Popular Post Calm Posted August 15, 2017 Popular Post Posted August 15, 2017 55 minutes ago, e-eye said: On a side note if what Anonymous says is true the Denver Snuffer does think he is David then they indeed will have an official leader in the movement. It has been awhile since I researched Snuffer, but my understanding is he dates the final loss of Priesthood authority by the LDS Church to his excommunication. It is the height of arrogance to claim the Church's rejection of him is its downfall and that is why I never bought into his 'I am not your leader' role playing of humility. 9
Hamba Tuhan Posted August 15, 2017 Posted August 15, 2017 (edited) On 8/15/2017 at 0:09 AM, stemelbow said: I think I've heard of some wards from different people where openness is a little more welcome. Where some level of personal thought is considered a contribution. I've met very few people in the Church who aren't open and don't welcome 'some level of personal thought'. They do exist, but they're rare, in my experience, and I've certainly never been a member of a ward or branch that did not welcome me, my thoughts, and my desires to make a contribution with open arms (and sometimes with open glee!). Quote But, in truth, if you could specify where you're talking about, I'd probably go out of my way to visit. Any other helps? Mate, did you miss the part where I mentioned that an apostle visited the ward and quelled the rising apostasy? If you're willing to go out of your way to visit a congregation that's careening into a defiant rejection of revelation and priesthood authority, you may want to skip the intermediate stages and just pick some man-made church? Edited August 15, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan 3
Scott Lloyd Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said: I've met very few people in the Church who aren't open and don't welcome 'some level of personal thought'. They do exist, but they're rare, in my experience, and I've certainly never been a member of a ward or branch that did not welcome me, my thoughts, and my desires to make a contribution with open arms (and sometimes with open glee!). Mate, did you miss the part where I mentioned that an apostle visited the ward and quelled the rising apostasy? If you're willing to go out of your way to visit a congregation that's careening into a defiant rejection of revelation and priesthood authority, you may want to skip the intermediate stages and just pick some man-made church? Or create his own. I linked to a website the other day that gives step-by-step instructions. There's even an app for it. By the way. I enjoyed your story, especially the part about the ninja apostle who came in and took care of business in a single weekend, telling the people what had to change immediately and saying those who wouldn't abide it would be removed from membership. Were there leadership changes as well? I should hope so. We need more of that in some quarters. Edited August 16, 2017 by Scott Lloyd
Hamba Tuhan Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Were there leadership changes as well? I should hope so. I actually don't know. I was in another stake when this all happened, and the only reason I knew about it was because, much later in my mission, I mentioned the war wounds from my having attempted to serve in that ward, and another Elder who was there during the correction said, approximately, 'Oh, that's been taken care of'', accompanied by the few details I shared on this forum. I think most people were just relieved. We missionaries certainly were. I don't recall any desire on my part for leadership changes. 1
Avatar4321 Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 On 8/12/2017 at 8:10 AM, rpn said: Denver Snuffer (who does not claim to be a prophet, and claims no one should look to him for leadership, although he acts like he thinks he is, and bases some of his stature on having had the Second Anointing) started the movement soon after the First Presidency upheld his excommunication. He claims that God has spoken with him and told him that the Church has gone off the rails and no longer has God's authority. That each man(?) has direct authority. They have rebapized using this individual authority. In September his group will vote to establish new scriptures: two different men who didn't know each other so the story goes, were inspired to rewrite the Doctrine and Covenants. They have put their work out there and it has been consolidated and talked through and their joint effort is going to be voted on. They removed scriptures that they claim the evidence doesn't support JS as giving (notably the ones that organize the church and 132). Denver Snuffer has written new revelation he has gotten. I think they are going to call it something else too. But if anyone wants to study it at some point, it will be interesting to see the basis for what they keep or remove. They are planning and collecting money to build their own temple. They adopted use of the LDS temple ceremony for their weddings. As to the stakes moving to apostasy? There has been stake consolidation in Boise, that some have attributed to Snufferites leaving. And there were a much bigger group at the conference held in May (if I recall correctly it was near a 1000), than organizers had planned for. But the movement is just 3 years old, and I've heard of members leaving the Snufferites since this movement to form a new church has accelerated. So who knows how it will ultimately sort out. ETA: They say they are reclaiming JS because the current institutional church has left the restored Gospel. They are going to adopt LDS Temple marriage ceremonies while removing scriptures on eternal marriage? 2
Avatar4321 Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 On 8/15/2017 at 11:37 AM, e-eye said: If she is telling the truth then we at least know that there are some current members of at least one stake presidency that believe in his teachings and either believe the stake is falling in sync to these teaching or are delusional in thinking so. We already knew the church was at least concerned about the situation which they should be with any movement. From what I recently read on another website is that the movement is having issues of their own with leadership and new/changing scriptures. I think you will see this movement stall out. The lifeblood of this movement are LDS members who for the most part either are fed up with leadership, feel enlightened, want a reason to excuse sin, or are disenchanted, which is not a great group of people you want to start a movement - people will hold on due to pride but like all false religions it will eventually fall apart. If she is telling the truth then someone who claims to be a member of a stake presidency is the source
Avatar4321 Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 On 8/15/2017 at 0:29 PM, pogi said: Apparently some of them claim no leadership at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver_C._Snuffer_Jr.#cite_note-16 There is a mn fellowship?
