LDS Freedom Forum

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:24 pm

shadow wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:19 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 1:58 pm

shadow wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 1:25 pm
There's no light or truth from Thomas.
The scriptures will correct Thomas' false teaching-

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.
Oh, "feel" that it's right?? Those silly feelings.
The Holy ghost works in many ways. The "David 8-| " Snuffers can't put Him in a box, despite their attempts.

Shadow,

The Scriptures don't correct what Thomas said but back him up. Thomas didn't deny God using feelings, in fact, he shared a experience he FELT.

DC 8:2 teaches this: "Yea, behold, I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart."

Notice that Thomas was describing in other words what verse 2 says. Your heart is the feeling part. But God communicates "pure intelligence" to our minds. Note the word AND. So this corroborates Thomas' teaching.

But if you want to be critical, please enlighten us by telling us what is wrong with Thomas' instruction below. I find it to be valuable and spot on:

The problem with relying on emotion is that it can come from any source. For that matter so can the voice in our head. Some people are so impressed when they receive things from the other side that they seem to forget that Satan is at work to deceive us. We are subject to equal amounts of revelation from Satan and his minions and an equal amount from God. Satan can imitate feelings of peace and love. That is why, he is called the deceiver. If all he could do was give us feelings of evil, he wouldn't have much chance of deceiving us.

We need a way to tell the difference. I have learned that if it comes from God, he is willing to explain it. The scriptures are the word of God. They are the iron rod. God will use the scriptures to explain things to you. In other words, he will use pure intelligence and not try to use emotion to influence us. God does not force. he waits for us to ask, then we must focus our thoughts on the question and let Gods thoughts enter into our minds. He will not force those thoughts upon us if we are thinking about football or something like that. Some people will believe the communications they receive from the voice in their head without testing them against the scriptures or they will accept feelings, emotions that are given to them from spiritual entities without testing them against the scriptures. This is the path to deception."

Thomas was trying to pit the church against Joseph Smith. He failed, like usual.

"The church teaches that the spirit is a feeling or an emotional experience. Joseph Smith said the Holy Ghost has no other effect than pure intelligence" -Thomas

What the church teaches IS correct. It isn't one vs. the other. Thomas and other false teachers and followers of Satan will mix some truth with their deception in order to try to validate their lies.

I don't know Thomas. And this isn't about him.

I certainly don't see any evidence of Thomas trying to pit the church against Joseph Smith.

I did see that Thomas taught truth above. You objected (maybe because of an existing bias against him?), but I challenged you to dissect what he said was wrong. The ball is still in your court.

It's an important subject, and I believe Thomas contributed some worthy and important insight into how to receive revelation and how to be on guard against the counterfeits of Satan.

Please quote (Thomas) above where you feel Thomas has erred in instruction, or was your criticism premature?

Finrock wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:02 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 2:30 pm

Finrock wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 1:44 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 11:37 am

Good afternoon Finrock,

Thomas' quote above beginning with "The situation we find ourselves in today..." makes perfect sense. The Jews (who rejected Jesus) relied on their authorities, their "brethren", the hierarchy of their day. That is one precedent Thomas refers to. Thomas says it very eloquently. He explains that a true prophet would not only conform to the pattern of prophets from the past, but that any true prophet's preaching and teaching would lead us into compliance with the word of God. Denver does this. The Brethren fail miserably and are in fact in complete apostasy from Scriptural precedent. A main and glaring precedent being that God appears to a true prophet (think Moses or Abraham, or Saul of Tarsus or Lehi or Joseph Smith) and that prophet declares the word of God which is a harsh (to the prideful) message of repentance, which results in them being cast out and persecuted by the religious hierarchy of the day. Denver checks off on every scriptural criteria. He's reviled and his reputation is mud among his own people, with the exception of the few who see through the lies and misinformation.

Yes, Denver would be an "authority", just as the Scriptures are, because what their message originated with God. There is no contradiction. That is Thomas' point!

Abinadi during his ministry didn't perform any miracles, as John the Baptist didn't, as many prophets have not. Performing miracles isn't an absolute rule when analyzing whether somebody is a true prophet. But it has happened, and frequently. Did Lehi performed a miracle? No. Did Alma the Older? No. Did Mormon or Moroni? No. Did Ether? No, not that we're aware of. But Nephi did on at least a couple of occasions (shocking his brothers and his escape feat in the wilderness come to mind, not to mention finding ore for making tools and then building a massive ship when he wasn't even a shipbuilder!).

You are correct that the absence of scriptural record doesn't mean they didn't perform miracles. But that would ALSO mean that any true prophet today could be performing miracles, but there is no record because they choose to not make it public precisely because, as Thomas said, miracles don't produce lasting faith. Which makes the point you're drawing attention to a moot point anyway, doesn't it?

