Denver Snuffer'S Book On The Second Comforter (And An Apology.)

[inquiringmind]

I apologize if there was anything inappropriate in asking if anyone here has received The Second Comforter, but I understand Denver Snuffer has, and has written a book on how to have such an experience.

And I know Paul saw the risen Christ on the road to Damascus (before his conversion), and wasn't forbidden to talk about it.

In fact, all the New Testament Apostles saw and talked with the risen Christ after His resurrection, and non of them kept it a secret, or were told to keep it a secret.

If they had been told to keep it secret, I wonder how much of the New Testament we'd have today?

So anyway, I would like to apologize to SamIam and any others who found my question regarding The Second Comforter distasteful, and I would not want anyone whose had such an experience to violate any secrecy requirement, but I was unaware of such a requirement.

Has any one read Mr. Snuffer's book?

Any idea why he would write such a book if there's a secrecy requirement attached to the experience?

(Or am I under some misconception in assuming he actually claims to have had the experience?)

[MormonMason]

Talking about visions is one thing. It is pretty much a surety that not all visions that occurred were mentioned in the Bible. Even Jesus put restrictions on some of his teachings and visions given to his disciples. For example, consider the Transfiguration on the Mount. Jesus only allowed three of his Twelve apostles to see this visionary experience and none of them were allowed to talk about it until Jesus was raised from the dead. The apostles spoke with veiled references of things that were taught in such a way that the teaching is hidden to outsiders. John the Revelator himself was forbidden to write certain things that he saw and heard, and was required to seal them up. Any avid Bible reader knows this kind of stuff. So it is with Latter-day Saints. There are somethings that are considered so sacred that we do not discuss them. There have been many revelations and visions I have seen. Some I have been allowed to share. Some I have been absolutely forbidden to share, even with my own family. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

I will only say this: I am a witness of Christ, his atonement, and of his resurrection, have seen Christ, and I have spoken with and have been spoken to by the Father. I will say no more than this.

Edited May 25, 2013 by MormonMason

[SamIam]

I apologize if there was anything inappropriate in asking if anyone here has received The Second Comforter, but I understand Denver Snuffer has, and has written a book on how to have such an experience.

And I know Paul saw the risen Christ on the road to Damascus (before his conversion), and wasn't forbidden to talk about it.

In fact, all the New Testament Apostles saw and talked with the risen Christ after His resurrection, and non of them kept it a secret, or were told to keep it a secret.

If they had been told to keep it secret, I wonder how much of the New Testament we'd have today?

So anyway, I would like to apologize to SamIam and any others who found my question regarding The Second Comforter distasteful, and I would not want anyone whose had such an experience to violate any secrecy requirement, but I was unaware of such a requirement.

Has any one read Mr. Snuffer's book?

Any idea why he would write such a book if there's a secrecy requirement attached to the experience?

(Or am I under some misconception in assuming he actually claims to have had the experience?)

When the experience is had specific personalized instructions come with it. Some are instructed do one thing and others another. Pontious, Snuffer, and the others I am familiar with receive specific counsel and instruction relative to sharing generalizations of their experience without specifics. This serves as a kind of a guide book approach in terms of sharing scripture and spiritual insight while preserving the integrity and sacred nature of the experience. None that have the experience step outside of the bounds of their specific instruction.

[inquiringmind]

Talking about visions is one thing. It is pretty much a surety that not all visions that occurred were mentioned in the Bible. Even Jesus put restrictions on some of his teachings and visions given to his disciples. For example, consider the Transfiguration on the Mount. Jesus only allowed three of his Twelve apostles to see this visionary experience and none of them were allowed to talk about it until Jesus was raised from the dead. The apostles spoke with veiled references of things that were taught in such a way that the teaching is hidden to outsiders. John the Revelator himself was forbidden to write certain things that he saw and heard, and was required to seal them up. Any avid Bible reader knows this kind of stuff. So it is with Latter-day Saints. There are somethings that are considered so sacred that we do not discuss them. There have been many revelations and visions I have seen. Some I have been allowed to share. Some I have been absolutely forbidden to share, even with my own family. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

I will only say this: I am a witness of Christ, his atonement, and of his resurrection, have seen Christ, and I have spoken with and have been spoken to by the Father. I will say no more than this.

Thank you.

[Robert F. Smith]

I apologize if there was anything inappropriate in asking if anyone here has received The Second Comforter, but I understand Denver Snuffer has, and has written a book on how to have such an experience.

