Wednesday, August 28, 2013


Because of recent events, I want to share a few things.

A few weeks ago I had a conversion with my neighbor about religion. He is Greek Orthodox. I asked him to explain how his faith differs from Roman Catholicism. He basically said that it all comes down to the fact that they don’t believe in papal supremacy. Basically, he said that he doesn’t believe that the Pope speaks with God, whereas the Catholics do. My neighbor did say that the Pope probably means well and is likely a wonderful man. 

Papal supremacy refers to the doctrine that the Pope, by reason of his office, is the earthly representative of God and holds all keys for the entire Christian Church. He has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered. In brief, "the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls.”

My neighbor and I share some common religious beliefs, since I don't believe in papal supremacy as well. 

A religion that believes in papal supremacy, would likely teach and sing songs like “Follow the Pope, follow the Pope.. don’t go astray. Follow the Pope, follow the Pope, he knows the way.” In their religious services, they would frequently speak about their love of their Pope, there would be stories told about him, illustrated books of his talks would be published, biographies would be written about his life. He would be called a Beloved Pope. Faithful members would have to sustain him as the only one who holds and can exercise all keys. People would hang on their walls pictures of the Pope, along with quotes like “When the Pope speaks, the thinking has been done”. It would be frowned upon to question the infallibility of the Pope. All of this would be required for continued growth and dominance of the Church. The Catholic church leadership would safeguard and maintain this orthodoxy of faith by bringing its members into compliance with this doctrine and its leaders or they are cast out. 

References in well known LDS books have linked the Roman Catholic church to the Great and Abominable church, and the Whore of Babylon. I wonder if the doctrine of papal supremacy is one of the main reasons. Any time we set up a man to be a mediator between us and God is abominable. While the Lord sends true messengers to preach and point His children to Him, the Lord employs no servant to come between us and the Lord.

I recently heard a quote attributed to Hugh Nibley, “Do not serve men who require your obedience, your adulation. Only one is worthy of disciples, and that is the Savior.”

True messengers sent to us from the Father will say things like.. Follow the Savior, follow the Savior. They would speak about their love of the Lord. They would not tolerate any attention towards themselves. They would say, forget about me, don’t write biographies about my life, I am not important. In fact, I am a fool. Look to the Lord, and His scriptures. In fact, please open up your scriptures in Sacrament Meeting. Read them and learn more about the prophecies. Stop hoping that someone “presiding” is going to lift you to heaven. No one can do that. There is only One who matters. When you focus on some man as a leader, you are an idolater. Put an end to your idolatry and look to Christ. The heavens are open. Connect with Him. Stop looking around – look up.

However, when these true messengers say such things they are usually mocked, labeled as apostate, and cast out and exed.


Anonymous said...

Dark days are here

Anonymous said...

The Lord is Supreme above all, be of good cheer.

Anonymous said...

20 But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive. (Old Testament, Genesis, Chapter 50)

Anonymous said...

I've had this scripture come to my mind as I reflect upon the actions against DS

Anonymous said...

When it is preached that we need no leaders, we need no Prophet,we need no Strengthening the Members Committee, we need no Correlation committee, hell we really don't need an organization at all..... people become as a ship without a rudder. Everyone's course is fine. After all, who's to say? "I'm getting revelation about this." "That is wonderful, brother, I have received revelation about this." "Praise the Lord, I learned this from a messenger recently!" "The Lord told me such-and-such last night...."

The problem is, you criticize people who follow the Prophet and think everything he does is fine, but you've taken it to the opposite extreme, where everything the Prophet does is wrong. You're just as extreme, just on the other side of the spectrum.

The other problem is that you actually think Snuffer has seen the Lord. You should read the entire history of the church, and not just the parts Snuffer quotes. You'll find the holes in his arguments and realize what's truly going on here, which is something you are not willing to entertain as possible.

Anonymous said...

I didn't take the post as insinuating that we need no leaders, no prophet and no organization. Moses established an organization. So did the Savior. So did Brother Joseph. There's no hint of some kind of ecclesiastical anarchy espoused whatsoever.

Nor does it insinuate that "everything the Prophet does is wrong". I think the error comes in the institution and its members apologetically idolizing and emulating the mortal prophet, and see him as our intermediary with the Savior...just as the Israelites did with Moses in the wilderness.

What it laments is the fact that we, as a church, collectively, have allowed this idol worship of leaders to metastasize to where it overtakes the living tissues of the gospel, which beckon us to Follow the Savior.

