Disciplinary Council Unless Passing The Heavenly Gate Is Withdrawn From Publication

[Deborah]

I'm always slightly amused by those who justify leaving the church by saying the Lord has something else for them. Right. In the case of Dutcher, he wanted to make movies that were not within church standards and he felt he needed freedom to express himself so of course he rationalized himself right out of the church.

[Calm]

I'm always slightly amused by those who justify leaving the church by saying the Lord has something else for them.

I would tend to believe them more if I saw great sacrifices in what they were doing instead of it appearing they were doing exactly what they wanted to do.

[Deborah]

I would tend to believe them more if I saw great sacrifices in what they were doing instead of it appearing they were doing exactly what they wanted to do.

 

Lol. Yes, they do describe life as becoming so much easier after leaving.

[iamse7en]

How did Denver Snuffer receive the 2nd Comforter without the 2nd anointing? That's like receiving the first comforter without being baptized and confirmed by authority.

[Duncan]

How did Denver Snuffer receive the 2nd Comforter without the 2nd anointing? That's like receiving the first comforter without being baptized and confirmed by authority.

 

where did you hear that? I am sure lots of people have seen Christ without having had the second anointing

[rongo]

He claims to have gotten it directly from *the* ultimate authority, not as a temple ordinance under the phase 4 Church.

[smac97]

He claims to have gotten it directly from *the* ultimate authority, not as a temple ordinance under the phase 4 Church.

 

Can you provide a reference for this claim?

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[David T]

Can you provide a reference for this claim?

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

See his book, "The Second Comforter: Conversing With the Lord Through The Veil".

[Bart Burk]

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2013/08/dont-call-me-yes-that-means-you-too_23.html

If the LDS Church just ignored him, how much attention would he get?  How many LDS would he really influence?  

[SamIam]

If the LDS Church just ignored him, how much attention would he get?  How many LDS would he really influence?  

 

He has published 11 publications thus far.  While I have little disagreement with the bulk of Receiving the Second Comforter, and several of his other books you can actually detect the seeds of dissention developing as he goes along until finally in the latest Passing the Heavenly Gift it comes full circle. 

 

His audience is not a small one.  As well his message has been so gracefully woven and carefully developed that of the 12 people I can name that I know who have sustained his books 10 of them have been persuaded that the church is in apostasy and that the brethren have failed.  He has set himself in the postion to accomplish what he claims they are no longer entitled or capable of doing and that being to lead you into the presence of Christ.  He covers himself by stating that people should still support the church as it is the best thing we have at the moment even though it is in apostasy.   

 

It is time that this be addressed and I hope he will put his house in order. 

 

Otherwise I guess I can just wait for the Dehlin podcast...

[LoudmouthMormon]

If the LDS Church just ignored him, how much attention would he get?  How many LDS would he really influence?  

 

I've been hearing passionate opinion from DS disciples for going on 4 years now.  He has a strong following of people who tell me what a great guy he is, and how worth-it his opinions are, and how important it is to consider his arguments.

 

(Now, full disclosure, these tend to be folk who will find some other fringey-counterculture trend to follow if they didn't have DS, but they're on his bandwagon right now.

[rongo]

I had never heard of him until about a year ago, and my cousins asked me to read "Passing the Heavenly Gift" so I could discuss it with them. I read it and wrote a review (just for them), and we discussed him/his book this summer when we were in Utah for a reunion. Their heads are on straight about the gospel, the Church, etc., so they aren't in danger of becoming Snufferites. Both sides of my family are very eclectic as far as Church history, writings, etc., and it has always been a joy and pleasure having knowledgeable and informed deep discussions as family. They simply wanted to know my thoughts about his book. But, they serve as examples of people who read his books with interest (while not crossing the line of Snufferism) who don't dabble in "fringey-counterculture"-ism. So, he is able to influence (or at least gain a hearing) among people who are not among the "kook fringe."

 

As others have pointed out, I think he is right about some things, and some of what he has to say resonates with me. He is clearly way out of bounds/off the reservation about other key things (crucial things), and his current problems come as no surprise to me after reading "Passing." I was unaware of his blog or his speaking tours, and what he has done since writing "Passing" represents a worsening on the apostasy spectrum than his previous books (that is, had everything left off with "Passing," he probably would be okay as far as his membership is concerned). Of course, his current self-published book probably advances the ball even further down that road. 