And I know Paul saw the risen Christ on the road to Damascus (before his conversion), and wasn't forbidden to talk about it.

In fact, all the New Testament Apostles saw and talked with the risen Christ after His resurrection, and non of them kept it a secret, or were told to keep it a secret.

If they had been told to keep it secret, I wonder how much of the New Testament we'd have today?

So anyway, I would like to apologize to SamIam and any others who found my question regarding The Second Comforter distasteful, and I would not want anyone whose had such an experience to violate any secrecy requirement, but I was unaware of such a requirement.

Has any one read Mr. Snuffer's book?

Any idea why he would write such a book if there's a secrecy requirement attached to the experience?

(Or am I under some misconception in assuming he actually claims to have had the experience?)

I haven't read Denver Snuffer's book, and am not sure of the context. Your (and possibly Snuffer's) misconception has to do with what in fact is the Second Comforter. As I pointed out, it is none other than the Holy Ghost, and the reception of it is exoteric and public, and fairly common within the LDS community. There is nothing secret about it. Jesus (who was the First Comforter) said that he would send the Second Comforter, and he did so on Pentecost -- a particularly public display of the power of the Holy Ghost. There is never anything wrong with publicly testifying about one's experience of the Holy Spirit, either at confirmation, or later in life.

If you and Snuffer are confusing the Second Comforter with Second Anointings, then you are indeed dealing with something far too sacred to discuss on this Board. We call such things esoteric, and they are not fit for public discussion.

[Robert F. Smith]

When the experience is had specific personalized instructions come with it. Some are instructed do one thing and others another. Pontious, Snuffer, and the others I am familiar with receive specific counsel and instruction relative to sharing generalizations of their experience without specifics. This serves as a kind of a guide book approach in terms of sharing scripture and spiritual insight while preserving the integrity and sacred nature of the experience. None that have the experience step outside of the bounds of their specific instruction.

From our previous thread:

Robert F. Smith, on 24 May 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

There is nothing verboten or unmentionable about it -- if you have been baptized and confirmed a member of the LDS Church, you have received the "Second Comforter," who is the Holy Ghost, who is often called the Paraclete. But what is a paraclete?

The phrase in Greek ('allon parakleton) is translated in various ways, and it can be confusing: John 14:16 "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter" (KJV; "Segond Consolateur" [German Luther Bible revised]; "another Counselor" [RSV, NIV]; "another Advocate" [JB, NRSV, SV]; "another Helper" [TEV]; "another to be your Advocate" [NEB, REB]; "another Paraclete" [NAB, see note: "Jesus is the first Paraclete" in I John 2:1]. In other words, Jesus is the "first counselor," and the Holy Spirit is the "second counselor."

For the rich OT context, see R. N. Whybray, The Heavenly Counsellor in Isaiah xl 13-14 (Cambridge Univ., 1971).

Samlam said:

Independent of your explanation above, I am positive that you are far too well read to miss the intent of the OP question which is to inquire concerning this observation by Joseph Smith:

Quote

The other Comforter spoken of is a subject of great interest, and perhaps understood by few of this generation. After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure, then it will be his privilege to receive the other Comforter, which the Lord hath promised the Saints, as is recorded in the testimony of St. John, in the 14th chapter, from the 14th to the 27th verses.

Note the 16, 17, 18, 21, 23 verses:"

16. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever;"

17. Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him; but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

18. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. . . ."

21. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. . . ."

23. If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

"Now what is this other Comforter? It is no more nor less than the Lord Jesus Christ himself; and this is the sum and substance of the whole matter; that when any man obtains this last Comforter, he will have the personage of Jesus Christ to attend him, or appear unto him from time to time, and even he will manifest the Father unto him, and they will take up their abode with him, and the visions of the heavens will be opened unto him, and the Lord will teach him face to face, and he may have a perfect knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of God; and this is the state and place the ancient Saints arrived at when they had such glorious visions—Isaiah, Ezekiel, John upon the Isle of Patmos, Paul in the three heavens, and all the Saints who held communion with the general assembly and Church of the First Born. (HC 3:380-81.)

Samlam:

Nonetheless, were the topic of the OP "can we discuss the Second Comforter", surely there would be no concern over such a conversation. However, to ask for a breech of the integrity required of those that have had this experience by asking outright concerning it's specific occurrence in an individuals life trivializes and demeans the sacred nature of the experience and illustrates a complete lack of spiritual maturity concerning sacred events. This, then becomes my objection to the specific nature of the OP.

