LDS Freedom Forum

=== wrote:Thank you

Man, I could swear I remember your username before you changed it to ===, but now I just draw a blank.

Thank you for your feedback, insight and encouraging words to me in following our Savior. It is really quite wonderful being able to speak my truth (or part of it) and be encouraged rather than called apostate. At least by most of you. ;) I do believe that seeking light should not be something to fear. For God is light and the bringer of all light. And all truth.

I am not a Snufferite, to be clear. But his book carries a spirit of truth that I have not felt in church for a very long time. Although today was pretty sweet. I attended a Primary Program. Groups of like-minded people can be found under a name, and I need some like-minded people in my life right now. I feel lead to this site for that very reason. So...Snufferite is pretty identifiable. I'm not looking for someone to worship, as in Denver Snuffer. But I am looking for those who have been where I am.

I do have to say that people who speak in mocking tones and make up names to belittle the children of God, lose my respect and my attention rather quickly. I'm not really interested in what they have to say, because Christ would never speak in such a way. "Where is thy light?" I am looking for light. I don't need dark, bitter, contending people. In them I find no image of Christ, and no reason to listen.

DarthVernacular wrote: One should exercise great care; study, prayer, listening to the Spirit.

I can certainly agree with that sentiment. The larger issue DV is what if the Spirit is telling you one thing and the PSR ( prophet ,seer and revealator- KOZ) is telling you something else? Thoughts DV?

Karenmarie wrote:Thank you for your feedback, insight and encouraging words to me in following our Savior. It is really quite wonderful being able to speak my truth (or part of it) and be encouraged rather than called apostate. At least by most of you. ;) I do believe that seeking light should not be something to fear. For God is light and the bringer of all light. And all truth.

I am not a Snufferite, to be clear. But his book carries a spirit of truth that I have not felt in church for a very long time. Although today was pretty sweet. I attended a Primary Program. Groups of like-minded people can be found under a name, and I need some like-minded people in my life right now. I feel lead to this site for that very reason. So...Snufferite is pretty identifiable. I'm not looking for someone to worship, as in Denver Snuffer. But I am looking for those who have been where I am.

I do have to say that people who speak in mocking tones and make up names to belittle the children of God, lose my respect and my attention rather quickly. I'm not really interested in what they have to say, because Christ would never speak in such a way. "Where is thy light?" I am looking for light. I don't need dark, bitter, contending people. In them I find no image of Christ, and no reason to listen.

You might consider the fact that where you probably choose the identifying moniker of Snufferite more as a humorous gesture for introduction than a statement of earnest intent, that many of us communicate with each other in familiar terms and humorous exchanges. I have been called an A*S*S* on a few occasions and other disparaging comments and it is these folks that I often enjoy the most for their sense of humor and though I might disagree and can do so vehemently, at the end of the day I like many of these folks that ride on the other side of the theological fence, though they call me names and I respond in kind. It adds an element of familiarity that I quite enjoy. Now as far as the mocking tones, :-\ as I am sure that it is me you are dissing here, I have to plead the fifth, but I will acknowledge that I can MOCK with the best of them.

natekriv wrote:Wow,

This is the craziest forum. It seems to be a constant battle between snufferites and monsonites. : )

Can no one agree that each of us ought to just follow Christ the best way we know how? Seek His Spirit and follow that Spirit?

Yes we can agree... viewtopic.php?f=1&t=36034 But sometimes it is a process of learning line upon line, here a little by DS, there a little by TM, always trusting the Holy Spirit when learning with or from anyone.

brlenox wrote:
When it comes to the Lorenzo Snow story do you feel it undermines the snufferim's credibility as it illustrates the typical nature of the reluctance of the general authorities to speak of their physical encounters with Christ or in your mind does it undermine the TBM's illustrating that once they had experiences and now have none such to claim?:D

While I should be going to bed I will take a brief shot at it as an officious intermeddler even though I know ahead of time neither of us will convince the other. The problem as you phrase it is that it assumes much of what is in controversy . You say ' it illustrates the typical... reluctance of GAs to speak of their... encounters with Christ". Yet you offer a single example of this for a period of 170 years. In general silence should not be construed as evidence of anything. It is a strange and perverse argument when you argue that the fact that nobody is willing to affirm the existence of something for 170 years is in fact proof of its existence. The other problem is that there have been those in the same period who have not been reluctant to affirm the point in controversy. There have been at least 5 men who in their capacity as special witnesses have witnessed that the Savior has appeared to them and specifically communicated with them.. So now tell me what is typical ? Is it to have special witnesses testify of their visits with the Savior or for them to remain silent having had such experiences? If we apply Occams Razor the simplest explaination ( which is mine incidentally ) is that some have experienced this but most have not. I don't know that this undisputed fact supports or undermines anything. I am continually amazed how you keep raising the terrible specter of that non-existent " ism" " snufferims' as if you were talking about some boogie man . Only you think there is such a thing, I am willing to accept the testimony of those special witnesses who bear unequivocal testimony and only wish more could and would do so, Whether or not Lorenzo Snow's son Leroi correctly recounted what Lorenzo Snows granddaughter recounted to him 35 years after it happened and whether Allie Young Pond ( the granddaughter ) accurately remembered what if anything her grandfather told her 35 years before its first publication ( since he told no one else including his counselors in the First Presidency- one of whom is on record as not believing it) has little relevance to the state of the LDS church today. If it is the true and living church the words of Joel should be manifested today , Who cares what happened 120 years ago. If his words aren't being fulfilled then maybe we should conclude it is the words of Moroni in Mormon 8 accurately describe the state of the institution today. Good night

