What price did He pay?

[Severed Lips]

Our gospel vernacular often ascribes the phrase “paid the price” in reference to the Savior’s atonement. What exactly do we think this means?



Part of the reason this has been on my mind is because we know that the consequence of our sins is spiritual death, or for that matter, eternal separation from God and no eternal redemption or divine potential. Essentially eternal damnation for all of us had there been no atonement wrought by Jesus. 


So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

[FrankOne]

Our gospel vernacular often ascribes the phrase “paid the price” in reference to the Savior’s atonement. What exactly do we think this means?



Part of the reason this has been on my mind is because we know that the consequence of our sins is spiritual death, or for that matter, eternal separation from God and no eternal redemption or divine potential. Essentially eternal damnation for all of us had there been no atonement wrought by Jesus. 


So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

That is a very good question for which I do not think we have an answer.
Whatever price he paid, he suffered no loss from it because he is the complete Son of God. Also, whatever he did was a service, not a sacrifice. He lost nothing, therefore the idea of sacrifice is more of a basic idea of how to understand something that goes beyond our comprehension.

If i were to speculate, I would guess that the law of the universe and time itself had to be satisfied of something for him to give the gift to us, which was perfect forgiveness. I would think it has something to do with satisfying justice on a universal scale.

Forgiveness is perfect.

[onefour1]

Doctrine and Covenants 19:16-19
16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;

17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink—

19 Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.

Here we learn that if we do not repent we must take on the same suffering that Jesus did. So, in this way Jesus has taken upon himself our suffering if we repent.

[darknesstolight]

Our gospel vernacular often ascribes the phrase “paid the price” in reference to the Savior’s atonement. What exactly do we think this means?



Part of the reason this has been on my mind is because we know that the consequence of our sins is spiritual death, or for that matter, eternal separation from God and no eternal redemption or divine potential. Essentially eternal damnation for all of us had there been no atonement wrought by Jesus. 


So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

He didn't pay the price on your behalf but to the degree that you have to offer up a sacrifice, and that sacrifice is truly a sacrifice, then it will hurt and you will suffer, however, you have faith or you know when you make the sacrifice that the reward for temporary suffering will be worth it.

When we plant a garden we are making a sacrifice. We are putting off immediate reward and suffering through the work of tending the garden and all that this entails (if done correctly it will be a lot of labour but also a joy). Same can be applied to any practice, or habit, or desire we wish to become masters of. If you want to lose weight you are going to have to sacrifice your laziness or perhaps your tendency to procrastinate, or your excuses, which when you look at it, you clearly enjoy and find a hard time giving up, if you find yourself in the situation of needing to exercise because you aren't (speaking generally).

If you don't get up and do the exercise, then you will sacrifice your good looking and healthy body. If you do get up and do the exercises, then you sacrifice the energy, the time, the complacency that is oh so nice, "me time", and so forth.

My point is that Christ did pay a price in the sense that He made a true sacrifice. It wasn't a fake sacrifice. It wasn't a trick. He really and truly sacrificed. He acted and did exactly what He expects us to be and to do and to act. He sacrificed His life because of sinners and endured for instance great physical and psychological pain as a result and did not retaliate or use any of that hateful energy spent on Him, to hold a grudge or to hate. Jesus bore the price to love His enemy to the extreme.

But Jesus did not pay the price on your behalf so that you would not need to suffer. You will have to pay a price, no matter what you do, there is going to be a sacrifice involved.

...

[Severed Lips]

Our gospel vernacular often ascribes the phrase “paid the price” in reference to the Savior’s atonement. What exactly do we think this means?



Part of the reason this has been on my mind is because we know that the consequence of our sins is spiritual death, or for that matter, eternal separation from God and no eternal redemption or divine potential. Essentially eternal damnation for all of us had there been no atonement wrought by Jesus. 


So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

That is a very good question for which I do not think we have an answer.
Whatever price he paid, he suffered no loss from it because he is the complete Son of God. Also, whatever he did was a service, not a sacrifice. He lost nothing, therefore the idea of sacrifice is more of a basic idea of how to understand something that goes beyond our comprehension.

If i were to speculate, I would guess that the law of the universe and time itself had to be satisfied of something for him to give the gift to us, which was perfect forgiveness. I would think it has something to do with satisfying justice on a universal scale.

Forgiveness is perfect.

Thank you for your response.

What do you mean by “he suffered no loss from it”?

