Snuffer & PTHG

[brlenox]

It seems ironic to me the number of people who will judge the truthfulness of a book based solely on the opinion of someone else who reviews that book. I imagine there are a number of reviews a person could read about the Book of Mormon; but that, in my opinion, wouldn't be the best way to find out if it contains truth. It seems that prayerful consideration of the actual words of the book, prayerful pondering of its message, and examination of its references would be more reliable.

This is a straw man after a fashion. I have read Snuffers books until PTHG, which revealed itself soon enough that it was not necessary to complete the read. However, it is not the books that we are considering, You can sense Denver's spirit and those who have adopted his critical demeanor from any number of sources. Even in his Second Comforter book years ago had very subtle seeds of condescension that, while not near what has become perfectly evident now in a multitude of his other public exposures, was still enough to catch my attention.

The mistake in this line of reasoning, that one needs to read his books to make a proper judgement, I think is identified in the temple. When Satan inquires of Adam concerning the fruit, Adam only seeks enough information to determine Satan's intent. Then without any further research into Satan's further explanations he simply shuts him down and will not engage in further conversation.

When Eve is approached, she is engaged in conversation. She entertains Satan's point of view. She considers upon his offerings and finally she is convinced Satan is a not a bad dude after all. Thus Satan takes advantage of the argument, Hey you haven't even listened to what I have to say...and it has nothing to do with Father. Of course in Denver's case it is, "I'm not saying you should leave Christ's church, even though it is a screwed up mess, has no authority, the temple ordinances are invalid and no one has any priesthood, I'm not saying anything about God's church..." The arguments are the same and the result in some instances is the same.

If you let Denver present his wonderful and desirable positive message of coming into the presence of the Lord as is 90 % of his message, there is great risk as you will have to read through a 100% of the book to get there. That 10% difference of Satan's message of "I said nothing about father" was all it took for the first fall...is Denver's 10% of "I'm not saying don't support the brethren" all that it will take for yours?

Would you mind elaborating? What part is Satan's message. Can you give me a quote, reference?

The message is symbolically contained in the phrase that I already clearly quoted, "I said nothing about father." While some may understand the significance of that phrase it is uncommon that many have given enough thought and pondering to understand that upon that principle Satan has accomplished his greatest acts of deception. So common has it become that it's influence is found from concepts such as science in general including evolution, to critical and ethical thinking college courses that are now showing up in high school to middle school curriculum. If I really thought that you were interested I could outline in clarity but you and I have discussed subjects before where I went to great efforts only to find that once again I had been led down a rabbit hole. If you are genuinely interested, I may go there but I will need to see genuine subject development from you where your investment is commensurate with my own.

[FoxMammaWisdom]

I've read his latest blog and I see nothing of the kind. For too long people are fixed on a paradigm that it's difficult to expand it or to see it from a different light. Look at the animation below. Is the figure spinning clockwise or counterclockwise? I see it moving clockwise. And when I study it long enough, I can see it moving counter clockwise. Then I can see it moving clockwise again.



We may have people argue that it can only move clockwise and others that swear counter clockwise. And both remain stubborn and unbending. Then there are the few who choose to study it out further and are able to see a different perspective. I understand why Denver was excommunicated. I also see that he has been obedient in the tasks given him by the Lord. I just don't see the disdain in his words the way others do. I see a man who has expounded on scripture. He has no more disdain than Nephi or Moroni or Joseph Smith who clearly wrote about the condemnation that we would fall under and how we can escape it. Furthermore, I do see that he is temple worthy, sustains his leaders, he still attends church and does what he can under his current restrictions.

And then there are those who would not even be able to get past condemning you for posting a nude silhouette - so they could get to the stage where they can even see and test the analogy you described. 8-| People see whatever they want and refuse to explore further. People judge unrighteously based on only a fraction of the picture, and fear of having their paradigms shattered. People judge based on their own fears and insecurities and guilt (pride and selfishness also seem to be factors, which I believe are derived from fear). If only we could just embrace all truth - regardless of what the messenger "looks like", regardless of our limited understanding, letting go of our traditions, with humility and the open faith and willingness to learn - like children have. Ask a child to look at the figure above. They will not see a nude body, nor will they be offended when you show them that the figure also turns a different way if you look at it slightly differently! They will become excited and figuratively say "WOW! That's so cool! I didn't know that... show me more!"

[brlenox]

I've read his latest blog and I see nothing of the kind. For too long people are fixed on a paradigm that it's difficult to expand it or to see it from a different light. Look at the animation below. Is the figure spinning clockwise or counterclockwise? I see it moving clockwise. And when I study it long enough, I can see it moving counter clockwise. Then I can see it moving clockwise again.

We may have people argue that it can only move clockwise and others that swear counter clockwise. And both remain stubborn and unbending. Then there are the few who choose to study it out further and are able to see a different perspective. I understand why Denver was excommunicated. I also see that he has been obedient in the tasks given him by the Lord. I just don't see the disdain in his words the way others do. I see a man who has expounded on scripture. He has no more disdain than Nephi or Moroni or Joseph Smith who clearly wrote about the condemnation that we would fall under and how we can escape it. Furthermore, I do see that he is temple worthy, sustains his leaders, he still attends church and does what he can under his current restrictions.

I could only analyze your image to the point that I realized your spinning lady is naked and my 13 years old son exclaimed "what are you looking at"? Noting Jules observation concerning the naked lady - tell that to my son. His shocked inquiry speaks volumes as to how someone with a child's innocence see's the image she would have us justify.

Coach, I know you are sincere and yet I marvel that you would suggest that upon the strength of his latest post that you would deny that all of the detractors are seeing nothing and are simply blinded by their "follow the brethren" hypnotic glasses. I freely acknowledge, as I earlier stated that 90 % of Denver's is very persuasive. I found myself intrigued and supportive ... until I ran into this forum. It was only, strictly, completely, seeing how members of this forum fawned over the man while decrying the arm of flesh of the Lord's chosen that I realized something was amiss. Over the course of several days I was distressed as I had to find spiritual insight to bring peace to my soul. I had made the mistake myself of attaching the message to Denver. Seeing how he was destroying peoples testimonies of the Gospel and the church and thus undermining Christ's efforts in the latter days caused me to waver on the message. I had to separate Denver from the message to continue forward. Here are a couple of links from Denver's Blog.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/75094608/Elijah-Edited-1

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/searc ... the%20Lord

If you can read them and not see that Denver is rewriting church doctrine or undermining the organization of the church then you surprise me. I'm not saying you need to agree but it should be clear the kinds of things that make some of us uneasy. I am willing to see why people love his message so much - it is a wonderful message.

