The most played episodes among Podcast App listeners.

1. 1
   Number 1: Mormon Book Reviews – An Interview With Denver Snuffer

   The following interview of Denver Snuffer was conducted by Steven Pynnaker on April 14, 2026 and was originally posted to the MBR YouTube channel. Steven Pynnaker: Welcome to Mormon Book Reviews: “Where an Evangelical Encounters the Restoration.” I’m your host, Steven Pynnaker, and I’m very excited about this guest of mine that has returned to the channel. His name is Denver Snuffer, and I’ve gotten to, I feel, become friends with him over the course of the last few years. The interview that we did with him—still—people still bring up to me. When I was at the Journal of Mormon Polygamy Conference last month, I had quite a few people come up to me, tell me how much they enjoyed that interview. So years later, that conversation still resonates in a lot of spaces, and I’m really honored and privileged to have Denver coming back on the program. Before we get started in the interview, I just want to let people know this is my very first interview in our new temporary studios. Our home has been torn down as of last week, and we are expecting for the new home to be delivered later this month. So we, Mom and I, want to ask/thank you for all your thoughts and prayers during this stressful time, but we’re grateful to be at our neighbor’s house, and we’re grateful to have a place that we can record some further important episodes here on MBR. Denver Snuffer, welcome back to the program. Denver Snuffer: Well, it’s good to see you again. I never like or enjoy being interviewed, but, you know, I’m willing to do it, and I’m grateful to talk to you again. I was glad to meet your mom. SP: Yes, Denver got to meet my mom, and that was great. She was really enjoying meeting him, as well, and hopefully, if he gets his way out to Florida, or we get back out there to Utah, we’ll have dinner sometime. I did want to say, too, that we’re, interestingly enough, we were supposed to tape this morning, and some things came up on Denver’s end, but actually, I think it was a blessing in disguise. Because shortly after, when we were supposed to tape our episode, Dr. Benjamin Park, he posted a video about Denver Snuffer and his “movement,” and I asked Denver to review it, and he is going to, but we’re gonna do that at the end of the interview. The main reason: at Thursday, I was having dinner with a friend, and he shared with me some new Scriptures that have been produced by this Covenant Christians movement. And I want to share with everybody this website real quick, just so people can see this, so they can… And I will have a link to this. It’s a… “What is a Covenant Christian?” is the question that’s asked, and this tells you everything about it. And there’s some really interesting things that you can… Lots of resources that you can use to find things, as well as a place that you can actually purchase these Scriptures that we’re gonna talk about. But before we get into that (we will revisit this site), but we actually wanted to talk about these Scriptures. So I was having dinner Thursday night with a friend. He shares with me these Scriptures. I text Denver. I’m like, Oh my gosh, like as I’m reading, going through it, it’s some of the most beautiful Scriptures I’ve ever seen and handled, and I was thoroughly impressed with them. And Denver was so kind to come on to talk about it. And I know you’re busy with the conference you just did this weekend. So, Denver, tell us, just share these Scriptures, because they’re astonishing, and tell us why you think these are so important. DS: Well, I’m actually holding the three-volume set up. I think you can see it on camera. There’s three volumes. Volume one is called the Old Covenants. Volume number two is called the New Covenants, and volume number three is called the Modern Covenants. The Scriptures that have been put together in the past (our leather, three-volume set of Scriptures) needed to be reprinted because material has expanded. There’s more to be included now. And the project included originally (when we were looking to put a set of Scriptures into print), we were looking for certain specifications to be made. The specifications were provided by a book reconstructionist who looked at the Royal Jongbloed Press out of the Netherlands and the quality of the work that they did, and he provided a list of specifications for the first set of leather-bound Scriptures. And a printer in India who really wanted to get into the Bible-binding business agreed to match all of the specifications, and the first set was printed in India. And because he was trying to get into the market and because we were very price-sensitive, the first set was printed by a startup (not a startup printer, but a startup Bible publisher) in India. Then enough demand was created over the years since that first printing that we needed to do a second printing, and the decision was made on the second print to go ahead and go to Jongbloed in the Netherlands and see what they could do for us in terms of the best printer in the world at binding Bibles. Could they do our project for us, and what would it cost? Now, it’s probably five times as much money for the three volumes in the second print than it was for the first print. However, they literally are some of the best-bound, highest quality materials that you can get from any place in the world. They are printed on 100% cotton and linen paper that’s provided out of France. The leather coverings come from England. The printing is done in the Netherlands, and they are meticulous. The copies all get gilded on the edge, but in addition to gilding, they also spray the edges so that on top of the gilding, there’s also paint. The gilding is intended to be a barrier against insects eating the paper. SP: Okay. DS: The gilding will wear off. (It’s actually metal; it’s gold. It will wear off by repeated use.) So Jongbloed puts ink on/over the top of that so that if the gilding wears off, there’s still a barrier for the insect through the ink. SP: Okay, so as I was paging through it the other day, I noticed that at one angle you look at it, it’s gold. I don’t know if you can pick it up on the camera, but at another angle, it actually turns red. Is that the paint? DS: It does turn red on every single leather-bound volume that is not blue, but in the blue volumes (and I’ve got blue leather coverings), they are the only ones that get a blue paint on top of the gilding. So mine has blue ribbons, blue leather, and then the blue overspray. All of the rest of them have red ribbons, have red overspray on top of the gilding; and it doesn’t matter if you get black, if you get brown/tan, or if you get red, it’s still gonna be red overspray and red ribbons. Blue is the only one that’s an exception. SP: Well, that’s the one I want to get because my favorite color is blue. So, Denver, why did they decide to… I mean, because again, these are not inexpensive, and you’re not making a profit off of these, so there’s none of that going on. What made you decide to go to that level of Scriptures at that price point? Because it’s not inexpensive. But the quality is astonishing at the same time. So how do you balance those two? DS: Yeah, there’s probably a little bit of history that informed my agreement with the people that were putting it into print, and that comes from Galileo, who wrote a text that got him in trouble with the Vatican. The Vatican gathered up and destroyed… I think there are only three copies of the book that remained after the censorship and the book-burning that was done, but I think two of those are in the Vatican archives; but one of them managed to get over the Alps and survived, and as a consequence, the book remains in print through today in various languages because a copy survived. These are intended—by the materials that got used and by the binding and the effort that got put together—these are intended to be able to go into daily use and survive daily use for five centuries. We wanted a durable product so that some amount of what it is that we do will survive on into future generations. And so I was persuaded that we make a run of books that are survivable, durable, everyday usable, and still be something that would be around for generations. I expect my grandkids and great-grandkids will use these very same volumes that I’m using (and marking up, by the way). And so it was durability, it was survivability, it was permanency that persuaded me. There were other people who just fell in love with the quality of the book that was being put out by… I mean, Jongbloed prints Bibles. Their primary forte is the production and sale of Bibles in various languages for various denominations; and just the quality of the book… If you pick up one of their Bibles, you have the same reaction that you have when you look at one of these sets, that is, that it feels like a very important, durable book. The other thing that… The pitch size on the first set was, I believe, 9.2. These are 11 pitch size, so they’re much larger print. They’re easier to read. There are some people who strain their eyes to read the first edition. These were made larger in part because that was the model that Jongbloed used in other Biblical print jobs that they had done with other versions of the Bible to make it readable, to make it like an actual text that you’re going to use and let it inform you. SP: That’s so interesting to me. Before we get actually into the content of these Scriptures, Denver, was there anything else about the production that you wanted to go into? By the way, what I’m also interested in is the fact that this is a company that publishes Bibles. Was there any pushback to publishing other Scriptures that were not part of the (if you