[FrankOne]

Our gospel vernacular often ascribes the phrase “paid the price” in reference to the Savior’s atonement. What exactly do we think this means?



Part of the reason this has been on my mind is because we know that the consequence of our sins is spiritual death, or for that matter, eternal separation from God and no eternal redemption or divine potential. Essentially eternal damnation for all of us had there been no atonement wrought by Jesus. 


So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

That is a very good question for which I do not think we have an answer.
Whatever price he paid, he suffered no loss from it because he is the complete Son of God. Also, whatever he did was a service, not a sacrifice. He lost nothing, therefore the idea of sacrifice is more of a basic idea of how to understand something that goes beyond our comprehension.

If i were to speculate, I would guess that the law of the universe and time itself had to be satisfied of something for him to give the gift to us, which was perfect forgiveness. I would think it has something to do with satisfying justice on a universal scale.

Forgiveness is perfect.

Thank you for your response.

What do you mean by “he suffered no loss from it”?

I would find many that would disagree with what I've said because it seems to contradict current teachings. My perspective is one man's attempt to make sense of all facets.

Although it appears from scripture that he physically suffered on the cross , we actually can't be sure that he did. There are no accounts of him crying out in pain that I know of. A Son of God does easily have the power to turn off his pain sensors because there are men today that can do it. See "Fakirs" which also walk on hot coals. These aren't just stories, it happens today. Men today can subject themselves to being encased in ice well beyond what is deemed possible and not suffer from hypothermia. See "Wim Hof". Since these things are visibly possible for men...why do we assume that Christ was in agony on the cross? Perhaps he did...and perhaps he did not.

In answer to your specific question , Christ didn't lose anything in what he did. He suffered no loss. In fact, after he left his body for 3 days and returned to it, his new body was perfected at the moment that he returned to the Father....so...he actually gained from it. Some say that he died and gave up his life. How is that possible at all? He merely left and came back. The general perspective paints a dark picture of death. The truth is that it is so bright that we cannot comprehend it.

If we were to search for anything that he may have lost, one could say that he lost the rest of his years as a mortal on earth. It wasn't Gods will that he live as a mortal any longer than he did, that's why it happened . No doubt, Christ enjoyed following the will of the Father. He had no desire to stay as a mortal because if he did, it would have been contradictory to the will of the Father.

We, as humans, tend to become dramatic about events which then skews the actual occurrences. What most see in Christ's crucifixion is a tragedy. There was no tragedy, only the perfect will of God and the willingness of Christ. Many men have given their lives in much more of a horrific manner in order to save others and without the certainty of an afterlife. Christ knew what was going to happen and he gladly chose it.

The event in the Garden of Gethsemane was something that we do not comprehend. His blood purged out of his body and I do believe he suffered tremendously, but by his choice. That moment was what appears to be the actual atonement. A purification which no man but Christ could have gone through and survived in the body.

We tend to dramatize pain and think it terrible. If pain is so 'bad' why does it seem to always lead to 'good'? We do everything in our lives to live in more comfort. We avoid pain at all costs.

The true test of our souls is to thank God when we experience pain and the deep lesson is to learn that the constant seeking of comfort is the avoidance of truth and the final lesson, ... which is to arrive at a state where one recognizes that pain is no longer necessary for our experience.

[onefour1]

John 10:17-18
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

I don't know that we fully understand the suffering of Jesus. The above verse tells us that no man could take Jesus' life from him. He laid down his life of his own will and had the power to take it again also. I think that he had life within himself and perhaps as the Son of God he could endure far more pain and suffering than the average human being. His experience in Gethsemane had him, God the greatest of all, suffering both body and spirit. He bled from every pore of his body. My personal view is that if any of us had to go through what Jesus did while here in mortality, it would have killed us. If Jesus suffered to the extent of all mankind, this would be impossible for any other mortal to bear. Maybe since he was the direct offspring of a God, he was able to bear far greater pain than we all can.

I often wonder if Jesus was never killed by those who sought his life because they didn't have the power to do so as the verse above seems to indicate.

[Reluctant Watchman]

There are laws that govern the universe. One of those is the law of justice. Any and all sin must receive due justice. That debt of sin can be "paid" (satisfied) through the law of mercy, to which the atonement of Christ is the epitome.