...

boo wrote:

brlenox wrote:
When it comes to the Lorenzo Snow story do you feel it undermines the snufferim's credibility as it illustrates the typical nature of the reluctance of the general authorities to speak of their physical encounters with Christ or in your mind does it undermine the TBM's illustrating that once they had experiences and now have none such to claim?:D

While I should be going to bed I will take a brief shot at it as an officious intermeddler even though I know ahead of time neither of us will convince the other.

I shudder sometimes at the hours of sleep I have lost – never to be regained from the exact same problem. However, as to convincing one another, that battle is already ceded. We are in agreement.

The general point you are making is the same one I am making. The story is not a valid jumping off point for either side of the debate though both sides find some way to weave it into a supporting observation. As a debate point, for me it only serves as a reminder that Lorenzo Snow never substantiated this account in a public setting.

From a personal perspective though, I find the story instructive and accept it as a legitimate rendering of an actual event. Not because it works for any of the debate but for me personally I have no reason to call anyone a liar or to question their motives concerning the story. Since I accept it as correct, it serves to illustrate that Lorenzo Snow never intended a public announcement of his audience with God.

boo wrote: The problem as you phrase it is that it assumes much of what is in controversy . You say ' it illustrates the typical... reluctance of GAs to speak of their... encounters with Christ". Yet you offer a single example of this for a period of 170 years. (Dispensational head material) In general silence should not be construed as evidence of anything. It is a strange and perverse argument when you argue that the fact that nobody is willing to affirm the existence of something for 170 years is in fact proof of its existence. The other problem is that there have been those in the same period who have not been reluctant to affirm the point in controversy. There have been at least 5 men who in their capacity as special witnesses have witnessed that the Savior has appeared to them and specifically communicated with them.. So now tell me what is typical ? Is it to have special witnesses testify of their visits with the Savior or for them to remain silent having had such experiences? If we apply Occams Razor the simplest explaination ( which is mine incidentally ) is that some have experienced this but most have not. I don't know that this undisputed fact supports or undermines anything.

As far as not mentioning all the others, I was writing a post…not a book. I have written near books on this forum. In fact I am going to give you the links for the one that relates to this issue of why there is little reference from General Authorities concerning visits from Christ. I suggest you read them next time you are finding it hard to get to sleep – guaranteed to get your doze on.

boo wrote:I am continually amazed how you keep raising the terrible specter of that non-existent " ism" " snufferims' as if you were talking about some boogie man . Only you think there is such a thing,

I do have a snuffer fixation…Or it may PSDD (Post Snuffer Distress Disorder) fortunately it only extends to conversations I have on LDSFF. I have mentioned before, when I first signed up here I came with an interest in Snuffer. It was six months or so prior to his excommunication. Over the next few months, as I observed what his teachings had done to people testimonies and how they had an incessant need to attack the church and its leaders and thus to undermine Christ’s church I realized Denver = Korihor. These were spiritual considerations for me and I felt that I was on this site to see what Devers teachings were doing to people. They were losing their testimonies, spouses were leaving spouses and all sorts of mayhem is the result. It was fascinating to observe the shear brilliance of the efforts of Satan to lure folks away from the church through Denver Snuffer. It was a study in introducing holes of doubt into testimonies and then to fill the holes in the testimonies with rationalizations that were clearly sourced from Denver’s spiritual advisors of questionable origins. The sycophants and otherwise followers thought not about what was going on, they just basked in the false sense of knowing something which in the end will prove to be not knowing enough.

Seeing him as a Korihor alters my response to him as I see him and his acolytes as destroyers of the kingdom. I do not care if I differ with someone in doctrinal understanding but I deplore deception that destroys souls and effects the Kingdom of God.

boo wrote: I am willing to accept the testimony of those special witnesses who bear unequivocal testimony and only wish more could and would do so, Whether or not Lorenzo Snow's son Leroi correctly recounted what Lorenzo Snows granddaughter recounted to him 35 years after it happened and whether Allie Young Pond ( the granddaughter ) accurately remembered what if anything her grandfather told her 35 years before its first publication ( since he told no one else including his counselors in the First Presidency- one of whom is on record as not believing it) has little relevance to the state of the LDS church today.