will) “mainstream” Christian canon? DS: We’ve run into that issue with other printers. We did not run into that issue with Jongbloed. We’ve had people outright say they’re not interested, and it’s for religious reasons. Jongbloed did not take that attitude, and they are the best. I just think that it’s foolish for someone who is in the business of printing and publishing to allow a religious bias to prevent them from practicing their craft. Jongbloed didn’t do that. SP: Okay, so that’s good to know. There’s other people out there, other groups, of course, that are producing scripture within the Restoration. And just to make you aware of it, this is a company that apparently does not discriminate against the Restoration, so that’s good on them that they understand the importance. And also sounds like, to me, they’re a good company probably to work with. DS: Very good. The one thing that they did require, however, was a minimum order because it takes so much to set up and do a run of a print and a binding of a book. There’s a minimum order, and we had to have multiple thousands of volumes printed. However, they were willing to count the total run of volume 3, volume 2, and volume 1 as meeting their minimum order quantity. So we didn’t have to get that quantity for each one of the three volumes; we just had to get that for the total of all of them combined. And because they are expensive and because it did present a financial challenge, one of the things that was done is before any contract was let, a pre-order was done. People who were interested could put their name in that they were willing to buy. They had to make a deposit. They either had to pay for it in full or they had to pay for at least half before and half upon delivery. And so the funds were gathered. Jongbloed required 50% of the print job to be paid upon placing the order and 50% at delivery. And so we had to gather the funds. There had to be enough interest. The number of people that were willing to pre-order and pay didn’t allow for a whole lot of excess copies to be made. A few people stepped up and agreed to fund additional copies to be printed that were unsold, and as a consequence of that, there are still some available sets for purchase. There aren’t a lot of extra; there are some. But also, you know Benchmark Books: They bought 10 copies, and they are selling their 10 copies. They ordered in advance when they heard it was becoming available. So there are still a handful that are available. But at that conference yesterday, I think they sold another dozen or so copies of the sets. So, you know, day by day the number diminishes. I assume we will have yet another printing at some point in the future. And I assume that the future printing will run like this one. That is, the demand will have to be there. People have to pre-order, and people will have to make a deposit. But I don’t know how long it’ll be between the two. It’s been years after the first run of leatherbound Scriptures before these got printed. But I’m sure there will be more editions printed at some point in the future. It’s also available as print-on-demand. But when you’re dealing with these kinds of texts, this volume is going to be substantially bigger in a print-on-demand, because they’re using cellulose paper. And so the size of the volumes are gonna be significantly bigger and far less portable than they are in the leather-bound edition. But you can get them through Amazon as a print-on-demand set if what you want is just the information. SP: Just the actual text itself; you can get print-on-demand that way. Okay, that’s good to know for people. So we’ll have a link in the description to that Amazon link. So for those of you who just want the content, you’ll be able to do that. Now, question I have is, I have your previous set that one of your friends graciously sent to me, and I’ve had the opportunity to go through those Scriptures. And those are actually, I thought that those volumes were pretty impressive as well. If somebody were to have this, the previous set, and now what would be the reasoning you would… What’s the difference between that set, and have there been changes made, additions? DS: Yes. SP: Maybe talk a little bit about some of the… Compare and contrast the two, the previous edition and this new one. DS: Well, yeah, there have been additions made. But in addition to it including more material, when the first edition of the Scriptures were printed… The Book of Mormon, for example, when it was originally put out as a volume didn’t have chapters; it didn’t have verses, but it did have paragraphs—actually, it did have chapters—but it had paragraphs. The numbering and the versification of that didn’t happen until several editions later. And I think it was Orson Pratt who was responsible for adding the chapters and verses. And when he did that, he more or less mirrored what the King James writers had done with staccato verses. You know, they’re short; they’re almost concepts or phrases, as opposed to sentences. And so, when you become familiar with the Scriptures, and you’ve bought them from Deseret Book, and you’re using King James Bibles and LDS chapters and versification, you would see the Scriptures laid out in one format. We laid out that first edition in paragraphs, mirroring the original Book of Mormon paragraph identification, and we numbered the paragraphs. That created a difficulty for anyone that had spent a lot of time studying the Scriptures. If you’ve got a verse and a chapter in mind/in your memory, to translate that from chapters into verses, paragraphs into verses, it becomes difficult. So, one of the things that has been done in this new leather set… I’m gonna see if I can get it close enough to the camera to see it, but on the one side of the page, there is red traditional numbering that you would find in any King James version of the Bible. On the same page, but opposite when you open it up, is the RE (the Restoration Edition) chapter and paragraph identification. In the column, the paragraphs appear and the numbering for the paragraphs are there, but inside each of the paragraphs, the verses appear. And for example, on this page, there is a paragraph, or excuse me, a new chapter nine. I don’t know if you can see that. SP: Yeah, I see there’s a new chapter nine. Yep. DS: Yeah, and all of the traditional numbering (verses and chapters), all of them are included in this new edition. They’re in red, and the verses are superscripts, and the chapters begin with a large number in red that tells you what chapter you’re looking at, but we also include our own identification by chapter and paragraph number. SP: Just to clarify, so basically you’re using your chapter, your breakdowns of the paragraphs, but then you’re including the versification of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints edition of the Book of Mormon (just keep in mind, of course, the RLDS has their own thing going on when it comes to those as well). But so basically, if you are a person who uses The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints versification, you’ll be able to use this and cross-reference it. DS: Yeah, the navigation tools that you would be familiar with in a King James Bible or in an LDS Book of Mormon are all included in this edition in the red lettering inside the text, with the chapter orientation on the top left-hand side, the RE new numbering orientation [on the] top right-hand side, but all of the paragraph numbers are included. So you can find a citation. If someone is trying to get you to look at 1 Corinthians 6:13, you can find that easily using the red superscripts and the red chapter identification. But you’ll also find, since the letters were written with ideas in mind, all of the letters are a single chapter in the RE edition. But if you still want to go to King James versification, it’s all included. And so in terms of navigation, these are a lot easier than the first edition. And if you’re talking to someone who has a traditional Bible or who is acquainted with LDS chapters and verses, it’s far easier to give them a cite. “Well, where do you find that in the Scriptures?” Now we have an easy way to say you can find it here. Before, you just had to pick up both books and look at them carefully in order to find the wording where the one and the other is duplicated, because the citations were not replicated. We did our own chapters and paragraphs. SP: Okay, interesting. So I guess for me, the question would be, and for a lot of people in the audiences who maybe have their own version of the Book of Mormon and Doctrines and Covenants (maybe their triple combo or their quad, whatever you want to call it), what would you say, what makes this series that your movement has created that’s highly informed by your work and your translations and stuff, what would you say, what makes this a better translation, maybe gives a better, fuller understanding of the Restoration? Is this something that’s not only for people that are part of your movement, but this can be used for anybody who believes in restoration of Scriptures? How would this help inform them? DS: Yeah, I think there are a number of things that distinguish this set from anything that has gone on before. The first point I would make is that on the 7th of December 1830, Joseph Smith (and this is a revelation that appears both in the Doctrine and Covenants as section 35, but it’s section 18 of our Teachings and Commandments—but it’s D&C 35), in this revelation, in December of 1830, Joseph Smith was getting a revelation that was received, addressed to Sidney Rigdon and mentioning Joseph Smith, and it states this, And a commandment I given unto you [that’s Sidney Rigdon] that you [Rigdon] shall write for him [that’s Joseph Smith], and the