[Atrasado]

The law was a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. When Christ suffered on the cross and in Gethsemane Jacob taught that He "suffere[d] the pains of all men, yea, the pains of every living creature, both men, women, and children, who belong to the family of Adam." In other words, in some way I don't understand He literally suffered all the pains of our sins, whenever they occurred, whatever they might be and I believe that means that He suffered those things from our point of view. That's why the bill was paid in full if we would repent.

This completely indexed life and experience throughout the universe because you can't understand many of our pains without understanding our happiness and hopes. And He cared enough about each of us that He did this to each of our deaths (and probably beyond). Every lonely road we walk, every stupid thing we say that hurts another, every rape or murder, and every slander and everything else He experienced, walked with us the whole way, and somehow overcame each pain without any bitterness. He truly is the Almighty and beyond all understanding!!! If we would just repent...

[onefour1]

There are laws that govern the universe. One of those is the law of justice. Any and all sin must receive due justice. That debt of sin can be "paid" (satisfied) through the law of mercy, to which the atonement of Christ is the epitome.

The way I see the appeasement of the law of justice working is that not only does all sin receive due justice but all injustice must also receive recompense. Jesus suffered to the extent of all mankind's sins but he himself did no sin. All the suffering and pain that Jesus went through was not just upon a being who never sinned. The Father must grant to the Christ a just recompense for all the suffering, pain, and death that Jesus went through. I believe that recompense was that if mankind would repent, he was recompensed the right to forgive sin (grant mercy). It is the just for the unjust.

1 Peter 3:18
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

[FrankOne]

There are laws that govern the universe. One of those is the law of justice. Any and all sin must receive due justice. That debt of sin can be "paid" (satisfied) through the law of mercy, to which the atonement of Christ is the epitome.

I'm interested in understanding the "law of mercy" which can satisfy the law of justice and how mercy answers for justice. Could you go into that subject further?

[Silver Pie]

So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

Read Come Let Us Adore Him - the chapter on the atonement. It speaks very plainly and says that Christ did suffer our pains. The pains of those who were victims - and the pains of those who were perpetrators when they come to the agonizing reality of what they'd done.

Some excerpts (the chapter begins on page 216 of the book):

As the Lord knelt in prayer, His vicarious suffering began. He was overcome by pain and anguish. He felt within Him, not just the pains of sin, but also the illnesses men suffer as a result of the Fall, and their foolish and evil choices.

This second wave was so much greater than the first that it seemed to entirely overcome the Lord. The Lord was now stricken with physical injuries, as well as spiritual affliction. As He suffered anew, His flesh was torn which He healed using the power of charity within Him. The Lord had such life within Him, such power and virtue within Him, that although He suffered in His flesh, these injuries healed and His flesh restored.

[Silver Pie]

It continues on, in regards to the Lord's greater and greater sufferings until -

a final wave came upon Him with such violence as to cut Him at every pore. It seemed for a moment that He was torn apart, and that blood came out of every pore. The Lord writhed in pain upon the ground as this great final torment was poured upon Him.

All virtue was taken from Him. All the great life force in Him was stricken and afflicted. All the light turned to darkness. He was humbled, drained and left with nothing. It is not possible for a man to bear such pains and live, but with nothing more than will, hope in His Father, and charity toward all men, He emerged from the final wave of torment . . . .

In the final wave, the most brutal, most evil, most heinous sins men inflict upon one another were felt by Him as a victim of the worst men can do. He knew how it felt to wrongly suffer death. He knew what it was like to be a mother holding a child in her arms as they are both killed by those who delight in their suffering. . . . He knew what it was to have virtue robbed from the innocent. . . . There was no cruelty, no offense, no evil that mankind has suffered or will suffer that was not put upon Him.

My bold:

As a result of what the Lord suffered, there is no condition - physical, spiritual or mental - that He does not fully understand.

He suffered that we might avoid sin by being obedient to His commandments. None of us need harm another, if we will follow Him. He knows fully the consequences of sin. He teaches His followers how to avoid sin.

[ransomme]

Our gospel vernacular often ascribes the phrase “paid the price” in reference to the Savior’s atonement. What exactly do we think this means?



Part of the reason this has been on my mind is because we know that the consequence of our sins is spiritual death, or for that matter, eternal separation from God and no eternal redemption or divine potential. Essentially eternal damnation for all of us had there been no atonement wrought by Jesus. 


So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

That is a very good question for which I do not think we have an answer.
Whatever price he paid, he suffered no loss from it because he is the complete Son of God. Also, whatever he did was a service, not a sacrifice. He lost nothing, therefore the idea of sacrifice is more of a basic idea of how to understand something that goes beyond our comprehension.

