The Appeal of Denver Snuffer

DenversReadersUpdate 9-11-13: Denver Snuffer has been excommunicated. You can read it on his blog.

A reader asked my opinion of a recent post about Denver Snuffer by Russell Stevenson over on Rational Faiths. Somehow I missed it even though I go there often. It’s entitled, “Housewife Danites: Denver Snuffer and the Suburban Underground” dated August 27, 2013. I had to laugh at the title and at much of the content. I like Russell’s style. So now we’re Facebook friends.

We’re going to see a lot more posts about Denver in the next few days and weeks. I suspect his disciplinary council on Sunday will not be attended by the most important person – Denver. I may be totally wrong, but the fact is we know he is starting his lecture tour on Tuesday. That’s a big clue he won’t be doing as the Stake President asked, so why show up? It’s a done deal, folks.

Update: I’ve been advised in the comments by one who knows that Denver will attend his council. As I wrote in the comment. I assume too much. To me, that’s a true sign of humility. Please forgive my arrogance for assuming otherwise. Also, remember, as the Stake President wrote in the summons, there are two options: disfellowshipment or excommunication.

Update2: There are those on the private email lists who have stated they will be fasting and praying for Denver. I feel to do the same. I was too quick to think that his case was open and closed – too quick to make him a martyr for the cause of free thought and dissent. Take what I write here with a grain of salt. Mine are only observations from afar. I do not know the man.

Russell writes about the Mormon underground which confused some of his readers. Not sure why the headline calls it the Suburban Underground, maybe someone else wrote that. Anyway, you’re going to have to wade through a lot of stuff to get to some of the meat of his comments about Denver, his appeal, why he matters and will continue to matter in at least the near future.

Confidence in the Face of Excommunication

Many people are fascinated by Denver Snuffer. I’m one of them. Yet I know I couldn’t do what he’s doing. God bless him and his family as he goes through this. Maybe it’s not a big deal because he’s expected it for so long. Perhaps the big day for Denver is not Sunday, but Tuesday. He might lose his church membership on Sunday but will teach things on Tuesday that are in his heart.

As I wrote in my last blog entry, if my Stake President said take down your blog or at least stop writing about Denver Snuffer, I would do as he asked. I expressed how much I need the temple and the Sacrament each week. Think of it. If he is excommunicated, Denver will no longer have access to those, nor the right, according to the church, to exercise his priesthood or to even wear the temple garments.

Since it is a commandment to pay tithing, if he desires to do so, it must be paid through another family member. There is the stigma in our LDS community of being shunned, even though it is a time when former members need the most love. There is the possible loss of income from former business associates who choose not to be associated with a man who has been excommunicated.

Something Different About Denver

You’ve got to ask yourself why he would be willing to give all this up. In his latest posts he hints at some of his conversations with his stake president, how he has tried to comply and yet how he cannot or will not give up the publishing contracts. Did you know that he donates all proceeds from the sale of his books to the church missionary fund? He does not promote them by the way.

There is something different about Denver Snuffer and everyone who writes about him both sees it and writes about it. We who have been following this saga over the past year or two since the release of Passing the Heavenly Gift see there are mainly two camps: those who love him and those who hate him [See my comment in response to Ray below]. Russell Stevenson writes in his post about The-Church-in-Waiting.

Denver referred to this idea a couple of posts ago on his blog, pointing out that the establishment of Zion is not and will not be brought about by an institution such as the LDS Church. That’s quite a claim, but actually quite tame compared to some of the things folks have been quoting in the many (138 now) comments on my post from the day Denver announced his summons to the world.

Something for Both Camps

I know this may seem like I’m wandering a little bit, but stick with me. It’s late, I’ve had a tough week and I’m tired. But I feel it’s important to get this posted tonight so folks will see it before this weekend. You can discount me because I’m a California Mormon but Russell Stevenson hit on something very important in his post: Denver Snuffer appeals to all kinds of Mormon folks.

I hate labels or groups, especially when it comes to people but we all do it. Take a look at what Russell is saying: He points out clearly that Denver appeals to conservative and liberal Mormons. He appeals to both men and women. He appeals to those who are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the church as well as those who are working to build the church up.

I get the impression Russell may have only recently been introduced to Denver’s writings, and had a lot of catching up to do in order to post his article with some credibility. But Stevenson does have credibility in Mormon history. Therefore I paid attention to his main point: Denver has appeal. That’s the bottom line. The man has charisma; he has confidence and exudes authority.

Wish I Could Be There Tuesday

Maybe that’s because he’s an attorney, or maybe it’s because of his claim to have met with the Savior. Not many people can or have made that claim. Denver has gone to great pains to make sure his picture is not posted in his books or on flyers advertising when he is going to speak. He has explained many times it’s because he wants to draw attention to his message, not himself.

I wish I could be there in Boise next week but I’ve got a certification class for work I can’t miss. I’m looking forward to listening to the talk I’ve already preordered from Doug Mendenhall. In many ways I envy my friends on the private discussion groups who will be there. I believe it will be an electrifying moment. Denver has a message he or someone who inspired him wants heard.

I can just see some of the opposing comments to this post now: “Yeah, we know that someone who inspired him is the devil.” Yep, some of the comments are that bad and worse, but for the most part, I’m grateful for my readers who are willingly and deliberately civil even though they disagree. I am fairly certain some from the SCMC have been adding their comments as well.

My conclusion on Denver’s Appeal

So what is that appeal of Denver Snuffer? He must be excruciatingly annoying to those who are able to poke holes in his arguments. They do a pretty good job too. Even some of his supporters have asked questions that make you wonder if he has contradicted himself or dramatically changed his beliefs or teachings between the time of his first book and his last one – PtHG.

The appeal is that he has not self-imploded like so many apostates have over the years. Note that I used the word apostate. Yes, if he is excommunicated, he can be considered an apostate from the LDS Church. In the minds of some people, that changes everything. To me, it does not make one bit of difference. I don’t see Denver as fighting against the Church but maybe I’m wrong.

Denver appeals to people who find something lacking in the LDS Church. I think Stevensen mailed it when he wrote about the idea of The Church-in-Waiting with one exception. We’re not looking to leave the church. We want the things the Lord has promised – to be taught by angels and to be invited to be a part of the Church of the Firstborn – obviously not an earthly institution.

Invitation to Dialog

Does any of this scare you? What are your thoughts? I love to read your comments. Thanks for visiting my blog and thanks for sharing what you think. You help me grow. That’s why I blog. And Richard, did I answer your question? I told you I might make it public if it got too long. In short, I loved Russell’s post. It made me think. I didn’t find it offensive, I found it humorous.

68 thoughts on “The Appeal of Denver Snuffer”

  1. A reader has suggested that there is going to be a large gathering at the stake center on Sunday evening at 6:30. He also intimated there would be media involved. [Address stake center removed] I expressed my opinion that Denver wouldn’t be there but several people corrected me.

    He has asked us on his blog not to write letters to the stake president – in short – to let this pass quietly. But hey, for what it’s worth, I also think it would be kind of cool to see it make the news. I mean, more people might wonder who is Denver Snuffer. I won’t be there. I’m a California boy, but I read the Salt Lake Tribune and KSL websites every day.

    Update: I got to thinking about this today (Sunday). I’m not so sure it would be such a good idea to go to Denver’s stake center either in a show of support of just to see if the media is there. I’m going back to what Denver wrote on his blog the other day. He didn’t want any letters of support written to his stake president. I don’t think he would care to have a bunch of people waiting outside the stake center for hours while the disciplinary council meets.

    But if the press is there waiting for the results, will he speak to them? I mean, he gave an Interview to Peggy Fletcher Stack of the Tribune on Friday. What do I know? I’m just a California boy who has an interest in what the man has published. The reaction has been interesting to watch. It seems everyone has an opinion. I hope we’re not pitting ourselves against ourselves. Is this a matter of “taking sides?” Shouldn’t be.

    1. I have been trying to figure out what the issues are concerning Denver Snuffer, Mel Fish, Max Skousen, George Pace, … And for me, I have come to an understanding.
      The only appropriate relationship we are to have with Christ is to come to the point of complete awe of who he is, what he has done and what will do for us. To teach anything else is deception. Talmage’s Jesus the Christ brings us to that awe in contrast to the teachings of the above mentioned. D&C 76, when studied very carefully, teaches us why that awe is appropriate.

  2. That was a job well done. Someone by the name of Roger K Young whom I have respected greatly over the years has been very critical of Denver, now slandering his name on AVOW. I am saddened at this.
    I have read and followed both men’s works, and I have received more joy from DS’s fruit than of RKY. The way I see it, you have one man who’s written material to “profit” from, and you then have the other man who has taken nothing from his sales, and donated those proceeds to the Church missionary fund. It makes you wonder whom is practicing potential priest craft?
    DS helped me to understand how to prepare myself, so that I could receive the blessing of becoming a “friend” of the Savior, and no longer just a servant. But according to RKY, no one that has had their audience with Yeshuah, would ever talk about it, or share such a sacred experience with others. If they do, then they have been deceived. I have been blessed to have many Brothers and Sisters whom each have received their “Blessing” come into my life, as a strength to draw upon, and also for me to help them too in their times of need. But according to some this is not correct, because we are to stay tight lipped about our own experiences, and not utter a word.

    If DS, myself, and others have been commanded to share our experiences with/of Him, and other Heavenly hosts, so that we can bring more of His and Father’s children into, or, back into the Gospel, then what right does he, RKY, and anyone else have to discredit these events? I have noticed a pattern with these modern day heretics. They have gone after DS, John Pontius, Avraham, Doug, etc…..for what purpose?
    I would dare say these modern day heretics are the ones being deceived. We must remember “by their fruits, ye shall know them”.

  3. I first heard of Denver from a friend of mine, who is a direct descendant of Parley P Pratt. He is now divorced, after many years as a church leader and temple attender.

    He sports a beard and embraces ideas that do not fit comfortably with he whom I used to know. I haven’t really learned from him all of the reasons he thinks this has happened, but the overtones are consonant with this idea of a secret doctrine, or an understanding of hidden things, a special gnosis, if you will, that conveys the same sense of confident independence and inner assurance that you seem to be ascribing to Denver.