scriptures shall be given, even as they are in [mine] own bosom, to the salvation of [mine] own elect (T&C 18:6). That commences a process that has become known as the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, but that is mentioned in over 15 revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, and I’ve marked all of them as I’ve gone through. The effort that Joseph and Sidney Rigdon made to get through the Bible and to write it as it appears in God’s own bosom resulted in a number of things that… LDS members would identify the Pearl of Great Price Book of Moses as a separate set of Scripture; that’s part of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. The Pearl of Great Price includes Matthew chapter 24; that was part of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. There was a revelation about the three degrees of glory that is known as Doctrine and Covenants section 76. That was not part, but was inspired by the translation of the book of John and an inquiry being made about the afterlife (because it appeared that there couldn’t be just a single division of heaven and hell). And so Doctrine and Covenants section 76 came as revelation, not as part of the translation of the Bible, but as an independent revelation inspired by the translation of the Bible. There’s another revelation that comes. This one is in February of 1831, so we’re now a few months after that. This is in Doctrine and Covenants 42, but it’s section [26] in ours. It includes this as part of that revelation, You shall ask, and my scripture shall be given as I have appointed (T&C 26:15) and so on. So it’s being mentioned again in a revelation in both LDS Scriptures and in ours. There’s another one, which is section 45 of the Doctrine and Covenants, section 31 of our Teachings and Commandments: …it shall not be given unto you to know any further than this, until the New Testament be translated, and in it all these things shall be made known. Wherefore, I give unto you that you may now translate it, that you may be prepared for things to come, [and] truly I say unto you that great[er] things await you. (T&C 31:13). And it goes on from there. Well, the effort that Joseph Smith had made to produce this resulted also in Joseph Smith warning that if the fullness of the Scriptures (and that’s what he called his Joseph Smith translation of the Bible, together with the Book of Mormon; they together comprised it—not the Bible, [but] the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible, together with the Book of Mormon), he said, “If the fullness of the Scriptures are not received by the Church, then it would yet fall.” When Brigham Young led the Mormon refugees out of Illinois, the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible remained in the possession of Emma Smith. She would later gift it to the church her son Joseph Smith III led. Joseph Smith III would let the (then the) Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints put into print the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible, and that’s the one that most people have become acquainted with. However, it has been in recent times that the actual Joseph Smith translation material (in fact, I’ve got a set of that in the other room here) became actually available. So we can see what Joseph did. We can also see that some of what he did got left out. And we know that the committee of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, when they put the JST into print, the committee made changes: they deleted some of what he had done; they added some things that they believed belonged in there. So when the actual original material Joseph had left us became available, the effort was made to gather the actual work that Joseph Smith had done on the Bible as the text to be used in these Scriptures. In addition, while putting the Joseph Smith translation into the text, it was also… Everyone who’s acquainted with Joseph’s Nauvoo-era talks knows that Joseph just spontaneously, while giving a talk in Nauvoo, would say, “Here’s a quote…” and he would say, “I could give a cleaner translation or meaning of this.” He corrected some things in Ezekiel; he corrected some things in the New Testament—and he just did this spontaneously. Well, the conclusion that we made was “In for a penny, in for a dollar”: If we’re gonna get what Joseph Smith did to clarify the Scriptures as they appear in the Lord’s own bosom, we put in also all of the Nauvoo-era additions, corrections, or restatements that Joseph provided to Bible passages. So the most complete and the most inclusive—including the Nauvoo-era talks—version of the Joseph Smith translation of the Old and New Testaments are what are the source material for the Old Covenants and the New Testament portion of the New Covenants. SP: Okay, so that’s really interesting. So that’s a very fascinating approach that you took. So in one sense, what you’re saying is Joseph Smith’s final word on a particular verse is what you put in your edition. Is that correct? DS: Yes. Yeah. And as far as I know, no one’s ever done this. SP: No. DS: Therefore, this is—to the extent that you want to honor Joseph Smith and respect the work that he had done—this is the most correct and the most inclusive of anything that has ever been put into print. SP: Okay. So, and again, I also want to talk a little bit about… Because obviously, people think, “Well, Denver Snuffer, Denver Snuffer!” But this is a group effort that’s being done here. DS: Yeah. SP: So maybe talk about that as well, that this is not Denver Snuffer coming up from Sinai with pure Scriptures, but you’re… This is a collaboration that you’re doing, and you’re seeking consensus on this as well. DS: This is a massive effort, a research project that involved dozens and dozens of people on each part of the book, and a division of labor and proofreading; and all of the versification was done by volunteers that went through meticulously to cross-compare and to make sure that the text that was going to go into the printer was correctly aligned with the correct verses and the correct chapters, both for the RE version and the KJV LDS chapters and versification. The research project included consultation with volumes of research. The Book of Mormon text, which we haven’t talked about yet, required an enormous amount of effort by multiple parties consulting with numerous source materials, much of which became available both through Royal Skousen’s set of research books, as well as The Joseph Smith Papers publication of manuscripts and revelation texts—and all of those materials became available while we’re doing this project. In addition, the first effort… When a preliminary Joseph Smith translation of the Bible effort rolled out at a conference in St. George, Utah (preliminary to getting the Scriptures adopted and approved at a conference), the first publication of that resulted in a fellow stepping forward who essentially had made it his life’s work for over a decade to meticulously go through the Joseph Smith translation. He looked at what had been done in that first St. George conference publication, and he said, “We’ve relied way too much on what the RLDS Church published as the Joseph Smith translation, and we have not picked up on the fact that they were not faithful/their fidelity wasn’t to the Joseph Smith effort, it was to their own sensibilities.” And so he had (and he then provided) numerous corrections, and that led in turn to fixing what had been done as an initial proposal, and then re-looking at everything and re-examining it, at which point the Nauvoo-era corrections were also concluded as an appropriate addition. And so it got put out, it was put into the hands of hundreds and hundreds, thousands of people who had access to it to evaluate it before any vote would be taken to adopt it, and in that process, more improvements and more study was made. The Book of Mormon is a whole different subject than the Bible, because the Bible is the Joseph Smith translation. The Book of Mormon, on the other hand: Royal Skousen has spent half a century looking at every single edition of the different versions of the Book of Mormon. The entire printer’s manuscript… Joseph Smith dictated a translation, but that copy of the translation was not trusted in E. B. Grandin’s hands. Everything that was in that translation was hand-copied to the printer’s manuscript. We had 100% of the printer’s manuscript available, and it’s in The Joseph Smith Papers, it’s in the Skousen seven-volume effort; you can see every word of that printer’s manuscript. The original translation got put into the cornerstone of, I think it was the Nauvoo House, and then it was left there in the cornerstone to rot, and only about 22% of that survived. But from the 22% of that that did survive, you can look at that, and you can look at the printer’s manuscript, and we know that the copyist for the printer’s manuscript made a mistake about every page and a half. SP: Okay. DS: Then the printer’s manuscript got typeset, and since we’ve got 100% of the printer’s manuscript, and we still have facsimile copies of the first edition, we know that the print shop: #1: Supplied 100% of the punctuation. That was done by John Gilbert, who was employed at E. B. Grandin’s shop. None of the punctuation was done by Joseph Smith or by anyone who was affiliated with the Restoration. It was done by a guy that worked as a printer. And so one of the things, when we did the Book of Mormon, we looked carefully at the punctuation. We eliminated all of the punctuation we could get away with eliminating. We tried not to superimpose an interpretation through the punctuation. For example, there have been scholarly debates that have raged for a century and a half about Joseph Smith’s shifting