Fabulous…I must commend you for your knowledge of such details. Most are not aware of how the story came to be and if you know these things from your own study that speaks highly of your efforts. If you got them from some summary of Denver’s somewhere, I am not so impressed but in my readings of his material, I do not recollect such was instructed. Still I maintain that we are in basic agreement as to the legitimacy of the story to serve as a point of public instruction. It can serve wonderfully for any person who seeks it for personal value.

As promised following are links for the discussion of a concept that I related to the calling of the dispensational head Joseph Smith and his role as the single most important testimony we need consider.

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=12" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=21" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I appreciate your candor, brienox, regarding your experience and path.

I do have a snuffer fixation…Or it may PSDD (Post Snuffer Distress Disorder) fortunately it only extends to conversations I have on LDSFF. I have mentioned before, when I first signed up here I came with an interest in Snuffer. It was six months or so prior to his excommunication. Over the next few months, as I observed what his teachings had done to people testimonies and how they had an incessant need to attack the church and its leaders and thus to undermine Christ’s church I realized Denver = Korihor. These were spiritual considerations for me and I felt that I was on this site to see what Devers teachings were doing to people. They were losing their testimonies, spouses were leaving spouses and all sorts of mayhem is the result. It was fascinating to observe the shear brilliance of the efforts of Satan to lure folks away from the church through Denver Snuffer. It was a study in introducing holes of doubt into testimonies and then to fill the holes in the testimonies with rationalizations...

wow.

Wow

Is right


What planet is that happening on?

I haven't heard or seen or read

About even

One

Single

Person

Losing their testimony

Bc

Of the snuff guy


Not
One



They actually usually seem to gain a

Stronger

Testimony


Of
Christ




And a deep desire
To know
And
To commune
With

Him


Such
Is
Life
Eternal

Right?

Some interesting comments here:

3 Nephi 12: 11-12:

"And blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake; For ye shall have great joy and be exceedingly glad, for great shall be your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets who were before you."

If your actions are misjudged, that is only normal. There have been charlatans using religion to cloak their evil deeds from the beginning of time. They are so widespread, so often exposed for what they really are, that humanity has a legitimate skepticism about those who come in the name of the Lord.

From Jimmy Swaggart's prostitutes to Ted Haggard's homosexual encounters, the evangelical world has been rocked by the sexual misconduct of ministers. Catholic priesthood sexual abuse has been so widespread that there is a whole legal industry devoted to bringing and defending claims from victims of that abuse. The LDS Church has quietly settled a number of claims on both coasts and adjusted how membership records are documented and what precautions are taken when calling a man to teach in Primary because of sexual misconduct and associated legal claims.

The Burt Lancaster film Elmer Gantry was based on the Sinclair Lewis novel and illustrated the life and deeds of a false prophet. Indeed, the term "prophet" is rarely used in modern vernacular outside of LDS circles unless coupled with the term "false." "False prophet" is expected. What is unexpected is the contrary.

So when first reactions are taken, it will always be to sneer, to jeer, to mock and to suspect those who come in the name of the Lord. They are right to do that. Everyone OUGHT to question motives. Everyone OUGHT to think you're a fraud. They should expect you are like all those others in whom society trusted. No one wants to follow Jim Jones to their death, drinking strychnine laced Kool-Aid in another mass-suicide. That has happened too often already. Indeed, the fruits of such false prophets have been so devastating, so evil, so wrong in spirit and result that only a fool would be eager to trust you even should you have a pure heart and a true message.

The first reaction should be skepticism which will result in an attempt to measure your sincerity. Until you've been tested by the world, there is no reason for the world to believe anything you have to say. They will revile you, thinking you just another fraud. They will persecute you as if a charlatan, though you are His disciple. They will say all manner of evil against you falsely, all the while thinking they are only giving you what you deserve.

This is how the world decides if you are following Him. They have seen and heard no end of those who have claimed to follow Him, and you are no different in their eyes. That is, until you have actually followed Him; borne their criticism, returned good for evil, and shown how devoted you are in fact, as Christ will address in coming verses. When you have proven your devotion, then some few will soften their hearts. Others will remain unwilling to admit the truth, even when it is apparent you are His.

This is the way in which Christ lived His life. These teachings are an explanation of Him. And, in turn, it is also an explanation of the lives of any who follow Him. To follow Him, and to learn of His ways always requires experiencing some of what He experienced. While He assumed a full measure of these teachings, we are required to experience some of what He did only to allow us to understand Him. But these teachings are meant to be lived. They are meant to be applied and tested. If you test them, you will discover Him through them.