While it's not the purview of this post to dissect all of DS's claims, (1) your statement that there are holes in DS's arguments lacks specificity and (2) your statement that the blog writer is not willing to entertain such a dialogue also lacks substantiation.

Someone once said, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone."

That's sage advice indeed.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, in that last comment there, I meant "UNapologetically"

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brett said...

"You should read the entire history of the church, and not just the parts Snuffer quotes. You'll find the holes in his arguments and realize what's truly going on here, which is something you are not willing to entertain as possible."

You've got my attention. Can you list a couple?

Senex said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Senex said...

"You should read the entire history of the church, and not just the parts Snuffer quotes."

And here I thought the _entire_ history of the church wasn't available in a set of volumes. I've been going around grabbing books by Roberts, Nibley, Widtsoe, Madsen, Quinn, Prince, and Alexander to fill in the gaps left out by the official history. Thank goodness we can finally read the whole thing without ommission or apology.

Care to point out the specific set in question?

Taylor said...

I actually really respected your comment until I read the last paragraph.

The hypothetical quotes you gave in the first part did ring with a weird chaotic tone. I agree that if the church as a whole right now did away with the organization that is what would happen. However I would not call the city of Enoch for example a "ship without a rudder". People have to be prepared to live laws that are not dependent on an organization. If they are not, then yes, it does just produce a random unorganized mess.

The last paragraph just seemed to be designed to make yourself look smarter or more informed that both Snuffer and the blog author. It weakened your argument.

If you don't have enough coconuts and believe enough in your comment to use your name why write it? Why not be accountable for your view? If you've got a more clear and correct view than the author or the readers, why hide?

Anonymous said...

What evidence do you have that Enoch's city did not have any church organization?

(Let's forget the psycho-babble and stick with the subject, okay? I won't analyze your brain and you don't need to worry yourself with my testicular circumference.)

Taylor said...

Yes, back to the subject.

There is evidence the City of Enoch did have church organization. The Church of Enoch. Organization is good. I agree with your comments about how, without one in our day, folks may end up with all kinds of "revelation" and saying "hell we don't need any organization at all". That indeed has the wrong feel to it.

Christ has always organized his Church so there is clearly a need. I think sometimes there is a subtle temptation to become dependent on the organization rather than on Christ. I believe the organization of the Church of Enoch differs greatly from the type of church organization we have here now on earth. Yet it's still worthwhile and and preparatory for higher laws. But I think it stops being preparatory when it, and a pope figure, become objects of allegiance. That misses the point. Granted not everyone takes it to that extreme but historically that is a pronounced trend, and one which I think the blog author is trying to point out so it can be avoided.

How do you see it?

Anonymous said...

Referring to Joseph Smith's 7 vol. history.

You need only read the first volume to find... "problems." That's not too much to ask, is it? We need to be a little more independent in our learning I think. People are always demanding, "Chapter and verse!" when they should be studying things out themselves more. That's my opinion.

This is not a fast food hand-out religion. "It's A!" "No, it's B!" It doesn't work like that. Intelligence is a function of obedience and time.

Joseph said, "The nearer man approaches perfection, the clearer are his views..." Snuffer has some views that do not jive with someone who claims to have had the visions he claims.

You know, beginning in '10 I was pro-Snuffer all the way. I couldn't get enough of him. He was like a fresh drink of cold water in a desert. I thought, "Yes!! Finally someone who can speak the truth!" I was so fed up and bored with the church curriculum and the nauseatingly dull church meetings. And City Creek was just damn embarrassing. Snuffer made me feel like the church was alive again! It's true! And it's exciting! I loved his subjects. And I loved his delivery.

But then... or maybe all along... there would be a nagging feeling here and there. Something did not feel right. I knew he was gifted with communicating and I couldn't put my finger on it, re-reading the paragraph that set the feeling off. When I analyzed the words, I couldn't see a problem. But there was the odd feeling... just a quiet, "no..."

I read Passing the Heavenly Gift the moment it came out. I read it the weekend I got it. I was familiar with most of the historical stories in there, including "Bishop balls-to-the-wall" as I privately called him.

Then I decided to take a break from Snuffer. I read the Joseph Smith history. I re-read the BOM 5 times in a year. I also did not participate in any LDS online conversations during this time.

Then I decided to go back and read his blog some more. Gosh there were some good entries there!

Anonymous said...


But things were different this time.

I saw things I did not see before. I thought about my life in the '10-'11 time frame and then in the '12-present timeframe. My thoughts. My focus. My missionary efforts. Even looked at my moods and emotions and interactions with people. (If you think I'm an a-hole now, you shoulda' known me in '10!)