The point I'm making is that your paradigm, from my perspective, is inconsistent. It suffers from the same socio- and egocentric dilemma that is found in the LDS faith. Denver Snuffer's Church and movement doesn't resolve the underlying issues that you have with the LDS faith. Its just a different "authority". You are abandoning your trust in one flesh and putting your trust in to another. Flesh is flesh. Authority is authority. If it is wrong here, then it is wrong there. Rationally you can't have it both ways. Of course you are free to believe how you wish. I'm just pointing out for your edification that you are presenting a problem with the LDS Church and providing a supposed solution, but your solution at a fundamental level doesn't resolve those issues because its just the same thing with a different name.

-Finrock

I think your perspective is based on a false premise.

First it's not "Denver Snuffer's Church." That is an important detail or I wouldn't correct you. There is no corporation. There is no hierarchy. There do exist fellowships which are not regulated. And there are thousands of individuals not even part of fellowships, like myself. On the other hand, the LDS "Church" is entirely different, very corporate, top-down in nature, and in fact The Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

But to your main point of confusion. It's innocent I acknowledge.

Your premise is the "underlying issue" is an "ego-centric" authority, or in other words, that the issue is man (flesh) having authority.

I don't believe authority in and of itself is bad. It is not inherently bad. Your premise seems to be that it is inherently bad. Because you say, "If it [authority] is wrong here, then it is wrong there."

Is that correct?

Denver isn't saying "authority" is bad. It is necessary. Both sides say it is necessary.

What Denver is saying is that because of unrighteous dominion the Brethren have lost their priesthood, or Amen to their priesthood, as DC 121:37 states.

The Brethren have abused it. They set themselves up as lights to the world. They seek the honors of men and praise of the world.

And if Denver's testimony is true, and if God has conferred the priesthood upon him, and if the powers of heaven are inseparably connected with the rights of the priesthood, then he is the authorized channel through which Christ is speaking.

You appear to be throwing the baby (authority) out with the dirty water (apostate Brethren).

The baby is still good and essential. Denver is just pointing out the dirty bath water.

Are you "anti authority", and therefore you don't believe God can ever talk to man and "send" him forth to declare a message?

To start, I don't call it Denver Snuffer's Church lightly or carelessly. Regardless of what you say or anyone else says, I've looked at the data available and based on my good sense and ability to comprehend and reason, Denver Snuffer is a leader of a Church. I also have not been convinced based on what I've read (and I've read and have informed myself sufficiently to draw a rational conclusion) that Denver Snuffer speaks for Jesus Christ and that Denver, with his particular doctrine and scriptures, represents Jesus Christ or is the mouthpiece of Christ here on earth. Further, the Spirit of Christ that is within me or the Light of Christ that I possess, does not recognize Denver Snuffer as one who is the mouthpiece of God here on the earth. I have found Denver to be quite skilled in the art of rhetoric and rhetoric devices and that portion of Light that is within me has been turned off by his subtle tactics and, to be direct, subtle manipulations.

By every measure Denver is a leader of a Church, a new brand of religion, and I have no doubt that this is Denver's movement and Denver's religion.

I understand what Denver Snuffer is saying. However, the Spirit says to me something completely different. There are errors and there are things that the LDS Church should repent from. This part seems obviously true to me as a person who no longer is spellbound to my leaders or as one who no longer venerates authority. I certainly respect the leaders of the Church, very much. I see them as no different than I. I have lived in apostasy, and as Thomas pointed out in another thread regarding John Doe's sins, we ought to be quick to forgive and slow to judge and to condemn. Christ treats the leaders of the Church, on a fundamental level, no differently than He treats me. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not rotten to the core and good for nothing but to be trammeled under the feet of men. It is not absolutely corrupt. If it was I would find no Light here. There would be no Good. But, there is and there is much good within the ranks of leadership of the LDS Church. These are my spiritual experiences. I can't say that I know for certainty that every leader in the LDS Church is a true prophet, a true seer, or a true revelator. However, I do believe and I am convinced by the power of the Holy Ghost that many are. I know through the power of the Holy Ghost that Thomas Monson is a true prophet of Jesus Christ, for instance. I don't know that he is a seer or a revelator through the power of the Holy Ghost, but I certainly sustain him in his calling and hope nothing but the best for him. I pray for him and truly hope that he can fulfill the calling he has. I respect his position as the President of the Church, even if he wasn't a true prophet, seer, or revelator. It is Monson's prerogative on how he wants to lead and guide the Church. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not the end, but a means. The LDS Church is a part of Zion, but it is not Zion. God controls His kingdom and God's kingdom is greater than the LDS Church paradigm and greater than the Denver Snuffer paradigm or greater than any single group or individual's paradigm.

I see Denver Snuffer just as I see any man. God is no respecter of persons. His light, to one degree or another, exist in all living things and all people. Denver Snuffer, if he speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, is speaking God's words. The same is true for any person on this planet. Having a calling and being in a position doesn't guarantee that one has the Holy Ghost. Denver Snuffer, if he speaks God's words, doesn't have a monopoly on speaking for Christ. He doesn't stand above his brethren and sisters. We should not look to him as anything or anyone greater than the least among us. His words don't have a special place in the Halls of the Celestial Kingdom above anyone else. He is just a man, probably doing his best to deal with life and get through this life with a sense of peace and joy.

