Who has jumped off the Denver Snuffer train?

[Zathura]

The wording for baptism is different (changed, altered) in the Book of Mormon vs what the Lord revealed to Joseph in the D&C. So for you guys, is the BoM false or is Joseph a false prophet?

Where's that John Wayne quote I like so much?? "Life is hard...."

It's not an equal comparison.

We've already discussed this many times. Joseph Smith talked to God face to face or heard his voice hundreds of times. He then presented it before the people to accept it before it was binding upon us.

The changes after him were not done in this manner, but were decided upon collectively by 15 men and placed in a manual(the ordinance changes were placed nowhere, they were just changed) and we all immediately were expected to accept it, and it now dictates everything.

Joseph did not claim to have talked to God every time he made a change. He was the prophet, seer and revelator. The members trusted that he was God's annointed servant on earth and he was free to make changes and decisions and the people accepted them. Your problem is that you don't believe we have a Prophet who leads us today. You've been listening to dissaffected members and they are influencing you to think like them. Either we are the Lord's true church on earth or we aren't. You'll have to find the answer to that for yourself. But I can tell you one thing. If the LDS church isn't the true church, then there is no true church on earth. Snuffer evolved his 'community' out of the LDS church; his teachings are heretical and based on his skewed 'interpretation' of LDS scripture and history. Even his own evolution from believing member to excommunicant is something he can't escape. He has no authority, because he could only claim to have gotten his 'authority' to start a new church, from his affiliation and ordination by the LDS church, which he said was rejected by God within only a few years of it's organization.

Have you read D&C? Have you noticed that it's the Lord speaking in almost every single section? Have you noticed the many times Joseph saw God?
Did you notice that he presented it before the Church so that we could accept it by common consent, and it THEN became binding upon us?

Did you ever see him make a decision with 14 others and then put it in a manual and then tell members that we had to follow the rules in the manual? He didn't do that, and you have to be willingly blind to say otherwise.

I never said that Denver has authority, so I don't know why you keep trying to convince me that he doesn't have authority.

[shadow]

The wording for baptism is different (changed, altered) in the Book of Mormon vs what the Lord revealed to Joseph in the D&C. So for you guys, is the BoM false or is Joseph a false prophet?

Where's that John Wayne quote I like so much?? "Life is hard...."

It's not an equal comparison.

We've already discussed this many times. Joseph Smith talked to God face to face or heard his voice hundreds of times. He then presented it before the people to accept it before it was binding upon us.

Not true.
And it is comparable. Those words are different. They're altered from the BoM to the D&C. Semp is probably freaking out :-$

[Zathura]

Even Brigham Young understood this.
Do you realize that he had the WoW presented before the people to accept it as a commandment because people didn't take it seriously?

Now I wonder, why would he do that.. Maybe because that's how God did things with Joseph.

[Zathura]

The wording for baptism is different (changed, altered) in the Book of Mormon vs what the Lord revealed to Joseph in the D&C. So for you guys, is the BoM false or is Joseph a false prophet?

Where's that John Wayne quote I like so much?? "Life is hard...."

It's not an equal comparison.

We've already discussed this many times. Joseph Smith talked to God face to face or heard his voice hundreds of times. He then presented it before the people to accept it before it was binding upon us.

Not true.
And it is comparable. Those words are different. They're altered from the BoM to the D&C. Semp is probably freaking out :-$

The words are different, because God told Joseph by his voice the wording.
Joseph didn't decide to word it differently after collectively deciding with 14 others.not comparable.

[SempiternalHarbinger]

The wording for baptism is different (changed, altered) in the Book of Mormon vs what the Lord revealed to Joseph in the D&C. So for you guys, is the BoM false or is Joseph a false prophet?

Where's that John Wayne quote I like so much?? "Life is hard...."

It's not an equal comparison.

We've already discussed this many times. Joseph Smith talked to God face to face or heard his voice hundreds of times. He then presented it before the people to accept it before it was binding upon us.

Not true.
And it is comparable. Those words are different. They're altered from the BoM to the D&C. Semp is probably freaking out :-$

D&C 1: 15: For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant.