So, long story short. I see problems with his message and his claims. I believe he is deceived. And I know this makes some of the pro-Snuffer people mad as hell. I understand. I was there not too long ago. Snuffer had brought me enlightenment and didn't want anyone screwing with that. That's how I looked at it, anyway. "I like how I feel when I read him! You don't get it!" Well.... now I know what I was feeling was the natural man... my favorite Snuffer subjects appealed to my natural man.

But the last few years I've also learned a little something about Satan. He's way smarter than we give him credit for, folks. Way smarter. Not just fools are deceived, you know. He goes after the Big Ones. He goes after the talented ones. The impressive ones. The ones people are drawn to. Deception is not simple. Deception is not easy to spot. It is complex and long-term and clever beyond our mortal abilities. Satan's not trying to destroy Chirst, he wants to replace him. He's not the hideous, unruly simpleton he wants us to think. I think The Devil's Advocate movie is a truer portrayal. The VERY ELECT must always be on the alert! They don't say, "No one need have any concerns for my standing before the Lord. I will be fine."


I'm not sure if Snuffer is a willing participant or not. I would hope not. But when he posts the SP's letter who asks him to stop his speaking tour and he flies in the face of that counsel, posting immediately afterward details about the venue, etc. it does not sit well with me. I would've liked to see him post something like: "I am temporarily postponing my upcoming talks. I want to spiritually prepare for my church court and pray to have the Holy Ghost with me during this critical time. I desire to comply with my priesthood leader's counsel as I know I will be blessed of the Lord for doing so."

But no. There is no wiggle room at all to misinterpret his intentions about following the counsel. In fact, I infer from his subsequent posts, he looks at the church court as irrelevant, and by extension, his church standing. Unfortunately, the more he says, "Don't worry about me...." or "Don't defend me...." some grow almost crazy in their defense of him.

That's my experience. I felt like sharing more than I usually do. I agree with comment#1 - Dark days are here.

Anonymous said...

I see it exactly how you just described. Both extremes lead to problems.

BTW, you'd win the coconut contest, since I have none. :)

Brett said...

AnonymousAugust 28, 2013 at 9:10 PM

Do you believe false spirits, or even the devil can enter the temple?

Denver has spoken with the Lord in the Draper temple SINCE the publishing of PTHG.

So let's just cut to the chase and call Denver a liar.

Why is it that people often want to take the middle ground. Joseph Smith imagined he saw the plates. Jesus Christ was a great moral teacher but not the son of God.

Denver has made bold claims. They are either true, or they are not. I guess if you believe that the temples are not holy and sacred a devil could have deceived Denver.

I find suspect the fact that you can't illustrate one example from your readings of history that dont jive.

You also seem to be critical of how Denver has handled the SP's letter. Usually those who are critical are themselves the one's lacking the Spirit. Denver has given rational explanations for posting the letter. He did not want people going to the presentations knowing that he might be ex'd. I for one thank him for that. I was going to invite a friend. I am sure he would not go if he were ex'd. I'm glad he told me so I didn't talk to my friend about it.

But you are quick to find fault.

You also do not consider that all of this is timed and planned by the Lord. The Boise meeting was scheduled well in advance of the discipline hearing, which is scheduled for Sunday. The letter actually ex'ing him will issue on a Monday. His "tour" starts on Tues.

Ever wonder why he'd start a "tour" on a Tuesday? This is all a part of His plan. It's under control.

Anonymous said...

I stand all amazed that soooo many in the church do not believe that any man outside the church heirarchy might actually converse directly with the Lord. Have people never heard of Lehi, or John the Baptist, or Alma Sr.? They ALL share at least two common traits...they all worked outside the church heirarchy and they were all real Prophets. Don't we still believe in revelation? Don't we still believe in the ministering of angels? Don't we still believe in a miraculous origin for the Book of Mormon?
Is it any wonder that more and more mormons are awakening to the news that something is definitely wrong at the COB? Perhaps Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Nephi, Alma, Helaman, Moroni, Mormon, and Jesus Christ all knew what they were talking about when they foretold that in the last days the church would slide into apostasy!

Anonymous said...

Yes. Do you believe there's some kind of force field around the temple that keeps out evil spirits? Do you believe no one has ever entered a temple unworthily? (So what kind of spiritual influence would they be under?)

Strange, that you would believe in this "infallibility" of the temple....

Brett said...

You do present an interesting point. I had not considered that the devil could appear in the temple.

I would have thought the temple would have so much light that the devils wouldn't want/be able to enter, if not cast out by consecrating the building for it's purposes.