Edited August 29, 2013 by rongo

[smac97]

Mr. Snuffer has a new post today. It has some ... interesting things in it:

> We don't need another church. We don't need and shouldn't want another hierarchy. The very idea is repulsing. Zion won't be a project managed by a control group.

==I am not sure what he is saying here. Zion, as a concept, necessarily requires an ordered structure, an organization, one which Christ leads through authorized servants.

> Zion is to have "one heart" and "one mind." It is the idea itself that creates it.

> If you create an organization, it can be compromised.

==Uh oh. Does this declaration include the LDS Church? And what if an organization is established by God and given instructions that it will not be "compromised" (that is, that it will not fall prey to apostasy)?

> It can be regulated. It can be overtaken by ambitious and cunning men; or by stupid, well-meaning, but misguided men.

==Are these veiled accusations against his stake president? Against the general leadership of the Church? They seem to be so.

> Organizations are a threat to Zion. Zion is an idea. Only an idea. It cannot be overtaken or controlled.

==This is incorrect. Zion is or will be, by definition, an "organization." Enoch ran the show the first time around. There will be a structured organization then, there will be one again.

> Conformance to the laws of man will ensnare you. Threats of litigation, loss of tax benefits or coercive power will work against you.

==This seems like an allusion to the LDS Church, which has previously been threatened with litigation, loss of tax benefits, coercive power, etc. (the Edmunds Tucker Act comes to mind). It seems like a suggestion to abandon the LDS Church, lest it "ensnare you."

> You cannot sue an idea. You cannot tax an idea.

==You also cannot implement the idea of Zion without ... an organization. Like the LDS Church.

> Zion will be free from the control of this world because, despite all man can do, threaten, oppose it, when it assumes the existence of merely an idea even dictators cannot touch it, cannot defeat it, cannot overcome it. Zion will gather people around an idea. There will be no leader and no one greater than another.

==Uh, no. Zion is based on an idea, but it will be governed. Christ will be the leader of it, and it will consist of an organization with leaders.

> How then are the people of Zion able to be of "one heart" and "one mind?" It will be because they agree on an idea which brings them together, and then they act in conformity with that idea.

==Yep. This coming together, however, does not mean there will be no organization to Zion. That just does not comport with the scriptures.

> Zion may have its ordinances and covenants, but they are between the individual who believes and God who ordains it.

==Mr. Snuffer seems to be discounting the need for the LDS Church as the conduit through which the priesthood authority for those ordinances and covenants is given.

> Organizations fiddle with the notion of Zion and believe they have some "power" or "control" or "dominion" that allows them to compel others to be uniform (D&C 121: 37). They use "compulsory means" to achieve this end. But this is not and can never be Zion (D&C 121: 46).

==This appears to be another veiled accusation against the LDS Church.

> Be patient. Over the next year the idea of Zion will become more clear than it has since the restoration ended.

==Hmm. And Mr. Snuffer will be the person doing the clarifying. Not President Monson. Not the LDS Church. Him.

> Zion, as an idea whose time will only come when her ideas are understood, must be plainly taught again.

==And Mr. Snuffer will be the person doing the plain teaching. Not President Monson. Not the LDS Church. Him.

> And so the idea needs to begin unfranchised, uncontrolled, unfettered by the laws of man, and unpolluted by the ambitions of men.

==Yet another veiled accusation against the LDS Church.

> This next year I will be trying to discuss as much of this idea as can be tolerated.

==So new light and knowledge will come to the Latter-day Saints in the next year through Mr. Snuffer. Not President Monson. Not the LDS Church. Him.

The sense of rebelliousness seems to be getting more acute.

-Smac

Edited August 31, 2013 by smac97

[rpn]

Yes, I read the new post and I think that does cross the line of apostasy.   First thing I've read that I thought did.   It makes me sad.

[Calm]

This next year I will be trying to discuss as much of this idea as can be tolerated. 

 

Nice setup.  Kind of reminds me of the Emperor's Clothes....anyone who protests must be someone who is not pure and righteous enough to tolerate the vision of Zion.

[EllenMaksoud]

After scanning through this thread, I wonder if someone has lost focus on the purpose for Jesus Christ in our lives. We are to love Heavenly Father, and love each other. Perhaps the rest is simply satanic distraction?