[shadow]

The words are different, because God told Joseph by his voice the wording.
Joseph didn't decide to word it differently after collectively deciding with 14 others.not comparable.

You'd have to believe Joseph was a prophet and he wrote the words correctly.
Same with any of his successors.

[kennyhs]

It just seems like we keep going round and round on this and never get anywhere.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day saints believes in a living prophet that leads and guides the church. We also believe in 12 apostles who help lead and guide the church, some of whom one day become the head of the church, if they live long enough. The Prophet, through continuing revelation, makes changes to the way the church is run. We ARE NOT a stagnant organization and things will change over time. If you all don't figure that out, you're going to have problems--I'm talking to those of you who continually complain about the changes within the church.

Why are some of you still grilling LDS members about beliefs you used to adhere to yourselves? Jeremy? Boo? Thomas? Separatist? and the rest of you who follow Snuffer but won't admit it? I'm not sure who you all are because you hide your affiliation with him these days. Those of you who've accepted Denver Snuffer as a Prophet (thereby rejecting Pres. Monson); You've decided you don't believe anymore and that's fine. You have that right. But what bothers me is that I have a right to continue to believe the church and sustain the present day leaders and how they run this church and I shouldn't have to constantly defend the basics. You all were once members and you know how things work in the church. You know that the Prophet receives revelation for the whole church and that means change. Over the almost 200 years of the existence of the church, we've been losing members every time the Prophet makes changes--because there are members who don't like change and see it as apostasy. Denver Snuffer's followers are just the latest to break off, believing they are the 'Lord's true church'. But yet, they won't openly admit what they are doing because they need to proselyte and ONLY people who are members of the LDS church are going to have any interest in their 'community'--and I assume that's why you all are here. To try to find converts.

Which brings me to Stahura. I'm sure Snuffer's adherents on this forum are working on converting Stahura to his movement, and he sounds like he's just the kind of LDS member they look for.

Stahura, We believe the living prophet makes changes, as he is inspired to do. That means if he wants to require members to sustain him and the Quorum of 12, whether it was required in the past or not, HE CAN REQUIRE IT!!! I believe you are sincere in your questions, but for you to learn anything from those questions, you're going to have to actually be open to considering the answers!! I seem to recall you are a long time member, you might have even said you served a mission, but sometimes you sound like you have virtually no knowledge of the Gospel. Have you been inactive a while? I'm not criticizing, I'm just trying to understand why you say things that are odd for an active, believing member. They're not odd for someone who's been out of the church for a while. And by the way, we don't teach that people have to go to the temple to be part of the kingdom of God--Baptism is the gateway to the Kingdom of God; Baptism is the entrance into the Celestial kingdom. It has to be done by someone having proper authority, one of those very basic things what you struggle with as well.

Denver Snuffer is not a prophet, he's simply a member who, somewhere in the last few years, lost his testimony and is now using his gifts and talents to take as many people out of the church, with him. And those who have put faith in his teachings often try to stay members in the LDS church because that's where they will find 'converts'. No one else would be interested or even have a clue what Snuffer is talking about.

:ymapplause:

[Wolverine]

:ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:

It just seems like we keep going round and round on this and never get anywhere.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day saints believes in a living prophet that leads and guides the church. We also believe in 12 apostles who help lead and guide the church, some of whom one day become the head of the church, if they live long enough. The Prophet, through continuing revelation, makes changes to the way the church is run. We ARE NOT a stagnant organization and things will change over time. If you all don't figure that out, you're going to have problems--I'm talking to those of you who continually complain about the changes within the church.

Why are some of you still grilling LDS members about beliefs you used to adhere to yourselves? Jeremy? Boo? Thomas? Separatist? and the rest of you who follow Snuffer but won't admit it? I'm not sure who you all are because you hide your affiliation with him these days. Those of you who've accepted Denver Snuffer as a Prophet (thereby rejecting Pres. Monson); You've decided you don't believe anymore and that's fine. You have that right. But what bothers me is that I have a right to continue to believe the church and sustain the present day leaders and how they run this church and I shouldn't have to constantly defend the basics. You all were once members and you know how things work in the church. You know that the Prophet receives revelation for the whole church and that means change. Over the almost 200 years of the existence of the church, we've been losing members every time the Prophet makes changes--because there are members who don't like change and see it as apostasy. Denver Snuffer's followers are just the latest to break off, believing they are the 'Lord's true church'. But yet, they won't openly admit what they are doing because they need to proselyte and ONLY people who are members of the LDS church are going to have any interest in their 'community'--and I assume that's why you all are here. To try to find converts.