    I’m not so inner focused. I see the denial and loss of conviction in many of you that dwell on these things that Denver is so anxious to share, while my own assurance and conviction that the Church is the work of God grows and grows and grows.

    The reason, I think, is not because I don’t see the weaknesses of the brethren, and the fix they have gotten themselves into, but because I see the hand of the Lord causing it all to work together for their good.

    This is his work, which he told his people about long before it came to pass, in astounding detail. When he said to the evil cabal of our day, whose works are in the dark, that he knows all their works and that Lebanon would become a fruitful field, a fruitful field that would be esteemed as a forest, he meant just that.

    It wouldn’t be a fruitful field, if Denver’s doubts were valid. The terrible one wouldn’t be brought to naught or the scorner consumed and the watchers for iniquity cut off, if the modern day exercise of the priesthood was nothing but an empty form, administered by uncompleted dolts, who have yet to understand that they have only been invited to obtain the power of the priesthood from heaven.

    Everyone in this Church should study and fast and pray over Section 101, the allegory of the olive trees, the meaning of the fullness of the gospel, and the prophecy of Joseph of old, concerning the fruit of his loins.

    I know the brethren ignore the parable of 101, Indeed, they skip over it in the teaching manuals, and when they do discuss it in the CES manuals, they leave it to brother Sperry to explain it.

    But it wasn’t their fault that the tower the Lord commanded them to build in the midst of the vineyard was never completed. The conclusion that it was nothing but a debating society, of little use on the frontier, was arrived at way before they were born.

    So, soon, they will arise, being very afraid, and they shall flee, The Twelve will be broken down and the works of the servants will be destroyed, and when the Lord comes to inquire, what the cause of the great evil is, they will all know that it was because they didn’t finish building the tower, because they didn’t think it was needed in a time of peace.

    But the good news is, the Lord will send his servant to gather the strength of his house, to redeem his vineyard. There is no doubt that the servant he refers to in the parable is Joseph.

    Hence, when the time comes, Denver will understand what Brigham couldn’t, concerning the doctrine of adoption, because, unlike Brigham, he will have the advantage of time, which brings all things to pass.

    Follow the brethren, brethren.

  4. My 2 cents. The path that leads us back into the presence of the Lord is one of obedience to the voice of the Spirit. Whether one has been in the presence of the Lord or not, the price was and forever will be obedience. Having been in divine presence does not remove this requirement moving forward – if anything, it requires more.

    Perhaps I can share a quote from a friend and mentor that I have come to love: “When seekers begin to experience the profound blessings of the gospel–the ministry of angels, the miracles of priesthood, and grand spurts of growth that can accompany such times–some seekers upon this part of the ladder occasionally buy into the lie from evil voices that there is something wrong with everyone else, or even the Church. ….. If one lifted off the ground in an airplane, it would be unbelievably arrogant to think ill of the people still in the airport and wonder what is wrong with them because they are not flying yet, or to look down upon the airport as defective because not everyone is in the air. The very purpose of the airport is to prepare people to fly, just as it did you. The fact that you are a few feet off the ground is glorious evidence that the airport is doing its job, and when you land again you will again be at the airport, waiting to get on your next plane. …….. Not only is [the church] “true,” but it works. It brings to our lives the very blessings we are seeking. If you soar for a moment, the Church and the fact that Jesus Christ endows it with His power and His grace and His priesthood are the reason you are soaring. There is no other reason. I often liken the Church, and the grace of Jesus Christ to which it gives us access, to a bottle of medicine that if taken will cure any disease you have. It will make you whole of any ailment or injury. Yet, when someone sees it, they wonder why the stopper is cork instead of a modern childproof cap, or they wonder why the label is hand-lettered and a little crooked–and they criticize and decline to drink the medicine that would have healed them of their spiritual maladies. My argument is–just drink the medicine! The label on the bottle or the color or taste of the medicine is irrelevant–just drink the medicine! The weaknesses of mortals who administer the bottle are irrelevant–just drink the medicine! The chips on the bottle do not damage the power of the cure–just drink the medicine! It will heal you and give you wings to fly.”


    1. Videre faciem Dei

      Fellow Seeker,

      One of the primary themes of Mr. Snuffer’s writings is that men do not need an intermediary between themselves and God. Your statement that the church gives us access to the grace of God is not correct. The church offers authoritative ordinances, it teaches, it prepares, it supports, but the church is not a requirement for us to access the Lord’s grace. Our God is available to all who seek him regardless of their church affiliation. We are not saved by virtue of our church membership and the “saving ordinances” it provides. Much, much more is required. Don’t be so quick to dismiss Denver’s message about the state of the church. If Denver has truly been commissioned to preach as he says, we should pay attention. Joseph Smith said “…the nearer man approaches perfection, the clearer are his views.” If Denver has really been in the presence of the Lord, perhaps his views are clearer. In any event, whether you believe his commentary on the state of the church or not, you cannot deny that his overarching message is one of repentance and hope, and urging for us to come unto Christ and be perfected in Him.

      1. Correct…2 Nephi 4:34; O Lord, I have trusted in thee, and I will trust in thee forever. I will not put my trust in the arm of flesh; for I know that cursed is he that putteth his trust in the arm of flesh. Yea, cursed is he that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arm.

  5. “I take issue with the direction the church has taken recently. There has been too much of a push in the church by the leaders and by many members to pander to current popular trends. In saying this I’m only focusing on the trends within the church. Nothing else. The trend is toward open acceptance of socially progressive christianity. This is the product of social, political and legal pressure.

    “The issue is therefore how the church is to accomplish these changes in its doctrine and teaching. To get from one position to another without destroying the believers is a challenge that can only be accomplished by having a foundation which includes the absolute confidence that the church leadership cannot be led astray. Church leadership inerrancy is necessary.

    “The church needs not only to “teach for doctrine the commandments of men,” the church must be able to teach AS doctrine the commandments of men. Meaning that the church must have those aboard who will do, believe and accept whatever the leaders tell the members. Unquestionably. Unhesitatingly.

    “Principally the shift has come when the church sought to make unconverted gentiles the same as the Jews. At first the church was true to the teaching and command of Jesus but over time heresies have crept into the church. With the supposed “conversion” of Saul who claimed to be trained as one of the most stringent Pharisees was all too quick to eat with and accept into the church gentiles who had not accepted the Mosaic Law.

    “Furthermore, in a shrewd move that only had the intention of increasing revenue and gaining the general acceptance of authorities within the empire, Peter announced that gentiles need only be baptized in order to be counted as the people of God. Given that his first gentile convert was a rather wealthy Roman Centurion this is clear proof that the church is pandering to the current political trends with more interest into working the church leaders into positions of power within the empire rather than promoting the pure doctrine as taught by our Lord and Savior Jesus.

    “With these changes in the doctrine we have lost the original teachings of Jesus who only taught the Jews and promised them salvation. Also with recent developments it is obvious that the church leaders are intending to take the church “mainstream” and are actively planning and expecting it to last more than 100 years, as if the imminent return of Jesus would not happen very soon as promised.

    “The leaders are slowly lulling the members to sleep and leading them as sheep are lead by a shepherd (they have even begun to call local leaders “bishops”!) all while moving the church carefully away from the established doctrine of Jesus, which involved exclusiveness, monasticism, healing and esoteric practices. But instead of following the lead of our Lord, they accept the lord known as Caesar and work on making the church more imperialistic, more Greek, and more inclusive. The new church leaders have all been trained in the ways of Greek philosophy and are as well versed in secular writings as they are of the Law.

    “The church has been transformed into something that Jesus never intended. He always intended it to be small and communal. There was never any intent that it be a world wide church mirroring the legal structures of power and finance. I know this because I have personally met Jesus and he was a humble man who would not have wanted his message distorted in such a way. The twelve that Jesus originally chose to lead the church we faithful at first, but over time they have bowed to the pressures of the world and no longer follow the direction of Jesus.

    I know this and have managed to figure it out while the chosen church leaders who are the authorized representatives of Jesus somehow failed to get the memo. I will be publishing a book shortly (that I won’t promote) and will go on a speaking tour to the various churches (where I won’t promote my book, which I won’t directly be talking about, but I will be talking about it’s content, which is totally different) where I will promote the fact that there is a hidden church that is not the official church structure lead by the 12 apostles that will ultimately lead us to salvation. The current church is just a placeholder because the key portions of Jesus’s authority were lost when he ascended into heaven.

    “I need to add that the advocates of academically and Greek Philosophically trained Christians have been far more tolerate of my views than the church has. They (the learned Greeks) are willing to be tolerant precisely because they’ve had their own view so marginalized in the past. For their kindness toward me I am appreciative.”

    –Damascus Ner (2nd century church member)

    I found this rather interesting 2nd century document in my backyard written by a church member who was concerned with the direction that the apostles were taking the church. Maybe it has relevance to the current discussion.

    1. Maybe I should explain my slightly satirical comment. This is the “too long; didn’t read” version (which may be just a tad bit long).

      Denver Snuffer’s argument can very easily be taken and set in a different time period. I can very easily imagine members of the early church in the 2nd century complaining that the apostles were leading the church astray because they were becoming too “Roman” or “Greek” and were not adhering to the “traditional teachings” found in Judaism. Some may have even complained that the church leaders were too quick to squash dissent and to excommunicate those who offered differing interpretations of not only Jesus and his ministry, but also how the church should be administered.

      Denver complains of the “corporate” nature of the church, but I imagine that if he was made a general authority (or even the prophet) and was sent to Nigeria to live for 5 years working on administering the church, and then sent to Ukraine for 5 years, then to Malaysia, then to somewhere in Latin America, then to some place in the US for 5 years each, and in each place he had to figure out how to successfully administer the church with all it’s property, tithing collection, welfare, distribution of books, sending of missionaries, calling local church leaders, working with attorneys when lawsuits were brought against the church, and had to deal with local, national, and international laws, in addition to corruption and lawlessness in certain (or all) places, and then he had to try to give a consistent spiritual message that could be understood by many different people across hundreds of cultures and in hundreds of languages, *and* keep it going for over 180 years, then I suspect that he would eventually recreate the very “corporate” structure of the church that he now so unapologetically condemns.