If i were to speculate, I would guess that the law of the universe and time itself had to be satisfied of something for him to give the gift to us, which was perfect forgiveness. I would think it has something to do with satisfying justice on a universal scale.

Forgiveness is perfect.

Thank you for your response.

What do you mean by “he suffered no loss from it”?

I would find many that would disagree with what I've said because it seems to contradict current teachings. My perspective is one man's attempt to make sense of all facets.

Although it appears from scripture that he physically suffered on the cross , we actually can't be sure that he did. There are no accounts of him crying out in pain that I know of. A Son of God does easily have the power to turn off his pain sensors because there are men today that can do it. See "Fakirs" which also walk on hot coals. These aren't just stories, it happens today. Men today can subject themselves to being encased in ice well beyond what is deemed possible and not suffer from hypothermia. See "Wim Hof". Since these things are visibly possible for men...why do we assume that Christ was in agony on the cross? Perhaps he did...and perhaps he did not.

In answer to your specific question , Christ didn't lose anything in what he did. He suffered no loss. In fact, after he left his body for 3 days and returned to it, his new body was perfected at the moment that he returned to the Father....so...he actually gained from it. Some say that he died and gave up his life. How is that possible at all? He merely left and came back. The general perspective paints a dark picture of death. The truth is that it is so bright that we cannot comprehend it.

If we were to search for anything that he may have lost, one could say that he lost the rest of his years as a mortal on earth. It wasn't Gods will that he live as a mortal any longer than he did, that's why it happened . No doubt, Christ enjoyed following the will of the Father. He had no desire to stay as a mortal because if he did, it would have been contradictory to the will of the Father.

We, as humans, tend to become dramatic about events which then skews the actual occurrences. What most see in Christ's crucifixion is a tragedy. There was no tragedy, only the perfect will of God and the willingness of Christ. Many men have given their lives in much more of a horrific manner in order to save others and without the certainty of an afterlife. Christ knew what was going to happen and he gladly chose it.

The event in the Garden of Gethsemane was something that we do not comprehend. His blood purged out of his body and I do believe he suffered tremendously, but by his choice. That moment was what appears to be the actual atonement. A purification which no man but Christ could have gone through and survived in the body.

We tend to dramatize pain and think it terrible. If pain is so 'bad' why does it seem to always lead to 'good'? We do everything in our lives to live in more comfort. We avoid pain at all costs.

The true test of our souls is to thank God when we experience pain and the deep lesson is to learn that the constant seeking of comfort is the avoidance of truth and the final lesson, ... which is to arrive at a state where one recognizes that pain is no longer necessary for our experience.

So he rebuffed the temptations of the Adversary and misusing/abusing His power, His priesthood, His authority just to misuse and abuse them during the forging of the Atonement?

No it makes no sense that he didn't fully experience what He went through.

Also why is your focus on loss, or no loss? Did he have to lose something?

Besides payment is not loss, it is an exchange. Your words give an impression of this loss thing as a kind of stumbling block, misplaced focus and frankly a fundamental misunderstanding.

[inho]

Let me rephrase the question, to see if I understand it correctly:

Since Christ is not eternally separate from God, he did not suffer spiritual death, which we would have to endure.

It is true that Christ was/is not separated from God an infinite amount of time (i.e., eternally). Nevertheless, his atonement was infinite (Alma 34:12). Somehow the different kind of infinity in his atonement compesates the infinite duration of second death. As already quoted in this thread, in D&C 19 he says that he suffered what we would have to suffer.

[FrankOne]

That is a very good question for which I do not think we have an answer.
Whatever price he paid, he suffered no loss from it because he is the complete Son of God. Also, whatever he did was a service, not a sacrifice. He lost nothing, therefore the idea of sacrifice is more of a basic idea of how to understand something that goes beyond our comprehension.

If i were to speculate, I would guess that the law of the universe and time itself had to be satisfied of something for him to give the gift to us, which was perfect forgiveness. I would think it has something to do with satisfying justice on a universal scale.

Forgiveness is perfect.

Thank you for your response.

What do you mean by “he suffered no loss from it”?

I would find many that would disagree with what I've said because it seems to contradict current teachings. My perspective is one man's attempt to make sense of all facets.