[strappinglad]

I am reminded of the Sesame character Mr. Snuffleupagus . Only seen by Big Bird ( and children ) . Disappears when an adult shows up.

I believe that the church only has about 200 years from the time of its establishment before a great unraveling occurs. This is the pattern that has been followed throughout history. It comes as a result of a generational change in attitude , which can be seen in the current generation of youth in and out of the church . Just because we are promised that this time the gospel dispensation will not be taken from the earth , does not means that the church will not suffer another great apostasy.

[Deborah]

Just because we are promised that this time the gospel dispensation will not be taken from the earth , does not means that the church will not suffer another great apostasy.

 

This apostasy is already taking place and it's interesting in it's difference. It is composed of supposedly faithful members like Snuffer who begin by criticizing the church and the leaders and make the plea that they only want to help but the more they are into this the more you can see their downward spiral into apostasy. Meanwhile they are true wolves in sheep's clothing who seek to destroy the church and the faith of it's members from within all the while proclaiming their righteousness and special inspiration and knowledge.

[Stone holm]

Well issuing an excommunication threat is always a good way to make a book a bestseller, the Vatican banning books is always good for sales.

[smac97]

Well issuing an excommunication threat is always a good way to make a book a bestseller, the Vatican banning books is always good for sales.

 

LOL.  You are right.  Controversy sparks sales.  I had not heard of Mr. Snuffer prior to this kerfuffle.  I was tempted to buy his book just to see what all the hubub is about.  On balance, I probably won't.  There are too many other books I should buy first.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[Sleeper Cell]

Well issuing an excommunication threat is always a good way to make a book a bestseller, the Vatican banning books is always good for sales.

 

And if your book doesn’t provoke an excommunication threat …?

 

 

　

Well, if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

[Vookman]

The contention that the Church gets progressively more debased from its roots has existed since David Whitmer concluded Joseph was not a prophet essentially after the publication of the Book of Mormon and organization of the Church, and "changing" revelations (aka "continuing revelation" by the faithful) in light of continuing revelation was an indication he was a fallen prophet.

 

Denver wants us to focus on our own salvation.  Because he believes the Brethren have been making changes, some of which are potentially away from fundamental teachings, he feels we must seek for our own spirituality.  At the same time he affirms this is still the only authorized, true Church, it just has some corrections to come at a future time.

 

I'm more of a continuing revelation and the Brethren's mistakes or trials don't really matter all that much in the scheme of things, guy.  I also don't think exposing mistakes is a bad thing, since it is out of the contrast of the humanity of the Brethren we come to see how truly involved God is with the affairs of his Children through periodically inspiring our leaders.  I strongly oppose the type of faithless reporting we see from most critics which makes the motives or intents of Church leaders evil or completely uninspired.

[daz2]

Assuming many of his ideas are off the wall, and that he is very critical of the leadership, what is it that he has advocated that members do that crosses the line?

[Deborah]

Because he believes the Brethren have been making changes, some of which are potentially away from fundamental teachings, he feels we must seek for our own spirituality.  At the same time he affirms this is still the only authorized, true Church, it just has some corrections to come at a future time.

 

Some of those who teach this believe it is their job to point these "errors" out. I find it very presumptuous and arrogant. If the Lord wants to chastize his prophets he seems to have no qualms doing so (ie Jonah). He doesn't need ark steadiers to do it.

I agree changes are a result of continuing revelation and I think the arguments for moving away from "fundamental" teachings are based on false understanding of what is doctrine and what is practice. The best example is Plural marriage. Many of those of fundamentalist thinking believe the church started falling when we abandoned plural marriage. They don't understand that the doctrine of the New and Everlasting Covenant under which that falls has not changed. The Law of Plural Marriage allowed under the N&EC is a practice which is clearly described in the BOM as being allowed only when commanded, and if it is commanded to begin then it can be commanded to end.

[Alan]

I have just read this book.

It's not particularly well written in my view (in fact, the puncuation is all over the place!), and it seems to jump around a lot. Maybe it's just me but he seems to jump from phase1 to phase 4 etc all the time, often in the same sentence.

He has some very narrow understandings/interpretations of certain scriptural passages too, in my view.

 

It occurs to me that his book borders on priestcraft in a way. He is setting himself up to preach to the people (through his book) and charging them (they purchase the book). If this is his eleventh book he must have made a tidy sum by now.

Edited September 1, 2013 by Alan