispensations that had the same organization. Things change sometimes within a dispensation (see Alma the Elder and Mosiah) And as you personally demonstrate in this very post, the biggest hangup LDS have now is with priesthood and offices. Just like the Pharisees in Christs day were stuck on being descendants of Abraham. Well, God sent the Gospel to the gentiles after the house of Israel rejected it, so why can't He further His work in a non-hierarchical manner after His message was rejected by the most hierarchical church? We should pick up where Joseph left off, but it is not an exact duplicate and it never was intended to be.
Why? Because he doesn't act in such an out of character way. His message does not change, it is given through Prophets,
who hold priesthood authority and therefore can speak for him. They follow an organization which allows us to know we are being counseled by true messengers.The scriptures repeatedly refute this concept (see Elijah, Lehi, John the Baptist, Christ himself, Abinadi, and so on.) Snuffer only rejected the church and it's organization when apparently, he lost his faith and then decided to help take others out of the church as well. And, God allowed for the gospel to be preached to the gentiles, at the same time that the jews were still being preached to--by a church, with an organization, which was guided by men, called of God.
My question above still stands to name 2 dispensations with the same organization between them. And again, do not misunderstand me. I am perfectly fine with organizations. But I can clearly see the wisdom of the Lord to move away from a more formal organization now, simply due to the hangups people in this generation have with them. Let me ask you this: put yourself in a modern day road to Emmaus situation. A person who you do not know with no distinguishing characteristics comes up and expounds the scriptures to you, in a way beyond you have ever understood. Is that person's message diminished because (s)he came outside of an organization, without apparent priesthood, office, lineage or titles? Seriously, deep down how do you think you would respond?

Post Reply