viewpoint of the Trinity, that the Book of Mormon was originally a Trinitarian text, and that Joseph progressed in his understanding/his theology until he became something other than Trinitarian by the time you arrive at Nauvoo. I look at Lectures on Faith, where Joseph Smith is not a Trinitarian and is consistent with what he would later say in Nauvoo, and using Lectures on Faith as the guide, I repunctuated all of the Trinitarian… I call them “Trinitarian commas.” I got it repunctuated so that it was consistent to read it in the new punctuation, consistent with what’s in Lectures on Faith. And as a consequence, my suggestion is that since John Gilbert was a traditional Christian and a Trinitarian, John Gilbert is responsible for that debate, not Joseph Smith; and that I fixed the debate simply by changing punctuation. SP: Okay, can you give an example of that? Because I think that’s really an important thing that you’re bringing out here, because of course, many people describe the Book of Mormon as being pretty orthodox in its Christian beliefs, and very Protestant, and also arguably, I’ve actually argued that the Book of Mormon is arguably more Trinitarian than the New Testament. I want to get… Give me an example here, because I find this really intriguing. DS: Well, here’s the problem. If I’d known you were gonna ask that question, I’d have the verse at my hand. But I can tell you this. You will find it if you read Abinadi and his explanation and his doctrinal description given by Abinadi as he’s being tried for his life in the text of the Book of Mormon. Compare what you’ve got in a traditional Book of Mormon with Abinadi’s defense to the version of the Book of Mormon that we print in Volume 2, the New Covenants, and you will see that the Trinitarianism is resolved simply by replacing punctuation. SP: Okay, that’s… I think that’s important. I’m really glad you brought that out because I think that’s a different approach that I would like to share this with other Book of Mormon scholars. Honestly, I would… Denver, if I were you, I would consider maybe even submitting a paper to the Book of Mormon Studies Association about your finding because I think that’d be a really interesting approach that you’re taking to the Book of Mormon and looking at it through a different lens. DS: Well, I might do that, but it… The only reason I would consider doing that is if I thought it would be helpful to someone else. I’m not really interested in notoriety. SP: I get it. But I think that’s an important contribution you’re making to the Book of Mormon scholarship, too. DS: Well, I’ll give some thought to that. Now, having said that about the Book of Mormon, it was always Joseph Smith’s intent to publish the New Testament and the Book of Mormon together. You saw that in our first edition of the Scriptures. That is true in this one as well. The first thing you encounter in Volume 2 is the New Testament that appears as the start, and the second thing that you’ll find in Volume 2 is the Book of Mormon in the form that we have—insofar as it is possible to do so—corrected, repunctuated, and included. And then in Volume 2, there is also what is called A Glossary of Gospel Terms. All three of these are in Volume 2. The Glossary of Gospel Terms is an explanation of language or meanings that you find in Scripture as an effort to help clarify how to understand something and how the word usage is appeared. It’s actually quite a theological exposition, and I think, for example, if someone were to do nothing more than to take the Glossary of Gospel Terms and read it from front to back, you would get a better theological education than you get from some divinity schools. Just reading from the index, these are the words that get defined in the context… And I’ll just… the Glossary. I’ll just read you a handful: Aaronic Priesthood, Abominable/Abomination, Accountability, Accountability, Age of, Accuse, Adam, Adam-ondi-Ahman, Added upon, Adoption, Adultery, Agency… …and that’s the beginning of the A’s. I’ll skip to K’s: Keeper of the Gate Keys, Keys of the Kingdom, Kingdom of God, Kingdoms, Know the Lord, Know/Knowledge. Skipping to S’s: Sabbath Day, Sacrament/Lord’s Supper, Sacred Embrace, Sacred Information, Sacrifice, Saint, Salem, and so on. So each of those has an entry. Some of those entries are a page or two or more. Some are short and brief, but all of them are intended to help someone understand what the Scriptures mean. So Volume 1: Joseph Smith Translation, Old Testament. Volume 2: New Testament Joseph Smith Translation, Book of Mormon, and Glossary of Gospel Terms. Now, one other thing I’m gonna pause and point out, Volume 2 ends on a signature. So that’s the last page of Volume 2. Volume 1 doesn’t end on a signature. There’s over 20 pages in the back that don’t have anything on it but lined pages to allow you to make notes. So if you want to write notes into your Scriptures, you have over 20 pages in Volume 1 that you can use to add or write down or memorialize anything that you want to put into the Scriptures, including, if you choose, a genealogy of you and your family. Volume 3, which we haven’t gotten to yet but we will get to in a moment, ends much earlier on a signature. So there’s about 40 pages in the back of Volume 3 that are nothing more than lined pages that you can use to write your own entries and make whatever things you think suitable for preservation in the back of your Scriptures. So you have notes available in Volume 1 and Volume 3, and 2 ends on a signature so that there is no lined paper there. SP: Well, let’s get to Volume 3, because what I find so interesting is I was caught off guard when I was going through these Scriptures, and I was like, “Wait, we have two sets of Book of Mormon in this set?” So explain to us the third volume, what this is all about. DS: Okay, first, it’s called the Teachings and Commandments, which is in contrast to Doctrine and Covenants. You know that the doctrine in the Doctrine and Covenants was Lectures on Faith. SP: Yes, yes. Absolutely. DS: So theLectures on Faith have gone back into Teachings and Commandments. They were removed from the D&C, I think in 1928 [1921], without a vote of the people. They were canonized in 1835. They were never de-canonized, they were just deleted. I think Bruce R. McConkie made a point of that at one point and said that “they were adopted as scripture, and they are scripture.” Although they aren’t in any LDS Scripture, they are in our Teachings and Commandments. So the first thing you’ll find in the T&C (the Teachings and Commandments) is that the Joseph Smith History has been greatly expanded. We’ve taken what he was doing to recreate the early history of the Church—after John Whitmer stole the history he had been keeping, and therefore, after Whitmer, and Cowdery, and Harris, and John Whitmer (David Whitmer’s brother) had left in rebellion against Joseph in Missouri—Joseph set about in 1838 to rewrite a history for the Church. That is what we’ve come to know as the Joseph Smith History, because it is a rewriting and a recreation in 1838 of what had gone on but had been kept by John Whitmer. He still had copies of his earlier revelations; they were separate, but he wove the narrative to put into the Joseph Smith History his earlier revelations. So the Joseph Smith History in the Teachings and Commandments, Volume 3, is greatly expanded. And you’ll find that within the Joseph Smith History in the Teachings and Commandments—which is T&C section 1—it also includes what has been, by the LDS, put into the Joseph Smith History: Doctrine and Covenants sections 2, 3, 10, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 19, 21, 22, and 23. All of those are now part of the Joseph Smith History, woven in as he wove it in when he was writing his history. So that’s the first thing you’ll encounter: greatly expanded history by Joseph Smith. Then you’ll find that Joseph Smith’s revelations are included; however, they do not take the form that they take in the LDS version. Joseph Smith got a revelation; Oliver Cowdery went out to Missouri and took those with him. He would typeset (at a press that they had bought) a compilation of those revelations that he called the Book of Commandments. When he was compiling the Book of Commandments, Oliver Cowdery thought it was his prerogative to exercise some editorial control and to add his contributions. And so the Book of Commandments took the revelations by Joseph and expanded them to include material Oliver Cowdery thought wise to be included within them. The press got destroyed. The Book of Commandments, while it had been gathered together, didn’t survive to be in print. However, bootleg copies were smuggled out, and the bootleg copies made their way back to Kirtland where they had a press. And in 1835, the material that had been edited by Oliver as the revelations then were turned over to a committee headed by Sidney Rigdon—and Rigdon felt a similar liberty. And so he and a committee that put together the Doctrine and Covenants in 1835 made further editorial changes to Joseph Smith’s revelations as they rolled out the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. In the meantime, separate from the committee working on the Doctrine and Covenants, Joseph Smith took personal responsibility for and exercised complete editorial control over Lectures on Faith, so that when it went to the press, it went to the press with the Lectures on Faith being the very first part of the book (first part, larger print—and it was the “doctrine”), followed by smaller print—editorially-revised from Oliver and Sidney and a committee—the revelations given to Joseph Smith. Then that compilation was presented to and approved by a vote of a conference in Kirtland, Ohio and became the