The temple may not have angels, but I simply didn't think devils were allowed. I can say I've never felt an evil influence there. I mean there are times when true messengers cast out Lucifer so that the student may be taught. I thought the temple was one example. I'll have to ask whether devils can go there.

You've still for a third time evaded the question of what "historical accounts" poke holes in Denver's paradigm.

Anonymous said...

One of the biggest things I appreciate about Denver snuffer is that he is able to cite his sources, his books are filled so many of them, It is so easy to research how he comes to his conclusions.

Anonymous said...

I'm not evading the question. I'm encouraging you to study it out for yourself. You don't need all the answers overnight, handed to you on a silver platter. Slow down.

I just thought it was interesting that you hold that the Prophet and leaders are infallible but look at the temple structure in a different light. Especially since the fallible leaders are responsible for the temples.... (if you even believe we have the power -as opposed to authority- to build temples since the Nauvoo temple failure.)

Who "allows" evil spirits to do what they do?

Adam said...

Amen JR. The scriptures are very clear about the Gentile apostasy. We are the salt that has lost its savor. We have become adulterous wife that has forsaken our Lord. We have become the wild fruit on the trees of the vineyard that will be cut off so that the House of Israel may be grafted in.

It's all in the scriptures... unfortunately few read them.

Anonymous said...

No mortal is free from flaws, but what I appreciate about this blog, and about the writings of Denver Snuffer is that they both encourage us to receive from the Lord himself ... Snuffer is constantly pointing us to the Savior, who then takes us to the FAther ... Do we ever hear this from the corporate church? Do we ever hear mention of the Second Comforter and it is available to all for God is no respecter of persons. If anyone has read Isaiah, then it is apparent that we are living in the times when the seer's heads are covered ... that there is an apostasy from truth. We are living in the fulfillment of prophecy. 3 Neph 20:11-12 Ye remember that I spake unto you, and said that when the words of Isaiah should be fulfilled—behold they are written, ye have them before you, therefore search them—And verily, I say unto you, that when they shall be fulfilled then is the fulfilling of the covenant which the Father hath made unto his people, O house of Israel. (3 Nephi 20:11-12)
He goes on,
And now, behold, I say unto you, that ye ought to search these things. Yea a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah. For surely he spake as touching all things concerning my people which are of the house of Israel; therefore it must needs be that he must speak also to the Gentiles. And all things that he spake have been and shall be, even according to the words which he spake. (3 Nephi 23:1-3)
So we are commanded to “diligently” study these things, “all things” which are going to be pertaining to the house of Israel. It sounds as though the Lord expects us to become familiar with the things that are to take place in the very last days, which is our time right now. In addition, he says that Isaiah touches on all things concerning the house of Israel, which will be. With this very plain and solemn commandment from the lips of the Savior himself, we must ask why there is no effort or attempt on the part of the corporate Church to institute a study of these great prophecies? If the Church is trying to follow and obey the commandments of the Savior, why do they not throw away the lesson manuals now in use and begin a Church-wide study of this magnificent book? Why are those who try to bring it to light censured and disfellowshipped? Why is the membership told not to read the unsealed Book of Isaiah? These are situations beyond our comprehension except that Isaiah explains that these very conditions would exist in Israel in the last days, and he leaves it up to us individually to read and understand these prophecies. And those of understanding are teaching many others in the Church as Daniel said:
And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits. And they that understand among the people shall instruct many:… (Dan 11:33)

Anonymous said...

"I'm not evading the question."

Adam said...


Anonymous said...

I offer the following regarding Denver Snuffer without comment:

"False prophets always arise to oppose the true prophets" - The Words of Joseph Smith, page 367.

"...and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation." - Joseph Smith History 1:25 (Pearl of Great Price)

Brett said...

I guess the way I see it, is that you made an assertion (history doesn't jive with Denver's paradigm) and usually when someone makes an assertion, the burden of proof is on them.

I totally get that everything should not be handed me on a silver platter. And I think it's a little disingenuous to suggest that anyone here is asking that. One example, one point in the direction wouldn't hurt. Because whatever you say will cause me to go look it up.

It's not like people just sit around waiting for Denver to write and don't do anything on their own. I just have a book list that's too long to go read all church history right now.

I feel impressed to first read the Old Testament and understand it better (I've largly neglected it thinking it wasn't all that important or applicable, but after reading Approaching Zion, I've changed my view), then finish Margret Barker's books, then Isaiah and some Giliadi books, then Daymon Smith's Book of Mormon Volumes, and 20 more.

I am just inviting you for a diversion from what I already feel inspired to do.