Which brings me to Stahura. I'm sure Snuffer's adherents on this forum are working on converting Stahura to his movement, and he sounds like he's just the kind of LDS member they look for.

Stahura, We believe the living prophet makes changes, as he is inspired to do. That means if he wants to require members to sustain him and the Quorum of 12, whether it was required in the past or not, HE CAN REQUIRE IT!!! I believe you are sincere in your questions, but for you to learn anything from those questions, you're going to have to actually be open to considering the answers!! I seem to recall you are a long time member, you might have even said you served a mission, but sometimes you sound like you have virtually no knowledge of the Gospel. Have you been inactive a while? I'm not criticizing, I'm just trying to understand why you say things that are odd for an active, believing member. They're not odd for someone who's been out of the church for a while. And by the way, we don't teach that people have to go to the temple to be part of the kingdom of God--Baptism is the gateway to the Kingdom of God; Baptism is the entrance into the Celestial kingdom. It has to be done by someone having proper authority, one of those very basic things what you struggle with as well.

Denver Snuffer is not a prophet, he's simply a member who, somewhere in the last few years, lost his testimony and is now using his gifts and talents to take as many people out of the church, with him. And those who have put faith in his teachings often try to stay members in the LDS church because that's where they will find 'converts'. No one else would be interested or even have a clue what Snuffer is talking about.

[Jesef]

Yep, logically, it's either the LDS Church (option #1) OR Denver (option #2), but not both - at least not entirely - which falls under option #3, i.e. neither is fully as claimed and the objective truth is something else entirely; this wouldn't necessarily mean that option #1 & #2 are totally false, evil, or useless/valueless, just not what they claim, which is the One true and exclusively divinely authorized way to ultimate salvation, exaltation, godhood, etc.

Has anyone here ever tried a lengthy water fast? I've heard of even as long as 40 days. It's interesting that the reported commentary on Jesus's 40 day fast - obviously not a firsthand account, btw - was that he was hungry, not thirsty. I've read of benefits both physical and spiritual for this type of fast. Talk about fanatical though!

[Mark]

Sadly the go to answer for many of your questions Semp is something of this effect: "Wherefore I, the Lord, command and revoke, as it seemeth me good..."

Do you have a problem with the Lords words here revealed through the Prophet Joseph? If you dont believe the Lord speaks through living Prophets in the LDS church to reveal his will you are under no obligation to be a follower of that church. There are hundreds of others to choose from. Or you can start your own faith like so many others have.

I know some men who believe that polygamy should be allowed to be practiced today and the earthly practice should never have been revoked from the church. Does that mean these folks should be allowed to be admitted to the temples of the LDS church and have all the women they desire to have physical relations with sealed to them in the temples?

Does the church have any rights or privileges to require certain standards of behavior or belief in order to admit people into their temples? Isnt this a freedom forum? What rights does the church have?

[shadow]

D&C 1: 15: For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant.

14 And the arm of the Lord shall be revealed; and the day cometh that they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles, shall be cut off from among the people;

15 For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant


And we see this today. Those who neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles are cut off. You're a part of that crowd, aren't you Semp? The Lords ordinances are found in His restored church. Going elsewhere for baptism etc. is straying. Amen.

[boo]

Found this:
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/ZebC.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But wondering about the arms raised to the square bit.