However, I cannot step over the fact that he opposes a fundamental principle when he undermines the brethren and the church. If Joseph is to be accredited a prophet at all then one only needs to realize that Denver is in the target range of his observations that those that elevate themselves while criticizing the church are at some point on the road to apostasy. In Denver's case he has been judged having achieved a fullness of that status. You really do have to see beyond his words as Denver's will state excessively the words "I am no one," but it is clear by his actions he thinks he is enough to defy the very gospel that birthed his hope of salvation and undermine it's leaders that in the beginning provided a hope and willingly place his own will above his membership. You may say that he is following the Lord will ahead of his membership in some organization.

Clearly you are right, but for me if line upon line precept upon precept means that I will have to throw out all of my lines and precepts that have become the foundation of all of my spiritual experiences and testimonies that have caused me to love my Savior with all my soul, before I can advance according to Denver's guidance then I have been deceived up to the point that I shift my paradigm to his. The Savior I know has restored his church in the fullness of times and he does not fail in his efforts to provide the warning voice for his children. Denver says the organization has failed...Both perspectives cannot be right and if the spirit has led me ever in my life then Denver is wrong or all of my guidance to this point has been predicated upon a false faith in Christ. I do not see that as the case.

[karend77]

The "methodology" to base their decision on the opinions of others (a source of information), along with prayer/being led by the Spirit is sound and logical. It is not unreasonable or "ironic" that many disregard what DS has written, by reading or researching the reviews/opinions of others who have read DS words, and through their own personal prayer and direction of the Spirit. They have the right to their opinion. It is not a final judgement of DS, but current opinion/judgement/decision that they are uncomfortable in the direction (they feel) DS has taken. As DS does not call himself a prophet, but is just an author whom is sharing his personal reflections and experiences, people have the right to not be chastised or compelled or guilt-tripped into reading what is not comfortable to them.

Dallin Oaks gave a talk on judging, where he says final judgement is not our to give but intermediate decisions/judgments are appropriate. "We must refrain from making final judgments on people because we lack the knowledge and the wisdom to do so. We would even apply the wrong standards. The world’s way is to judge competitively between winners and losers. The Lord’s way of final judgment will be to apply His perfect knowledge of the law a person has received and to judge on the basis of that person’s circumstances, motives, and actions throughout his or her entire life (see Luke 12:47–48; John 15:22; 2 Ne. 9:25)."

and "The Savior also commanded individuals to be judges, both of circumstances and of other people. Through the prophet Moses, the Lord commanded Israel, “Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour” (Lev. 19:15).On one occasion the Savior chided the people, “Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?” (Luke 12:57). On another occasion he said, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24)."

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1999/08/judge-not-and-judging" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ATL Wake]

I've not read any of his books nor do I intend to. Like most critics, his is a twisted interpretation of scripture and history.

I don't understand how anything follows this.

[brlenox]

People judge unrighteously based on only a fraction of the picture, and fear of having their paradigms shattered. People judge based on their own fears and insecurities and guilt (pride and selfishness also seem to be factors, which I believe are derived from fear). If only we could just embrace all truth - regardless of what the messenger "looks like", regardless of our limited understanding, letting go of our traditions, with humility and the open faith and willingness to learn - like children have. Ask a child to look at the figure above. They will not see a nude body, nor will they be offended when you show them that the figure also turns a different way if you look at it slightly differently! They will become excited and figuratively say "WOW! That's so cool! I didn't know that... show me more!"

Again I have to mention that you way missed the have a child look at the image theory...my 13 year old is as innocent as they come and having been "caught" I can tell you I was slightly embarrassed myself that he did note all to quickly what the image was, perhaps quicker than I did.

Still I don't want to miss the point you were trying to make otherwise. As I look around this forum, I do not see that the TBM's are not being child like. Most of us here have an expanded understanding of the gospel. We are students. We can relate with depth, our understandings of the scriptures. Our resources and quotes that we use to provide a standard for our musings and contemplation's are readily available at our fingertips so familiar we are with the material out there. We finalize with testimonies born of the spirit. My point being that of these TBM's I can readily observe that many of them, like myself have altered our paradigms to see beyond the simple doctrines taught in our Sunday School classes etc. Most of us all hold certain understandings that we silently sustain in our interactions with others because we can see that others might night be spiritually prepared to consider upon the information, that someday they may be ready to hear. If I were to speak freely in church and foist my understandings I could easily teach my way right out of the church. However we understand something that so many in this forum decry and condemn.

The primary duty of the church is to mass teach the principles that will ultimately enable those who are true believers to be brought unto the Holy Ghost who will then take on their individual and private instruction and enable them to come unto Christ in their time and according to the head and diligence they put into the process.

When I hear some complain that we are not taught this or that and our leaders are only regurgitating baby food over and over then I realize that I am listening to someone who has yet to truly be educated by the spirit in such a way as to understand how the system works and why Joseph Smith spoke to Wilford and Brigham and strongly emphasized tell the members to get the Holy Ghost and it IT will guide them correctly. Thus the pattern of the Brethren and the Prophets are to be very cautious in exceeding the boundaries of the Lord in teaching his children. I marvel how often folks here refer to 2 Nephi 32 hoping to expound on the message and what Nephi is stating and then miss the message of restraint that Nephi laments is necessary:

2 Nephi 32:7
7 And now I, Nephi, cannot say more; the Spirit stoppeth mine utterance, and I am left to mourn because of the unbelief, and the wickedness, and the ignorance, and the stiffneckedness of men; for they will not search knowledge, nor understand great knowledge, when it is given unto them in plainness, even as plain as word can be.

When individuals such as Denver and some here seek to supplant the natural educational processes of learning to hear the voice of the Holy Ghost, they risk destroying those unprepared. When it is time to know it will be plain to understand and the spirit is so plain to Nephi that he knows when to stop expounding because he knows if they cannot hear the voice of the spirit they are not ready. Denver does not know this and neither do most of his ill-taught supporters. It is the order of heaven. That is the purpose of this counsel by Boyd K. Packer:

Do not be impatient to gain great spiritual knowledge. Let it grow, help it grow, but do not force it or you will open the way to be misled. (Boyd K. Packer, https://www.lds.org/ensign/1983/01/the- ... f-the-lord)

The brethren truly understand the boundaries of the Lord when they teach. They cover their material in just the right fashion that, if you are seeking, your ears will be pricked and in the spirit and the hearer will seek of the Lord that which caught their attention. The spirit will guide each according to the place they are at best. We are humble enough and child like enough to realize and believe the Lord knows best and that he has instituted a process that is perfect for each individually. When the spirit has your ear, you can go as fast as you are able.