      I learned a long time ago that God is involved with His Church (and His church, meaning those who are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) and that He has personal interest in it and personal control over it. I find it amazing that Denver thinks that the Church has somehow been put off track and is being consistently mislead by its leaders to chase some “socially progressive” pipe dream, but that God failed to tell, warn, or even inform His chosen representatives. He (God) did not even send another prophet to work miracles and reveal new scripture, but He, for some inexplicable reason, found it necessary to inspire Denver Snuffer to figure this all out and that God is somehow incapable of speaking and inspiring His chosen and authorized leaders with the same knowledge.

      The thing to remember is that God is fully aware of what needs to happen in order to accomplish His work, and if that means forming a corporation to be the legal entity of His Church, then He will do that.

    1. Slight thread hijack: why is it that journalists in Utah can’t write about anyone without mentioning how many children they have?

  6. ” “Yeah, we know that someone who inspired him is the devil.” Yep, some of the comments are that bad and worse, but for the most part, I’m grateful for my readers who are willingly and deliberately civil even though they disagree.”

    Denver has indeed been taken in by a false spirit. And if God has told me to warn my fellow neighbors when it has been given me to recognize this spirit, to some it may be viewed as bad or uncivil, but I know what God has asked of me and what I speak I speak in compassion according to the spirit of the Lord within me.

    I have been given the gift of discernment, to discern the spirits, and my voice is the voice of a friend offering truth to those who are not endowed with this gift or who may be susceptible to this deception. To all who will listen to these words and who are willing to try the spirits, I offer this warning that Denver has been taken by a false spirit that comes from that wicked one – whose voice will only lead one to misery and the destruction of the soul. If you are willing to pray and act on my words, you will know that I speak the truth.

    My best to all of you. – Your brother in Christ.

    1. Hi SteveF, I’ve read your comments and appreciate your visits. Not sure if I’ve ever responded directly to you before although I know others have. We obviously disagree – at least for now. I may be wrong, and therefore, guilty of being mislead by a false spirit in a likewise manner. But for the record, I have specifically prayed for and about Denver Snuffer and about specific things he has written in his books.

      To be very specific, I have prayed, and will be fasting tomorrow for a clearer understanding in my own mind of how I will continue my interest in, time invested in and amount of spiritual energy spent on what Denver Snuffer writes or says. I appreciate your warning voice. As far as I can tell, to this day, Denver still advocates following the Savior, not any man – including himself. To paraphrase, “Don’t let anyone come between you and your Savior. Nobody else can save you.”

      I will do as you ask. I am willing to pray and act upon your words, although I’m not sure what action you are suggesting. My prayers to Heavenly Father about this go something like this, “Father, thou knowest I have studied what Denver has written extensively. I have read his books, listened to his talks and am trying to put into practice his advice to come unto Christ through service to others and in simply living the gospel of Christ – repent, receive the Holy Ghost and endure to the end in faithfulness.”

      “Since I have taken the time to study and ponder what the man has written, I feel I have the right to ask for a confirmation if what he has written will be helpful to me in my search to draw closer to the Savior and to fulfill my purpose in life, whatever that may be. Father, in all sincerity, I ask, has Denver been deceived in what he has written in his latest book? Has he repeated lies of the adversary and therefore will I be mislead on the path to salvation or distracted from holding to the iron rod if I continue to read and ponder what he has written?”

      That sort of prayer has been asked and answered many times over the past eighteen months or so since I started praying about what I was reading in Denver’s books. Since I read PtHG first, you can be sure that I was very specific about what I read in there. Steve, to this day, I continue to feel, and this is for me only – not necessarily others – that I will be blessed if I continue to ponder what he has written and what he will be teaching on his lectures over the next year.

      Again, I appreciate your warning voice. I appreciate your closing line – “your brother in Christ”. In the end, we all must stand before the bar of Christ and answer for our own actions – what we did with our time on this earth and how we served and blessed others, or what we found in our pursuit of knowledge through the myriad of voices out there. We are here to learn. I feel to repeat what I learned from Max Skousen, and this is a paraphrase – I have had my ladder up against the wrong tree. I have been trying to eat from the tree of knowledge. I need to be eating from the tree of life. Who will lead me to that tree better than the Holy Ghost? For me, the Holy Ghost whispers, “Tim, you will be blessed as you read and ponder the works of Denver Snuffer.”

      This isn’t for everyone. We are here to make decisions and choices. I have made my choice. For the past eighteen months, without ever meeting the man, I have studied his message and have felt it lead me to want to read the scriptures more, to love and serve others better, to be more patient in affliction and sorrow, including physical pain, and to do all within my power to receive both the first and the second comforter as commanded in the scriptures. Perhaps I’m just not very good at explaining to others why Denver’s writings appeal to me. So be it.

      I’ll end with this thought: Is this a choice between me following what Thomas S,. Monson says and what Denver Snuffer writes? No. I don’t see it as an either / or choice. I see it as a “We accept truth from all sources” kind of thing. Am I loyal to the church. Yes, I am. Will I do what my stake president tells me if he ever gets involved in what I am writing here? Yes, I will. If one day, this blog disappears, you will know it’s because I either died and could no longer pay for the domain name or my priesthood leader asked me to take it down.

      God bless you my brother and be cheerful. I have found a great source of power lately in the idea of being cheerful in the face of adversity – in my case, the physical pain through which I pass. It seems nobody likes a grumpy old man. I hope I don’t come across that way. If I have, please forgive me. I mean only to share what I think is something amazing – something which has filled a great need for me that I have not found in the correlated curriculum of the LDS Church. It’s up to me to seek further light and knowledge.

      Tim Malone
      Latter-day Commentary

      1. Thank you for the response, Tim. Whereas my warning was to everyone who sees it in that last comment, I would like to respond specifically to you and your comment here. I hope you know it is not my intention to take away from any good you have received, and that I do not doubt that there really is good you have received. Truth can be found among error, and since I do not find Denver to be a devil, but rather a child of God, I would expect a whole lot of good in him, and thus would expect much of this inherent goodness to come out in his writings. In addition, with all the painstaking effort and research he has put into his writings, I would expect some good and interesting results from that as well. And indeed this is the case, I have seen many good things. Yet this does not to take away from that in many things he has been deceived, and the false spirit that he has been so influenced by has grown and become more apparent with the passage of time, and that if he continues to abide in this spirit it will be spiritually destructive, in a very large way, not only to him, but also to those who follow and likewise become deceived or taken by this spirit. (I don’t mean to suggest this spirit is new, however.)

        So if you have found good, and you have been inspired to find it, all the better. But the danger is, as I am sure you are quite aware, that in the absence of full discernment a person may at first partake of fresh water and assume all is well only to find out much later that they were also mistakenly taking in poison. My warning is against the poison, not the fresh water.

        To act on my words would mean to try the spirit of my words in prayer but not just in prayer, but by going about your life in such a way that accepts/tests on faith what I am saying to be true (if Denver truly is taken by a false spirit, then I would/ought to do..x y z). By so acting in concert with prayer, In time you’ll be able to see the resultant fruits, whether they are good or bad, and whether such a course of action has been spiritually uplifting or denigrating. But as for recommending any specific actions outside of prayer, I’d expect this would most likely vary person to person catered to individual circumstance.

        You mentioned some things you have prayed about, and as far as I can tell they sound like the right type of questions. I do not have specific inspiration on what other questions might also be helpful to pray about, but here are some additional questions that I think getting answers to could be particularly helpful/enlightening as you seek to discover if Denver really has been taken by a false spirit, to discover if my warning is truly of God:

        1) Did Elijah give and restore the full sealing keys to the earth through Joseph Smith?
        2) Have these keys been passed on to the present day?
        3) Are the keys of Elijah those which authorize the conferral of the fullness of the Melchizedek Priesthood?
        4) Do the current First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles hold the fullness of the Priesthood that the Lord spoke of in the D&C, that Joseph referred to in several of his Nauvoo discourses?
        5) Has Christ ever lost the reigns in overseeing and guiding the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS, from the death of Joseph to today?
        6) Does the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles teach that which Christ would have them teach to the Church today? Or would Christ have their message/teachings be something different or more?
        7) Has the LDS Church been led astray, in more than just honest mistakes or errors that the Lord has allowed for due to mortal weakness? Or, rather, has the Lord ever been displeased with the overall way any President of the Church since the death of Joseph Smith has led the Church?
        8) Has the LDS Church been progressing toward or digressing away from Zion from the death of Joseph Smith to today?
        9) Will the LDS Church apostatize or fall in this last dispensation? And has the Lord or will the Lord ever take away the authority that He gave to the church through Joseph Smith?
        10) Will Zion be redeemed by an elite select group of individuals relatively few in number privy to some sort of special knowledge , or will it rather come by and through the efforts of a large group of people (hundreds of thousands or millions)?
        11) Will Zion be redeemed through the efforts and organization of the LDS Church? Or is there no institution/organization necessary for the redemption of Zion?

        That’s a lot I have written, so I’ll go ahead and stop there. Maybe these things will help, maybe they won’t; I hope they will. I wish you the very best in your journey and pray for the same for all of us.

      2. This is in reply to SteveF from 9-7-13 at 5:27pm. Hope it shows up in the right place.

        Those are great questions Steve. It would be wonderful to see a table side-by-side comparing what Denver has said in response to these questions – taken of course from his books with page numbers or from his blog, which is also in book format now. I know I’m not going to do that.

        There may be some who have that kind of time and inclination but I don’t. But I do want to take a shot at answering the questions from the standard curriculum, also wishing I had the time to show references from texts with pages numbers, etc. I’m not scholar, just a regular old member.

        So here are my answers – things I believe from what I’ve been taught – just from off the top of my head, and for the sake of discussion. Maybe you can counter with what Denver has taught so we can all see the difference and understand better why he will be excommunicated tomorrow.

        1) Did Elijah give and restore the full sealing keys to the earth through Joseph Smith?

        Yes. We believe and teach Elijah the prophet came to the earth, I assume as a resurrected being, on assignment from God, and gave the power to seal on earth and on heaven to Joseph Smith. As far as I know we believe this was accomplished by the laying on of hands. And as far as I recall, most lessons point out that this took place in the Kirtland temple, as documented by section 110.