Doctrine and Covenants, a volume of Scripture that was accepted by the church. And it has been in that form that it has come down through the LDS Church, and we inherited that as the Doctrine and Covenants, minus the Lectures on Faith after 1928 [1921]. We went back and re-looked—because the original revelations are now available—we went back and looked and eliminated everything that had been added to the original Joseph Smith revelation by Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon, or the committee, so that the revelation that gets blown up in the Doctrine and Covenants gets cut down in the T&C. And one example that I can point out pretty quickly is what becomes section 27 of the Doctrine and Covenants. Well, section 27 of the Doctrine and Covenants is section 8 in the Teachings and Commandments, and (as you can see) it’s two paragraphs. And you can go online and find this stuff. If you want to see the difference between what Joseph received as a revelation and what the LDS Church publishes after Oliver, Sidney, and the committee puts out, just compare section 8 of the T&C with section 27 of the Doctrine and Covenants, and you’ll find that the original revelation there (like many of the others, if you do a cross comparison) is significantly reduced in volume and more modest in content, with less grandiose reference to Peter, James, and John, and others that were added by folks who wanted to improve, I guess, the psychological effect upon the reader. We’ve gone back to the original. We’ve gone back and looked at the minimum of what Joseph Smith had actually received as his revelation. SP: So, I’m curious because, you know, why would you do that? If Joseph was okay with these expanded revelationsm why shouldn’t everybody else be okay with it? What’s your process of doing this? DS: For the same reason that Joseph was okay with giving 116 pages of the original manuscript to Martin Harris: Joseph was persuadable, and Joseph… He was told, “You’re no good at reading what’s in the hearts of men.” (He was told that after he had had the failure with the 116 pages.) Joseph was persuadable, and as a consequence of that… You know, look at the office of high priest, for example. The office of high priest (if you examine it in a biblical setting) is an Aaronic priesthood office held by Aaron and the oldest son/ grandson/great-grandson of Aaron to function in the Aaronic priesthood, performing the rites of the law of Moses. That’s what the high priest was. The idea of a high priest really fascinated Sidney Rigdon, and Rigdon really, really, really wanted a high priest office, which becomes—in the LDS Church—it becomes a Melchizedek priesthood office that is elevated above everything, excepting only an apostle or a president of the high priesthood. But technically, Joseph should never have been persuaded by Sidney. And I view a lot of what has happened within the Restoration as an accommodation that Joseph Smith was willing to make for the benefit of the people he was called upon to lead. So why would we go back and look only at the original statement in the revelation God presumably gave to Joseph Smith? In part, it is a way of saying we respect everything that Joseph did as a prophet, and we respect everything that God said to him directly. But the fact that Joseph Smith entertained other people’s notions—including Martin Harris’ insistence on taking the 116 pages—suggests to me that the prudent course is to look at what God said to Joseph and confine ourselves to that, and to let the persuasions that may have informed other things go, even if Joseph Smith was okay with it. SP: Interesting. Now, the question then, some people would say, well, Joseph was a fallen prophet. Are you saying that Joseph was a flawed man? But still, I mean, it’s just, he’s a human being, right? So you’re saying that Joseph was—at the same time—was operating in the prophetic, but also could make mistakes, maybe with the selling of the copyright in Canada, the lost 116 pages. It seems to indicate that you’re willing to say that Joseph was more fallible than maybe a lot of people are willing to accept. DS: He was human, and therefore, any of us who are human are necessarily, therefore, fallible. There is no such thing as an infallible mortal. And I believe, when Joseph vouched for the doctrine in the Doctrine and Covenants, and when Joseph in… He was lamenting this, about how much of the criticism against him was unjustified, but some of the things that he had done or said could be criticized, but there’s no flaw, there’s no error in the revelations. I take that statement by Joseph—and it’s in one of his Nauvoo-era talks: “there’s no mistake in the revelations; they’re trustworthy”—I take that to mean that he’s counseling us, through the years between then and now, to stay focused on the revelations and to allow him… I mean, why did he leave and cross the Mississippi River headed west in 1844 in June? Why did he turn around and return? I mean, was his instinct to depart, and to go and to try and make the restoration continue in another venue (perhaps among the Native Americans, to whom one of the groups to whom the Book of Mormon was addressed)? Was that the right instinct? Was returning to Nauvoo the wrong one? Was his observation that if his life is no use to his friends, it’s no use to himself? What do we make of that? I mean, Joseph clearly hoped not to be going to his death but resigned himself that that’s perhaps the outcome. And it was the outcome. I don’t think Joseph vouched for all of the editorial additions that were made in the 1835. If you read the sequence of sustaining votes and the vouching, Joseph Smith vouched for the Lectures on Faith—the doctrine. Other people vouched for the Book of Commandments/ Doctrine and Covenants content. And so our effort is to try and find exactly what did God say to Joseph in the revelations? And can we isolate that enough to feel confident it actually came from God, is reliable, is what was said to him originally? And if we have to deal with the clutter of what someone else threw in, we would just as soon not do so. Therefore, we did the research to find what was the original text, and we preserved the original text. Nothing else. SP: Okay, so I’m really curious here. So, did you take the same approach, applying modern biblical scholarship to, for instance, the New Testament? Like, in your New Testament, is the long ending of Mark in there, or do you take that out? Like, what kind of approaches are you taking? Because we know that there were things that were added to the English versions that weren’t in the original manuscripts. How did you approach those verses? DS: From our perspective, those issues—while they may be legitimate, and while they may be worth looking into—we were relieved of any responsibility for that when Joseph Smith went through the Joseph Smith translation. Therefore, if what we regard to be a prophet is revising the canonical text and saying, “This is what is in the Lord’s own bosom, in His own heart,” that’s the text that we want to rely upon. There are a lot of things about the biblical text… I mean, Bart Ehrman’s work on the Christological debates in the second and third century, resulting in the alteration to support one viewpoint about Christ versus another viewpoint actually corrupting the Scripture, I mean, those are really interesting ideas that, you know, you want to pause and give some attention to. But we feel Scripture entrusted into the hands of a prophet becomes an independently reliable source of material that we can trust, much like Moses reconstructed the original narrative of the Creation going back to Adam in the Pentateuch, and much like Ezra reconstructed the Bible after the Babylonian exile. The Bible has been reconstructed, rewritten, reclaimed multiple times, and Joseph Smith was given the assignment to do the same thing. And therefore, we can look at all of the debates. We can look at the German school and the various sources—the priestly source, the Jehovistic source, the Elohistic source, the Deuteronomist source—and entertain all of the analysis that people have done on textual criticism or higher criticism, and let that inform us in one way or another. But in terms of our Scripture, we’re gonna trust the prophet. SP: Well, that’s really interesting because, of course, Joseph was the one that even said that the German translations were very accurate. So that has to inform the conversation a little bit too. And so you have all this data and information, and here is Denver Snuffer, and here are people in the community, you know, collaborating on this process. Did you guys have, like, debates about some of this stuff? I mean, how do these conversations look? And also, I’m curious too, Denver, you know, with the King James Translation of the Bible, all the names of the people that participated in the translation were listed. Do you guys have a similar thing with your Scriptures as well? Two questions. DS: No, the people who participated, participated voluntarily, and some of them insisted on their anonymity, and some of them were indifferent about whether their names were attached or not. And so the effort that was made, it was really a research project. And yeah, there was a lot of spirited discussions during the process. And there were times when—because the research had disclosed a lacuna in the record, which had been filled in by what we considered as a group to be an unreliable source—the debate was, do you leave the lacuna? Do you adopt what may be unreliable? Or do you supply a replacement? Or how do you deal with that? And so, yeah, there was a lively discussion. The net result was: We take the minimalist view; we want as reliable a source of material as is possible. And that means, if anything