Authority comes from the Spirit. Period. The Holy Spirit is the authority and the Holy Spirit can be found all over the place and there are many who speak by the power of the Holy Ghost. It isn't just found in an exclusive group, or a special remnant, or a few elites, or with a small number of supposedly holy and exclusively humble people. So, I seek for true messengers from the Father. I discern them by the power of the Holy Ghost. I have taken as my guide the Holy Spirit, which Spirit allows me to hear God's voice and His words when He speaks, be it through whatever mouthpiece that is speaking.

-Finrock

The point I'm making is that your paradigm, from my perspective, is inconsistent.

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:51 pm We Mormons...

shadow wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:30 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:24 pm

shadow wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:19 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 1:58 pm

Shadow,

The Scriptures don't correct what Thomas said but back him up. Thomas didn't deny God using feelings, in fact, he shared a experience he FELT.

DC 8:2 teaches this: "Yea, behold, I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart."

Notice that Thomas was describing in other words what verse 2 says. Your heart is the feeling part. But God communicates "pure intelligence" to our minds. Note the word AND. So this corroborates Thomas' teaching.

But if you want to be critical, please enlighten us by telling us what is wrong with Thomas' instruction below. I find it to be valuable and spot on:

Thomas was trying to pit the church against Joseph Smith. He failed, like usual.

"The church teaches that the spirit is a feeling or an emotional experience. Joseph Smith said the Holy Ghost has no other effect than pure intelligence" -Thomas

What the church teaches IS correct. It isn't one vs. the other. Thomas and other false teachers and followers of Satan will mix some truth with their deception in order to try to validate their lies.

I don't know Thomas. And this isn't about him.

I certainly don't see any evidence of Thomas trying to pit the church against Joseph Smith.

I did see that Thomas taught truth above. You objected (maybe because of an existing bias against him?), but I challenged you to dissect what he said was wrong. The ball is still in your court.

It's an important subject, and I believe Thomas contributed some worthy and important insight into how to receive revelation and how to be on guard against the counterfeits of Satan.

Please quote (Thomas) above where you feel Thomas has erred in instruction, or was your criticism premature?

I did quote him. Pay attention.

"The church teaches that the spirit is a feeling or an emotional experience. Joseph Smith said the Holy Ghost has no other effect than pure intelligence" -Thomaa

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:51 pm

Finrock wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:02 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 2:30 pm

Finrock wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 1:44 pm

The point I'm making is that your paradigm, from my perspective, is inconsistent. It suffers from the same socio- and egocentric dilemma that is found in the LDS faith. Denver Snuffer's Church and movement doesn't resolve the underlying issues that you have with the LDS faith. Its just a different "authority". You are abandoning your trust in one flesh and putting your trust in to another. Flesh is flesh. Authority is authority. If it is wrong here, then it is wrong there. Rationally you can't have it both ways. Of course you are free to believe how you wish. I'm just pointing out for your edification that you are presenting a problem with the LDS Church and providing a supposed solution, but your solution at a fundamental level doesn't resolve those issues because its just the same thing with a different name.

-Finrock

I think your perspective is based on a false premise.

First it's not "Denver Snuffer's Church." That is an important detail or I wouldn't correct you. There is no corporation. There is no hierarchy. There do exist fellowships which are not regulated. And there are thousands of individuals not even part of fellowships, like myself. On the other hand, the LDS "Church" is entirely different, very corporate, top-down in nature, and in fact The Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

But to your main point of confusion. It's innocent I acknowledge.

Your premise is the "underlying issue" is an "ego-centric" authority, or in other words, that the issue is man (flesh) having authority.

I don't believe authority in and of itself is bad. It is not inherently bad. Your premise seems to be that it is inherently bad. Because you say, "If it [authority] is wrong here, then it is wrong there."

Is that correct?

Denver isn't saying "authority" is bad. It is necessary. Both sides say it is necessary.

What Denver is saying is that because of unrighteous dominion the Brethren have lost their priesthood, or Amen to their priesthood, as DC 121:37 states.

The Brethren have abused it. They set themselves up as lights to the world. They seek the honors of men and praise of the world.

And if Denver's testimony is true, and if God has conferred the priesthood upon him, and if the powers of heaven are inseparably connected with the rights of the priesthood, then he is the authorized channel through which Christ is speaking.

You appear to be throwing the baby (authority) out with the dirty water (apostate Brethren).

The baby is still good and essential. Denver is just pointing out the dirty bath water.

Are you "anti authority", and therefore you don't believe God can ever talk to man and "send" him forth to declare a message?