One of the characteristics, I have observed in the scriptural prophets and modern day prophets is there is never a sense of casual in their treatment of the things of God. Speaking generally and not specifically to your material, the ideal standard of contemporary intellectual efforts is the sterile treatment of all aspects of a subject with the clinical approach that illustrates our "maturity" in being able to address any aspect of any subject within all boundaries that can apply. Somehow, by using respectful tones and language composition that appears to favor a learned approach, we in many cases loose the sensitivity of what is and what is not appropriate. This tendency has become common place now, particularly on forums such as MDD, so that we deceive ourselves in thinking that any intellectual treatment of a subject is laudable and to be encouraged. For personal reasons, I have determined that, though it places me on the outside looking in from time to time, I wanted to cultivate the sense of what I perceive to be sacred to God as being sacred to me as well.

Thus I find the OP question which would only barely, possibly be appropriate in the most rare of circumstances at the bidding of the spirit in a private circumstance, to be completely and totally out of bounds in a public forum such as this. For the owner of the OP's own benefit I speak as I do. The only hope the questioner ever has of really understanding the experience for him or herself is first to recognize that while we see through a glass darkly if you are going to pound on it with a sledge hammer it just gets boarded up with plywood so you can't see anything at all.

I apologize for my encyclopedic tone, Samlam, but I was astonished that no one had by then recognized what is a commonplace in understanding of Scripture. I deliberately avoided an emotional or "churchly" presentation of the basic exoteric facts, but given your usual depth of understanding, I had thought that you would at least see the problem as one of biblical illiteracy -- the most vexing problem we actually face in this and similar matters -- rather than a failure to treat an esoteric subject with the proper reverence..

At the same time, I was blissfully unaware of Joseph Smith's comments. Thank you for providing them. However, that does not change the standard exegesis of the NT texts dealing with the Second Comforter as an exoteric subject, even though it raises other questions about who actually took dictation (and how accurately) for Joseph's statements here. Was Joseph talking about something other than the standard exoteric matter displayed at Pentecost? It seems as though he must have been. What do you think?

Edited May 26, 2013 by Robert F. Smith

[telnetd]

If you and Snuffer are confusing the Second Comforter with Second Anointings, then you are indeed dealing with something far too sacred to discuss on this Board. We call such things esoteric, and they are not fit for public discussion.

I have never read of Second Anointing in any LDS literature, but

it sounds like a sacred matter so I won't question it. But can the

First Anointing be discussed publicly?

Gail

[Robert F. Smith]

I have never read of Second Anointing in any LDS literature, but

it sounds like a sacred matter so I won't question it. But can the

First Anointing be discussed publicly?

Gail

A fair question, Gail,

However, since the first anointing is also esoteric and takes place in LDS temples, I will simply quote a line from a famous LDS hymn, "The Spirit of God," saying "We'll wash and be washed, and with oil be anointed."

[K-2]

I haven't read Denver Snuffer's book, and am not sure of the context. Your (and possibly Snuffer's) misconception has to do with what in fact is the Second Comforter. As I pointed out, it is none other than the Holy Ghost, and the reception of it is exoteric and public, and fairly common within the LDS community. There is nothing secret about it. Jesus (who was the First Comforter) said that he would send the Second Comforter, and he did so on Pentecost -- a particularly public display of the power of the Holy Ghost. There is never anything wrong with publicly testifying about one's experience of the Holy Spirit, either at confirmation, or later in life.

If you and Snuffer are confusing the Second Comforter with Second Anointings, then you are indeed dealing with something far too sacred to discuss on this Board. We call such things esoteric, and they are not fit for public discussion.

The Holy Ghost was only a second comforter to the former-day saints who lived during the mortal life of Jesus though. Now we receive the Holy Ghost first, and the presence of the Savior second.

Edited May 27, 2013 by K-2

[SamIam]

If you and Snuffer are confusing the Second Comforter with Second Anointings, then you are indeed dealing with something far too sacred to discuss on this Board. We call such things esoteric, and they are not fit for public discussion.

From our previous thread:

Robert F. Smith, on 24 May 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

There is nothing verboten or unmentionable about it -- if you have been baptized and confirmed a member of the LDS Church, you have received the "Second Comforter," who is the Holy Ghost, who is often called the Paraclete. But what is a paraclete?