rpn Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 (edited) https://bringingtolighthiddenthings.wordpress.com/2017/08/14/first-blog-post/ This thread will give you a good snapshot of how the Remnant is different from mormonism/lds. And this post states Snuffer's response to the above. Edited August 16, 2017 by rpn
rpn Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said: They are going to adopt LDS Temple marriage ceremonies while removing scriptures on eternal marriage? They have adopted lds temple marriage ceremony, which is done in the mountains. And I have read the scripture changes they have finalized, so I do not know if they removed 132 in the final version or parts thereof.
Avatar4321 Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 On 8/15/2017 at 1:49 PM, e-eye said: I don't disagree that disaffection can be a good thing - it is true many good things can come about from it. What I believe is that when you pull disaffected people from something that they see is less than perfect you are setting yourself up for similar results when you fail to deliver - especially when what they left was true and better. Case in point - read this blog from a follower of the Denver movement and then read the comment below. https://bringingtolighthiddenthings.wordpress.com/2017/08/14/first-blog-post/ Sorry this is kind of a thread drift, but I think what you see here and what you will see with this movement are members becoming upset that what they signed up for isn't exactly what they thought. Those who left the church will be left searching again. On a side note if what Anonymous says is true the Denver Snuffer does think he is David then they indeed will have an official leader in the movement. Interesting read. It seems like the brother with the discipline issue means polygamy might be an issue in their movement
Avatar4321 Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 On 8/15/2017 at 2:56 PM, Calm said: It has been awhile since I researched Snuffer, but my understanding is he dates the final loss of Priesthood authority by the LDS Church to his excommunication. It is the height of arrogance to claim the Church's rejection of him is its downfall and that is why I never bought into his 'I am not your leader' role playing of humility. It is rather timely
ttribe Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said: They are going to adopt LDS Temple marriage ceremonies while removing scriptures on eternal marriage? 23 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said: If she is telling the truth then someone who claims to be a member of a stake presidency is the source 21 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said: There is a mn fellowship? 8 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said: Interesting read. It seems like the brother with the discipline issue means polygamy might be an issue in their movement 7 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said: It is rather timely Note to Avatar4321 - This board does have a multi-quote function. It might be good form to make use of it.
Calm Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 39 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said: If she is telling the truth then someone who claims to be a member of a stake presidency is the source Given the way she wrote it, it seems she had no way to verify if this claim of being a member of the SP was accurate or not. And she does not specify what type of documents are discussing the reasons for discipline. If they are just emails sent from other anonymous sources or speculations not based on actual participation in the discipline process, they would amount to nothing in terms of confirming. At this point, evidence appears to me to be pretty much speculative. I would not be surprised to see confirmed some in stake presidencies have ventured into Remnant waters, but just don't think documentation amounts to anything yet.