[Thomas]

brlenox wrote:
The message is symbolically contained in the phrase that I already clearly quoted, "I said nothing about father." While some may understand the significance of that phrase it is uncommon that many have given enough thought and pondering to understand that upon that principle Satan has accomplished his greatest acts of deception. So common has it become that it's influence is found from concepts such as science in general including evolution, to critical and ethical thinking college courses that are now showing up in high school to middle school curriculum. If I really thought that you were interested I could outline in clarity but you and I have discussed subjects before where I went to great efforts only to find that once again I had been led down a rabbit hole. If you are genuinely interested, I may go there but I will need to see genuine subject development from you where your investment is commensurate with my own.

Evasive as always from you as well as another straw man. Why can't you show some clear examples, that come from Denver's writings, instead of generalizations and straw men.

[Thomas]

brlenox wrote: When individuals such as Denver and some here seek to supplant the natural educational processes of learning to hear the voice of the Holy Ghost, they risk destroying those unprepared. When it is time to know it will be plain to understand and the spirit is so plain to Nephi that he knows when to stop expounding because he knows if they cannot hear the voice of the spirit they are not ready. Denver does not know this and neither do most of his ill-taught supporters. It is the order of heaven. That is the purpose of this counsel by Boyd K. Packer:

You truly do not know the first thing about Denver.

[marc]

I could only analyze your image to the point that I realized your spinning lady is naked and my 13 years old son exclaimed "what are you looking at"? Noting Jules observation concerning the naked lady - tell that to my son. His shocked inquiry speaks volumes as to how someone with a child's innocence see's the image she would have us justify.

Yes, I thought that might be an issue for some. It might have been for me once. How did you receive your son's inquiry?

Coach, I know you are sincere and yet I marvel that you would suggest that upon the strength of his latest post that you would deny that all of the detractors are seeing nothing and are simply blinded by their "follow the brethren" hypnotic glasses.

Ah, you are making an assumption about me. What made you think that this is how I see anyone who disagrees with Brother Snuffer? Is it because you have preconceived notions about those who "fawn" over him and think that I am the same? I don't think you have such notions, but your words seem to betray you.

I freely acknowledge, as I earlier stated that 90 % of Denver's is very persuasive. I found myself intrigued and supportive ... until I ran into this forum. It was only, strictly, completely, seeing how members of this forum fawned over the man while decrying the arm of flesh of the Lord's chosen that I realized something was amiss.

So it was people's opinions that swayed you from your initial judgement of a message, and thus you have made a judgement about the messenger. I could be wrong, but that is how it's worded. Am I misjudging you and you misjudging me as most are misjudging Denver?

Over the course of several days I was distressed as I had to find spiritual insight to bring peace to my soul. I had made the mistake myself of attaching the message to Denver. Seeing how he was destroying peoples testimonies of the Gospel and the church and thus undermining Christ's efforts in the latter days caused me to waver on the message. I had to separate Denver from the message to continue forward. Here are a couple of links from Denver's Blog.

Ironic, though, as his doctrinal insights have only strengthened my testimony and understanding of my Savior and of the many doctrines of the Book of Mormon. My foundation remains firm.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/75094608/Elijah-Edited-1

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/searc ... the%20Lord

If you can read them and not see that Denver is rewriting church doctrine or undermining the organization of the church then you surprise me. I'm not saying you need to agree but it should be clear the kinds of things that make some of us uneasy. I am willing to see why people love his message so much - it is a wonderful message.

What Denver does is lays out the scriptures, plain as day, and leaves it to the reader to decide. I have come to many of the same conclusions on my own after having studied the scriptures for over twenty years. And am still pouring over the Book of Mormon today and the other standard works. I understand what Isaiah and Nephi and Moroni and many others have said about us. It ain't pretty. And if people's testimonies are suffering as a result, then there's a problem with their foundation.

When Christ visited the people in Bountiful, most were spared only because they were "more righteous" than all the rest who were destroyed. He then taught them many things and when he looked around he saw that they were "weak" and he commanded them to go home and pray to the Father concerning what he taught them. They were weak because they had no clue what he was talking about. They didn't search the scriptures. Thereafter, He expounded Isaiah (of all prophets) and commanded them and us to search Isaiah and to search the scriptures.

However, I cannot step over the fact that he opposes a fundamental principle when he undermines the brethren and the church. If Joseph is to be accredited a prophet at all then one only needs to realize that Denver is in the target range of his observations that those that elevate themselves while criticizing the church are at some point on the road to apostasy.

I have yet to see Denver elevate himself. Perhaps we can analyze the criteria for this phenomenon.

In Denver's case he has been judged having achieved a fullness of that status. You really do have to see beyond his words as Denver's will state excessively the words "I am no one," but it is clear by his actions he thinks he is enough to defy the very gospel that birthed his hope of salvation and undermine it's leaders that in the beginning provided a hope and willingly place his own will above his membership. You may say that he is following the Lord will ahead of his membership in some organization.

Clearly you are right, but for me if line upon line precept upon precept means that I will have to throw out all of my lines and precepts that have become the foundation of all of my spiritual experiences and testimonies that have caused me to love my Savior with all my soul, before I can advance according to Denver's guidance then I have been deceived up to the point that I shift my paradigm to his. The Savior I know has restored his church in the fullness of times and he does not fail in his efforts to provide the warning voice for his children. Denver says the organization has failed...Both perspectives cannot be right and if the spirit has led me ever in my life then Denver is wrong or all of my guidance to this point has been predicated upon a false faith in Christ. I do not see that as the case.

Remember that we are still under condemnation. This has not been removed from us collectively. Jesus Christ declared it to Joseph Smith and the prophet of our church, Ezra Taft Benson declared in '87 that it had not been removed and in 1993, Dallin H. Oakes reemphasized the same. The Savior you and I both know, has not removed this condemnation. And I know exactly what it means and why and what I am doing to come out from it. Simply stated, we are not Zion. And a desolating scourge is coming and it will come first upon the Lord's house. I am sure you can understand why the membership will be targeted first.