I will have to hunt a bit but there are photos of LDS Sacrament Meetings in the 1920s showing the members kneeling and those blessing the Sacrament doing so with uplifted arms. Interestingly the Wiki article under Sacrament LDS acknowledges both the use of wine and the fact that the whole congregation knelt

[Zathura]

:ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:

It just seems like we keep going round and round on this and never get anywhere.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day saints believes in a living prophet that leads and guides the church. We also believe in 12 apostles who help lead and guide the church, some of whom one day become the head of the church, if they live long enough. The Prophet, through continuing revelation, makes changes to the way the church is run. We ARE NOT a stagnant organization and things will change over time. If you all don't figure that out, you're going to have problems--I'm talking to those of you who continually complain about the changes within the church.

Why are some of you still grilling LDS members about beliefs you used to adhere to yourselves? Jeremy? Boo? Thomas? Separatist? and the rest of you who follow Snuffer but won't admit it? I'm not sure who you all are because you hide your affiliation with him these days. Those of you who've accepted Denver Snuffer as a Prophet (thereby rejecting Pres. Monson); You've decided you don't believe anymore and that's fine. You have that right. But what bothers me is that I have a right to continue to believe the church and sustain the present day leaders and how they run this church and I shouldn't have to constantly defend the basics. You all were once members and you know how things work in the church. You know that the Prophet receives revelation for the whole church and that means change. Over the almost 200 years of the existence of the church, we've been losing members every time the Prophet makes changes--because there are members who don't like change and see it as apostasy. Denver Snuffer's followers are just the latest to break off, believing they are the 'Lord's true church'. But yet, they won't openly admit what they are doing because they need to proselyte and ONLY people who are members of the LDS church are going to have any interest in their 'community'--and I assume that's why you all are here. To try to find converts.

Which brings me to Stahura. I'm sure Snuffer's adherents on this forum are working on converting Stahura to his movement, and he sounds like he's just the kind of LDS member they look for.

Stahura, We believe the living prophet makes changes, as he is inspired to do. That means if he wants to require members to sustain him and the Quorum of 12, whether it was required in the past or not, HE CAN REQUIRE IT!!! I believe you are sincere in your questions, but for you to learn anything from those questions, you're going to have to actually be open to considering the answers!! I seem to recall you are a long time member, you might have even said you served a mission, but sometimes you sound like you have virtually no knowledge of the Gospel. Have you been inactive a while? I'm not criticizing, I'm just trying to understand why you say things that are odd for an active, believing member. They're not odd for someone who's been out of the church for a while. And by the way, we don't teach that people have to go to the temple to be part of the kingdom of God--Baptism is the gateway to the Kingdom of God; Baptism is the entrance into the Celestial kingdom. It has to be done by someone having proper authority, one of those very basic things what you struggle with as well.

Denver Snuffer is not a prophet, he's simply a member who, somewhere in the last few years, lost his testimony and is now using his gifts and talents to take as many people out of the church, with him. And those who have put faith in his teachings often try to stay members in the LDS church because that's where they will find 'converts'. No one else would be interested or even have a clue what Snuffer is talking about.

:ymapplause: You probably should keep cheering for the Judge-Fest! Assuming these people are as evil and lost as y'all are saying, then you'd think you need to be charitable, long suffering and kind.

Nah, it's probably just better to judge them, make assumptions about their character and then cheer others on who do the same right? Oh and lets call them to repentance!

Well done friends :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:


Let's make fun of the Apostates!!

That's what Christ would do right?

[SempiternalHarbinger]

Found this:
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/ZebC.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But wondering about the arms raised to the square bit.

I will have to hunt a bit but there are photos of LDS Sacrament Meetings in the 1920s showing the members kneeling and those blessing the Sacrament doing so with uplifted arms. Interestingly the Wiki article under Sacrament LDS acknowledges both the use of wine and the fact that the whole congregation knelt

The picture above was taken about 1894. It shows that the Melchizedek Priesthood holder is raising both hands as he offers the Sacrament Prayer. Many living LDS members recall that when a Priest in the Aaronic Priesthood offered the prayer, he raised his right hand only. The practice was discontinued in the LDS Church in the 1930s.