Calm Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) 30 minutes ago, ttribe said: Note to Avatar4321 - This board does have a multi-quote function. It might be good form to make use of it. Makes it harder keeping track for a person you are responding to. He was also responding over a half an hour as well as to different people. I would never have reached my ridiculous number of posts by using multiquote and no one will ever catch up if they use it. I have tried it myself at times recently and been unhappy with the result in spite of it being embarrassing to have ten posts in a row (which can happen if I get way behind in a thread and have too much to say). It used to be easier to edit imo. Now it can be almost impossible to capture just the portion I want without just using the backspace key (maybe using the current iPad as I have a similar problem of "selecting" on gmail). Doing that for multiple posts has led to multiple errors for me. If Avatar uses a phone, it might be very difficult to make work. Edited August 17, 2017 by Calm 2
clarkgoble Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) On 8/15/2017 at 0:49 PM, e-eye said: On a side note if what Anonymous says is true the Denver Snuffer does think he is David then they indeed will have an official leader in the movement. Oh Geeze. I missed that. That's kind of funny. I'd never heard of that John Pontius guy either who was mentioned in the comments. Is he still LDS or is he part of the Snuffer group too? Edited August 17, 2017 by clarkgoble
juliann Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) 36 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: Oh Geeze. I missed that. That's kind of funny. I'd never heard of that John Pontius guy either who was mentioned in the comments. Is he still LDS or is he part of the Snuffer group too? He's dead. He is the one who wrote Visions of Glory based on "Spencer's" tales. What I will find interesting in this movement is how it works out with women being able to strip men of their priesthood certificate (he can't use priesthood outside of his home.) If they are writing scripture they are institutionalizing and that has always meant that women lose power. Maybe these women can hang onto it, but having a "leader" contradict a woman's council isn't a good sign. Edited August 17, 2017 by juliann
clarkgoble Posted August 18, 2017 Posted August 18, 2017 2 hours ago, juliann said: He's dead. He is the one who wrote Visions of Glory based on "Spencer's" tales. What I will find interesting in this movement is how it works out with women being able to strip men of their priesthood certificate (he can't use priesthood outside of his home.) If they are writing scripture they are institutionalizing and that has always meant that women lose power. Maybe these women can hang onto it, but having a "leader" contradict a woman's council isn't a good sign. What the structure seems to privilege is a de facto Protestant like priesthood of all believers. There's less binding people together so if you don't like something, go do your own thing. In this case it sounds like someone was trying to inject polygamy into the movement that's causing this schism. I don't want to be too critical as you can find similar things going on in our own early history. That in turn led to more centralization of power under Joseph which alienated the people who liked that more democratic structure with lots of checks and balances. The big difference is that the Snuffer groups more or less were reacting to the mature priesthood structure whereas Joseph was primarily reacting to the loose protestantism of the burned over district. There wasn't a lot of Catholic or Orthodox influence otherwise I suspect the early church might have evolved differently. What's interesting is that the Snuffer group went for this idealized democratic and egalitarian vision rather than copying the established successful structures such as formal priesthood hierarchy or the main alternative of "great teachers" such as one finds in the Rabbinical movement or the somewhat similar structure of Imams in Islam. I think that's because they're trying to maintain some semblance of priesthood without having the hierarchal structure.
stemelbow Posted August 18, 2017 Posted August 18, 2017 On 8/15/2017 at 4:12 PM, Hamba Tuhan said: I've met very few people in the Church who aren't open and don't welcome 'some level of personal thought'. They do exist, but they're rare, in my experience, and I've certainly never been a member of a ward or branch that did not welcome me, my thoughts, and my desires to make a contribution with open arms (and sometimes with open glee!). Nearly the opposite for me. But, perception is reality in this type of stuff, I guess. Kind of feeling some level of confusion though. When you suggested a ward was allowing, as in welcoming differing ideas, as opposed to most wards not allowing such, it was a bad thing. Now you seem to say every ward and nearly all Mormons welcome differing ideas. "It had been allowed over some years to become a safe haven for a progressive/feminist clique that was growing in its influence and reach. In my time" On 8/15/2017 at 4:12 PM, Hamba Tuhan said: Mate, did you miss the part where I mentioned that an apostle visited the ward and quelled the rising apostasy? If you're willing to go out of your way to visit a congregation that's careening into a defiant rejection of revelation and priesthood authority, you may want to skip the intermediate stages and just pick some man-made church? So they are still careening? I thought you said it was all fixed by the authority wagging the threat of excommunication over their heads. It is an odd thing, really, though. They always say that type of stuff has to happen on a local level, but the central authority seems to often have a say when it comes to believing the wrong way. Every Church is man-made, even the LDS one, I'd say. So i'm not sure what your problem is really.