[brlenox]

brlenox wrote: When individuals such as Denver and some here seek to supplant the natural educational processes of learning to hear the voice of the Holy Ghost, they risk destroying those unprepared. When it is time to know it will be plain to understand and the spirit is so plain to Nephi that he knows when to stop expounding because he knows if they cannot hear the voice of the spirit they are not ready. Denver does not know this and neither do most of his ill-taught supporters. It is the order of heaven. That is the purpose of this counsel by Boyd K. Packer:

You truly do not know the first thing about Denver.

Ah, but Thomas ... what is genuinely of far greater significance and far greater importance is that I know enough about God and his Son Jesus Christ to recognize their hand in guiding the church according to the principles of the restored gospel. I know Elder Packer, and President Monson, and Elder Bednar and dozens of others who are called by the Lord and sustained by the membership and in fact are sustained by me.

I also know Nephi and why the spirit stopped his utterance and how the children of God are to be instructed of the Lord. Perhaps I do not know the FIRST thing about Denver but I clearly know the LAST thing. He has been judged and found wanting and now speaks with the voice of an apostate. He should not be heeded by anyone who sustains the Lord or his church or his chosen leaders.

[keep the faith]

As I read through the words of Denver Snuffer apologists here I am totally convinced that he could say just about anything negative or attacking you can possibly think of directed at the church and its leadership and those who defend him at all costs would just nod their heads and praise him for his greater wisdom and understanding. The discernment processes have been shut down. The man has reached almost infallibility status with all his defenders. How ironic is that. :))

[Thomas]

brlenox wrote: When individuals such as Denver and some here seek to supplant the natural educational processes of learning to hear the voice of the Holy Ghost, they risk destroying those unprepared. When it is time to know it will be plain to understand and the spirit is so plain to Nephi that he knows when to stop expounding because he knows if they cannot hear the voice of the spirit they are not ready. Denver does not know this and neither do most of his ill-taught supporters. It is the order of heaven. That is the purpose of this counsel by Boyd K. Packer:

You truly do not know the first thing about Denver.

Ah, but Thomas ... what is genuinely of far greater significance and far greater importance is that I know enough about God and his Son Jesus Christ to recognize their hand in guiding the church according to the principles of the restored gospel. I know Elder Packer, and President Monson, and Elder Bednar and dozens of others who are called by the Lord and sustained by the membership and in fact are sustained by me.

I also know Nephi and why the spirit stopped his utterance and how the children of God are to be instructed of the Lord. Perhaps I do not know the FIRST thing about Denver but I clearly know the LAST thing. He has been judged and found wanting and now speaks with the voice of an apostate. He should not be heeded by anyone who sustains the Lord or his church or his chosen leaders.

So now you will publicly defame the man based on your false perceptions and made up version of his words. If your going to beat up on the man, at least have the decency to do it based on something he has actually said or written.

Let us not forget, Christ was judged and found wanting by his priesthood leaders. He then spoke with the voice of an apostate.

[jo1952]

As I read through the words of Denver Snuffer apologists here I am totally convinced that he could say just about anything negative or attacking you can possibly think of directed at the church and its leadership and those who defend him at all costs would just nod their heads and praise him for his greater wisdom and understanding. The discernment processes have been shut down. The man has reached almost infallibility status with all his defenders. How ironic is that. :))

The irony.

[Thomas]

As I read through the words of Denver Snuffer apologists here I am totally convinced that he could say just about anything negative or attacking you can possibly think of directed at the church and its leadership and those who defend him at all costs would just nod their heads and praise him for his greater wisdom and understanding. The discernment processes have been shut down. The man has reached almost infallibility status with all his defenders. How ironic is that. :))

Straw man. Do you have a legitimate point to make?

[lemuel]

I also know Nephi and why the spirit stopped his utterance and how the children of God are to be instructed of the Lord.

Why did the spirit stop Nephi's utterance? From my reading of 2 nephi 31:20-21, the doctrine of Christ is given in 7 steps:
Steps 1-4: the 1st 4 principles & ordinances
Step 5: press forward with steadfastness in Christ, feasting upon the word
Step 6: enduring to the end
Step 7: receiving our C&E from the Lord.

Then, in chapter 32:6-7 Nephi tells us that there are more than 7 steps, and Christ will give them to you personally in the flesh.

Then the spirit stops Nephi's utterance. Nephi wants to tell us steps 8-n, but he is constrained.

[AnthonyR]

Thus when you state that you prayed and fasted and sought deep to know if you could be led to Christ through the teachings of "Snuff", I have to wonder upon what credentials "Snuff" was your chosen subject of prayer and not Thomas S. Monson.
WTH? Where did you ever get the notion I haven't done the same about Pres. Monson? You look through a filter which tells you things that weren't said.
What criteria did you use to exclude one individual but cling to the other.
Again, you have one imaginative filter Lenox. Where was it said that I excluded pres. Monson from my inquiries?
The subjective nature of choosing between two men who both claim a prophetic status implies that something about one message was already appealing to you on a level that the others message did not.
LOL Where have I stated Pres. Monson's message is not appealing to me? Quite the opposite actually.
You made a choice the moment you wondered if the prophet needed an assistant in Denver Snuffer.
WOW Lenox. This whole post is full of your own assumptions which are BLATANTLY incorrect[/b][/b] Go re-read, re-evaluate my post without all of your pre-conceived notions on who you think I am and what I posted.
Some of us decided it was clear he did not based on the criteria of Christ's determining who would lead his church according to a consistent pattern.
I agree, Christ's hand is in ALL things, and is at the helm of The Church

Lenox. Your response is all chuck full of your assumptions which you see through your filter. Do not assume anything you just said about me or know how I think. If I said all you implied, I would not be writing this rebuttal. You lump me in a group called the "Snuffer Team". I am sorry that is how you see me. I see you and I going the distance together, not in separate 'teams'. C'mon Brother!

BTW, I did actually pray, fast, go the distance to find out if what I read in The Second Comforter, Nephi's Isaiah, 18 Verses, First 3 Words etc... are worth my pondering and study. I got a Hell Yes they are!