The fact that you can't name one example, really only leads me to believe the points you have are weak--if even existant.

Look, I'm a degenerate, an attorney also, and I deal with this everyday. Whenever a party fails to provide evidence to back what they've asserted, they tend not to have the evidence.

If you provided one example, that would suggest that you do indeed have many examples, which you do not need to provide. Otherwise, you ought to just suggest that history might not jive with Denver's account and invite people to look into it instead of explicitly asserting it.

I'm definitely opening to the idea that people can be deceived in the temple. When I was on my mission I got to ask Elder Maxwell where the devil gets his power, and he said he only has the power that we give him--which is of course the answer to your question.


Response and Clarification for 4:37

"When it is preached that we need no leaders, we need no Prophet,we need no Strengthening the Members Committee, we need no Correlation committee, hell we really don't need an organization at all..... people become as a ship without a rudder.

I actually think we do need prophets, not sure about the committees though. :) Please read all the blog post on the role of leaders from Elder Richard G Scott:

"The problem is, you criticize people who follow the Prophet and think everything he does is fine, but you've taken it to the opposite extreme, where everything the Prophet does is wrong. You're just as extreme, just on the other side of the spectrum."

The purpose of the post was not to criticize, but just point out how dangerous it is to incorporate a papal supremacy doctrine into a religion.. but the importance of following the Savior and not put a man in place of him. Read again the words of Elder Richard G Scott on coming unto Christ instead of coming unto Church. Yes there needs to be a balance. I didn't intend for my post came across as too far of a swing to the other side.

"The other problem is that you actually think Snuffer has seen the Lord. You should read the entire history of the church, and not just the parts Snuffer quotes. You'll find the holes in his arguments and realize what's truly going on here, which is something you are not willing to entertain as possible."

I didn't mention any of this in the post, so I am not sure where this is coming from. I would be most grateful if you helped me see the holes in his arguments since it sounds like you know have studies and know more about church history. Not sure how you got the impression that I would not be willing to entertain that.


Not sure if you want to share you name... but Can I ask why you are reading this blog in the first place?

Anonymous said...

I haven't read any Denver Snuffer books; nor have I heard him speak or met him--

I read a few things from his blog about a year ago. Some of them I agreed with; others I did not.

I was uncomfortable with his 'following'. I'm uncomfortable with anyone having a following but Jesus Christ, to be exact.

But I am troubled over this disciplinary action.

1--there are a LOT of people who have a LOT of concerns about the church who do not voice them; I keep myself anonymous on most Mormon blogs; I have pen names or screen names; I don't use my real name--anywhere. At what point does a person's conscience or agency to believe what he/she chooses to believe--become a target for suspicion? I have my concerns, but I wouldn't share them with anyone outside my immediate family, perhaps not even with everyone in my immediate family. There is only one person (my spouse) with whom I share everything I believe and think and feel with regards to religion, the church, and God. IF I have had any experiences with divinity I keep them to myself.

Why? Because I would be AFRAID to tell anyone. It's not just the pearls before swine thing; it is that I have responsibilities I don't need to be taken away from so that I can be persecuted--

2--this business about strengthening the members, this committee--sounds like double speak; is that what it is called? How is it strengthening the members to do ANYthing but testify of Jesus Christ, urge people who believe on His Name to repent--? Going around keeping lists on people and asking others to check people out (and, yes, we know this has happened; one of us, won't say which, husband and wife, had a missionary companion whose father was assigned to do just this, BEFORE the strengthening the members committee was established--

How is this helping anyone? Are members of the church babies who have to be protected? It's not like *we* as LDS aren't 'out there' every day with satan doing all in his power to destroy us--

how can separating someone like Denver Snuffer, whether or not he's seen Jesus, whether or not he's doing the right thing to have a 'following'--how can that protect anyone? It doesn't--

the ragings of satan are THERE/HERE/EVERYWHERE . . . no matter who gets disciplined or not--


who is being strengthened?