I apologize for my encyclopedic tone, Samlam, but I was astonished that no one had by then recognized what is a commonplace in understanding of Scripture. I deliberately avoided an emotional or "churchly" presentation of the basic exoteric facts, but given your usual depth of understanding, I had thought that you would at least see the problem as one of biblical illiteracy -- the most vexing problem we actually face in this and similar matters -- rather than a failure to treat an esoteric subject with the proper reverence..

At the same time, I was blissfully unaware of Joseph Smith's comments. Thank you for providing them. However, that does not change the standard exegesis of the NT texts dealing with the Second Comforter as an exoteric subject, even though it raises other questions about who actually took dictation (and how accurately) for Joseph's statements here. Was Joseph talking about something other than the standard exoteric matter displayed at Pentecost? It seems as though he must have been. What do you think?

Really no apology needed. It is always the requisite of any conversation for everyone involved to exchange long enough that we have negotiated each other’s manner of speech until we are agreed upon what the subject of the discussion is.

As far as our responses and the different tack taken to address the question we both answered from the perspective in which we heard the question and it just took that settling in process before we all knew which was the actual perspective under consideration.

I realize I stated before that I was positive with your extensive knowledge that you were aware of Joseph Smith’s comments. Therein was my mistake and while I remain a touch flabbergasted that the text of the comment was new to you, nonetheless, I stand corrected on my assumption. It is a classic situation of “we only hear what we know”. I was positive of his intent from what I knew and you were positive from what you knew and technically we are both correct in our response based on what we heard. However, once we came full circle to understanding what was the correct perspective, it was easier to see our different perspectives caused the separation of agreement. Had I of heard the question as you did, I would have responded in similar fashion, though less elegantly, I'm sure.

As far as what I think about Joseph Smith’s departure in the scripture my explanation is not really consistent with traditional forms of accepted protocol for educated standards of presentation. We read literally what he states and then we compare with what the verse says and absent agreement we begin to question was he recorded accurately or was he mistaken in what he thought he read etc. As you nicely pointed out in your analysis of the Greek, Christ is referring to the future receipt of the Holy Ghost but Joseph expounds in a completely “off” explanation of a concept that he terms receiving the second comforter which seems to counter the contents of the verse. However, Joseph’s comments are perfectly consistent with the true order of things and it is not the typical case that we receive Christ personage first before we receive the Holy Ghost. He doesn't explain himself, but we just have to accept the spirit of his comments is correct and then we have to get the same spirit to perceive his starting points. It never occurs to me to question whether he is right.I simply have to figure out that his starting point is not exactly the verse but the verse put in the correct order of traditional events in our lives.

One fascinating characteristic of Christ and Joseph as well, is that they take the question that is asked and then they answer the question that was intended. Or other times they start speaking from the middle as in when Christ warns of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Apostles forgot the bread- Apostles think bread, Christ is talking hypocrisy and false influence.

Joseph frequently expounds on scriptures in a completely different fashion than I was accustomed to thinking. In Words Of Joseph Smith he expounds on why the devils wanted Joseph to send them into the swine, as the devils knew that if Christ did something that affected the material priority of the people they would compel him to leave because he was taking money out of the pockets of the locals. The devils knew they would choose material gain over spiritual gain. Same book, he mentions about the other angel flying in the midst of heaven having the everlasting gospel to preach who I always just assumed was Moroni. Joseph says it is Peter as a result of the requirement of the Melchizedek Priesthood before one has the keys of proselyting.

Thus I have come to accept a premise that works for me. It is an interesting thing about when someone is acting in the capacity of seership. They never seem to tell you what you can readily glean on your own nor do they paint within the obvious lines. Instead they “seer” not only forward in time but forward in meaning. They reveal what is not commonly seen be it events or be it the mind of God as to what a fuller of understanding of scripture might be, though it is not readily apparent in the original genesis points of the exchange. They see beyond.

For me Joseph starts at the point of what Christ is telling you in the second comforter verses, he rearranges it and puts it in Gospel order for the typical state of affairs of the majority of God’s children and then he leads us forward to understanding that which is not seen and that is what a seer always does when acting as a seer.