Look Lenox, you and I were created different. You are a different man than I am. We learn differently. The Lord will utilize other tools, study manuals, etc for each student. I may learn how to do a math problem different than you and we can still get the same answer. Right now, God is utilizing Snuffer to teach me things that I need, For ME. If they aren't for you, why judge me for the answer I received from our Heavenly Father? All you are doing is judging Him and me for the curriculum he is utilizing for me ATM. I hope both of us end up exalted together. The leaders of the Church are part of my curriculum, and will probably always be so.

[brlenox]

I could only analyze your image to the point that I realized your spinning lady is naked and my 13 years old son exclaimed "what are you looking at"? Noting Jules observation concerning the naked lady - tell that to my son. His shocked inquiry speaks volumes as to how someone with a child's innocence see's the image she would have us justify.

Yes, I thought that might be an issue for some. It might have been for me once. How did you receive your son's inquiry?

I only stated that someone had posted a picture and then let the subject go. My point was that where others claim the innocence of a child would see nothing but a spinning lady do not understand children very well and the the innocense of a child is a reasonable filter to consider such things

Coach, I know you are sincere and yet I marvel that you would suggest that upon the strength of his latest post that you would deny that all of the detractors are seeing nothing and are simply blinded by their "follow the brethren" hypnotic glasses.

Ah, you are making an assumption about me. What made you think that this is how I see anyone who disagrees with Brother Snuffer? Is it because you have preconceived notions about those who "fawn" over him and think that I am the same? I don't think you have such notions, but your words seem to betray you.

As you state about me, I don't have such notions truly about you, However, I was calling you out on the absurdity of saying "I've read his latest blog and I see nothing of the kind." It is not typical of you to make such an ill thought observation as that what others are observing should be found in his latest post or that by reading his latest post one should be able to form any kind of a credible opinion at all.

I freely acknowledge, as I earlier stated that 90 % of Denver's is very persuasive. I found myself intrigued and supportive ... until I ran into this forum. It was only, strictly, completely, seeing how members of this forum fawned over the man while decrying the arm of flesh of the Lord's chosen that I realized something was amiss.

So it was people's opinions that swayed you from your initial judgement of a message, and thus you have made a judgement about the messenger. I could be wrong, but that is how it's worded. Am I misjudging you and you misjudging me as most are misjudging Denver?

This observation is also not like your usual self. It is not like you to read into something what is not even insinuated too. My statement above eludes non whatsoever to others opinions. It eludes clearly that in the observation of behaviors, fruits if you will, I noted a wide and disparaging difference in the attitudes of those on the " "Snuff" side of the debate versus those of sound testimony and supportive of the brethren.

Over the course of several days I was distressed as I had to find spiritual insight to bring peace to my soul. I had made the mistake myself of attaching the message to Denver. Seeing how he was destroying peoples testimonies of the Gospel and the church and thus undermining Christ's efforts in the latter days caused me to waver on the message. I had to separate Denver from the message to continue forward. Here are a couple of links from Denver's Blog.

Ironic, though, as his doctrinal insights have only strengthened my testimony and understanding of my Savior and of the many doctrines of the Book of Mormon. My foundation remains firm.

Hence why I use the term "some" are misled. It is entirely possible for some to read Denver's material and cast off the dross of his errant conclusions. However, there are others who cannot be as objective as you have done. Can you say that you do not see exactly what I am observing as obvious? Again I have noted in the past where you were willing to admit such and venture a cautious overtone. It is also why of all of those on this forum that I might consider strong Denver supporters, I have to place you somewhere outside of that group. You are more thoughtful, less defensive and more independent in your thinking that those that parrot and quote Denver as if he is prophet and his writings scripture.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/75094608/Elijah-Edited-1

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/searc ... the%20Lord

If you can read them and not see that Denver is rewriting church doctrine or undermining the organization of the church then you surprise me. I'm not saying you need to agree but it should be clear the kinds of things that make some of us uneasy. I am willing to see why people love his message so much - it is a wonderful message.

What Denver does is lays out the scriptures, plain as day, and leaves it to the reader to decide. I have come to many of the same conclusions on my own after having studied the scriptures for over twenty years. And am still pouring over the Book of Mormon today and the other standard works. I understand what Isaiah and Nephi and Moroni and many others have said about us. It ain't pretty. And if people's testimonies are suffering as a result, then there's a problem with their foundation.

You are sidestepping my observations. Can honestly state that you not detect the undertones of Denver's critique of the Church and the brethren. It has long been an understanding of mine the the greatest deceptions are not obvious if you do not want them to be. It is not a question of being wrong in content but in being wrong in emphasis. The emphasis of dissension and criticism that is rampantly inspired on this forum by Denver's writings is beyond contestation. It inspires the defenders to also respond in strength and strong response. I must admit I am torn myself between the caution to avoid contention and the example of braiding a small whip to address the undermining efforts of those who seek to destroy the church from within. Should I let them be and or should I stand for something. I choose to stand in sustainment of Christ and his church. I may change my approach if I can determine the error of my manner. Sometimes, I have noted that spirit of contention taking hold and I do back away. However, on the subject of defending the Lord's church and his prophets I have not felt to do so.

As well as reading and understanding Isaiah and Moroni etc, I agree that you do better than most. However, I have not observed in the past that you include in the group that is falling astray the brethren of the church. The members cover the spectrum of strength and weakness and there is no doubt that in many ways as a membership we are not doing as well as we should. However, those same members that are not doing so well as they should have the same model for instruction as is always exampled in the church when organized as Christ organizes his church. It is stated "These are true messengers, I exhort you to give strict heed to their counsel." Never is it stated that he will supplant these apostles and prophets with those he will raise up to oppose them such as is the case with Denver.

When Christ visited the people in Bountiful, most were spared only because they were "more righteous" than all the rest who were destroyed. He then taught them many things and when he looked around he saw that they were "weak" and he commanded them to go home and pray to the Father concerning what he taught them. They were weak because they had no clue what he was talking about. They didn't search the scriptures. Thereafter, He expounded Isaiah (of all prophets) and commanded them and us to search Isaiah and to search the scriptures.

Indeed as you speak here of the membership it will be again. I do not deny that. However, we both read teh scriptures the same in this sense. AS well this agrees with the words of the leadership. It also speaks to those who will not heed the voice of that leadership and will be led astray.

However, I cannot step over the fact that he opposes a fundamental principle when he undermines the brethren and the church. If Joseph is to be accredited a prophet at all then one only needs to realize that Denver is in the target range of his observations that those that elevate themselves while criticizing the church are at some point on the road to apostasy.