appears to have been potentially an inappropriate insertion or an inappropriate elaboration, then leave it out. And ultimately, after years of effort and years of review, ultimately, it was presented to the Lord in a prayer that I offered on behalf of the committee. And we got an answer from the Lord to that prayer about the content of the Scriptures, including corrections that were made by the Lord, removing some of the material that we had tried to make work, and replacing it with something different. And both the prayer that was offered at the end of the project and the answer that we received at the end of the project are in the Teachings Commandments, Volume 3, explaining what we were allowed, instructed, commanded, or required to add and required to delete. That’s all in the Teachings and Commandments. In addition, we had, in the original version that we put out… Some of the uncertainties resulted in us putting a bracket and inserting words that were our cumulative and ultimately unanimous decision of the solution. So, there were brackets, and inside the brackets, there was the solution that we had come to—and it required unanimity; it would not go in if it wasn’t unanimous. Nevertheless, we recognized that despite unanimity, it belonged in a bracket. One of the things we were told in the answer was that we could remove the brackets. Another thing that we were told is that the work of coming up with modern English was accepted, and we were allowed to go on with that effort to make a modern English explanation, but we were cautioned: “You cannot change the content. If you’re going to adopt a modern English version, you must be certain about the content, and if you remain uncertain about a modern English version, then leave it or come back to me, and I’ll tell you how to fix it.” So, the Scriptures got done, got published, got approved, got voted on, but after that, there was still an effort on the Book of Mormon to convert the text into a modern English version. That took years further. The work of Royal Skousen included consultation with an early modern English scholar: “Elizabethan Shakespearean early modern English.” He was a scholar that was acquainted with how the word usages during the translation of the Book of Mormon related to an earlier era and not to the time (the modern English being spoken at the time of Joseph Smith). Therefore, some of the word usages, phrases, colloquialisms that got incorporated into the Book of Mormon text in 1830 had a different meaning from what the words mean to us in modern English, and that fellow who was a consultant with Royal Skousen was hired to assist with a number of issues in the modern English version to help convert it into modern English. After four years of effort to make the Book of Mormon read in modern English, the project was turned over to me. When it was turned over to me, it was still (in my view) a long way from what it needed to be if we were gonna accomplish the task. And so I set about looking at it, praying about it, and trying to have it make sense. One of the things, for example, that was still in the modern English version when it was turned over to me was, And it came to pass… SP: Mm-hmm. DS: And it came to pass, depending upon the context of the paragraph that it precedes, could best be put, “Later,” or different context, it could better be put, “As a consequence.” SP: Okay. DS: Or it could be, “And so we see.” It depends on the context of what is going to follow after and it came to pass. In some places, all it means is “later,” and sometimes the later is like “much later,” like, And it came to pass: that could be a month later, it could be a year later, it could be some time span in between. But what they’re signaling in the text (And it came to pass) is something that the next paragraph will help you understand. So, I went through the entire thing, cover to cover, and in my view, in my understanding (I suppose I could say, “in my experience” or “in my testimony”), I got a lot of help from inspired readings that allowed me to understand the text in a way that I could not attain to without that assistance. At times, the ideas were flowing so quickly that it would be a cryptic restatement and then highlighting because it needed to be clarified. And I got through the entirety of the text, went back, started with the highlights, then I realized that I really ought to look at the highlighted text in context of what was going on; ultimately went all the way back, and went all the way through trying to expand and contextualize. My first… I got it in a Microsoft Word format. My first pass-through reduced the Microsoft Word format (the number of pages) by about 45 pages. Then I went through it again, and it was restating exactly the same thing, just in simpler, clearer, more terse language that a modern reader would understand much more readily. By the time I had gone through it and gone through it and gone through it, it got to the point where there were changes that needed to be made to update some specific things, and I sent it back to the people who were doing that who had turned it over to me, with instructions that I asked them to follow because I was getting text blind. I was seeing things that I thought were there because I’d read it, and read it, and re-read it, and re-edited it, and re-edited it. I sent it back to them with instructions about making a handful of specific changes that I wanted them to make, including getting rid of “Messiah” and “Messianic,” and going back to “Christ” and “Jesus” in places because this is an English-language version that will largely be read by English-language people. There are some places where Messiah ought to remain, but for an English reader, generally, it should be otherwise. And so I had them do some changes or some corrections that could be done largely by “search and change,” but there were details they needed to pay attention to. They did that and turned it back to me. I went through it two more times, and then I believed it was done. And at that point, I was presenting it for approval by the Lord. I got told that it was not approved, that I needed to go through it again one more time, cover to cover; and then I went through it a final time, and during that final—I don’t remember what these were—but during that final read-through, there were about a dozen things that still needed to be and were rendered differently and more clearly, and that became what we call the Covenant of Christ. The Covenant of Christ is a modern English version of the Book of Mormon. It appears in Volume 3 because it’s modern. It appears in Volume 3 as part of the Modern Covenants. And this allows you to open up anywhere you want to in the Book of Mormon: Alma chapter 12. You can go to the Covenant of Christ, and you can go to Alma chapter 12, and you can read at the same time Alma chapter 12, verse 9: And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying…And in modern English: Alma began to elaborate, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless, they are laid under a strict command…they shall not impart — Many people are given knowledge of God’s mysteries; however, they’re placed under a strict command to only discuss that part of His word He allows to be given to mankind, only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.corresponding to their obedience and diligence given [heed and diligence given] to him. (Alma 9:3 CE) So, if you want to double-check the translation into modern English: in Volume 2, you can leave it open, and you can read Book of Mormon; and in Volume 3, you can leave it open, and you can compare phrase by phrase, word by word (Volume 2 and Volume 3 of the Book of Mormon versus the Covenant of Christ), and you can get as granular as you want in examining it. So, the Teachings and Commandments, Volume 3, include original Joseph Smith material; in addition, Lectures on Faith; in addition, when the LDS Church went through the Scriptures and published their new copyrighted version with the improved footnotes in 1980, the head of the committee, as I understand it (certainly one of the members of the committee, in any event) was Bruce R. McConkie, who wrote many of the chapter headings. Bruce R. McConkie wanted… It got leaked out; I don’t know if there’s any official statement of this, but it was a buzz at the time. I was still down at BYU, so you know, there were insider leaks. (For goodness’ sake, President Kimball’s son was on the faculty.) Bruce R. McConkie, on that committee, wanted to include the entire letter that was written from Liberty Jail. Instead, the Doctrine and Covenants had excerpted Doctrine and Covenants section 121, Doctrine and Covenants section 122, and Doctrine and Covenants section 123, which were clips from the letter from Liberty Jail; and Bruce R. McConkie lost the argument, I think in part because they did not want to re-number Doctrine and Covenants sections. So the D&C still includes only excerpts from the Liberty Jail letter. The Teachings and Commandments have the entire letter Joseph wrote from Liberty Jail, including everything that you see in the Doctrine and Covenants 121, [12]2, and [12]3. All of it is in there. It’s embedded inside the letter. So in that sense, we’ve expanded what Joseph did by adding Lectures on Faith, expanded by the entire letter from Liberty Jail, and Joseph Smith had revelations that were not included in the Doctrine and Covenants that we could see were authentic and could see what was originally written; those were added. And in addition, Joseph Smith… One of the very few talks Joseph ever wrote that was delivered during the Nauvoo era, and on the occasion of the talk being given, I believe he was ill or his throat was sore, so the talk was actually read by one of his