I might not agree with Denver Snuffer, but this instilling of fear into the hearts of anyone who asks honest questions . . . doesn't seem like an apostolic or Godly thing to do at all--

if Denver Snuffer were teaching against Jesus Christ, well, then he would be an anti-Christ, like Korihor and others who followed Nehor--

but he hasn't--

This is my concern--

to be continued--

Anonymous said...

why go around witch hunting? It's scary; it doesn't make anyone feel like the church (whatever it has come to mean) is a safe place for those who are honest in heart. Those who are honest in heart are seeking for truth and seeking to learn about Jesus Christ. A church that keeps lists on people can't possibly be following the Savior when they do that. And it makes me sad. I HAVE felt the Spirit from some of these men; I want to believe they are good--
but this business of witch hunting--

is not going to get anyone to a good place--

Maybe leaders think that they are responsible for this, for keeping the church 'pure', but they can't control our thoughts, so no 'keeping the church pure' is really going to work. They can't control what we say in our homes--

thank heavens for that--

I feel that it's important to stick with the Book of Mormon and don't stray from the doctrine that is found in there at this time, but I've had people look uncomfortably at me when I've said that, even, aloud. I haven't even borne my testimony for a long time--the last time I bore my testimony about the Book of Mormon one active member in the congregation gave me such a hateful look that I felt almost afraid--

others looked away--

so, this is how the members are being strengthened.

Sorry for the rant.

I speak as someone who doesn't 'follow' Denver Snuffer. This court thing against him is disturbing me.

Anonymous said...

"I'm not evading the question."

Anonymous said...

Re: your statement "2--this business about strengthening the members, this committee--sounds like double speak; is that what it is called?" --

In the BBC TV program, "The Mormon Candidate," reporter Michael Sweeney gained two senior confirmations of the current existence of this "Strengthening the Members Committee".

The two people directly asked about this secret Committee were Elder Jeffrey Holland and Senior Church PR Manager Michael Purdy. In Purdy's case, his initial reaction was to deny knowledge of this Committee, but when pressed, subsequently confirmed that it does exist: (start around the 3:35 mark).

For more about the Committee, go here:

Taylor said...

Anon 4:37.

I want to, if I can, clarify my previous comment at 8:39. I think it's worthwhile to differentiate between "organization", (like as in God organized something from chaos) on the one hand, and "an" organization Ie: an earthly corporation with a formal legally recognized status as an institution. The second is almost a person, and even has legal rights. I believe the Church of Enoch has the first kind of organization, a unifying force but was not "an" organization like the LDS church currently is.

Too often when people hear the word "church" all they think about is "an" organization. Not the unifying, united, bonded state of people in harmony with each other and God.

So back to our original ship without a rudder thing. I don't believe "an" organization is always what Christ was after when "organizing" a church.

You agree?

Brian said...

Following the Spirit, and the Lord most important, as that is following Him. Trust not in the Flesh. I am in leadership in the Church, and I question much those who need to be told or ask so much what to do. I feel better when members seek for answers, and get them.
Dark days, and Great days are here.
In the BOM there were many that thought they could not worship God cause the Organization/church had kicked them of the synagogue, but those were the ones that received the Word of the Lord.
Bowing to a man or President of Church in not right, as we should only bend or knews to one person, and that is God.

Anonymous said...

One other thing that Lehi, John the Baptist, and Alma Sr. all had in common: They were all persecuted and hated by the leaders of the church in their day. Why should any man be persecuted and hated for testifying of Jesus Christ and crying repentance?

Anonymous said...

You lack credibility at this point. You are not being taken seriously. First read DS books and attack the holes you find in those, make sure you can cite your argument so we can at least look at it and see if you have truth on your side

Anonymous said...

A high profile, believing Mormon, that has written several books about Mormonism, has publicly “denigrated virtually every prophet since Joseph Smith and put the church in a negative light”.

Anonymous said...

Yes you are evading the question. You should defend your claim against Denver's history error, and cite them by pages so we can see exactly what you are talking about. As pointed out all ready Denver cites his claims masterfully, can you?

Anonymous said...

I think you missed what the disciplinary action is about. It's not about testifying of Christ. (That should be obvious, but I guess not.)

Toni said...

Quite a long thread this particular comment spawned. I only want to comment about not having a rudder. The rudder is Christ - or the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit.

I believe the idea of no Prophet (notice that the op capitalized the P), no correlation committee, no Strengthening the Members Committee (a precursor to an LDS inquisition if another hundred years pass, imo), and even no organization (hierarchy, rules and regulations is what I understand this to mean) is only frightening to those who place their trust in man. We in Babylon are so far removed from Zion that were we placed in the center of one we'd have such a culture shock that we would probably reject Zion and couldn't escape from it soon enough.

Like David, I wonder why the need to throw Denver into the mix. There was no mention of him in the blog post that I remember.

Toni said...

Devils can enter the temple if they ride in on the shoulders (so to speak) of those who go in. Not everyone who enters truly follows Christ. Other than that, I believe Brett is spot on.

Toni said...

Anonymous 12:13 pm, there is credibility in that two part post. We are hearing from someone who does not claim to listen to/believe Denver, though s/he has read the blog. We are hearing from someone who has no fear of Denver and no ax to grind. It is a passionate plea, with no desire to argue (debate, with all the Babylonic rules that go with that) that I found. I find it refreshing and convincing, on the side of compassion for Brother Snuffer.