I have yet to see Denver elevate himself. Perhaps we can analyze the criteria for this phenomenon.

In Denver's case he has been judged having achieved a fullness of that status. You really do have to see beyond his words as Denver's will state excessively the words "I am no one," but it is clear by his actions he thinks he is enough to defy the very gospel that birthed his hope of salvation and undermine it's leaders that in the beginning provided a hope and willingly place his own will above his membership. You may say that he is following the Lord will ahead of his membership in some organization.

Clearly you are right, but for me if line upon line precept upon precept means that I will have to throw out all of my lines and precepts that have become the foundation of all of my spiritual experiences and testimonies that have caused me to love my Savior with all my soul, before I can advance according to Denver's guidance then I have been deceived up to the point that I shift my paradigm to his. The Savior I know has restored his church in the fullness of times and he does not fail in his efforts to provide the warning voice for his children. Denver says the organization has failed...Both perspectives cannot be right and if the spirit has led me ever in my life then Denver is wrong or all of my guidance to this point has been predicated upon a false faith in Christ. I do not see that as the case.

Remember that we are still under condemnation. This has not been removed from us collectively. Jesus Christ declared it to Joseph Smith and the prophet of our church, Ezra Taft Benson declared in '87 that it had not been removed and in 1993, Dallin H. Oakes reemphasized the same. The Savior you and I both know, has not removed this condemnation. And I know exactly what it means and why and what I am doing to come out from it. Simply stated, we are not Zion. And a desolating scourge is coming and it will come first upon the Lord's house. I am sure you can understand why the membership will be targeted first.

We are agreed. And again typically I consider your emphasis in the appropriate ranges and generally perceive it to be so now. In this sense, again I state, you are not to be considered the norm of the Denver snuffers. They take this emphasis here of the membership and apply it in far too broad and extensive a manner to include the very leaders Christ has provided to offset the misdirection of those who will heed their counsel.

[brlenox]

So now you will publicly defame the man based on your false perceptions and made up version of his words. If your going to beat up on the man, at least have the decency to do it based on something he has actually said or written.

Let us not forget, Christ was judged and found wanting by his priesthood leaders. He then spoke with the voice of an apostate.

Thomas, I and others have done this beyond your denials. It would do little good to do so again.

[brlenox]

Thus when you state that you prayed and fasted and sought deep to know if you could be led to Christ through the teachings of "Snuff", I have to wonder upon what credentials "Snuff" was your chosen subject of prayer and not Thomas S. Monson.
WTH? Where did you ever get the notion I haven't done the same about Pres. Monson? You look through a filter which tells you things that weren't said.
What criteria did you use to exclude one individual but cling to the other.
Again, you have one imaginative filter Lenox. Where was it said that I excluded pres. Monson from my inquiries?
The subjective nature of choosing between two men who both claim a prophetic status implies that something about one message was already appealing to you on a level that the others message did not.
LOL Where have I stated Pres. Monson's message is not appealing to me? Quite the opposite actually.
You made a choice the moment you wondered if the prophet needed an assistant in Denver Snuffer.
WOW Lenox. This whole post is full of your own assumptions which are BLATANTLY incorrect[/b][/b] Go re-read, re-evaluate my post without all of your pre-conceived notions on who you think I am and what I posted.
Some of us decided it was clear he did not based on the criteria of Christ's determining who would lead his church according to a consistent pattern.
I agree, Christ's hand is in ALL things, and is at the helm of The Church

Lenox. Your response is all chuck full of your assumptions which you see through your filter. Do not assume anything you just said about me or know how I think. If I said all you implied, I would not be writing this rebuttal. You lump me in a group called the "Snuffer Team". I am sorry that is how you see me. I see you and I going the distance together, not in separate 'teams'. C'mon Brother!

BTW, I did actually pray, fast, go the distance to find out if what I read in The Second Comforter, Nephi's Isaiah, 18 Verses, First 3 Words etc... are worth my pondering and study. I got a Hell Yes they are!

Look Lenox, you and I were created different. You are a different man than I am. We learn differently. The Lord will utilize other tools, study manuals, etc for each student. I may learn how to do a math problem different than you and we can still get the same answer. Right now, God is utilizing Snuffer to teach me things that I need, For ME. If they aren't for you, why judge me for the answer I received from our Heavenly Father? All you are doing is judging Him and me for the curriculum he is utilizing for me ATM. I hope both of us end up exalted together. The leaders of the Church are part of my curriculum, and will probably always be so.

You are right in certain regard that I am lumping you in a group. If you are not identified with them then my apologies. However, there are experiences that I have had that oppose your observations, and while that is entirely possible, I hold them as truths. When the voice stated to me that "I have never ordained apostates to teach my truths" concerning the material I was reading in hopes of further enlightenment I recognized a profound reality. My apologies to you if I have attributed an excessive Denver perspective to your state of mind but where your answers and mine were so different, I am left to consider the matter upon what I understand. Nonetheless, again my sincerest apologies otherwise.

[Thomas]

So now you will publicly defame the man based on your false perceptions and made up version of his words. If your going to beat up on the man, at least have the decency to do it based on something he has actually said or written.

Let us not forget, Christ was judged and found wanting by his priesthood leaders. He then spoke with the voice of an apostate.

Thomas, I and others have done this beyond your denials. It would do little good to do so again.

I haven't seen anything but straw men and out right lies. Do you have a link to one these factually based threads?

[brlenox]

As I read through the words of Denver Snuffer apologists here I am totally convinced that he could say just about anything negative or attacking you can possibly think of directed at the church and its leadership and those who defend him at all costs would just nod their heads and praise him for his greater wisdom and understanding. The discernment processes have been shut down. The man has reached almost infallibility status with all his defenders. How ironic is that. :))

Straw man. Do you have a legitimate point to make?

Thomas - this is absolutely unfair. I am the strawman here. First you build me up to my singular status and I get to feeling all proud and excited about what a unique individual I am and then you go and burst my bubble by making me common with everyone else.

I'm so sad now. I just want to cry.

[marc]

I could only analyze your image to the point that I realized your spinning lady is naked and my 13 years old son exclaimed "what are you looking at"? Noting Jules observation concerning the naked lady - tell that to my son. His shocked inquiry speaks volumes as to how someone with a child's innocence see's the image she would have us justify.