        2) Have these keys been passed on to the present day?

        Yes. Members of the LDS Church believe and teach that the keys to seal on earth and heaven have been passed from Joseph to the twelve, and then on to each apostle / prophet in succession until the present day, meaning that they are held in full by the present prophet, President Thomas S. Monson. We also believe upon his death, they will continue to be held in perpetuity by the apostles and prophets until the return of the Lord Jesus Christ, when they will be returned to Him by the prophet / president at that time, which I believe will take place at Adam-ondi-Ahman.

        3) Are the keys of Elijah those which authorize the conferral of the fullness of the Melchizedek Priesthood?

        Frankly, I’m not sure I understand what the fullness of the Melchizedek Priesthood entails, but if you mean the power to seal on earth and heaven, then yes, that’s what those keys are for, as far as I understand it. We believe that the prophet has delegated that sealing power to sealers who work in the temples, allowing them to perform ordinances that are valid on earth and heaven.

        4) Do the current First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles hold the fullness of the Priesthood that the Lord spoke of in the D&C that Joseph referred to in several of his Nauvoo discourses?

        Yes, as far as I know, this is what members of the LDS Church are taught and believe. I’m still not sure what the “fullness of the priesthood” is so if anybody could enlighten me, I’d be very grateful. I guess when we say “fullness” we mean to say “everything there is to the priesthood.” Can someone help me out here? I’m just shooting from the hip and not looking things up.

        5) Has Christ ever lost the reigns in overseeing and guiding the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS, from the death of Joseph to today?

        We are taught and believe that the Lord has personally guided this church from the day it was restored until the present day. We believe he accomplishes this through inspiration to the quorum of the twelve and if necessary, direct revelation to the prophet as in the case of President Kimball in the 1978 revelation, who then presented it to the twelve for ratification. We then voted as a church to accept it as a binding revelation. We believe Christ continues to guide the church today through inspiration to local leaders as directed by polices set in place by Apostles and Prophets.

        6) Does the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles teach that which Christ would have them teach to the Church today? Or would Christ have their message/teachings be something different or more?

        We believe that we are being taught in General Conference and in Stake Conferences the things the Savior would have us hear and understand to guide our lives today. We believe that the Lord will give us ample warning of his plans (Amos 3:7) and the prophet will share that with the people of the church. As far as we are taught, the Lord would have us follow the prophet, who will ensure that we receive any warnings or new teachings or guidance as we need them today.

        7) Has the LDS Church been led astray, in more than just honest mistakes or errors that the Lord has allowed for due to mortal weakness? Or, rather, has the Lord ever been displeased with the overall way any President of the Church since the death of Joseph Smith has led the Church?

        Most LDS members are not even aware of any honest mistakes or errors. We believe and are taught the Lord is pleased with the Church, speaking collectively and not individually and has been from the days of the prophet Joseph until our day. We are especially appreciative of the sacrifice so many of our ancestors made to cross the plains, establish the church in the Salt Lake Valley and send the gospel to the rest of the world, anticipating the day the Lord is to return.

        8) Has the LDS Church been progressing toward or digressing away from Zion from the death of Joseph Smith to today?

        Zion is a difficult concept to understand for most people. It means giving all your time, talents and property to the church. We are certainly not living that today but hopefully progressing toward that goal. Personally, I don’t think it will happen in my day, or at least not under the present economic conditions. It would be an amazing sifting process if the prophet were to announce we are to start living the law of consecration on January 1st, 2014. As far as we are taught and believe, we are progressing toward that goal, but not many know exactly how it will be achieved. Some say it will take a miracle – a dramatic change in the world economy.

        9) Will the LDS Church apostatize or fall in this last dispensation? And has the Lord or will the Lord ever take away the authority that He gave to the church through Joseph Smith?

        We believe the LDS church to be the Kingdom of God on the earth, established for the last time as prophesied in Daniel, the kingdom set up without hands and the stone that will continue to roll and grow until it fills the whole earth (I’m really paraphrasing here). We are taught and believe the church will never fall or be taken away from the earth, nor has the church lost the authority it had received through Joseph Smith to perform ordinances, preach the gospel, build temples, confer priesthood, print scriptures, collect tithing – all the things a church needs to do to exist.

        10) Will Zion be redeemed by an elite select group of individuals relatively few in number privy to some sort of special knowledge , or will it rather come by and through the efforts of a large group of people (hundreds of thousands or millions)?

        As far as I know and have been taught, Zion is a collective effort, and we are all supposed to be involved in the creation of Zion. I know of no official church teaching that indicates Zion is to be built or established by a secretive or select few, but maybe someone else can point to the right place in our curriculum that shows otherwise. Better yet, show that to us in the scriptures.

        11) Will Zion be redeemed through the efforts and organization of the LDS Church? Or is there no institution/organization necessary for the redemption of Zion?

        This seems like a repeat of question ten. We have been taught and believe Zion is a collective effort, headed up by the leaders of the LDS Church, from the prophet down to the Elder’s Quorum President, home teacher and even father in the home. Zion starts in the home. We define it in many ways, but a state of heart and mind is critical for the acceptance and establishment of Zion. I read Denver’s recent post on that point and was amazed. I had never considered such an idea that Zion is not the result of an institution or organization.


        Well, that about sums it up from the top of my head what I have been taught and have believed all my life. I know Denver teaches otherwise on a lot of these, probably all of them, otherwise I don’t think you would have brought up each of these points. Thanks for asking the questions and getting me to think. I hope I have quoted correct doctrine from the curriculum. You know not everyone believes the way I have written my answers here. Sure wish someone had the time to point to page numbers in Denver’s books where he presents opposing views so we can discuss.

        Thanks Steve. Much appreciated. You’re a good man. You really got me thinking. I’ve looked back through my logs and note you’ve left 31 comments over the last seven months. I also realized that I had responded to some of your comments before. Please accept my apologies for not noting that previously. I really appreciate my readers, especially those who leave comments. I know we’re all busy trying to make a living and take care of our families. God bless. Cheers.

        Tim Malone
        Later-day Commentary

      3. I’ve mostly abstained from these comment threads lately, but here is how I would answer the eleven questions posed. I can speak only for myself:

        1. All of Joseph’s Nauvoo discourses in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith compiled by his grand-nephew and later Church
        president Joseph Fielding Smith that discuss Elijah mention his return in a [still] future tense rather than the past tense. In D&C
        section 128 the Prophet recounts the heavenly messengers who’ve delivered messages and/or keys. Elijah is not mentioned other than
        possibly as a “divers angel” (verse 22). Even accepting D&C 110, I believe Elijah has yet a future role to play (see Article of
        Faith 9).

        2. All keys currently possessed by mortals on this earth are held by President Thomas S. Monson. Some keys have not been restored
        yet (those pertaining to Levitical animal sacrifices, or the resurrection) and it is possible that the Lord has removed some
        (polygammy as one possible example).

        3. JST Genesis 14 indicates that the Lord reserves the conferal of the fullness of the priesthood to himself. This is entirely
        congruent with the bestowal of the fullness of the priesthood and the unconditional sealing power on Nephi in Helaman chapter

        4. If they have each been orainded by God then yes (see JST Geneis 14). Oliver Cowdrey taught the original Twelve in this
        dispensation that their ordination was not complete until God himself laid hands on them. Whether this has happened for all fifteen
        of the current members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve I’m obviously not privy to. To paraphrase Elder Bednar’s
        October 2010 conference address, by virtue of their calling they have a priesthood injunction to act to ask, seek, knock and receive
        it. I sustain them regardless of whether they have had their ordination completed yet or not.

        5. No, from a macro-perspective. As D&C section 3 indicates the works of God cannot be frustrated. From a micro-perspective,
        however, we can though through misuse our agency elect not to receive all the grace the Lord is working to provide us, i.e., we may
        be like the chicks who the hen was trying to gather under her wing who refused to be gathered (see 3 Nephi chapter 10). His work and
        His glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man (Moses chapter 1) but clearly not all will choose Him.

        6. In general certainly, else he would remove them from their place in time. Undoubtedly the Lord wishes that we as a people
        collectively were prepared to receive the greater things he has so far had to withhold due to our lack of faithfulness (see 3 Nephi
        chapter 26) in which case he would reveal it through the president of the high priesthood. That has obviously not happened yet,
        though I long to see the day.

        7. Joseph Smith is the only president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who has ever presided over the LDS Church
        for any period of time when it was not under divine condemnation (D&C section 84). Given that Joseph Smith has done more than
        anyone else save Jesus Christ for the salvation of men in this world (D&C section 135) and the Lord was still displeased with him at
        times (as noted in a number of canonized revelations), I would not be at all surprised if the Lord had been displeased with some of
        the actions of some of Joseph’s successors in the presidency. On the contrary, I would be shocked if Presidents Young through Monson
        were not also fallible humans in need of repentance just as much, if not more so, than Joseph. It doesn’t take much to lose heavenly
        priesthood power (inspite of ordination) as D&C section 121 makes so abundantly clear.

        8. Clearly digressing at first despite all of Joseph and the Lord’s efforts, even prior to his death (or else the martyrdom might
        well not have happened). The Book of Mormon shows that, even among the Lord’s chosen people, there is a natural ebb and flow of
        righteousness–the pride cycle, it is often called. Therefore it seems reasonable to expect that at times we will be progressing and
        at times digressing. Zion will be redeemed eventually. The Lord told us that she would be chastened for a little season (D&C
        section 100). Nephi also reminds us not to be at ease and assume all is well in Zion (2 Nephi chapter 28) lest the devil cheat us of
        our souls.

        9. When John the Baptist restored the Aaronic Priesthood he said that it would remain until the sons of Levi do offer again an
        offering in righteousness (D&C section 13; JS-History). The Lord already took away the fullness of the Priesthood from the Church
        once in this dispensation (D&C section 124). His having done so once already, it would seem presumptous of me to assume that He
        could (or would) never do so again. Until the sons of Levi have offered their sacrifice again in righteousness (which they obviously
        have not) then the authority of the Aaronic Priesthood is firmly in place in the LDS Church, meaning that we have access to the keys
        of the ministering of angels and as long as angels appear and minister our faith is not in vain (see Moroni chapter 7).