To start, I don't call it Denver Snuffer's Church lightly or carelessly. Regardless of what you say or anyone else says, I've looked at the data available and based on my good sense and ability to comprehend and reason, Denver Snuffer is a leader of a Church. I also have not been convinced based on what I've read (and I've read and have informed myself sufficiently to draw a rational conclusion) that Denver Snuffer speaks for Jesus Christ and that Denver, with his particular doctrine and scriptures, represents Jesus Christ or is the mouthpiece of Christ here on earth. Further, the Spirit of Christ that is within me or the Light of Christ that I possess, does not recognize Denver Snuffer as one who is the mouthpiece of God here on the earth. I have found Denver to be quite skilled in the art of rhetoric and rhetoric devices and that portion of Light that is within me has been turned off by his subtle tactics and, to be direct, subtle manipulations.

By every measure Denver is a leader of a Church, a new brand of religion, and I have no doubt that this is Denver's movement and Denver's religion.

I understand what Denver Snuffer is saying. However, the Spirit says to me something completely different. There are errors and there are things that the LDS Church should repent from. This part seems obviously true to me as a person who no longer is spellbound to my leaders or as one who no longer venerates authority. I certainly respect the leaders of the Church, very much. I see them as no different than I. I have lived in apostasy, and as Thomas pointed out in another thread regarding John Doe's sins, we ought to be quick to forgive and slow to judge and to condemn. Christ treats the leaders of the Church, on a fundamental level, no differently than He treats me. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not rotten to the core and good for nothing but to be trammeled under the feet of men. It is not absolutely corrupt. If it was I would find no Light here. There would be no Good. But, there is and there is much good within the ranks of leadership of the LDS Church. These are my spiritual experiences. I can't say that I know for certainty that every leader in the LDS Church is a true prophet, a true seer, or a true revelator. However, I do believe and I am convinced by the power of the Holy Ghost that many are. I know through the power of the Holy Ghost that Thomas Monson is a true prophet of Jesus Christ, for instance. I don't know that he is a seer or a revelator through the power of the Holy Ghost, but I certainly sustain him in his calling and hope nothing but the best for him. I pray for him and truly hope that he can fulfill the calling he has. I respect his position as the President of the Church, even if he wasn't a true prophet, seer, or revelator. It is Monson's prerogative on how he wants to lead and guide the Church. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not the end, but a means. The LDS Church is a part of Zion, but it is not Zion. God controls His kingdom and God's kingdom is greater than the LDS Church paradigm and greater than the Denver Snuffer paradigm or greater than any single group or individual's paradigm.

I see Denver Snuffer just as I see any man. God is no respecter of persons. His light, to one degree or another, exist in all living things and all people. Denver Snuffer, if he speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, is speaking God's words. The same is true for any person on this planet. Having a calling and being in a position doesn't guarantee that one has the Holy Ghost. Denver Snuffer, if he speaks God's words, doesn't have a monopoly on speaking for Christ. He doesn't stand above his brethren and sisters. We should not look to him as anything or anyone greater than the least among us. His words don't have a special place in the Halls of the Celestial Kingdom above anyone else. He is just a man, probably doing his best to deal with life and get through this life with a sense of peace and joy.

Authority comes from the Spirit. Period. The Holy Spirit is the authority and the Holy Spirit can be found all over the place and there are many who speak by the power of the Holy Ghost. It isn't just found in an exclusive group, or a special remnant, or a few elites, or with a small number of supposedly holy and exclusively humble people. So, I seek for true messengers from the Father. I discern them by the power of the Holy Ghost. I have taken as my guide the Holy Spirit, which Spirit allows me to hear God's voice and His words when He speaks, be it through whatever mouthpiece that is speaking.

-Finrock

Finrock,

I always appreciate your comments. Thank you. I won't quibble about definitions of "church".

I was objecting to, if you will, your statement that there are inconsistencies in logic of the DS Movement. You said,

The point I'm making is that your paradigm, from my perspective, is inconsistent.

Then I shared how there is no inconsistency. I didn't see your response to my rebuttal.

I hope you don't mind me staying on point. So you agree that there are no inconsistencies? You said, "You are abandoning your trust in one flesh and putting your trust in to another. Flesh is flesh. Authority is authority. If it is wrong here, then it is wrong there. Rationally you can't have it both ways."

No, the "authority" is not what was wrong "there" in the LDS Church. How can "authority" be wrong? What is wrong would be the decisions to abuse it. The Lord is very sensitive to the authority question. Many are called, but few are chosen. The Second Commandment forbids using His name by unauthorized people. Either you're an agent of His, or are you are not.

Jesef wrote:Those believing and following Snuffer actually believe he has authority from Christ/God to do and say what he has and is. Yet they oft quote this "cursed is he that putters his trust in man" from Nephi and apply it to the LDS Prophet/Apostles, but it doesn't apply to how they hold/view Denver. They also fall back to the scriptures as their gold standard of authoritative truth - but the scriptures, themselves were produced via the same pattern we are talking about: the Lord basically inspiring or revealing words to chosen servants/men/prophets - the only difference is they are written words and the guys who wrote them are dead. Also, it is plain to see that nearly any argument can be made and supported using scriptures - Joseph made that very point in recounting his search for the right church, James 1:5, etc. Also, as I've pointed out, many scriptures can simply be ignored or re-worked if they don't fit one's paradigm - like "for the last time" - why didn't the Lord say "the most recent time" to end all confusion and ambiguity? Because, clearly, in context, it means "the final time"! Some of these things are so ridiculous I'm just stunned.

shadow wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:02 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:51 pm We Mormons...