Yes, I thought that might be an issue for some. It might have been for me once. How did you receive your son's inquiry?

I only stated that someone had posted a picture and then let the subject go. My point was that where others claim the innocence of a child would see nothing but a spinning lady do not understand children very well and the the innocense of a child is a reasonable filter to consider such things

I apologize for that. I should have been more careful in my selection of an image.

Coach, I know you are sincere and yet I marvel that you would suggest that upon the strength of his latest post that you would deny that all of the detractors are seeing nothing and are simply blinded by their "follow the brethren" hypnotic glasses.

Ah, you are making an assumption about me. What made you think that this is how I see anyone who disagrees with Brother Snuffer? Is it because you have preconceived notions about those who "fawn" over him and think that I am the same? I don't think you have such notions, but your words seem to betray you.

As you state about me, I don't have such notions truly about you, However, I was calling you out on the absurdity of saying "I've read his latest blog and I see nothing of the kind." It is not typical of you to make such an ill thought observation as that what others are observing should be found in his latest post or that by reading his latest post one should be able to form any kind of a credible opinion at all.

There might be a misunderstanding here. I was referring to keep the faith's following comment, which I should have quoted:

"Tell me how tasty these fruits are from this portion of Bro. Snuffer's most recent blog about throwing out any idea of him starting his own church."

I take Denver at his word when he said he has no desire to do so. This blog entry was apparently in response to an accusation made against him. But I am curious how others perceive the contrary. Sarcasm, perhaps?

I freely acknowledge, as I earlier stated that 90 % of Denver's is very persuasive. I found myself intrigued and supportive ... until I ran into this forum. It was only, strictly, completely, seeing how members of this forum fawned over the man while decrying the arm of flesh of the Lord's chosen that I realized something was amiss.

So it was people's opinions that swayed you from your initial judgement of a message, and thus you have made a judgement about the messenger. I could be wrong, but that is how it's worded. Am I misjudging you and you misjudging me as most are misjudging Denver?

This observation is also not like your usual self. It is not like you to read into something what is not even insinuated too. My statement above eludes non whatsoever to others opinions. It eludes clearly that in the observation of behaviors, fruits if you will, I noted a wide and disparaging difference in the attitudes of those on the " "Snuff" side of the debate versus those of sound testimony and supportive of the brethren.

Just making sure.

Over the course of several days I was distressed as I had to find spiritual insight to bring peace to my soul. I had made the mistake myself of attaching the message to Denver. Seeing how he was destroying peoples testimonies of the Gospel and the church and thus undermining Christ's efforts in the latter days caused me to waver on the message. I had to separate Denver from the message to continue forward. Here are a couple of links from Denver's Blog.

Ironic, though, as his doctrinal insights have only strengthened my testimony and understanding of my Savior and of the many doctrines of the Book of Mormon. My foundation remains firm.

Hence why I use the term "some" are misled. It is entirely possible for some to read Denver's material and cast off the dross of his errant conclusions. However, there are others who cannot be as objective as you have done. Can you say that you do not see exactly what I am observing as obvious? Again I have noted in the past where you were willing to admit such and venture a cautious overtone. It is also why of all of those on this forum that I might consider strong Denver supporters, I have to place you somewhere outside of that group. You are more thoughtful, less defensive and more independent in your thinking that those that parrot and quote Denver as if he is prophet and his writings scripture.

On the contrary, I do see it. And I have observed how some idolize Denver. This, however, has not swayed me from reading his material any more than it has swayed me from learning from, say, Gileadi. But that is another topic. But again, I do agree that there are some who get carried away. It's unfortunate that this becomes as stumbling block for others.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/75094608/Elijah-Edited-1

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/searc ... the%20Lord

If you can read them and not see that Denver is rewriting church doctrine or undermining the organization of the church then you surprise me. I'm not saying you need to agree but it should be clear the kinds of things that make some of us uneasy. I am willing to see why people love his message so much - it is a wonderful message.

What Denver does is lays out the scriptures, plain as day, and leaves it to the reader to decide. I have come to many of the same conclusions on my own after having studied the scriptures for over twenty years. And am still pouring over the Book of Mormon today and the other standard works. I understand what Isaiah and Nephi and Moroni and many others have said about us. It ain't pretty. And if people's testimonies are suffering as a result, then there's a problem with their foundation.

You are sidestepping my observations. Can honestly state that you not detect the undertones of Denver's critique of the Church and the brethren. It has long been an understanding of mine the the greatest deceptions are not obvious if you do not want them to be. It is not a question of being wrong in content but in being wrong in emphasis. The emphasis of dissension and criticism that is rampantly inspired on this forum by Denver's writings is beyond contestation. It inspires the defenders to also respond in strength and strong response. I must admit I am torn myself between the caution to avoid contention and the example of braiding a small whip to address the undermining efforts of those who seek to destroy the church from within. Should I let them be and or should I stand for something. I choose to stand in sustainment of Christ and his church. I may change my approach if I can determine the error of my manner. Sometimes, I have noted that spirit of contention taking hold and I do back away. However, on the subject of defending the Lord's church and his prophets I have not felt to do so.

As well as reading and understanding Isaiah and Moroni etc, I agree that you do better than most. However, I have not observed in the past that you include in the group that is falling astray the brethren of the church. The members cover the spectrum of strength and weakness and there is no doubt that in many ways as a membership we are not doing as well as we should. However, those same members that are not doing so well as they should have the same model for instruction as is always exampled in the church when organized as Christ organizes his church. It is stated "These are true messengers, I exhort you to give strict heed to their counsel." Never is it stated that he will supplant these apostles and prophets with those he will raise up to oppose them such as is the case with Denver.

I am aware of his comments about the church and its leaders. I am not going to be an apologist for him. He can take care of himself. I simply take what messages of his that I encounter, and keep or discard as the Spirit directs. Same with anything anyone else says, including our leaders. But I do love and sustain them. I don't care about the "battle" between those who "fawn" and those who "detract." I'm simply interested in the messages. I agree that the Lord will not supplant our leaders.

When Christ visited the people in Bountiful, most were spared only because they were "more righteous" than all the rest who were destroyed. He then taught them many things and when he looked around he saw that they were "weak" and he commanded them to go home and pray to the Father concerning what he taught them. They were weak because they had no clue what he was talking about. They didn't search the scriptures. Thereafter, He expounded Isaiah (of all prophets) and commanded them and us to search Isaiah and to search the scriptures.