        10. Zion will be the pure in heart (D&C section 97). Therefore it must be redeemed by people who have obtained charity (perfect
        love) which is a gift of (perhaps the greatest gift of) the spirit (see Ether chapter 12, Moroni chapters 7 & 10, etc.)

        11. I believe a redeemed Zion will be made up of members of the Church of the Firstborn (see Sections 76 & 93, Moses chapter 7).
        Ideally all the programs (though I sometimes have questioned ward basketball 🙂 and efforts of the LDS Church are directed towards
        preparing and qualifying us to obtain membership in that Eternal church. However, hearts become pure one person at a time through
        the exercise of our individual agency in receiving grace from God. We do not need to wait for President Monson (or some yet future
        leader) to tell us now is the time to become a Zion person (see D&C section 58). We already have the call, abundantly, in the Book
        of Mormon (and I hear it in the teaching of the brethren too).

  7. “We who have been following this saga over the past year or two since the release of Passing the Heavenly Gift see there are mainly two camps: those who love him and those who hate him.”

    Again, it looks like people like me are excluded from your broad brush strokes, Tim – even though you use the word “mainly”. Some people who are being accused of hating a man actually object to the book and some statements on his blog – and are concerned about the obvious changes they have observed in the man since he wrote and published PtHG. They have no hatred of him. I think that describes more of his critics than your statement above allows – probably enough to constitute a third “camp”.

    I have seen the polarization in your writing for a while now, Tim, that I didn’t see here previously, and I have been concerned about it. The tone and tenor of your blog and the comment threads is quite different than it was when I first came to admire you so much.

    May God bless you on your journey, but I will not be commenting any more on posts about Bro. Snuffer.

    1. Ray, I sense I have offended you, perhaps by ignoring you or not responding to your comments, for which I apologize and ask your forgiveness. Although you and I have never met, we go back a long ways in the LDS blogging world. You have always been kind in what you have written in my comments here on my blog and when I have written something in response to your entries posted on your own blog.

      You’re right, that was a poor choice of words and an unfair judgment by putting people into two camps of love or hate. You are correct. That’s not the issue. I’m guessing you are like me in that you have never met Denver Snuffer, although I could be mistaken. We have to make our judgments, and yes, we are here to make judgments, based on what we read. I get that. Denver can be abrasive, offensive, demeaning or denigrating. Maybe he deserves to be excommunicated for that.

      If I remember correctly you and I have both sat on High Councils. I have said I would not want to be on this High Council tomorrow because I would have to speak up in favor of allowing Denver to retain his membership privileges of taking the sacrament, attending the temple, exercising his priesthood, wearing the garment, paying tithing and all the other things we enjoy because of our membership in the LDS Church. I do not want to see him excommunicated.

      You are also correct that I have changed in the way I blog over the years. I suppose polarization is as good a word as any to describe it. As I have aged and especially as I have gone through some sort of encounter with the adversary over the past six months, I have found myself pleading more for release and for respite from the pain. It has not been forthcoming, at least not in the way I had hoped, in spite of all I have done and tried to do in following the normal course of Western medicine to find relief from constant headaches and migraines.

      I had not realized until Tuesday, when my employer pointed it out to me, that I had become a “cranky old man”. He said, “You’re not a very cheerful person to deal with lately. Our employees deserve to be met with a cheerful hello and a cheerful disposition when you are helping them with their computer problems.” It shook me up. He was right. I had been cranky lately. I asked Carol about it and she was quick to confirm the diagnosis. My point is, you are correct that I have changed. The tenor and tone of my blog is different from what it used to be.

      Some have accused Denver of picking a fight when he wrote PtHG. I kept saying to myself when I first read it, “He did not need to write this book. This stuff is all over the Internet already. Anyone who has studied our history knows these facts, ugly as some of them are.” Yet, as I read, I was filled with something in my heart that I had not felt in a long, long time. It was excitement at learning something new, for there were indeed new things in there I had not found elsewhere. I know why we teach the basics every Sunday in church and I know fully well we are each responsible for feeding our souls as well as our minds with the deeper aspects of the gospel that we don’t talk about in church.

      I’ll stop there because I just said what I wanted to say to you. The writings of Denver Snuffer, for me, fill a void. He has led me to more deep prayer and pondering about the Savior than any other LDS writer, bar none. I mean that. Yes, more than Bruce R. McConkie, Neal A. Maxwell, David Bednar, Dallin Oaks, Jeffrey Holland or any other apostle who has the specific charge to lead us unto Christ. I did not include a multitude of other great LDS writers on purpose. I listed only apostles, who stand as witnesses for Christ and are to teach us “Till we all come in the unity of the faith.”

      The big difference? I don’t hear them teaching: “I have seen the Savior. You can too. Here’s how you do it.” Instead, what I hear from everyone with whom I discuss this: “Oh, they have seen him, they are just under a strict obligation not to tell anyone.” Sorry, I must be lacking in faith, because that doesn’t help me. Maybe I haven’t been paying close enough attention. I love listening to Elder Oaks, Elder Bednar, Elder Holland, President Eyring and all our apostles. But for me, none have said, or I haven’t felt it, “I have seen him, you can too, here’s how you do it.” Where’s the step by step process?

      I’ve gone on long enough. You have said you would not respond to anything I write about Denver Snuffer. I understand. I do not fault you for that. As of 11pm tomorrow evening, according to his own interview in the Salt Lake Tribune yesterday, Denver Snuffer will be an apostate, a former member, excommunicated for apostasy. We shall see. I hope not. But I will always thank God that someone, a priesthood brother I greatly respect, brought his writings to my attention with a simple question, “What do you think of the latest book from Denver Snuffer, Passing the Heavenly Gift?

      God bless you my friend. You have my prayers and best wishes in your search for new employment. I mean that sincerely. I pray for people I don’t know personally whenever someone asks for it or lets me know of a need. I pray you will find what you need to continue to provide for your family and to be happy with your daily walk in life. It’s a shame we all live so far apart that we can’t meet. I would like to have served with you in a HP group leadership or whatever might bring us together in service and love in this wonderful church.

      Tim Malone
      Latter-day Commentary

    2. I’m in your camp Ray. I read Second Comforter and listened to DS talks, and really felt the spirit. I read PTHG and thought I was reading a springboard for every bitter anti-Mormon with an axe to grind. I believe DS did experience what he said he did, but I think that something has gone wrong with him since. I think the main problem is that Snuffer began writing books that establish truth from a doctrinal angle–all quite good books, and then he completely changed direction and started trying to discern spiritual truth from a largely historical angle. This is the same reference point that bitter anti-mormon antagonists use. DS compounds his own perceptual problem by now insisting in a recent blog, that PTHG has transcended history, and is actually the Truth, not merely history. I believe DS is being taken over with the same pride that he accuses the brethren of possessing. Anyone who tries writing based on historical analysis is in for a rapid and constant lesson in humility. Mormon History is an absolute mess; however, it is saved by the fact that all other histories are full of the same problems. Nibley said that Roman History was nothing more than a giant propoganda tool of scheming emperors; as are the stellae in Copan. Perhaps DS will return to the original type of exposition that made us appreciate his writing. Time will tell. Peace.

  8. Elect (Study guide from LDS Org)
    The elect are those who love God with all their hearts and live lives that are pleasing to him. Those who live such lives of discipleship will one day be selected by the Lord to be among his chosen children.

    Matthew 24
    21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

    22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.

    23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

    24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

    Is this one of those times? I’m not sure. From my posts, you can tell that I don’t think Denver’s dog hunts…

    I am glad that Tim has this site. This is where I learned about the Electric Universe, which I find quite fascinating.

    From some posts, it sounds like some have been offended in the church. That is very easy to do, I’m sure I have offended some. If you have been offended, please forgive.

    Let me suggest 2 main points for receiving the Second Comforter: obedience and charity. If we are obedient, then it is a matter of becoming like the Savior, having his Charity. Then at the right time, we will be received by Him.

    I love all the apostles, the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve, and the other general authorities. This is what President Eyring said in his talk, “Come unto Me”, at last conference:

    “I am a witness of the Resurrection of the Lord as surely as if I had been there in the evening with the two disciples in the house on Emmaus road. I know that He lives as surely as did Joseph Smith when he saw the Father and the Son in the light of a brilliant morning in a grove of trees in Palmyra.”

    That is clear to me.

    I don’t want anyone to leave, stay away, or be excommunicated from the Church. Let us love God with all our hearts, let us be His disciples, let us watch and be very careful for the false things we face in these days.

    And let us love one another.

    1. Rick: Thank you so much for adding that quote from President Eyring. See, I haven’t been listening closely enough. That is a powerful witness. Now I need to listen closely to the Brethren when they teach specific steps we can take in prayer or otherwise to receive a similar witness. Perhaps it just takes time, humility, sacrifice, service and doing all we can to love and strengthen one another. Anyway, thanks again for bringing that quote to my attention. I much appreciate it. God bless and be of good cheer.

  9. “It’s a shame we all live so far apart that we can’t meet. I would like to have served with you in a HP group leadership or whatever might bring us together in service and love in this wonderful church.”

    Amen, my friend. I hope you find peace in your trials.

    Fwiw, you have not offended me. I simply don’t want to be part of the contention that rages in the comment threads that deal with Bro. Snuffer. It is the antithesis of what feeds my own soul. I limited my comment to those threads on purpose, since I still respect you greatly.

    If you are interested, please read the following as my final input. I think it’s an interesting balance between how you and I currently see this situation – and it is a statement of mine that says I understand the need for you to follow your own faith and for me to follow mine, all within the same broad faith tradition:

  10. Still neutral toward Denver but…

    Gamaliel on the trial of Peter and the Apostles before a council, from Acts 5….

    38) And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
    39) But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

  11. I could really careless about Denver Snuffer. He has his agency to do what he wants. He is welcome to his thoughts and his own beliefs. But when you take to open forums or publish books that contradict church teachings then you should be dealt with. I too have had many wonderful and sacred experiences that have led to my conversion.