Aren't you a Remnant now? Got your feet in both pools, eh?

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:05 pm

shadow wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:30 pm

I still haven't seen you critically dissect Thomas' instructions/ good advice/ teachings above. I guess you won't. That's fine. Admit it. He was spot on. You would do well to adopt that wisdom instead of railing against it.

cestlavive wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:12 pm There's more than the LDS Church. There's more than Denver and the "movement". There's more than mere Christianity. Coming from someone who has been strongly and loyaly involved with both the LDS Church for 12 years and thereafter in Denver's movement for 6 years, there is more... There is Christ. I am learning more about Jesus every day as I try to implement His teachings in my life and live exactly as He instructed. Having a personal relationship with Jesus? There is nothing on this planet that I've experienced that is better. I hope we can get back to Jesus and His pure gospel as found in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon. If we go back to the basics with help from what Denver helped uncover for the last several years, we will find so many gems.

Look up into the sky full of stars at night. What the bleep do any of us know but that there will always be more. Paradigms will change. Who of us are like Enoch or the prophets of old? How did they get to where they got? Did their paradigms change? If so, how many times? Who of us are moving mountains, putting out fires, healing people that come to us for healing, stopping storms and floods. Where are the works of the Father made manifest? Jesus says in John 14:12 that if we truly follow Him, believe in Him, we will do the things he did. We will walk in purity, in light, in truth. We will make the world a much better place. We will manifest the works of the Father by performing miracles in Jesus holy name. We will heal instead of tearing to pieces as the Pharisees did.

Shadow, that Ferris Bueller clip is hilarious, and I think it applies as much to Jesus Christ as it does to Denver. The people that the LDS church cast off (in my case I was cast off for asking too many questions and looking into the "deep doctrines") are drawn to Denver just as the people that were cast off and considered dirty or "unclean" in Christs day were drawn to Him. All our paths look different, so we don't need to belittle or set up elitist ranks..."better than thou" ranks. We are all little kids scooting on our butts trying to learn how to walk.

I can see where those on this forum in the LDS Church come from. I can see where those who have read Denvers books, lectures, conference talks and blog posts come from. I think Denver is an awesome dude. I also believe that there is a spirit of deceit that came into the movement a few months ago. I can't explain it, it's just what I've experienced behind the scenes out of public view and scrutiny. I've been heavily involved with the scandals of late and because of that I don't understand Denver at the moment. But then, he never wanted us "following" him, and I'm taking that seriously now after having been personally involved with the dramas in the movement as of late. I cannot follow him. It's leading into a pit. I think here very soon there's going to be a reformation. Maybe? Hopefully. I hope that those of us in the movement can see that maybe we have become a little too idolatrous, trading Monson for Snuffer. LDS 1.0 for LDS 2.0.

I absolutely do not believe that Denvers 12 page paper put out on his blog came from my God. It has truths in it, good philosophies mingled with scripture, but it is just off enough....I don't think God will think the less of us if we go to HIM to make a personal covenant if we have questions about this covenant. I have come to that conclusion.

I'm not interested in gossip. I don't want to spread falsehoods. These are my experiences. I want the truth wherever and however it is found.

I absolutely do not believe that Denvers 12 page paper put out on his blog came from my God. It has truths in it, good philosophies mingled with scripture, but it is just off enough...

Having a personal relationship with Jesus? There is nothing on this planet that I've experienced that is better. I hope we can get back to Jesus and His pure gospel as found in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

Finrock wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:12 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:51 pm

Finrock wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 3:02 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 2:30 pm

I think your perspective is based on a false premise.

First it's not "Denver Snuffer's Church." That is an important detail or I wouldn't correct you. There is no corporation. There is no hierarchy. There do exist fellowships which are not regulated. And there are thousands of individuals not even part of fellowships, like myself. On the other hand, the LDS "Church" is entirely different, very corporate, top-down in nature, and in fact The Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

But to your main point of confusion. It's innocent I acknowledge.

Your premise is the "underlying issue" is an "ego-centric" authority, or in other words, that the issue is man (flesh) having authority.

I don't believe authority in and of itself is bad. It is not inherently bad. Your premise seems to be that it is inherently bad. Because you say, "If it [authority] is wrong here, then it is wrong there."

Is that correct?

Denver isn't saying "authority" is bad. It is necessary. Both sides say it is necessary.

What Denver is saying is that because of unrighteous dominion the Brethren have lost their priesthood, or Amen to their priesthood, as DC 121:37 states.

The Brethren have abused it. They set themselves up as lights to the world. They seek the honors of men and praise of the world.