[Jesef]

So this all comes back to "who is/are the Lord's truly authorized and chosen/anointed servant(s)?", i.e. who has the real scepter of divine authority and righteousness. James 1:5 Go ask God. I'm trusting he will own and confirm or re-confirm who is doing his real work. Arguing about it and coming up with parallels and quoting/interpreting scriptures, etc., isn't going to bring me certainty. Because, as has been demonstrated (mostly by me, not taking credit, but discredit) by the number of posts and pages here, it's an unsolvable puzzle with intelligent, articulate, beautiful, divine children of God on both sides. Sadly, there is confusion and contention. I truly pray you all Love and Joy and Peace and the Spirit and Power of the Holy Ghost and of God in all of your lives and families. My heart is broken. Meekness and lowliness of heart bring the visitation of the (power of the) Holy Ghost and the pure love of Christ (maybe the Love and Spirit of God are the same thing or co-existent or something). I need that. I really want to KNOW. In the meantime, I'm just going to do my best to live the teachings of Christ. I do believe Christ was honest, all the time, never pretending or masquerading. Not accusing anyone. But if you're not being completely honest, you're damning yourself, or halting your growth and learning, with a huge stumbling block of unbelief (false belief and/or lack of belief) - I don't believe a person can have real faith/confidence if they aren't being true to themselves. I am looking at my own heart and expressions right now too. Be Faithful & True!

[shadow]

:ymapplause: You probably should keep cheering for the Judge-Fest! Assuming these people are as evil and lost as y'all are saying, then you'd think you need to be charitable, long suffering and kind.

Nah, it's probably just better to judge them, make assumptions about their character and then cheer others on who do the same right? Oh and lets call them to repentance!

Well done friends :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:


Let's make fun of the Apostates!!

That's what Christ would do right?

Coming from a guy (you) who is always judging the saints as being followers of men, you're quite brave for making that post #-o

[shadow]

Where does it say in the scriptures, any of them, that one should raise both hands when blessing the sacrament? I've not read it anywhere.

[boo]

Found this:
http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/ZebC.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But wondering about the arms raised to the square bit.

I will have to hunt a bit but there are photos of LDS Sacrament Meetings in the 1920s showing the members kneeling and those blessing the Sacrament doing so with uplifted arms. Interestingly the Wiki article under Sacrament LDS acknowledges both the use of wine and the fact that the whole congregation knelt

The picture above was taken about 1894. It shows that the Melchizedek Priesthood holder is raising both hands as he offers the Sacrament Prayer. Many living LDS members recall that when a Priest in the Aaronic Priesthood offered the prayer, he raised his right hand only. The practice was discontinued in the LDS Church in the 1930s.

Good work and speedy too .Since this thread has been further derailed I assume no one will object to me pointing out that originally Priests rarely blessed the Sacrament . Because D C 20 : 46-50 specifically directs that a Priest is only to officiate in blessing the sacrament if no Elder is present. So Shadow who cares if it is in the scriptures or not .We can see that we often pay little attention to what the scriptures actually say anyway

[Jason]

You'd think the only pre requisite to entering the Lord's house would be faith in the Lord. It's just ironic that you're kicked out if you don't believe in 15 mortal men. God has never given such a commandment.
This is all besides my own personal belief.
I'm thinking with an objective mind, and none of this makes sense.
By teaching that you cannot enter the Kingdom of God without going into the Temple, and then not allowing people INTO the Temple who don't believe in 15 men, you are putting a man in between you and your God.

Its not believing in 15 mortal men...its believing that God has called 15 mortal men to His ministry and to administrate the affairs of His church. If you don't believe that...you probably shouldn't be in the church and doing yourself a disservice in the process.

There is no break in the chain of command that originated with the restoration of the organization of the church administered by the also restored Holy Priesthood beginning with Joseph Smith and the many others (of whom a great number left to kick the bricks of their pride...and a few came back).

In the temple you covenant to build the Kingdom and specifically the church...lead by God through those 15 mortal men. If you fundamentally don't believe that....why in the world would anyone want to attend the temple and make promises they had no intention of keeping? Not to mention that you have to lie to get a recommend just to get in and lie again before God, angels, and all those witnesses present there.

Its bad enough to have good intentions and fall short (none of us are perfect)...but seems completely asinine to me to have no intention whatsoever and still proceed.