As far as the topic of the second comforter and Joseph’s explanation, it is actually the core principle of a multitude of commentaries by prophets and apostles. However, if one was not familiar Joseph’s statement in some cases we would not hear the words of the prophets or apostles as they intended but would make different assumptions upon their meaning. Not wrong assumptions but suitable for the knowledge of those who hear. Here are a few comments that tie the interpretation of the second comforter to Christ as we have been doing in this thread and a few that simply fill in other tangents of the concepts under discussion.

Discuss:

1.) Show that receiving the Second Comforter, being sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise and having your calling and election made sure are synonymous. (Melchizedek Priesthood, Improvement Era, 1942 Vol Xlv. December, 1942. No. 12)

If all things operate by law, and they do; if God is no respecter of persons, and certainly he is perfectly impartial; if his course is one eternal round, never varying from age to age, and such truly is the case—then all of the gifts and graces and revelations ever given to any prophet, seer, or revelator in any age will be given again to any soul who obeys the law entitling him so to receive. While discoursing about the Second Comforter and in setting forth that those whose callings and elections have been made sure have the privilege of seeing the face of the Lord while they yet dwell in the flesh, the Prophet Joseph Smith said: "God hath not revealed anything to Joseph, but what He will make known unto the Twelve, and even the least Saint may know all things as fast as he is able to bear them." (TPJS, p. 149.)(Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith [1985], 90.)

It is the privilege of all those who have made their calling and election sure to see God; to talk with him face to face; to commune with him on a personal basis from time to time. These are the ones upon whom the Lord sends the Second Comforter. Their inheritance of exaltation and eternal life is assured, and so it becomes with them here and now in this life as it will be with all exalted beings in the life to come. They become the friends of God and converse with him on a friendly basis as one man speaks to another. (B. McConkie, The Promised Messiah: he First Coming of Christ 584.)

When he first began to teach it (using the term), he specifically defined “calling and election sure” as a revelation from Jesus Christ directly to an individual absolutely assuring eternal life in words such as “Son” or “Daughter” – “Thou shalt be exalted”!” He taught that those who heard such an audible voice could then approach the Lord and through prayer receive the mysteries of godliness by the manifestations of the “Second Comforter. Words of Joseph Smith p 200-202

“I have learned that where there is a prayerful heart, a hungering after righteousness, a forsaking of sins, and obedience to the commandments of God, the Lord pours out more and more light until one finally has power to pierce the heavenly veil and to know more than man knows. Such a person has a priceless promise that one day he will see the Lord's face and know that he is (see D&C 93:1).” – “The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball,” edited byEdward L. Kimball, p. 73

I know that God our Father lives, that we are, as Paul said, his offspring. I know that we dwelt in his presence in pre-earth life and that we shall continue to live beyond the grave. I know that we may return into his presence, if we meet his terms. I know that while we are here in mortality there is a means of communication between him and us. I know it is possible for men to so live that they may hear his voice and know his words and that to receive "the Holy Spirit of promise" while here in mortality is possible. And so, in the words of the Prophet Joseph, "... I ... exhort you to go on and continue to call upon God until (by the more sure word of prophecy) you make your calling and election sure for yourselves,..." (HC 5:389.) In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. Making Our Calling and Election Sure Marion G. Romney, Cnfrnce Report, October 1965-

From the first existence of man, the faith necessary unto the enjoyment of life and salvation never could be obtained without the sacrifice of all earthly things. It was through this sacrifice, and this only, that God has ordained that men should enjoy eternal life; and it is through the medium of the sacrifice of all earthly things that men do actually know that they are doing the things that are well pleasing in the sight of God. When a man has offered in sacrifice all that he has for the truth’s sake, not even withholding his life, and believing before God that he has been called to make this sacrifice because he seeks to do his will, he does know, most assuredly, that God does and will accept his sacrifice and offering, and that he has not, nor will not seek his face in vain. Under these circumstances, then, he can obtain the faith necessary for him to lay hold on eternal life.” (Lectures on Faith, 6:58; see also D&C 98:11–15 and Teachings, p. 322.)

I only want to draw your attention to these verses. Enos testified: “I will tell you of the wrestle which I had before God before I received a remission of my sins.” He clarified that wrestle with God for us. Note the fervor in his petition: “My soul hungered…I kneeled down before my maker…I cried unto him in mighty prayer and supplication for mine own soul…all day long did I cry unto him.” (Enos 1:4, italics added.)