And if Denver's testimony is true, and if God has conferred the priesthood upon him, and if the powers of heaven are inseparably connected with the rights of the priesthood, then he is the authorized channel through which Christ is speaking.

You appear to be throwing the baby (authority) out with the dirty water (apostate Brethren).

The baby is still good and essential. Denver is just pointing out the dirty bath water.

Are you "anti authority", and therefore you don't believe God can ever talk to man and "send" him forth to declare a message?

To start, I don't call it Denver Snuffer's Church lightly or carelessly. Regardless of what you say or anyone else says, I've looked at the data available and based on my good sense and ability to comprehend and reason, Denver Snuffer is a leader of a Church. I also have not been convinced based on what I've read (and I've read and have informed myself sufficiently to draw a rational conclusion) that Denver Snuffer speaks for Jesus Christ and that Denver, with his particular doctrine and scriptures, represents Jesus Christ or is the mouthpiece of Christ here on earth. Further, the Spirit of Christ that is within me or the Light of Christ that I possess, does not recognize Denver Snuffer as one who is the mouthpiece of God here on the earth. I have found Denver to be quite skilled in the art of rhetoric and rhetoric devices and that portion of Light that is within me has been turned off by his subtle tactics and, to be direct, subtle manipulations.

By every measure Denver is a leader of a Church, a new brand of religion, and I have no doubt that this is Denver's movement and Denver's religion.

I understand what Denver Snuffer is saying. However, the Spirit says to me something completely different. There are errors and there are things that the LDS Church should repent from. This part seems obviously true to me as a person who no longer is spellbound to my leaders or as one who no longer venerates authority. I certainly respect the leaders of the Church, very much. I see them as no different than I. I have lived in apostasy, and as Thomas pointed out in another thread regarding John Doe's sins, we ought to be quick to forgive and slow to judge and to condemn. Christ treats the leaders of the Church, on a fundamental level, no differently than He treats me. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not rotten to the core and good for nothing but to be trammeled under the feet of men. It is not absolutely corrupt. If it was I would find no Light here. There would be no Good. But, there is and there is much good within the ranks of leadership of the LDS Church. These are my spiritual experiences. I can't say that I know for certainty that every leader in the LDS Church is a true prophet, a true seer, or a true revelator. However, I do believe and I am convinced by the power of the Holy Ghost that many are. I know through the power of the Holy Ghost that Thomas Monson is a true prophet of Jesus Christ, for instance. I don't know that he is a seer or a revelator through the power of the Holy Ghost, but I certainly sustain him in his calling and hope nothing but the best for him. I pray for him and truly hope that he can fulfill the calling he has. I respect his position as the President of the Church, even if he wasn't a true prophet, seer, or revelator. It is Monson's prerogative on how he wants to lead and guide the Church. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not the end, but a means. The LDS Church is a part of Zion, but it is not Zion. God controls His kingdom and God's kingdom is greater than the LDS Church paradigm and greater than the Denver Snuffer paradigm or greater than any single group or individual's paradigm.

I see Denver Snuffer just as I see any man. God is no respecter of persons. His light, to one degree or another, exist in all living things and all people. Denver Snuffer, if he speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, is speaking God's words. The same is true for any person on this planet. Having a calling and being in a position doesn't guarantee that one has the Holy Ghost. Denver Snuffer, if he speaks God's words, doesn't have a monopoly on speaking for Christ. He doesn't stand above his brethren and sisters. We should not look to him as anything or anyone greater than the least among us. His words don't have a special place in the Halls of the Celestial Kingdom above anyone else. He is just a man, probably doing his best to deal with life and get through this life with a sense of peace and joy.

Authority comes from the Spirit. Period. The Holy Spirit is the authority and the Holy Spirit can be found all over the place and there are many who speak by the power of the Holy Ghost. It isn't just found in an exclusive group, or a special remnant, or a few elites, or with a small number of supposedly holy and exclusively humble people. So, I seek for true messengers from the Father. I discern them by the power of the Holy Ghost. I have taken as my guide the Holy Spirit, which Spirit allows me to hear God's voice and His words when He speaks, be it through whatever mouthpiece that is speaking.

-Finrock

Finrock,

I always appreciate your comments. Thank you. I won't quibble about definitions of "church".

I was objecting to, if you will, your statement that there are inconsistencies in logic of the DS Movement. You said,

The point I'm making is that your paradigm, from my perspective, is inconsistent.

Then I shared how there is no inconsistency. I didn't see your response to my rebuttal.

I hope you don't mind me staying on point. So you agree that there are no inconsistencies? You said, "You are abandoning your trust in one flesh and putting your trust in to another. Flesh is flesh. Authority is authority. If it is wrong here, then it is wrong there. Rationally you can't have it both ways."

No, the "authority" is not what was wrong "there" in the LDS Church. How can "authority" be wrong? What is wrong would be the decisions to abuse it. The Lord is very sensitive to the authority question. Many are called, but few are chosen. The Second Commandment forbids using His name by unauthorized people. Either you're an agent of His, or are you are not.