You will also come to know and understand the prophets who went before. This is a timeless brotherhood. Some of them invariably also come to succor their fellow Saint. This is always the same when the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is lived on the earth.

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2010/ ... 11-12.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I know shadow has used the scripture about Christ's yoke being easy to claim this as a false doctrine but look to the life of Joseph Smith, Lehi, John the Baptist, Abinadi, Peter, Job, Isaiah, Joseph, Daniel, Alma, Nephi and countless martyrs who died as witnesses for Christ.

brlenox wrote:


The general point you are making is the same one I am making. The story is not a valid jumping off point for either side of the debate though both sides find some way to weave it into a supporting observation. As a debate point, for me it only serves as a reminder that Lorenzo Snow never substantiated this account in a public setting.

From a personal perspective though, I find the story instructive and accept it as a legitimate rendering of an actual event. Not because it works for any of the debate but for me personally I have no reason to call anyone a liar or to question their motives concerning the story. Since I accept it as correct, it serves to illustrate that Lorenzo Snow never intended a public announcement of his audience with God.

boo wrote: The problem as you phrase it is that it assumes much of what is in controversy . You say ' it illustrates the typical... reluctance of GAs to speak of their... encounters with Christ". Yet you offer a single example of this for a period of 170 years. (Dispensational head material) In general silence should not be construed as evidence of anything. It is a strange and perverse argument when you argue that the fact that nobody is willing to affirm the existence of something for 170 years is in fact proof of its existence. The other problem is that there have been those in the same period who have not been reluctant to affirm the point in controversy. There have been at least 5 men who in their capacity as special witnesses have witnessed that the Savior has appeared to them and specifically communicated with them.. So now tell me what is typical ? Is it to have special witnesses testify of their visits with the Savior or for them to remain silent having had such experiences? If we apply Occams Razor the simplest explaination ( which is mine incidentally ) is that some have experienced this but most have not. I don't know that this undisputed fact supports or undermines anything.

As far as not mentioning all the others, I was writing a post…not a book. I have written near books on this forum. In fact I am going to give you the links for the one that relates to this issue of why there is little reference from General Authorities concerning visits from Christ. I suggest you read them next time you are finding it hard to get to sleep – guaranteed to get your doze on.

boo wrote:I am continually amazed how you keep raising the terrible specter of that non-existent " ism" " snufferims' as if you were talking about some boogie man . Only you think there is such a thing,

I do have a snuffer fixation…Or it may PSDD (Post Snuffer Distress Disorder) fortunately it only extends to conversations I have on LDSFF. I have mentioned before, when I first signed up here I came with an interest in Snuffer. It was six months or so prior to his excommunication. Over the next few months, as I observed what his teachings had done to people testimonies and how they had an incessant need to attack the church and its leaders and thus to undermine Christ’s church I realized Denver = Korihor. These were spiritual considerations for me and I felt that I was on this site to see what Devers teachings were doing to people. They were losing their testimonies, spouses were leaving spouses and all sorts of mayhem is the result. It was fascinating to observe the shear brilliance of the efforts of Satan to lure folks away from the church through Denver Snuffer. It was a study in introducing holes of doubt into testimonies and then to fill the holes in the testimonies with rationalizations that were clearly sourced from Denver’s spiritual advisors of questionable origins. The sycophants and otherwise followers thought not about what was going on, they just basked in the false sense of knowing something which in the end will prove to be not knowing enough.

Seeing him as a Korihor alters my response to him as I see him and his acolytes as destroyers of the kingdom. I do not care if I differ with someone in doctrinal understanding but I deplore deception that destroys souls and effects the Kingdom of God.

boo wrote: I am willing to accept the testimony of those special witnesses who bear unequivocal testimony and only wish more could and would do so, Whether or not Lorenzo Snow's son Leroi correctly recounted what Lorenzo Snows granddaughter recounted to him 35 years after it happened and whether Allie Young Pond ( the granddaughter ) accurately remembered what if anything her grandfather told her 35 years before its first publication ( since he told no one else including his counselors in the First Presidency- one of whom is on record as not believing it) has little relevance to the state of the LDS church today.

Fabulous…I must commend you for your knowledge of such details. Most are not aware of how the story came to be and if you know these things from your own study that speaks highly of your efforts. If you got them from some summary of Denver’s somewhere, I am not so impressed but in my readings of his material, I do not recollect such was instructed. Still I maintain that we are in basic agreement as to the legitimacy of the story to serve as a point of public instruction. It can serve wonderfully for any person who seeks it for personal value.

As promised following are links for the discussion of a concept that I related to the calling of the dispensational head Joseph Smith and his role as the single most important testimony we need consider.

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=12" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=21" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=33194&start=30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well it is so refreshing that we can jointly agree on anything that I think I will celebrate by going to bed. Sweet dreams little lamb or wolf or sheep or turducken or what ever you are