Then Enos testified: “there came a voice unto me, saying: Enos, thy sins are forgiven thee, and thou shalt be blessed…wherefore, my guilt was swept away.” (Enos 1:5,6) When he inquired of the Lord how this had been accomplished, the Lord answered him: “Because of thy faith in Christ…thy faith hath made thee whole.” (Enos 1:8, italics added.) Enos was spiritually healed. Through his mighty supplication to God, he experienced what the faithful of any dispensation can, do, and must experience if they are to see God and be filled with His Spirit. Become acquainted with Enos and the entire Book of Mormon, the greatest book in the world—a new witness for Christ. It is written for us today. This I know.” (First presidency Message – keys to Successful Member-Missionary Work, President Ezra Taft Benson, Ensign, First Presidency Message, September 1990)

Edited May 27, 2013 by SamIam

[Robert F. Smith]

...........................................

As far as the topic of the second comforter and Joseph’s explanation, it is actually the core principle of a multitude of commentaries by prophets and apostles. However, if one was not familiar Joseph’s statement in some cases we would not hear the words of the prophets or apostles as they intended but would make different assumptions upon their meaning. Not wrong assumptions but suitable for the knowledge of those who hear. Here are a few comments that tie the interpretation of the second comforter to Christ as we have been doing in this thread and a few that simply fill in other tangents of the concepts under discussion.

I'm very glad we had this conversation, Samlam, and I am humbled by my ignorance of this aspect of things. Good thing is that I now have some excellent references to put in a file for future reference. Thanks.

Bob

[SamIam]

I'm very glad we had this conversation, Samlam, and I am humbled by my ignorance of this aspect of things. Good thing is that I now have some excellent references to put in a file for future reference. Thanks.

Bob

I know that my observation here is not necessary but of all the things written in these forums what you illustrate here is of greater worth than the majority of the opinions, statements predicated upon research, facts, factoids and sundry other classes of information.

I am didactic by nature and my tone less gentle than some. I try to be correct in my understandings but I genuinely admit that in terms of intellectual foundations of knowledge and historical evidences you are far and away one of the most, if not the most capable on this forum and certainly my superior.

Yet where most will suffer some measure of chagrin and need to "defend" themselves against the possibility of some supposed public embarrassment, you calmly illustrate how your quest is not about being perceived as the superior intellect or fount of wisdom. This is so uncommon amongst those gifted with intellectual talents such as yours that I must highlight the profound significance of such rare character.

It is interesting that the topic of discussion is the receipt of the second comforter for it takes such a one to be able to move beyond the moment of learning of a possibility to seeing the possibility manifest in their life.

In the same fashion I must mention inquiringmind's response as similar in the fashion of his capacity to not be offended at my direct and unreserved response to his initial question. He took no offense and instead evaluated the information and not the delivery. I make no apology as that is part of the process of us declaring who we are and what is important to us. Those concerned about their image before men defend that image before men. Those concerned about knowing God, focus more the traits and attributes that will prepare them to meet Him. The ability to look beyond offense, especially when none was intended, is such a rare and pleasant trait that it exceeds in worth our general exchanges in these forums and should be remarked upon and emphasized in my opinion.

[rongo]

None that have the experience step outside of the bounds of their specific instruction.

That isn't true. There are those who have "had the experience" who have discussed it, unwisely and "outside the bounds of their specific instruction."

[SamIam]

That isn't true. There are those who have "had the experience" who have discussed it, unwisely and "outside the bounds of their specific instruction."

Perhaps you might provide some further confirmation. I am perfectly willing to amend my position but I need more information to do so. Of course logically one would surmise such, I simply have no evidence in this dispensation where it has occurred.

Edited May 28, 2013 by SamIam

[Calm]

Perhaps you might provide some further confirmation. I am perfectly willing to amend my position but I need more information to do so. Of course logically one would surmise such, I simply have no evidence in this dispensation where it has occurred.

One guy (IIRC his last name was Phillips) did an interview with John Dehlin IIRC (or someone else) that has been confirmed as a real former member and whatever calling he claimed as well as those I trust saying the rest of his claims are probably likely as well. It was talked about quite a bit last year IIRC, big news in the exmormon community I believe (things always seem more recent to me than they really are these days), just google and I am sure you will find it. There might even be a thread about it here. Edited May 28, 2013 by calmoriah

[SamIam]

One guy (IIRC his last name was Phillips) did an interview with John Dehlin IIRC (or someone else) that has been confirmed as a real former member and whatever calling he claimed as well as those I trust saying the rest of his claims are probably likely as well. It was talked about quite a bit last year IIRC, big news in the exmormon community I believe (things always seem more recent to me than they really are these days), just google and I am sure you will find it. There might even be a thread about it here.