Toni said...

True. It's about harming the institution of the church, and about teaching what the church does not want taught. As I recall, Abinadi was accused of the same thing. So was Lehi. Laman and Lemuel were faithful followers of their religion. Their father was an apostate and, as such, should have gotten the death penalty. But he ran away instead.

Anonymous said...

You have a different view on Lehi. Lehi believed in the prophets since they came on the scene and preached their message of repentance. He joined their "team" if you will, and prayed in behalf of the people of Jerusalem. (I Nephi 1:4-5) As he prayed, he received additional light and knowledge -- more than he was asking, which is sometimes the case in scriptures. (I Nephi 1:6-14) We only have a small fraction of what Lehi was given in dreams and visions. (I Nephi 1:16) Lehi then went forth and preached and prophesied to the people the things which the Lord had shown him and which was the same message as the other prophets, such as Jeremiah. He was mocked. Then things heated up and the people desired and made plans to murder him - remove their conscience, as it were, from staring them in the face and making them uncomfortable.(I Nephi 1:19-20) Nephi asserts his father was delivered by the power of the Lord based on his faith. (I Nephi 1:20) If you want to call Lehi an apostate and a coward, you can. But I believe you are wresting the scriptures. Snuffer is no Lehi.

Anonymous said...

I love the visions that DS has shared in his books, is one from his blog

AV said...

Anonymous 4:37,

I agree with Toni, Christ & the Holy Ghost are our 'rutter'. The righteous need no prophet to lead them for they can and do receive as much or far more revelation/truth/guidance then what a prophet would give them. The righteous are spiritually independent. All men & women should be prophets.

Prophets are sent to call 'the wicked' to repentance, so they too can hopefully become righteous & become prophets who then have the Holy Spirit to call them to repentance if needed.

I believe Joseph Smith taught, and I agree, that we must become 'prophet level', meaning very very righteous and possess 'perfect love' and able to receive personal revelation constantly, if we are going to not be deceived and attain eternal life.

But even Prophets and righteous people still are striving to possess perfect love, I don't know of any mortal or prophet other than Christ who has ever possessed 'perfect love'. But righteous people and prophets are striving to gain it and they do to a certain level, though they aren't perfect yet.

And I don't believe in or agree with DS. I'm sure he is sincere and a very nice man, but I don't believe he has really seen the 'real' Christ. I believe many today are being deceived by visitations of false Christs. I do not believe he preaches or practices Christ's teachings, which he would if he really saw and believed in Christ. DS also seems to believe 'prophets of God' will/can lie, purposefully deceive and abuse their wives and run around after other women behind their back. With prophets like that who needs devils?

AV said...

Anonymous 4:37, (Part 2)

True Prophets are definitely wonderful and important to have around & they help us and give us 'free' revelation that we don't have to get ourselves, but no one can get to heaven by just 'following the prophet' no matter how wonderful and true he may be. For prophets never tell us enough of the mysteries to make it. We must gain the Holy Ghost (actually 'perfect love' Joseph Smith said) in order to learn 'the truth of all things' and to be able to discern all truth from error and not be deceived and thus attain eternal life.

For even the best of prophets have often been deceived themselves at time, and have taught falsehoods to the people, though maybe not enough falsehoods to become 'fallen' prophets. Though many prophets have fallen for whoredoms and have lost their high standing with God.

Even the great and true prophet Joseph Smith was often deceived by evil men, even to put them into Apostleship. He often taught false doctrine and lead people astray by it, for he was learning line upon line just like the rest of us. But he became a wiser and truer prophet the longer he lived.

So the mantra to 'follow the prophet' is not safe, for the prophet is not always correct. Like is said above, a true prophet would point to Christ and say 'follow Christ' not me, for I am very fallible. True prophets encourage us to think, question and prove all things, they would never tell us the 'thinking has been done for us'.

Can you imagine Mormon at the end of the Book of Mormon saying "Don't question the things of this book, just accept them as true, for we can't be wrong."

False prophets say that if your revelation is different then their's then 'your's' is from the Devil. False prophets don't like being disagreed with, they will ex you for not supporting or sustaining them as the only source of truth and power. They will 'cast you out' if you disagree with them and try to teach others to only follow Christ and his laws. False prophets will tell you that they will/can never lead you astray, that God won't let that happen. They are banking on people never checking their scriptures or church history to see that prophets can/have indeed lead many people astray throughout history and most people don't check up on it, they just believe whatever false prophets tell them, for they like the easiness of they way in just following blindly.