clerks. But the content: We have 100% of that talk that Joseph prepared. That talk is also included as a section of the Teachings and Commandments. In addition, we’ve grabbed a few of Joseph’s… We call them “proverbs,” but it’s really quotable quotes, little witticisms that Joseph Smith delivered. We’ve gathered those in, and we’ve made them the Proverbs of Joseph Smith. And then there’s a group of sayings that I put into some… I don’t know which book it was in, but it was a group of sayings. Those got put in also as a group of Proverbs of Denver Snuffer. And then revelations that had been received during the effort we made to get the Scripture Project done; a prayer that was offered to try and secure for us a covenant; a covenant language that was given to us by the Lord; and then going right up to and including revelations received about the Covenant of Christ; and then, ultimately, the Covenant of Christ; and the delivery to us of a new name that was received by revelation is, I think, the last one of the revelations in the Modern Covenants, just before the Covenant of Christ. Let me see if I can tree that real quick. This is 21 December 2024, and it’s included as section 185 of the T&C: This is what you shall say to the people: I give to you a name to distinguish you from others, and you shall call one another by this name: COVENANT CHRISTIANS because you…hold a covenant with me that make you my followers deserving of my protection. But my protection does not only defend, but also corrects, reproves, disciplines and guides you along that you may be mine indeed. So that’s the final revelation in the T&C. It’s section 125 [185]. Following it is the Covenant of Christ. So that’s volume 1, 2, and 3. SP: Well, that’s phenomenal, and I’m so glad you’re able to get really deep in the weeds. And I have a few questions for you, because I think it’s important for people to understand the process. And what I find so fascinating is, on one hand, you’re kind of taking the scholarly approach—where you have a committee, and you’re going through the text, and you’re having conversations—but then there’s the revelatory aspect of this too. Some people would just go and say, well, why not just ask for the revelation? Why even go through all the process of going through a committee? Why can’t you just have all this revealed to you? And then others would be like, Well, why don’t you just do the scholarship and not have any revelation? DS: Hold on. It’s precisely what the Lord told Oliver Cowdery when he tried and failed to translate the Book of Mormon plates: “You took no thought except to ask. You’re supposed to study it out in your own mind first, and then ask” (see JSH 13:26). What I have found is that to get revelation requires that you do the hard work first. I have spent, on some subjects, years of study before I felt that I was entitled to take it to the Lord. And after years of study and taking it to the Lord, what I have found is that He will respond, and He will correct me when I’m wrong, and He will confirm it when I’m right. But some of the most important things that I have learned have been as a result of an honest, diligent, lengthy effort to study it out, reach a conclusion, only to find out that I am in fact wrong, and that then something follows that comes from God. But it doesn’t come gratuitously, and it doesn’t come easy. So we took seriously the revelation to Oliver, and we studied it out as thoroughly, as completely… We deserved to get an answer from God because we had paid the price beforehand to approach the Almighty and ask, “Did we get it right? And if not, will you correct us?” So that’s why. SP: Okay. And does these volumes, does it include the Book of Abraham? DS: Yes. SP: Okay. So what was your approach to, like, that Scripture? Because that’s so interesting, is because you actually have kind of the translation process where we have, like, the individual characters and then a translation that would later then be part of the Book of Abraham. How did you approach the Book of Abraham? DS: Okay. I gave a talk (I believe the talk is now a book). The title of the talk… I gave this one at a conference in Aravada, Nevada (Aravada, Nevada—which is a combination of Arizona and Nevada. It was way down south. Steph and I took a hike, and we walked out of Nevada, into Arizona, and then turned around and came back again. A lot of cactus down there.) The talk, “Religion of the Fathers,” explains… It’s a long talk. I think it was over three hours of talking and explaining. And so I would commend to you (if you’re really interested in how we approached the Book of Abraham) that talk, which took a great deal of study and a great deal of effort. Briefly—and without really covering what’s in that talk—when you go through Genesis (the Joseph Smith Genesis text), there is this expansion of material about Adam. There is this expansion of material about Enoch. There is an expansion of material about Melchizedek. And there is an expansion of material about Moses. But there’s nothing that materially adds to Abraham. And yet, Abraham is the Father of the righteous—which is another subject I intend to address, at length, in July of this year at a conference that’s set in Colorado. And I think that one is gonna push back the understanding about Abraham and Abraham’s role further. But I think the Book of Abraham is really something that… What Joseph Smith should have done is to just take it and stick it into the Genesis account as an elaboration on the life of Abraham, and not to have left it as a dangling, separate matter; because I think it belongs within the Genesis narrative. So what we have done in the Old Covenants in Genesis (when we get to Abraham) is there’s a note stuck into the text in red. SP: Oh, yeah. DS: Yeah. This is… It would be in the King James Version: Genesis chapter 12, about verse 16. We stick in a red little note. I don’t know if you can see that. Let me see if I can… Oh, right there. Where am I? SP: Okay. Yeah, I see it. Yeah. Oh, by the Book of Abraham. Oh, okay. And then… DS: Yeah, that’s where the narrative of the Book of Abraham belongs. The Book of Abraham—you should read the talk, “The Religion of [our] Fathers”—the Book of Abraham was actually not written in Egypt. It was written before he enters into Egypt. And the criticisms of the Book of Abraham about what was going on and how he’s describing the lay of the land and the human sacrifice, all of that took place in Mesopotamia on a trip through territory occupied by Egyptophiles who were imitating what was going on in Egypt; but they’re not in Egypt, and Abraham is not in Egypt. And one of the things that the Egyptian scholars have missed is the fact that this is completely preliminary to Abraham’s entry into Egypt. Read “The Religion of the Fathers.” It’s available through… Well, you don’t have to pay anyone; you can go to my website, www.denversnuffer.com, look at downloadables, “The Religion of the Fathers” is… You can download a PDF and read it there. SP: Okay. DS: We’ve done a… I’ve done a whole lot more with the Book of Abraham than people probably have imagined. But it’s in our Scriptures, and it’s there for a reason; and I believe it belongs in Genesis. And it fills in a missing component of Old Testament narrative that Joseph Smith omitted—I believe by inspiration, as he was going through the Genesis account—but it gets added at a later time, I think through inspiration and revelation, and I think it belongs in Genesis and not as a separate text. But we took… There was a meeting, there was a conference, there was a vote; the vote was collected, and while the book of Abraham was approved for inclusion, the vote did not agree to put it into Genesis. And so it’s in the Scriptures, it’s referenced in Genesis as belonging at that spot, but the vote did not put it there, so it’s not in Genesis. SP: Okay, well thank you for sharing that process. That’s really fascinating to me to hear this, and hear it from you. Was there anything else, because I wanted to… I did want to ask you about Benjamin Park and the video he put out today. But before we do that, was there anything else about these Scriptures that you wanted to highlight or talk about? DS: I have been going through and transcribing notes. I taught gospel doctrine for like three decades in the LDS Church, and as a consequence of that, I made a lot of marks in a LDS quad combination (large print, by the way). And I’ve gone through, and I’ve been in the process of transcribing notes and cross references from earlier versions of the LDS Scriptures into these new ones that we have. And in the process, the cross-referencing has taken me everywhere, back and forth, and in and out. And I’m not saying this as some sort of prideful boast; I’m just saying that this is my observation: These Scriptures are better than anything I have ever had access to. They are more complete. They are more valuable. They are more understandable. They really are… If you’re talking about any branch of the Restoration, of what they’ve done with the Scriptures, these are the respectful, the most complete, the most usable with all of the cross-referencing that is made that allows you to get into both; and as I’ve transcribed the notes, I’ve just been in awe of all of the effort that all of the people have made in order to make this stuff possible. I mean, I accept accountability for the revelations that got put in here, or the Covenant of Christ that got put in here, the Testimony of St. John that got added; and anyone want to throw rocks at that, they can throw ‘em at me. But the rest of the effort and the meticulous work that has been done, the research that has been done, it deserved to get the attention of the Lord and to get Him to respond—because the saints got condemned