I do recall having read his story - Thomas Phillips. He references the second anointing, but makes no references to having received the second comforter. Off the top of my head I recollect a statement by Elder McConkie that having ones calling and election made sure could entail receiving the second comforter, and that it made one eligible to request such and seek that blessing. However, it would appear that Thomas began the seeds of apostasy within moments, figuratively speaking, of his second anointing and never pursued the second comforter experience. Thus for this cause, He is not one I would consider as having received the second comforter and the subsequent experience that is part of that process.

He does provide his email address and if anyone had questions of him, I'm sure he would respond.

Edited May 28, 2013 by SamIam

[rongo]

Perhaps you might provide some further confirmation. I am perfectly willing to amend my position but I need more information to do so. Of course logically one would surmise such, I simply have no evidence in this dispensation where it has occurred.

I'm not going to give names, but I know some people (more than one) who have received the ordinance of the Second Anointing who have talked about it from the pulpit (in their ward). And who have created concerns in people because of their "daily walk and conversation," which is not what most would expect of those who have received it. Perhaps you are distinguishing between those who have received the ordinance and those who actually have received the Second Comforter?

[SamIam]

I'm not going to give names, but I know some people (more than one) who have received the ordinance of the Second Anointing who have talked about it from the pulpit (in their ward). And who have created concerns in people because of their "daily walk and conversation," which is not what most would expect of those who have received it. Perhaps you are distinguishing between those who have received the ordinance and those who actually have received the Second Comforter?

Our conversation is, from my perspective strictly the receipt of the Second Comforter point of view. "The daily walk and conversation" is often, and should be for all who ultimately receive it, a prelude to actually receiving the second comforter and of course continues thereafter. Learning to hear and converse with the Lord is a prerequisite to actually coming into his presence. I suspect that in the case of those that reference the Second Anointings publically they may be delaying their own blessings of receiving the second comforter if it is as beyond the mark as you say.

[Avatar4321]

I'm very glad we had this conversation, Samlam, and I am humbled by my ignorance of this aspect of things. Good thing is that I now have some excellent references to put in a file for future reference. Thanks.

Bob

Being humble is good. I am learning alot from this thread as well.

[Avatar4321]

Our conversation is, from my perspective strictly the receipt of the Second Comforter point of view. "The daily walk and conversation" is often, and should be for all who ultimately receive it, a prelude to actually receiving the second comforter and of course continues thereafter. Learning to hear and converse with the Lord is a prerequisite to actually coming into his presence. I suspect that in the case of those that reference the Second Anointings publically they may be delaying their own blessings of receiving the second comforter if it is as beyond the mark as you say.

Unfortunately, it's a tendency to most humans, the saints included, to be the biggest stumbling block in recieving the blessings Our Heavenly Father has for us. I know I am my own worst enemy.

[SamIam]

Another quote to add to the list:

“…no man will ever see God by just wishing it, wanting it, asking for it — nobody with just ordinary interest or curiosity. The Lord doesn’t go around just showing Himself — like you go to a show and see something you pay for. The Lord doesn’t. But every soul may see Him and know that He is, if that soul will do the things the Lord will require of him.” (Elder Spencer W. Kimball, “See His Face”, Santa Monica Stake fireside on November 18, 1973)

[Ahab]

I apologize if there was anything inappropriate in asking if anyone here has received The Second Comforter, but I understand Denver Snuffer has, and has written a book on how to have such an experience.

It may seem nitpicky, but many people seem to confuse the second Comforter with the first one. When Jesus said he would send another comforter to the apostles, he was talking about the Holy Ghost. He was the first one, and he still is. FWIW.

[SamIam]

It may seem nitpicky, but many people seem to confuse the second Comforter with the first one. When Jesus said he would send another comforter to the apostles, he was talking about the Holy Ghost. He was the first one, and he still is. FWIW.

Read the entire thread and then try again.

[Ahab]

Read the entire thread and then try again.

No thank you. I made the point I wanted to make.

[SamIam]

No thank you. I made the point I wanted to make.

Alas, sometimes you show such potential and then...well your loss and mistake.