If you 'prove all things' and study Joseph Smith's own words (and not hearsay) that he 'published during his lifetime when he could speak for himself', you will find that he did not preach or practice polygamy, it was all Brigham's idea, who then pinned it on Joseph after he died to try to justify his whoredoms.

AV said...

Anonymous 4:37, (Part 3)

I agree with the author above, 'Follow the Savior', only 'Christ & the Holy Spirit' knows the way.

But we need the words of 'both' Christ and the Holy Spirit to prove each other correct. If we only have the words of Christ we might misinterpret them incorrectly if we don't have the Holy Ghost, and if we only go by our personal revelation (as most people do) and don't prove all things by what the scriptures and Christ have said, then we can easily fall for false revelation that the Devil is constantly giving us and be easily led astray thinking we are doing God's will.

But as Christ said, above all we need to have Charity, perfect true love, especially for our spouse, if we are ever going to have the Holy Spirit as our guide to discern truth from error and true prophets from false prophets, and become prophets ourselves.

If we don't have Charity, true Christlike perfect love, it doesn't matter how nice, smart or wonderful we may be or how many true prophets, scriptures, words of Christ or truth we have, or how many mighty works we may perform, we will still easily and quickly be deceived and fall and lose our place in the Celestial Kingdom and probably never know it until it's too late.

AV said...

We can't love Christ anymore than we love our spouse. We can't love our children or anyone else, anymore than we love our spouse. Marriage and true love, is the salvation of our children and the world and ourselves.

If we don't love our spouse then we don't love Christ. If we cast off our spouse then we cast off Christ. If we are unfaithful in any way to our spouse, then we are unfaithful to Christ. If we don't serve our spouse then we don't serve Christ.

Marriage is where we prove we really follow Christ and have perfect love. Especially when our spouse is hard to love.

AV said...

Have you read "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy" yet? It can be read free online at

Also, have you visited It has much truth also to be learned.

Only if we are unafraid of the truth will we find it.

Anonymous said...

You sound like someone from the LDS Freedom Forum, well you were on there, was your name there Amore Vero?

AV said...

Anon 9:10, I agree with you about DS, I don't believe in his claims or teachings either.

But I'm amazed that you would believe in men like Brigham Young, John Taylor, WW etc. & even the church leaders today, who preach and practice far more contrary to Christ than Denver ever did.

Church leaders are total hypocrites for judging Denver or anyone else, when their own actions and beliefs are far far worse & contrary to Christ. It's such a sham.

I think you'd benefit going back into the scriptures we got from Joseph (which doesn't include D&C 132) and into church history and searching some more about what Joseph really said and did and how opposite Brigham's ideas & desires were to Joseph's & the Gospel.

We have to decide who we are going to believe either Joseph or Brigham, for they started 2 opposite religions and taught and practiced completely opposite doctrines from each other.

Anonymous said...

Denver's understanding of D&C 132 is interesting:

Anonymous said...

I believe the LDS temples were invented by devils. And I know tons of very unrighteous people who lie their way into temples daily, to even work there.

I wish I had a nickle for every time I heard someone tell me how they received 'revelation from God' while in the temple, but I knew it was from the Adversary, (like have an affair with your secretary and divorce your wife), for it's completely contrary to God's commandments and laws.

I believe LDS temples are the Devil's house, so of course he and his angels would walk around in there deceiving everyone. God and his angels would never step foot in an LDS temple.

For Joseph Smith seemed to have completely different ideas about what temples should be used for and I don't believe he believed in or came up with the endowment/sealing stuff, I believe that all came from Brigham to help justify his whoredoms.

Brigham's temples are a completely different thing then Joseph's temples.

I would encourage you to study and believe the real teachings of Joseph Smith, that he publicly taught & published while he was alive and could speak for himself, not all the unproven hearsay & claims said by those who had every reason to lie about Joseph.

Anonymous said...


I know that.

anonymous 12:18

Anonymous said...


thank you--

anonymous who ranted


You must not have read what I posted. I don't need to be credible for how I feel about Denver Snuffer. I need to be credible as a member of the church who is frightened by the black listing and witch hunting--

but you either didn't read what I wrote, or you just need someone to argue with--LOL!

I'm afraid I'm not your 'man'. :)

aredesuyo said...

They can't teach the truth about the prophesies of Isaiah because it would be self-destructive to the institution. The more I study the Book of Mormon, the more I find it ironic that we use it as a missionary tool, and yet it testifies against the very corporation that publishes it.