  12. And it continues: Denver brought his family with him to the disciplinary council last night. The Stake President wouldn’t let them in. Denver and his family left. Presumably, the council was held without him.

    And a little bit more background:

    One more post from Denver this evening. He said he knows a decision was made, but doesn’t know what it was:

    And it’s official. Denver posted Wed at 1:25. He has been excommunicated.

  13. This situation reminds me of what happened last year when BYU professor Bott? was dismissed when he restated in an article/interview what 19th century prophets claimed regarding blacks being less valiant, fence-sitters and the result of the curse of Cain. That situation caused the church to make a statement that such was no longer the church’s stand, hence new policy regarding blacks was created. I don’t think the brethren felt good about throwing Bott under the bus for stating what they most likely believe too, but it was a sacrifice that benefits the church in the long run. Snuffer calls it caving in to current culture. Pragmatists call it real life. It is sometimes difficult to know what is still valid from past teachings, but I do know that you need to take the current temperature of the room when dealing with 19th century prophecies or you will end up like Bott and Snuffer.

    1. Randy Bott was never dismissed, officially censored, condemned or “thrown under the bus”. In the Washington Post article his statements were taken out of context, for political reasons, and the Church responded quickly so as to not involve itself in the political firestorm that could have resulted. At the time the article appeared it was the middle of the 2012 election and there were plenty of people in both parties that were trying to stir up racial tensions in the election.

      1. Bott was not fired, but his retirement date was sped up. I’ll choose my words more carefully in the future. Like you said, it was absolutely the wrong time to say what he did.

        1. When he was interviewed what he said was something along the lines of “This is what people said in the 1800’s and some of these comments continued into the 1900’s.” But what got reported in the article was “These are the reasons why I think that blacks were not given the priesthood.” And the way he was quoted in the article implied that the reasons given were the personal views of Brother Bott.

          So in the interview he tried to explain in great detail some rather complex theological arguments that were used by others over the years, and he got quoted as saying “These are the reasons why I think that blacks did not hold the priesthood.” There is a big difference between “These are the arguments that people used.” and “These are the arguments that I use.” Unfortunately the author of the article failed to make that distinction and made Brother Bott look bad.

          There is no evidence that “his retirement date was sped up”.

        1. I hope you do realize that Daniel Peterson wrote that to point out how ridiculous it is to assert that Randy Bott had “his retirement date sped up” because of the hatchet job that the Washington Post did. BYU, and the church in general doesn’t work like that.

    2. “It is sometimes difficult to know what is still valid from past teachings, but I do know that you need to take the current temperature of the room when dealing with 19th century prophecies or you will end up like Bott and Snuffer.”

      That explains why I have a hard time with Isaiah! If it is hard to know what is still valid from the 19th century, after less than 200 years, what hope do we really have of understanding what’s valid from the 9th century BC? That’s, like, approaching 3,000 years ago–the problem is 15x worse!

      1. Truth doesn’t work that way.

        If it is wrong now, it was wrong then, and vice versa.

        All of Isaiah is still valid.

        Apparently there was some date at which the leaders went from ‘can and do lead us astray’ to ‘can never lead us astray’. Hence confusion.

  14. Its either truth or not. His message, not the messenger. The lord told him to write TSC, also PTHG. The message is clear. James 1:5. We must ask, we must connect to heaven ourselves, we must put Christ FIRST in our lives, no man, no prophet, no-one first. We must “seek the face of the lord that in patience we may posses our souls” (D&C 101 verse ? Look it up)

    I wanted earnestly to know some things about him. The answer was so clear it surprised me. We don’t have to pick and choose between the message, or any other place. Its either truth or it isn’t. The church allows us connect to heaven, but the messages I have received through the holy ghost, denver being the carrier of the message. Is truth.

    One thing I have noticed above is the conflation of keys and power and authority. One can pass along keys and authority but not power. Packer has stated the biggest issue in the church is the lack of power. So when someone says did JS pass along the power of elijah (sealing power) the answer is an absolute no. Did he pass the keys? yes. Power is retrieved the same way it was in Helamen 10, also JST Genesis 14.

    You cannot pass a power that one is unworthy for. I cannot be given power if I am living in sin my whole life. Even if authority is conferred upon me Think of D&C 121… When someone sins (unrighteous dominion)… Amen to that authority of that man. OUCH!… So If I was baptized by someone who had no authority was it valid? We teach we must have it! This is why there is a separation of the preparatory gospel and the fullness of the gospel. The ability to get true power comes from Christ, by his own voice, when one is willing to only do the will of the father. The keys are valid, but like D&C 132:7, all ordinances must be sealed by the holy spirit of promise, the sealing power of elijah is “sufficient to make ones calling and election made sure” (Joseph Smith)… The ordinances are just like the ordinance of the Holy ghost, “receive the holy ghost”, Its an admonition to GO GET IT. You made the covenant now obey it to GET IT. The scriptures refer to this as the baptism by fire, change of heart, song of redeeming love, true conversion, etc… Likewise each other physical ordinance has a spiritual counterpart.

    1. I do not believe for a minute that he was visited by Christ, but by the devil himself. Satan deceived him into believing he is Christ as he has before in the scriptures. There is no light about this man. His spirit is dark. He is irreverent. I know because I was at his talk in Boise. Half of the room left after he made irreverent comments about garments & temple clothing. He talked about intercourse & polygamy disgustingly and there were children present. And he has 9 kids! He said damn & he’ll as swearing and not in a spiritual context. He talked about his baptism and how the sun moon & stars were all present! Who cares! He said he was given the gift of prophecy at that time. Not the gift of the Holy Ghost but the gift of prophecy & it was because of he had changed the hearts of all the people in attendance at his baptism one by one! How crazy is that? How is that even about prophecy? This man is a nut. You can get all your knowledge from God, the scriptures, prayer, & study.not anywhere in the scriptures does it say we must have a personal appearance from God in order to have salvation or to be a leader or a teacher.

      And not Just because Denver tells you that you can.

      1. It helps to know someone who attended the talk. It will be interesting to see how Tim views the talk after he receives the CDs.

        I agree with you. A BIG RED FLAG should go up if someone publicly announces they have seen the Savior. If people would have met Denver from his recent posts, no one would pay attention to him.

      2. Lol so now its a red flag to state you have seen Christ? Sorry joseph, sorry rigdon, sorry paul, sorry moses, sorry brother of jared, sorry nephi, sorry elder haight, ALL red flags… Ill just throw the scriptures out and never seek the face of the lord.

      3. I have also heard a completely different story. So I am not sure what to make of it. I will also wait for the CD’s. As for much of your post there are things that I Highly disagree with such as this statement…

        “.not anywhere in the scriptures does it say we must have a personal appearance from God in order to have salvation”

        On the contrary it very well does over and over. Have your endowments? Been to the temple? But I will take it directly from joseph smith.

        A fanciful and flowery and heated imagination beware of; because the things of God are of deep import; and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and solemn thoughts can only find them out. Thy mind, O man! if thou wilt lead a soul unto salvation, must stretch as high as the utmost heavens, and search into and contemplate the darkest abyss, and the broad expanse of eternity—thou must commune with God.

        Joseph Fielding Smith (editor), Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 137

        We commanded to seek the mysteries of God. “thou must commune with god”. Not to mention verses like “ye cannot be saved in ignorance” “rend the veil of unbelief” “will not search deeper” “nor comprehend great understanding” such as in 2 nephi 32:7.

        “Seek the LORD, and his strength: seek his face evermore. (psalms 405:4)

        101:38 And seek the face of the Lord always, that in patience ye may possess your souls, and ye shall have eternal life.

        Anyways, its comments like these that concerns me most. It actually is the reason people are so fond of the books like john pontius, denver, because they teach what has not been taught for quite some time. Go read McConkie, he has many great talks on the importance of seeking christs face.

        “blessed are the pure in heart they shall see God”. God is not a liar. When one becomes pure he will see God. When one is not pure, “no unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of god”.

        D&C 93:1 Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who forsaketh his sins and cometh unto me, and calleth on my name, and obeyeth my voice, and keepeth my commandments, shall see my face and know that I am;

        EVERY SOUL.. who does these 5 things. Spencer W Kimball called this the gospel manual. I wonder why? Not really I know why.

      4. EOG – you reference church leaders as seeing Christ, and we have the scriptures about them. Yes, they do see Christ, and we see their works/fruit.

        What are Denver’s works today. 🙂

        You only wish your moniker, you are a deceiver.

  15. I have just read on DS’s blog that he has indeed been excommunicated. It is done. My opinion is that although Denver had many wonderful things to say, he did go too far in a couple of areas. I want to follow the brethren.

    1. Follow the brethern? We are supposed to follow Christ. This is the message that seems to upset people. Its true whether he is exed or not.

      “76:98 And the glory of the telestial is one, even as the glory of the stars is one; for as one star differs from another star in glory, even so differs one from another in glory in the telestial world;

      99 For these are they who are of Paul, and of Apollos, and of Cephas.

      100 These are they who say they are some of one and some of another—some of Christ and some of John, and some of Moses, and some of Elias, and some of Esaias, and some of Isaiah, and some of Enoch;

      These are they who some of Monson, some of holland some of denver snuffer or even joseph smith. Thats the message. If we follow any man. We will not even be Terrestial! What a message.

      The message is, we MUST seek our own experience the same way Joseph smith did, “we must commune with God or be damned” (Parry commentary on calling and election). Or as joseph said “if thou soul will lead you to salvation…thou must commune with god”

      Denver DID this. Now he is telling us, don’t follow ANYONE but Christ. HE can be exed, the message won’t change. We must connect to heaven. His fruits are good. That is what matters to me. I have never been closer to the savior these past 3 months than my entire life.

      1. ElectOfGod, thank you for your comment. I’ve been pondering Denver’s latest post all day. I even had to get on my knees for some peace and understanding. I have to agree! His fruits are good and I’ve been more focussed on developing a relationship with my Savior than I ever have been! I should have learned this from the scriptures but unfortunately I wasn’t studying the scriptures the way I should have been. Denver is the one who redirected my focus in the direction it should be, my Savior and diligently studying the Book of Mormon. I don’t fault our current church leadership. I think in a more subtle way they have been preaching the same message, I’ve just been a slow learner and needed a more direct talking to… Which is what Denver was able to do. He just said… “Hey you, silly, wake up!!! Hellooooo!?!!! This is what it’s ALL about!!