And also that which was written by the prophet Malachi: For, behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

Wherefore, this shall be the answer of the Lord unto them:

In that day when I came unto mine own, no man among you received me, and you were driven out.

When I called again there was none of you to answer; yet my arm was not shortened at all that I could not redeem, neither my power to deliver.

Behold, at my rebuke I dry up the sea. I make the rivers a wilderness; their fish stink, and die for thirst.

I clothe the heavens with blackness, and make sackcloth their covering.

And this shall ye have of my hand—ye shall lie down in sorrow.

Behold, and lo, there are none to deliver you; for ye obeyed not my voice when I called to you out of the heavens; ye believed not my servants, and when they were sent unto you ye received them not.

Wherefore, they sealed up the testimony and bound up the law, and ye were delivered over unto darkness.

These shall go away into outer darkness, where there is weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth.

Behold the Lord your God hath spoken it. Amen.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testa ... ang=eng#72" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

well, whatever you want to call it, there was never a time that God said " You cannot enter my house without first verbally expressing your belief that I called these 15 men, and if you don't believe it you cannot enter my house and enter my Kingdom".

God has had Temples built throughout history, this is in the scriptures. It is his house, and he always said that he would fill that house with his glory. This is why I, and everyone else wants to enter the Temple. That's the fundamental belief and "incentive" to go seek and enter a Temple.
The fundamental belief and "incentive" to enter Temples was NEVER the idea that God called 15 men to lead us, as you suggested in your post

I don't think to myself, "ah wow, these 15 Apostles are so great. I really want to enter the Temple because those 15 men are so great, they are truly called of God, so I want to enter the Temple." Nobody thinks like that.
No. I think to myself "I love my Father in Heaven, I want to feel his presence and his presence can be found in the building that he says is his house, a building in which he has promised to fill with his glory. I want to go there to feel his presence."

This is why, in Joseph's time there was no requisite of expressing belief in the calling of 15 men and obtaining a recommend to enter the Lord's house.

Agree to disagree. I believe if you search the scriptures closely there has always been a requisite...even if its just taking off your shoes because you are on holy land.

There have also been some strict punishments for those who cross the line...even if only to steady an ark (good intentions).

[Jason]

When presented with the facts, it seems you either have to accept that the "chain" was broken, or you must accept that setting apart and ordination and laying on of hands is a mere formality.

There is no break in the chain of command that originated with the restoration of the organization of the church administered by the also restored Holy Priesthood beginning with Joseph Smith and the many others (of whom a great number left to kick the bricks of their pride and continue to do so...and a few came back...and hopefully will do so even if in the life to come).

One point is that Brigham Young , John Taylor, and Wilford Woodruff were not ordained nor set apart to be the President of The Church, they just stepped into the position and were sustained. Then Lorenzo Snow was the first to be officially set apart but not ordained, they specifically said that the President didn't need to be ordained, only set apart. Starting with David O Mckay though, they were then set apart AND ordained.

That certainly is strange and we are presented with 2 theories.
1. Setting apart and ordination is a mere formality and doesn't actually effect the passing of the keys, and therefore the line of succession was not broken.
2. Setting apart and ordination are necessary for the passing along of keys and the appointment of a new President, and therefore the line of succession was broken.

I don't trust your source. So I'll agree to disagree.

[Jeremy]

Do you have a problem with the Lords words here revealed through the Prophet Joseph?

I do not. I do have a problem with how the wildcard is used by men when it is intended to be used by the Lord.

If you dont believe the Lord speaks through living Prophets in the LDS church to reveal his will you are under no obligation to be a follower of that church.

Agreed.

There are hundreds of others to choose from. Or you can start your own faith like so many others have.

Thanks for the permission. However, I am not seeking for such a thing.

I know some men who believe that polygamy should be allowed to be practiced today and the earthly practice should never have been revoked from the church. Does that mean these folks should be allowed to be admitted to the temples of the LDS church and have all the women they desire to have physical relations with sealed to them in the temples?

No, it does not mean that.

Does the church have any rights or privileges to require certain standards of behavior or belief in order to admit people into their temples?