Thomas stated the following: "The situation we find ourselves in today has scriptural precedent. Almost all people get it wrong. Why? Because they rely on authority or authorities."

Almost all people get it wrong because they rely on authority or authorities. That is what Thomas believes. He isn't applying his believes consistently across the board. He exempts himself from this thing which is wrong when it applies to his paradigm and his "man" or chosen authority. Not to mention that scriptures also fall in to the category of being arguing from authority. You can't reasonably say that it is wrong to rely on authority and then turn around and base your whole paradigm by relying on authorities (scriptures and Denver Snuffer in this instance). He is applying his belief inconsistently. He is special pleading.

I'll use Jesef's response to my post to more clearly point out the inconsistency.

Jesef wrote:Those believing and following Snuffer actually believe he has authority from Christ/God to do and say what he has and is. Yet they oft quote this "cursed is he that putters his trust in man" from Nephi and apply it to the LDS Prophet/Apostles, but it doesn't apply to how they hold/view Denver. They also fall back to the scriptures as their gold standard of authoritative truth - but the scriptures, themselves were produced via the same pattern we are talking about: the Lord basically inspiring or revealing words to chosen servants/men/prophets - the only difference is they are written words and the guys who wrote them are dead. Also, it is plain to see that nearly any argument can be made and supported using scriptures - Joseph made that very point in recounting his search for the right church, James 1:5, etc. Also, as I've pointed out, many scriptures can simply be ignored or re-worked if they don't fit one's paradigm - like "for the last time" - why didn't the Lord say "the most recent time" to end all confusion and ambiguity? Because, clearly, in context, it means "the final time"! Some of these things are so ridiculous I'm just stunned.

-Finrock

Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Jesef wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:28 pm I read Denver's "Prayer for Covenant" and "Answer and Covenant"
http://denversnuffer.com/wp/wp-content/ ... venant.pdf
http://denversnuffer.com/wp/wp-content/ ... venant.pdf

What struck me is that he's representing the Lord to be as wordy as he is, i.e. it sounded like Denver speaking, more like all his writings and his talks and less like the revelations given to JS in D&C. Sure, one could argue, it was given to Denver in his own (wordy) language, but that doesn't quite smell right either. His "translation" or revision of The Book of John "The Testimony of John" also seemed very "Denver-ish" - peppered with all his lingo and insights, not like an actual inspired translation or restoration of scripture:
http://scriptures.info/Scriptures/pgp/john/

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 9:36 am Clearly, you don't read Denver Snuffer and are utterly unfamiliar with his teachings. A key and unmistakable highlight of his teachings is that he is seeking to preserve Joseph's teachings. It is the Church which has rejected Joseph's teachings! You are completely confused. I can only conclude that you are reading "anti Denver" stuff and haven't bothered to read what he has actually written or said. Please be more attentive to detail. Please be informed, and don't outsource your thinking to others.

And you said "most" of what I said was deceptive. What is deceptive? I welcome corrections. I actually do seek the truth. If you do, as your name states, please engage and don't be lazy by withdrawing after a false allegation.

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:55 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 9:36 am Clearly, you don't read Denver Snuffer and are utterly unfamiliar with his teachings. A key and unmistakable highlight of his teachings is that he is seeking to preserve Joseph's teachings. It is the Church which has rejected Joseph's teachings! You are completely confused. I can only conclude that you are reading "anti Denver" stuff and haven't bothered to read what he has actually written or said. Please be more attentive to detail. Please be informed, and don't outsource your thinking to others.

And you said "most" of what I said was deceptive. What is deceptive? I welcome corrections. I actually do seek the truth. If you do, as your name states, please engage and don't be lazy by withdrawing after a false allegation.

Check out my post count and start date. I am intimately familiar with Snuffer propoganda. His teaching on the Nauvoo Temple has been rebutted numerous times and Joseph Smith plainly taught and the D&C plainly records that the dispensation of Joseph Smith was to be the last (see my sig). Denver gives no indication that he even understands these teachings. He may as well be teaching reincarnation it is so foreign to what Joseph revealed.

As for the rest you believe you can read the minds of General Authorities and of course you cannot do so. What you attribute to them is false.

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 5:09 pm

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:55 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 9:36 am Clearly, you don't read Denver Snuffer and are utterly unfamiliar with his teachings. A key and unmistakable highlight of his teachings is that he is seeking to preserve Joseph's teachings. It is the Church which has rejected Joseph's teachings! You are completely confused. I can only conclude that you are reading "anti Denver" stuff and haven't bothered to read what he has actually written or said. Please be more attentive to detail. Please be informed, and don't outsource your thinking to others.

And you said "most" of what I said was deceptive. What is deceptive? I welcome corrections. I actually do seek the truth. If you do, as your name states, please engage and don't be lazy by withdrawing after a false allegation.