rockpond Posted August 18, 2017 Author Posted August 18, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Nearly the opposite for me. But, perception is reality in this type of stuff, I guess. Kind of feeling some level of confusion though. When you suggested a ward was allowing, as in welcoming differing ideas, as opposed to most wards not allowing such, it was a bad thing. Now you seem to say every ward and nearly all Mormons welcome differing ideas. "It had been allowed over some years to become a safe haven for a progressive/feminist clique that was growing in its influence and reach. In my time" So they are still careening? I thought you said it was all fixed by the authority wagging the threat of excommunication over their heads. It is an odd thing, really, though. They always say that type of stuff has to happen on a local level, but the central authority seems to often have a say when it comes to believing the wrong way. Every Church is man-made, even the LDS one, I'd say. So i'm not sure what your problem is really. Stemelbow -- You are forgetting the unwritten order: Questions are honored... as long as they are faith promoting. Differing ideas are welcomed... but don't share them publicly. Personal revelation is encouraged... just make sure it aligns with the Brethren. Edited August 18, 2017 by rockpond 2
stemelbow Posted August 18, 2017 Posted August 18, 2017 16 minutes ago, rockpond said: Stemelbow -- You are forgetting the unwritten order: Questions are honored... as long as they are faith promoting. Differing ideas are welcomed... but don't share them publicly. Personal revelation is encouraged... just make sure it aligns with the Brethren. Oh you're right. I forgot. I still like to challenge all the unwritten rules that seem to make the Church and culture too cumbersome and exclusive. That can't be the way of God. I reject such a notion. 1
Hamba Tuhan Posted August 19, 2017 Posted August 19, 2017 16 hours ago, stemelbow said: When you suggested a ward was allowing, as in welcoming differing ideas, as opposed to most wards not allowing such, it was a bad thing. Now you seem to say every ward and nearly all Mormons welcome differing ideas. I think you're the one who concocted the supposed opposition here. As a rule, all wards welcome all kinds of people and their attendant ideas. That this attitude somehow requires the Church to tolerate the growth of apostasy in one of its congregations is risible. I'm certain that I could list certain 'differing ideas' that you would state should never be allowed to be taught at church. Just because your list and the Lord's list might not be exactly identical doesn't make the Church intolerant of difference. Quote Every Church is man-made, even the LDS one, I'd say. I say otherwise. See, differing ideas. Quote So i'm not sure what your problem is really. I wasn't aware that I have one. Are you suggesting that I do? Or perhaps projecting? 2
juliann Posted August 19, 2017 Posted August 19, 2017 (edited) On 8/16/2017 at 5:11 PM, Calm said: Given the way she wrote it, it seems she had no way to verify if this claim of being a member of the SP was accurate or not. And she does not specify what type of documents are discussing the reasons for discipline. If they are just emails sent from other anonymous sources or speculations not based on actual participation in the discipline process, they would amount to nothing in terms of confirming. At this point, evidence appears to me to be pretty much speculative. I would not be surprised to see confirmed some in stake presidencies have ventured into Remnant waters, but just don't think documentation amounts to anything yet. I had taken her claims at face value but listening to some of the Fabrezio show concerned me so I am waiting for something more conclusive. I do like the way she is humanizing the polygamist women and children by face to face contact. But having dinner with them is not a sociological study. She mentioned the conflict in eating with those from groups who have child abuse issues and given the recent national events, I'm wondering if she would do the same with the Charlottesville perps. The more I listen to her the more concerned I am as she establishes a bigger social media footprint given her data-less conclusions and a penchant for giving a voice to males who very may well be criminals. I found her dismissal of the objections of survivors of that deeply disturbing. The Snufferites kind of remind me of the problems the Christian churches had with "gnostics" as they all grappled for legitimacy. The so-called gnostics were a particular problem because they were in the congregations, not always outside of them. Edited August 19, 2017 by juliann 3
stemelbow Posted August 21, 2017 Posted August 21, 2017 On 8/19/2017 at 5:52 AM, Hamba Tuhan said: I think you're the one who concocted the supposed opposition here. As a rule, all wards welcome all kinds of people and their attendant ideas. That this attitude somehow requires the Church to tolerate the growth of apostasy in one of its congregations is risible. so what apostasy are you alluding to? You had called that ward, "a safe haven for a progressive/feminist clique". Are you saying if someone shows up in a ward that espouses a feminist or progressive mindset (not sure exactly what that means to you) that person's views should not be welcome? That person should be made to feel rejected rather than feel safe in the ward? On 8/19/2017 at 5:52 AM, Hamba Tuhan said: I'm certain that I could list certain 'differing ideas' that you would state should never be allowed to be taught at church. Just because your list and the Lord's list might not be exactly identical doesn't make the Church intolerant of difference. I say otherwise. See, differing ideas. I wasn't aware that I have one. Are you suggesting that I do? Or perhaps projecting? Well issue (so not problem if you have an issue with that term) with what is said.
stemelbow Posted August 21, 2017 Posted August 21, 2017 On 8/19/2017 at 10:36 AM, juliann said: . I found her dismissal of the objections of survivors of that deeply disturbing. Did I miss this in the Fabrizio interview? Or was this from somewhere else? If so, can you point me to it?
clarkgoble Posted August 21, 2017 Posted August 21, 2017 On 8/18/2017 at 1:57 PM, stemelbow said: Oh you're right. I forgot. I still like to challenge all the unwritten rules that seem to make the Church and culture too cumbersome and exclusive. That can't be the way of God. I reject such a notion. Huh? Can't there be right or wrong answers? What's the point of leadership if they can't point towards the right?
Recommended Posts