Although it appears from scripture that he physically suffered on the cross , we actually can't be sure that he did. There are no accounts of him crying out in pain that I know of. A Son of God does easily have the power to turn off his pain sensors because there are men today that can do it. See "Fakirs" which also walk on hot coals. These aren't just stories, it happens today. Men today can subject themselves to being encased in ice well beyond what is deemed possible and not suffer from hypothermia. See "Wim Hof". Since these things are visibly possible for men...why do we assume that Christ was in agony on the cross? Perhaps he did...and perhaps he did not.

In answer to your specific question , Christ didn't lose anything in what he did. He suffered no loss. In fact, after he left his body for 3 days and returned to it, his new body was perfected at the moment that he returned to the Father....so...he actually gained from it. Some say that he died and gave up his life. How is that possible at all? He merely left and came back. The general perspective paints a dark picture of death. The truth is that it is so bright that we cannot comprehend it.

If we were to search for anything that he may have lost, one could say that he lost the rest of his years as a mortal on earth. It wasn't Gods will that he live as a mortal any longer than he did, that's why it happened . No doubt, Christ enjoyed following the will of the Father. He had no desire to stay as a mortal because if he did, it would have been contradictory to the will of the Father.

We, as humans, tend to become dramatic about events which then skews the actual occurrences. What most see in Christ's crucifixion is a tragedy. There was no tragedy, only the perfect will of God and the willingness of Christ. Many men have given their lives in much more of a horrific manner in order to save others and without the certainty of an afterlife. Christ knew what was going to happen and he gladly chose it.

The event in the Garden of Gethsemane was something that we do not comprehend. His blood purged out of his body and I do believe he suffered tremendously, but by his choice. That moment was what appears to be the actual atonement. A purification which no man but Christ could have gone through and survived in the body.

We tend to dramatize pain and think it terrible. If pain is so 'bad' why does it seem to always lead to 'good'? We do everything in our lives to live in more comfort. We avoid pain at all costs.

The true test of our souls is to thank God when we experience pain and the deep lesson is to learn that the constant seeking of comfort is the avoidance of truth and the final lesson, ... which is to arrive at a state where one recognizes that pain is no longer necessary for our experience.

Also why is your focus on loss, or no loss? Did he have to lose something?

I was answering a direct question that was asked of me to answer.

[FrankOne]

So we are told Christ paid the price…however from my view (which I concede is extremely limited) he didn’t suffer what we would have suffered. So exactly how did he pay the price if He didn’t endure what we would have had to endure?

Read Come Let Us Adore Him - the chapter on the atonement. It speaks very plainly and says that Christ did suffer our pains. The pains of those who were victims - and the pains of those who were perpetrators when they come to the agonizing reality of what they'd done.

Some excerpts (the chapter begins on page 216 of the book):

As the Lord knelt in prayer, His vicarious suffering began. He was overcome by pain and anguish. He felt within Him, not just the pains of sin, but also the illnesses men suffer as a result of the Fall, and their foolish and evil choices.

This second wave was so much greater than the first that it seemed to entirely overcome the Lord. The Lord was now stricken with physical injuries, as well as spiritual affliction. As He suffered anew, His flesh was torn which He healed using the power of charity within Him. The Lord had such life within Him, such power and virtue within Him, that although He suffered in His flesh, these injuries healed and His flesh restored.

The quotes that you provided was one man's speculation of the experience of Christ which is no different than my speculation. Just opinions.

[Silver Pie]

The quotes that you provided was one man's speculation of the experience of Christ which is no different than my speculation. Just opinions.

Nope. He saw this in vision. The Lord showed it to him so he could be a bona fide witness of the sufferings, death, and resurrection of Christ. He bore witness of seeing all three things.

Also, I quoted it in response to the op. I did not read the other posts in this thread until this afternoon, so I had no idea how you responded until today. And I can see truth in your response. I like what you had to say.

[FrankOne]

The quotes that you provided was one man's speculation of the experience of Christ which is no different than my speculation. Just opinions.

Nope. He saw this in vision. The Lord showed it to him so he could be a bona fide witness of the sufferings, death, and resurrection of Christ. He bore witness of seeing all three things.

Also, I quoted it in response to the op. I did not read the other posts in this thread until this afternoon, so I had no idea how you responded until today.

I can understand that you trust the guidance of Denver Snuffer, but not everyone subscribes to his version of what is true. I've read many visions from many people from many religions and faiths. The contradictions are enormous. So, for me, it is his vision, not God's truth.