Sure they do, as soon as they acknowledge that they are "their" temples. However, if they are going to declare they are HIS temples, then HE should determine who has the right and privilege as well as the standard.

Isnt this a freedom forum? What rights does the church have?

Indeed it is. :ymapplause: The church has every right to operate as it wishes. I have no objection how "she" handles "her" business... the only objection is when she says she is his while imposing her will. But my objection only goes so far as to point it out.

[boo]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the question we are asked is: Do you SUPPORT the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve as Prophets, Seers and Revelators?

Ah wrong . The question is do we sustain . We sustain by acknowledging their right to preside and conduct the affairs of the institution. You can sustain Obama as president even we disagree with his policies. You guys are so quick to condemn. You have no idea what conversations I have had with my bishop and SP about these matters. Really I would be more circumspect in my haste to judge others honesty or integrity if I were you.

So I will ask you again Boo. If a Snuffer had come to you while you were serving as a Bishop in the church and proclaimed that the church had now fallen into an apostate state and its presiding authorities had lost all valid priesthood authority and keys would you have issued them a recommend to attend the temple? Is it appropriate for that individual to be found making covenants in the temple that they are intending to rebel against and break? Is that merciful?

Mark I am loath to contribute to this line of inquiry.I am loath to create contention. I and my personal opinions or beliefs are of little or no consequence. The only reason I began to comment in this thread was to respond to a series of particular questions at the express request of the op. It doesn't matter what I would have done a decade ago. The issue for both of us is are we going to follow the voice of the Savior today. I pray for the 15 along with my Bishop and SP everyday and I sustain them in their ecclesiastical positions and recognize their right to hold those positions. Their actions and teachings and beliefs are between them and God and I have no right to dictate to them. Even though I mourn that the institution which i love and have given my life to isn't the one I joined more than 60 years ago. My task I presently believe is to nurture and lift those who I can and speak the truth as directed by the Spirit so long as I am permitted to do so. Tinally you may be surprised to learn that for an extended period following the publication of Passing the Heavenly Gift which essentially said the things mentioned above multiple bishops and SPs found Snuffer worthy to hold a TR.

[Zathura]

:ymapplause: You probably should keep cheering for the Judge-Fest! Assuming these people are as evil and lost as y'all are saying, then you'd think you need to be charitable, long suffering and kind.

Nah, it's probably just better to judge them, make assumptions about their character and then cheer others on who do the same right? Oh and lets call them to repentance!

Well done friends :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:


Let's make fun of the Apostates!!

That's what Christ would do right?

Coming from a guy (you) who is always judging the saints as being followers of men, you're quite brave for making that post #-o

I challenge you to find the last time that I made a statement where I judged anybody for being a follower of men or for idolizing men.
The last post you'll find like that will be a good 3-4 months ago, when I apologized for speaking like that and stopped.

[Zathura]

:ymapplause: You probably should keep cheering for the Judge-Fest! Assuming these people are as evil and lost as y'all are saying, then you'd think you need to be charitable, long suffering and kind.

Nah, it's probably just better to judge them, make assumptions about their character and then cheer others on who do the same right? Oh and lets call them to repentance!

Well done friends :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause: :ymapplause:


Let's make fun of the Apostates!!

That's what Christ would do right?

Coming from a guy (you) who is always judging the saints as being followers of men, you're quite brave for making that post #-o

I challenge you to find the last time that I made a statement where I judged anybody for being a follower of men or for idolizing men.
The last post you'll find like that will be a good 3-4-5 months ago, when I apologized for speaking like that and stopped.
oddly enough, even BeePrepared pm'd me more than once to thank me for being better and for apologizing and correcting my attitude, about a week before she was banned. She was more TBM and defensive than all of you, so I'm confident that I'm no longer "a guy who is always judging saints as being followers of men"

If you decide to take the challenge and find a place, I'll apologize once more. If you don't want to take the challenge, then you should withdraw you statement, as it is untrue.

[Zathura]

Tinally you may be surprised to learn that for an extended period following the publication of Passing the Heavenly Gift which essentially said the things mentioned above multiple bishops and SPs found Snuffer worthy to hold a TR.

True story