  16. I was at his talk in Boise. His first 2 sentences said leaders in the church had to be a Converted adult male. Of course that described Denver, then he went on to point out all that was wrong with us & the church. The guy is full of himself, preaches false doctrine, looks for problems & focuses on human frailties & negativities. He was irreverent. He was disgusting, he was stupid & contradicted himself. There was no talk of the Holy Ghost or the spirit or the testimony of why he was baptized. It was all about his viewpoint mingled with scripture. In the end he said he was like Joseph Smith & we can all be like Joseph Smith. he insinuated he was the next prophet to fixed the boggled restoration. the last chapter of his book says, we have to go back to the beginning & have animal sacrifice since it wasn’t done right the first time. Read his last chapter of passing the heavenly gift. It’s so stupid that anyone would follow this crazy man. He is the next David Karesh or Jim Jones. beware!

    1. Thanks for your contribution and summary of the Boise meeting Lilly. I hope to receive the CDs later this week and share some thoughts based on what I hear in them and feel as I listen. Perhaps I will feel the same as you. Surely it must have been a rough day fro him, having just learned earlier in the day he had been excommunicated. By the way, I have read a few other comments elsewhere from those who were at the meeting. They tell a significantly different story. It’s times like this I wish I still lived in Utah so I could attend personally. Cheers.

      1. Satan has refined his methods and in the end, even the very elect will be deceived. Denver confuses us with the double talk. He comes across as a lawyer with closing remarks and make us believe anything, He sounds like he is on to something then I find myself asking “what is his point?” Or he drops the topic in mid sentence. I found myself asking that his last book. And your point is Denver…. He has not backed up with evidence but with lies & opinion. It would be different if also talked about the good that Brigham young did. How maybe his personality was such that needed to be tough at the time. How he was tirelessly trying to move the church forward with little direction. How he took on the countenance and seemed to appear as Joseph smith after have taken on the mantel of prophet. All our prophets are men only who bring there own work to better us. If we were to focus on just the bad, then we could go back to the beginning and judge every prophet & leader not only in the church but in the world, as they all have something controversial.

    2. Lily-
      I wasn’t there so I cannot comment as you have, but I find it interesting that you take such umbrage with his statement of animal sacrifice, seeing as how even D&C and the teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith say the same thing…that at some future date the sons of Levi will have to offer up a sacrifice in righteousness. I’ve been taught that since seminary, and always understood it in the context of the restoration of ALL things at at least some point in the journey of the church.

      To scoff at it as you have suggests you have not understood what is already clearly stated in our scripture and church approved manuals.

      Perhaps your other comments regarding the event are true. But your credibility to speak as one who would know whether or not he speaks the truth is seriously undermined by your apparent lack of understanding of widely accepted doctrines.

      I say this not to be critical nor judgmental. Your opinion of the event you attended is as valuable as anyone else’s. I’m glad you wrote what you did and shared your concerns.

    3. Lily, …..I believe Denver suggested members who worked in the missionary dept. of the church should be converts, preferably adult converts. Your statement seems to me a dishonest distortion of what Denver said. There are other dishonest statements you have made. Why would you do that?

  17. Good points Lily. Thanks for sharing. Actually Denver addresses the story of Brigham taking on the countenance of Joseph in his book. I had not considered some of the things he brought up (did not have the sources), so I found it interesting. Denver does not appeal to everyone. Some find his style rough, abrasive, disrespectful, denigrating, etc. I have never met the man so I don’t have an opinion. I judge him solely based on what I have read in his books, on his blog, and what I have heard in previous recorded lectures. So I appreciate your contributions.

  18. Lily,

    Even Joseph said animal sacrifices will return.

    “the offering of sacrifices has ever been connected and forms a part of the duties of the Priesthood. It began with the Priesthood, and will be continued until after the coming of Christ, from generation to generation. These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings. . . those things which existed prior to Moses’ day, namely, sacrifice, will be continued.” (Teachings, pp. 172-73.)

  19. I was there also and I did not hear any of what Lily stated. Perhaps we all tend to receive in the ways we are expecting? I have not read any of Denver’s books so I did not know what to expect. I went with an open mind to hear what he had to say. I heard nothing that insulted the church. Only by extrapolating would I have been able to find insult.

    I came away with a desire to learn more and the desire to draw closer to my Savior. I saw no evil in that man but the strength of conviction and the love of The Lord.

    1. I also was in Boise but must have been at a different meeting. Lily’s comments do contain a resemblance of what I heard but in a very different manner. I heard and felt a powerful testimony of the Savior and the Prophet, Joseph Smith. The focus was on the message, not the messenger. Remarks regarding temple clothing enlightened and brought new meaning to the temple ceremony, in ways very few had thought of before. Everyone is going to perceive the meeting in their own individual way. Fortunately for all interested, you can purchase a CD of the event and just listen to the word. It’s interesting that the scriptures sometimes refer to the word as a two-edge sword. The word will definitely divide. That’s how it was in the meridian of time, that’s how it is now.

  20. Ok, I have to weigh in here. There is a well known Non-LDS Christian, who constantly refers to his face-to-face conversations with the Savior. He is adamant, almost strident, in his attempt to persuade people that Nineveh-like repentance is the only thing that will save this nation. Americans must repent and be born again first, and, then, they must prepare physically for what is coming in every way possible, if they expect to escape what is coming upon America.

    Of course, I tried to talk to him about the restored gospel, but he and his cohorts on Blog Talk Radio, will have none of it. I was summarily kicked out of their on-going conversation of Christianity and America. How likely is it that this man has conversed with the Savior, and has no idea that Joseph Smith is his servant? I’ll answer for us all: There is a zero chance that his testimony is true.

    Now, we have this conversation here about Denver, who claims to have seen the Savior and is not hesitant to correct the leading brethren, given the insight and confidence his “personal relationship” with the Savior affords him.

    My observation is this: The Non-LDS man who claims to have seen the Savior rejects Joseph Smith and everything to do with his work. The LDS man who claims to have seen the Savior does not reject Joseph Smith and his work, but he rejects those who have continued his work, in the sense that he believes that not all has been done the way he thinks it ought to have been done, given his special insight, afforded him by the Savior.

    Now, this is the question for all those in a quandary regarding who is right in this situation that seems to pit those who claim to have gained a personal audience with the Savior, and those who have gained an office to conduct the work of the restoration of the house of Israel: “What is the fulness of the gospel?”

    Please, don’t answer by parroting what some church authority has stated, or what someone claiming to be blessed with the special insight of the second comforter has stated.

    Just tell me your own answer, based on the canonical scriptures of the LDS Church. “What is the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ?” that is contained in the Book of Mormon.

    Keep in mind the Father’s warning in 3 Nephi 16:

    10 And thus commandeth the Father that I should say unto you: At that day when the Gentiles shall sin against my gospel, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, and shall be lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth, and shall be filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations; and if they shall do all those things, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, behold, saith the Father, I will bring the fulness of my gospel from among them.

      1. Hi dbundy. I read every comment. Sometimes I take a long time to ponder the really good ones like yours. Here are some thoughts in response to your comment from yesterday (the 12th): I asked that same question myself in some of the comments on another post: Indeed, what is the fullness of the gospel? Is it different from the fullness of the priesthood? I think so. According to what I read in the Book of Mormon (2 Ne 31-32) and 3 Ne 11 (latter half) the fullness means to believe in Christ, repent, be baptized by immersion and by fire.

        Specifically, in 3 Ne 11:35 – “…unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost.” And in 2 Ne 36:6 – “…there will be no more doctrine given until after he shall manifest himself unto you in the flesh.” There’s more in the verse but that’s enough to answer for me the question you asked. The fullness of the gospel for me, as I see it in these scriptures, is to have the Savior bring you (me) into the presence of the Father. I know there are some preliminary steps but you asked about the fullness. That’s my opinion.

        1. Well, I understand why you would answer like that, but you see the reason I asked the question is because most Latter-Day Saints don’t know the answer, but I’ll get to that below.

          What matters most in this context is that it’s a limited time offer. We can all agree, I think, that the it is now on the table for the Gentiles, but, if they reject it, it will be withdrawn, when they are fully ripe in iniquity.

          Now, that being the case, can any one say that the good news, which the Father has placed on the table, is defective, or somehow comes with a caveat of some kind? Will someone here cringe at the thought of a Gentile accepting the offer, but not reading the fine print at the bottom of it, which Snuffer could point out, because of the special insight he has attained?

          Will they need to learn that the leaders of the Church, administering the laws and ordinances of the fulness of the gospel, which Jesus characterized as the work of the Father that would commence in all the earth, when the fulness of the Gentiles was come in, which it now has, have not received of the fulness of the gospel themselves?

          Do we really believe that this marvelous work and wonder, which shall cause the wisdom of the wise to perish, and the understanding of the prudent to vanish, has never really gotten off the ground yet, and won’t until someone like Snuffer, someone mighty and strong, comes along to correct it?

          I submit that this is not the case. The deaf are hearing the words of the book and the blind are seeing out of obscurity and out of darkness. The meek are increasing their joy in the Lord, and the poor among men are rejoicing in the Holy One of Israel. Those that erred in spirit have come to understanding, and those who murmured have learned doctrine.

          Most important of all, Lebanon has become a fruitfull field, and the fruitfull field is esteemed as a forest.

          Is this not good news? Soon, kings will shut their mouths, when they see that which they had not heard, and when they see that which they had not considered. The terrible one shall be brought to naught, and all these scorners, who are heaping contempt upon the work, shall be consumed.

          There is more, but I’m sure you get the point: For all the faults of an organization of weak and sinful men that constitutes the Church Joseph organized and that Brigham and the other presidents led into the wilderness, where it has flourished and grown unto the fulfillment of the words of the prophets, it is accomplishing the thing the Lord sent it to do, which is to proclaim the fulness of his gospel.