[Silver Pie]

I can understand that you trust the guidance of Denver Snuffer, but not everyone subscribes to his version of what is true. I've read many visions from many people from many religions and faiths. The contradictions are enormous. So, for me, it is his vision, not God's truth.

I totally agree to disagree.

Here is where I'm coming from: When 9/11 happened, I thought a true prophet would point out that it was a shot across the bow; it was God warning us that we would be destroyed if we didn't repent. When I went to General Conference, what I heard the "prophet" say was namby-pamby things and that he believed that us going into Afghanistan was us defending ourselves.

I was shocked. Surely a prophet of God had read the Book of Mormon and knew that following the gadiantons into their own land was wrong - that it would lead to failure. Plus there was a zero call to repentance.

After conference, I did more than pray to God, I cried, I pleaded, I begged - Don't you love us as much as other countries (in scripture)? Won't you send us a prophet to warn us of destruction before we are destroyed? Over and over again, I begged him to send someone to warn us before we were destroyed.

It was in 2010 - a friend kept sending me links to Denver's posts. I found the site a bit boring at first. I wanted sensationalism, I guess. But I read out of politeness and finally became interested in some of the things Denver had to say.

One day, I was reading one of the blog posts (I don't remember which one), and I recognized the voice speaking. It wasn't Denver; it was Christ. As soon as I saw that I recognized who was actually speaking in those few sentences, the memory of my prayer came back to me, and God distinctly said to my mind, "This is the man you prayed for."

You can have no greater witness than from God - so for all the defects Denver has (real or imagined), God told me he was a person sent to warn us of our destruction, and he has done so.

I am convinced that Denver tells the truth of his eyewitness account in the book. My conviction comes from my relationship with God. I do not have an automatic expectation that others will believe me. In fact, I see that many people don't trust Denver, don't believe him, revile him, mock him, hate him, and/or fear him, plus he was cast out of the LDS Church for writing a book on Church history that didn't "make the Church look good." To me, that is even more evidence he was sent from God - but my real witness came from God, himself.

So feel free to believe what you will. I've no problem with you or anyone else believing differently from me. And I will continue to believe what God, himself, tells me.

[FrankOne]

I can understand that you trust the guidance of Denver Snuffer, but not everyone subscribes to his version of what is true. I've read many visions from many people from many religions and faiths. The contradictions are enormous. So, for me, it is his vision, not God's truth.

I totally agree to disagree.

Here is where I'm coming from: When 9/11 happened, I thought a true prophet would point out that it was a shot across the bow; it was God warning us that we would be destroyed if we didn't repent. When I went to General Conference, what I heard the "prophet" say was namby-pamby things and that he believed that us going into Afghanistan was us defending ourselves.

I was shocked. Surely a prophet of God had read the Book of Mormon and knew that following the gadiantons into their own land was wrong - that it would lead to failure. Plus there was a zero call to repentance.

After conference, I did more than pray to God, I cried, I pleaded, I begged - Don't you love us as much as other countries (in scripture)? Won't you send us a prophet to warn us of destruction before we are destroyed? Over and over again, I begged him to send someone to warn us before we were destroyed.

It was in 2010 - a friend kept sending me links to Denver's posts. I found the site a bit boring at first. I wanted sensationalism, I guess. But I read out of politeness and finally became interested in some of the things Denver had to say.

One day, I was reading one of the blog posts (I don't remember which one), and I recognized the voice speaking. It wasn't Denver; it was Christ. As soon as I saw that I recognized who was actually speaking in those few sentences, the memory of my prayer came back to me, and God distinctly said to my mind, "This is the man you prayed for."

You can have no greater witness than from God - so for all the defects Denver has (real or imagined), God told me he was a person sent to warn us of our destruction, and he has done so.

I am convinced that Denver tells the truth of his eyewitness account in the book. My conviction comes from my relationship with God. I do not have an automatic expectation that others will believe me. In fact, I see that many people don't trust Denver, don't believe him, revile him, mock him, hate him, and/or fear him, plus he was cast out of the LDS Church for writing a book on Church history that didn't "make the Church look good." To me, that is even more evidence he was sent from God - but my real witness came from God, himself.

So feel free to believe what you will. I've no problem with you or anyone else believing differently from me. And I will continue to believe what God, himself, tells me.

I have great confidence in the fact that your experience was valid...exactly as you wrote it and exactly as it applied to your request in your prayer. I also have high confidence that Denver Snuffer is doing a great work that is necessary in these last days. This may sound confusing but it is clarified in another writing of mine.