Indeed as you speak here of the membership it will be again. I do not deny that. However, we both read teh scriptures the same in this sense. AS well this agrees with the words of the leadership. It also speaks to those who will not heed the voice of that leadership and will be led astray.

However, I cannot step over the fact that he opposes a fundamental principle when he undermines the brethren and the church. If Joseph is to be accredited a prophet at all then one only needs to realize that Denver is in the target range of his observations that those that elevate themselves while criticizing the church are at some point on the road to apostasy.

I have yet to see Denver elevate himself. Perhaps we can analyze the criteria for this phenomenon.

In Denver's case he has been judged having achieved a fullness of that status. You really do have to see beyond his words as Denver's will state excessively the words "I am no one," but it is clear by his actions he thinks he is enough to defy the very gospel that birthed his hope of salvation and undermine it's leaders that in the beginning provided a hope and willingly place his own will above his membership. You may say that he is following the Lord will ahead of his membership in some organization.

Clearly you are right, but for me if line upon line precept upon precept means that I will have to throw out all of my lines and precepts that have become the foundation of all of my spiritual experiences and testimonies that have caused me to love my Savior with all my soul, before I can advance according to Denver's guidance then I have been deceived up to the point that I shift my paradigm to his. The Savior I know has restored his church in the fullness of times and he does not fail in his efforts to provide the warning voice for his children. Denver says the organization has failed...Both perspectives cannot be right and if the spirit has led me ever in my life then Denver is wrong or all of my guidance to this point has been predicated upon a false faith in Christ. I do not see that as the case.

Remember that we are still under condemnation. This has not been removed from us collectively. Jesus Christ declared it to Joseph Smith and the prophet of our church, Ezra Taft Benson declared in '87 that it had not been removed and in 1993, Dallin H. Oakes reemphasized the same. The Savior you and I both know, has not removed this condemnation. And I know exactly what it means and why and what I am doing to come out from it. Simply stated, we are not Zion. And a desolating scourge is coming and it will come first upon the Lord's house. I am sure you can understand why the membership will be targeted first.

We are agreed. And again typically I consider your emphasis in the appropriate ranges and generally perceive it to be so now. In this sense, again I state, you are not to be considered the norm of the Denver snuffers. They take this emphasis here of the membership and apply it in far too broad and extensive a manner to include the very leaders Christ has provided to offset the misdirection of those who will heed their counsel.

Thank you. I am not. I am simply a careful observer. I do like to poke and prod a bit once in a while to get a better reading of others but refrain from judging and/or accusing, or at least try. In the end, it doesn't matter how well someone "follows" a leader. It matters that such leaders only point toward Christ and how well we attune ourselves to Him and His Spirit.

[FoxMammaWisdom]

Brlenox, maybe your boy saw a naked lady, but mine did not. Never mind, point clearly missed - on all counts. I'm bowing out of another pointless Snuffer argument so I can move on to where my time will be better spent...

[A Random Phrase]

I've read his latest blog and I see nothing of the kind. For too long people are fixed on a paradigm that it's difficult to expand it or to see it from a different light. Look at the animation below. Is the figure spinning clockwise or counterclockwise? I see it moving clockwise. And when I study it long enough, I can see it moving counter clockwise. Then I can see it moving clockwise again.



We may have people argue that it can only move clockwise and others that swear counter clockwise. And both remain stubborn and unbending. Then there are the few who choose to study it out further and are able to see a different perspective. I understand why Denver was excommunicated. I also see that he has been obedient in the tasks given him by the Lord. I just don't see the disdain in his words the way others do. I see a man who has expounded on scripture. He has no more disdain than Nephi or Moroni or Joseph Smith who clearly wrote about the condemnation that we would fall under and how we can escape it. Furthermore, I do see that he is temple worthy, sustains his leaders, he still attends church and does what he can under his current restrictions.

And then there are those who would not even be able to get past condemning you for posting a nude silhouette"

Hm. It could simply be wearing a bodysuit.

[Ides3Life]

Coming to final conclusions without actually looking at the data is a interesting phenomenon. It is not unique to our time. I found the following quote from Noel Reynolds interesting, since it reminded me of the OP, regarding a viewpoint from a BYU professor in the early twentieth century about the Book of Mormon:

As he told one group at BYU, he had never even read the Book of Mormon. This admission may seem surprising coming from a learned man who rejected the authenticity of the Book of Mormon on the grounds that he "know of no real evidence in its support, and [that] there is a great deal of evidence against it." But like other leading spokesmen for this perspective widespread among these cultural Mormons, McMurrin had decided early on that because such a book couldn't be true, it wasn't worth reading. In the same interviews, McMurrin explained: "I came to the conclusion at a very early age, earlier than I can remember, that you don't get books from angels and translate them by miracles; it is just that simple... all of the hassling over the authenticity of the Book of Mormon is just a waste of time."

It is so easy to make assumptions about what we believe someone is saying or did say without actually reading what they did say. I had mentioned PTHG to my sister and she told me she wasn't going to read it because "he [Denver] used many, many hostile sources for his book and I feel that hostile sources, even when they are first person sources, (written by people living at the time,) can seldom be trusted to tell the truth."

This is a decision based on a false assumption. If you review the bibliography for PTHG you will find that a majority of the references in the book come from the following sources:

the scriptures,
the teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith,
the Joseph Smith papers,
lectures on faith,
the Journal of Discourses,
Diaries of Apostles,
messages of the first presidency,
conference talks,
the encyclopedia of mormonism,
Articles from the Ensign,
Messenger and Advocate,
Millenial Star,
Times and Seasons,
church historians such as B.H. Roberts and Joseph Fielding Smith,
books by modern church apostles,
BYU religion professors
FARMS

I expressed this to her. Her reply was "As far as the sources for his book: It is easy to list a bunch of sources but not necessarily use much from them and to rely heavily upon those that fit your own premise. I have not read the book and do not intend to do so."

Again, another assumption, the sources listed above do make up a large part of the references in the book. I would say the number one source for PTHG is actually the Book of Mormon itself. If you feel upset by PTHG, you should also probably be upset at the prophets of the Book of Mormon and what they say about the latter day gentiles. They saw our day and were familiar with the "All is well in Zion" attitude.

“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won't come in.”
― Isaac Asimov

"Prove all things, hold fast that which is good." - 1 Thessalonians 5:21

"There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all the way and not starting." - Buddha