Check out my post count and start date. I am intimately familiar with Snuffer propoganda. His teaching on the Nauvoo Temple has been rebutted numerous times and Joseph Smith plainly taught and the D&C plainly records that the dispensation of Joseph Smith was to be the last (see my sig). Denver gives no indication that he even understands these teachings. He may as well be teaching reincarnation it is so foreign to what Joseph revealed.

As for the rest you believe you can read the minds of General Authorities and of course you cannot do so. What you attribute to them is false.

Somebody asked for my opinion on what the differences were. So I cut to the chase.

For a definitive list of acts of apostasy, I've left that above (maybe on page 3 of this thread).

Not one of my fellow brothers and sisters has seen fit to rebut any of those 8 acts of apostasy. Neither will you I suppose. To me, rebutting or not rebutting is a litmus test to one's sincerity of if your simply loyal to a manmade institution or to the Lord. Would love to hear your reply.

Arenera wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 7:51 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 5:09 pm

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 4:55 pm

underdog wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 9:36 am Clearly, you don't read Denver Snuffer and are utterly unfamiliar with his teachings. A key and unmistakable highlight of his teachings is that he is seeking to preserve Joseph's teachings. It is the Church which has rejected Joseph's teachings! You are completely confused. I can only conclude that you are reading "anti Denver" stuff and haven't bothered to read what he has actually written or said. Please be more attentive to detail. Please be informed, and don't outsource your thinking to others.

And you said "most" of what I said was deceptive. What is deceptive? I welcome corrections. I actually do seek the truth. If you do, as your name states, please engage and don't be lazy by withdrawing after a false allegation.

Check out my post count and start date. I am intimately familiar with Snuffer propoganda. His teaching on the Nauvoo Temple has been rebutted numerous times and Joseph Smith plainly taught and the D&C plainly records that the dispensation of Joseph Smith was to be the last (see my sig). Denver gives no indication that he even understands these teachings. He may as well be teaching reincarnation it is so foreign to what Joseph revealed.

As for the rest you believe you can read the minds of General Authorities and of course you cannot do so. What you attribute to them is false.

Somebody asked for my opinion on what the differences were. So I cut to the chase.

For a definitive list of acts of apostasy, I've left that above (maybe on page 3 of this thread).

Not one of my fellow brothers and sisters has seen fit to rebut any of those 8 acts of apostasy. Neither will you I suppose. To me, rebutting or not rebutting is a litmus test to one's sincerity of if your simply loyal to a manmade institution or to the Lord. Would love to hear your reply.

Someone might believe they have received a might spiritual experience and related understanding of scriptures which is opposite of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Using Abinadi's story for example, a favorite of remnants. Abinadi was called of God to deliver a message to King Noah and his wicked priests. King Noah was the son of Zeniff. Zeniff and others were over-zealous and left the safety of the Nephites, led by Mosiah, then King Benjamin, then Mosiah.

After a period of time, the people of Zeniff turned to wickedness and went down the evil path led by King Noah and his wicked priests.

Abinadi delivered a message of repentance and a strong message on Christ. King Noah and all but one of his wicked priests rejected Abinadi, and Abinadi was burned to death. Alma (the Elder) went through a sore repentance but became an instrument in God's hand, eventually leading some converts back to Zarahemla & reunited with the safety of the Nephites.

If someone in our day believes strongly that the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have been derelict in leadership, they could go to Salt Lake City, Utah and present their case to the 15 apostles. Most likely they would be told to go back to their bishop and stake president.

If that person wants to address the stake president, they could ask the stake president for a meeting to address the dereliction of leadership from Christ and call them to repentance.

I think an Abinadi type person would take on the leaders.

What we usually see is a person taking on an anonymous position and addressing innocent members of the Church and complaining about the Church, leadership, and hard-headed members. This isn't an Abinadi type but a weak insecure person. Someone who thinks they have proven issues against the church but in reality have lost their faith.

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 7:59 pm King Noah was apostate. Historically the Snuffer brigades portrayed Noah as a properly keyed President, and he was not. They were fallen.

As I said earlier, Joseph Smith stated numerous times that his was the last dispensation, without qualification (see my sig). The Snuffer brigades simply do not know the teachings of Joseph Smith.

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 7:59 pm King Noah was apostate. Historically the Snuffer brigades portrayed Noah as a properly keyed President, and he was not. They were fallen.

As I said earlier, Joseph Smith stated numerous times that his was the last dispensation, without qualification (see my sig). The Snuffer brigades simply do not know the teachings of Joseph Smith.

God had often sealed up the heavens because of covetousness in the church. Said the Lord would cut short his work in righteousness and except the church receive the fullness of the scriptures they would yet fail. ( JSP documents volume 2 pg 85)

The church was true and Joseph was a true prophet but Brigham Young made bogus of it.( paraphrasing)

Thomas wrote: ↑August 30th, 2017, 8:59 pm So, sorry to say, but the current church is fallen, just as King Noah was fallen. We have the proof right before our eyes but refuse to see it.