          And if the Gentiles reject the fulness of his gospel, AND SIN AGAINST IT, the Father will withdraw it from them and bring it to his people, oh house of Israel, and the last shall become the first, and the first shall become the last, once again.

          Now, if the fulness of the gospel is for the Savior to bring us into the presence of the Father, how can it be said to be contained in the Book of Mormon, but not in the Bible? Jesus said to the Jews, “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” The Gentiles have known this from the beginning.

          No, the fulness of the gospel, which the Gentiles are missing, includes the good news of the restoration of the house of Israel to their favored status, with all the rights and priviledges of the priesthood, along with the re-possession of the lands of their inheritances, having a knowledge of their fathers and the knowledge of Christ and how to come unto him and be saved that their fathers had.

          In other words, the message of the Latter-Day Saints is that the only salvation remaining for the Gentiles is for them to be identified in the same covenant and to worship at the same altar, as Israel. There is no other way.

          Snuffer insists that this message has been majorly compromised by the leaders of Ephraim at least three times, which is evidence that they are out of order and have been from the time of Joseph’s demise.

          However, this cannot be, unless one is ready to confess that the Lord’s servants don’t need him, don’t need the authority and power of his priesthood to accomplish this great and marvelous work.

          In this view, the servants of the nobleman did not properly plant the twelve olive trees in the good spot of ground, as he sent them to do, because they were only “Yankee guessers.” The enemy will not come to break down the twelve trees and take upon himself the fruit of the vineyard, because there can’t be any worth taking, if the trees were never planted, or never planted properly.

          I submit that this is nonsense. The twelve olive trees were planted properly, and the fruit good and plentiful. So much so that the enemy desires it and has broken down the hedge protecting the vineyard, to the surprise of the servants, who will arise, affrighted, and flee.

          The enemy will break down the twelve olive trees and destroy the works of the servants, but this great evil will be possible, not because the servants of the nobleman didn’t possess the fulness of the priesthood, or because they were “Yankee guessers,” but because they didn’t finish the watch tower their Lord commanded them to build in the midst of the vineyard, which would have enabled them to see afar off, and to make ready and to have prevented the vineyard from falling into the hands of the destoyer.

          Nevertheless, he will send his servants to redeem his vineyard, and it will be redeemed, though the Gentiles be destroyed off the the face of the land their forefathers conquered, in the process.

          Hopefully, Denver Snuffer will humble himself sufficiently and be received back into the fold, as many others before him have done.

          I apologize for the length of this comment, Tim, but I had to write it. May God bless us all to count our many blessings, and see what God has done.

  21. Tim, I was wondering about this from Bro. Snuffer’s blog the end of March:

    “When the Seed of the Woman was born, a new star appeared in the heavens. In like manner, when the Lion of Judah returns, as with his first coming, there will be a new star seen. All the world will note its appearance and shall be troubled at its meaning. When it makes its appearance, you may know His return is soon upon the world. You may also know by that sign that He has given to me the words I have faithfully taught as His servant.”

    Do you have any new thoughts on this in light of his excommunication?

    Thank you for your insights and commentary of this man’s writings. I enjoy this blog very much.

  22. Hi Always Pondering. All I can offer is Denver’s response when I asked him that same question back in March. Here is his response:

    “The “Sign” is not meant to be understood until it appears. When it does those few words will take on a great deal more meaning than people are able to see at the present. For the present it is best left as the brief statement that I’ve put onto the blog. Messengers are not as important as messages. Even the sign is intended to ratify the message alone. As always I’m incidental. The answer is “yes” to whether someone can know the truth of any matter by the Spirit, as Moroni 10:5 promises. Sometimes I wish everything I’ve done or written could have been done anonymously, but an authentic message requires an identifiable messenger. Even a reluctant one.”

    Denver Snuffer

    I wrote about it in this previous post:

    I have an idea what it means but I can’t share it with anything to back it up until my book is finished. Sorry for being so cryptic. Thanks for visiting my blog and adding your comment to the dialog.

  23. dbundy, what is the watch tower which wasn’t built?

    Spencer, via John Pontius, (Visions of Glory) suggests cataclysmic earthquakes “break down the wall”. Several of the First Presidency and Apostles will be killed. Many others will perish. After some regrouping, certain members of the church will be sent out on “missions” to gather Zion, and start the trek to Missouri to build the New Jerusalem, the trek will take a few years.

    A huge earthquake rips California to pieces (we don’t know what happens to Tim). Another earthquake splits the United States up the Mississippi river, a large land mass arises in the Gulf of Mexico, sending floods as high as Chicago, clearing out Missouri, and preparing the new land mass for Enoch’s Zion. Something happens to our President/Congress, and the east turns into a “zombie land” scenario.

    Foreign troops will be sent to “help/conquer” the United States, the Church organizes and members begin to live more like a Zion people, with increased spiritual power to silently resist the conquering. Some members will be translated and assigned to gather Zion by using “portals” to travel through space and time as needed.

    Years later, Christ does come, with the burning, the righteous are caught up to him (our version of the rapture) and those left on the earth are stubble.

    Having been exposed to the Electric Universe from Tim’s site, I tend to think that most of the catastrophes will be created from cosmic events (comet/tails, planet sized passing, asteroids, meteors, etc).

    So before the Second Coming, there will be some years of tribulation the likes this world has never seen. If the time frame isn’t shortened, even the elect won’t make it. There only one hope, righteousness.

    I am interested about what the watch tower represents.

    1. Rick,

      The hedge, which protects the vineyard and which the Lord suffered to be established, to be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles, is the U.S. constitution.

      Without its protection for religious liberty and free press, the work of the servants in the vineyard would have been stopped long ago. The twelve olive trees of the vineyard that the servants were commanded to plant are the offices of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who shoulder the responsibility of the Lord’s work. They bear the precious fruit that the Lord can lay up against the season, just as olive trees do.

      The watch tower, which the Lord commanded to be built, so that a watchman could watch for the enemy’s preparations to come against the vineyard, for which the servants laid the foundation, but never finished, because they began to question its utility, during the time of peace that they were experiencing, is called the Council of Fifty.

      Joseph received the revelation to establish it in the Spring of 1842, and finally managed to do it in the Spring of 1844. You can read more about it here:

      It’s membership of fifty or so brethren (and even non members) met secretly, under the direction of the President of the Church, who was ordained as the king of the kingdom of God on earth, administering the laws of his kingdom, with the keys and power thereof, and judgment, by the hands of the Lord’s servants.

      The Twelve Apostles were standing members of the Council and the rest were selected from among the community and membership of the Church. Their initial mandate, while under the protection of the U.S. Constitution, was to study and teach one another according to D&C 88:118-120, and 109:7. They also were charged with special projects, as directed, from time to time.

      However, their main purpose was to watch. Watch for the enemy, which was defeated with the revolution, but whose tentacles were even then reaching out to stealthily break down the hedge of the Lord’s vineyard and spoil it.

      Nevertheless, out on the frontier of the West, this was hard to understand. The danger of the Illuminati, formed in Europe in 1776, as it turns out, and of the secret combinations they built up over the years, to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations and countries, and to bring to pass the destruction of all people, was not easy to comprehend for a people facing hunger, privation and wild savages, while tasked with planting the trees of the Lord’s vineyard and cultivating and nourishing them.

      Therefore, those that complained that the Council really served no purpose, and was as useless as a “debating society” on the frontier, which in their relative peace and isolation was just a waste of time, won out over those who were concerned that it was a commandment of the Lord. They stopped meeting in 1884 and it was effectively extinguished with the death of President Grant in 1945.

      It was a secret organization, and it conceivably could have had chapters in every LDS community and even non-LDS communities, where warranted, but it would not have succumbed to the tax laws, since it would not have needed to be a 501 3(c) corporation, like the Church.

      Anyway, you get the idea. The saints would not have fallen asleep, the Lord’s servants would not have been fooled by the hidden “darkness” of the Egyptian mystery schools, and would have been alert to the evil cabal’s true intentions to infiltrate America’s political, religious, economic and educational institutions, to bring her down by design, HAD THEY HARKENED UNTO THE COMMAND OF THE LORD TO BUILD THE TOWER.

      Alas, it was not to be, and now we must pay the consequences. The good news is in the parable. I encourage everyone to read it carefully and prayerfully, fasting if you need to, in order to understand what we are facing, but how the Lord’s promise of redemption fits so perfectly in today’s revelations, both in the Bible, in the Book of Mormon, the D&C and the PoGP!

      We can rejoice brethren and sisters that we have part in such a marvelous work and wonder. Bless our leaders, uphold their arms as Aaron and Hur upheld the arms of Moses, when they grew heavy.

      Think of how heavy the burden of those men and women is, who are seeking to be valiant in the testimony of Jesus, and have rounded off their shoulders to bear off this kingdom!!!

      Let us pray for them. Let us speak up for them and support them and sustain them with all our hearts. Let us go to with all our strength and all our might and with all our hear and all our mind to love God and one another and gird up our loins looking forth for coming as the bridegroom to receive his kingdom, pure and innocent and adorned as the Bride of Christ.

      Even if we must give our lives to do it, the Lord has promised that those who are valiant in the testimony of Jesus to the end will partake of all the glory of the wedding feast and of his great millennium of peace, and of his everlasting kingdom. He will not leave us out in the day he makes up his jewels!!!

      I know this, with every fiber of my being!!! Sing ye to the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. Courage, brethren; and on, on to the victory! Let your hearts rejoice, and be exceedingly glad. Let the earth break forth into singing. Let the dead speak forth anthems of eternal praise to the King Immanuel, who hath ordained, before the world was, that which would enable us to redeem them out of their prison; for the prisoners shall go free, and the terrible one shall be brought to naught.

      We may know with a surety that all the scorners, those who heap contempt upon the work and mock it, shall be consumed, and all that watch for iniquity, to take away your religion, your property, your children and even your lives, shall be cut off, together with all those that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that speaks truth to power, and turn aside the just for a thing of naught.

      Let us pray for Denver and all those who may have been overcome, as he has, that they may turn and repent, so that we might once again receive them unto ourselves, that they may partake of the heavenly gift together with us, once again.

      With all my heart,

Comments are closed.