when they weren’t paying respectful attention to the Scriptures. They got condemned in September of 1832: …your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief… By the way, “unbelief” is a term that we define in the glossary. It’s a specific word with a specific meaning. …and because you have treated lightly the things [which] you have received, which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation. And this condemnation rests upon the children of Zion, even all, and they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon, and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say but to do according to that which I have written, that they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom. (T&C 82:20) We took seriously the condemnation. We took seriously the idea that something needed to be done to reciprocate and to say, “Yeah, we’re under condemnation, but is there anything we can do to emerge from out/from under that condemnation? Is there any way that you would allow a group to escape that condemnation by showing the deference?” And that deference isn’t acquired simply by sitting back and saying, “Tell us, Jesus, what you want us to write.” It requires the kind of sacrifice, the kind of applied effort, the kind of studious, long-suffering that was required of the committees that work on this stuff and all of the people that contributed to the process. And at the end of that very difficult journey, I tried to estimate the amount of time: It was about a century of man-time spent working directly to get this done. I believe we qualified to receive the voice of the Lord, and I believe we got it. And therefore, I have no hesitation about saying that this is the best set of Scriptures that I believe have ever been produced. And among other things, one of the things the Lord has said about this. These specific Scriptures: These scriptures are sent forth to be my warning to the world, my comfort to the faithful, my counsel to the meek, my reproof to the proud, my rebuke to the contentious, and my condemnation of the wicked. They are my invitation to all mankind to flee from corruption, repent, and be baptized in my name, and prepare for the coming judgment. (T&C 177:3) I think the only reason we have those words given to us by the Lord is because of the effort that went into making these. This was no small effort, and this isn’t Denver Snuffer acting like he’s a big man. I’m a small part of an effort that the Lord respected, and I was instrumental only in helping put it together and guide it. The effort and the price and the legitimacy of all of this is dependent upon dozens and dozens of people spending years of effort, with numerous hours every week, repeated meetings, numerous conferences, efforts to get it out and to get it criticized and to get feedback from the people that would ultimately be adopting it. It was not a small effort. It’s taken a decade and a half, and it’s taken a century of man-hours to get it done. So when I say they’re the best I believe I have ever laid my hands on, I’m saying that because they’re the best that I have ever laid my hands on. SP: I love it, and I can vouch for this, folks. I’ve had the opportunity to befriend some of the people who’ve been part of these projects, and their attention to detail and how seriously they’re taking this, is… I can vouch for that. I’ve had/spent hours off the record, on phone calls, and had taped interviews with various people. I want to commend the great work that they do. And I think, obviously, Denver—a lot of people like to put this all on you, but obviously—you’re a person, much like Joseph, who needed good people around him to help with this work, and it sounds… DS: I couldn’t do it. Yeah. SP: Couldn’t do it on your own, and I think Joseph recognized that as well. I thank you again for discussing this. I think this is really important. You know, I tell people that part of the purpose of this channel is for scholars to be able to watch it 50 years from now, knowing that we don’t have an agenda. We’re just trying to get information out, and I think this was a very insightful conversation. Before I let you go, I did send you that Benjamin Park video, and I think it’s actually, honestly, Denver, I think it’s a God thing. I think originally we were supposed to tape this morning, and it didn’t work out, and next thing you know, Benjamin puts this video out, and I thought, this must be the reason why. So Denver, I’d like for you to just talk a little bit about it. I want to pull it up here real quick too, just so that people can see, and I’ll have a link to it, as well. But yeah, if you go on to Benjamin Park’s YouTube channel, he just posted this video earlier today about Denver: “The Denver Snuffer Movement Explained in 20 Minutes.” Denver, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. DS: Well, I don’t take offense at people’s honest efforts to try and restate or explain something, and I mean, if I were grading him on the spirit with which he approached it, I’d give him an A. I’d give him an A! If I were grading him on the accuracy of the material, I would say it’s a C. It’s dated; he’s not up-to-date. He hasn’t stayed with it, and he’s borrowed an idea; and this is a problem with Mormon history, generally. I’ll illustrate it with a little story that I have told before: Brigham Young and the saints are leaving Nauvoo, Illinois, and they’re heading parts unknown in the West. And the likelihood is that the original target was Oregon; it is possible that the original target was California, but it was certainly not the Great Basin. And they struggle, and they suffer, and they’re hungry. And finally, with Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever afoot, and with exhaustion of materials, and with the planting year fast expiring—I mean, you’re now July 24th in 1847—you’re struggling into a barren, salted desert with a very sick Brigham Young, and at that point, “Oh hell; this is the place,” stick the cane in the ground, and then we’ll start celebrating. In fact, they didn’t have the ability to get any farther. So, here you’ve got someone that is aiming in that direction to try and get an objective achieved, who winds up over here instead. And what the historians now do is they take the story of winding up here, and they tell it in reverse back to where they started from; and “faith in every step” and “this is the place” is the crossroads; it is Zion. It is “beneath the shadows of the everlasting hills.” And so we hear that week after week, and we celebrate—not as the ridiculous, pathetic, tragic end of a journey… I mean, at least it was Mexico. At least you’d escape those scoundrels back east that were so opposed to you. It was liberation, except the Treaty of (oh, what is it?) Guadalajara? The treaty that ceded it to the United States happens almost immediately after they arrive at a godforsaken salt flat desert. And so in reverse, what the historians try to do is to turn that into a narrative, and that narrative appears to be purposeful from the outset. And it’s not disappointment; it’s triumph. It’s not, you know, stumbling through illness into a tragic end; it’s revelation and God. And the narrative is completely recast. The point of that story is to say, if you were to ask those directly participating at the moment, they would never tell you the story that the historians tell you about the migration from Nauvoo, Illinois to Salt Lake City and the settling in Salt Lake City. That was, in short, a spontaneous blunder that resulted in, “Now we’ve got to write a history about it, so let’s make it seem purposeful!” It wasn’t at all. The thing I would criticize Benjamin about is that he’s reading into me purposes that have never existed, okay? I didn’t set about to put together a set of Scriptures. Those ideas to do something to try and repent, came from two completely—it was actually three; so let me say, “two,” and then I’ll describe the third—two completely different groups of people who were looking at the Scriptures and saying, “Look what’s rolling out. We’re getting The Joseph Smith Papers. We’ve got something that Royal Skousen is producing. We’ve got a source of material that we really ought to take a careful look at.” And so one group was going through all of the Scriptures trying to get it right, and another group spontaneously and independent of them was going through and trying to get the Scriptures right. At the same time, there was a third individual who was himself trying to get it right, and that third individual learned about one of the groups, and he joined that group, so his independent work then got subsumed within one of the two groups. These people were working on this for several years, independent of me. I had no intent to participate in any of this. I had no idea it needed to be done. This was people inspired, they believe, by the Spirit of God to lead them to try and fix a problem and to emerge out of condemnation. So, I hear a rumor that some of the people who have been meeting with our group of folks are working on trying to fix the Scriptures. I hear a rumor, and I’m kind of satisfied that someone’s doing something, and I’m at least curious—we may not ever publish it, or we may publish it as a commentary; we may just make it available as a PDF—but I commend the effort. So, I hear about it, and then it’s in a December timeframe (I don’t remember which year this was). One of the two groups approaches me, and they deliver to me what they believe to be a reconstruction that’s more accurate of the Scriptures, and I was pleased to see that. Then, within one week, the other group that had been working on the Scriptures (completely separate from them) comes to me and says, “We have an improved version, a more accurate version of the Scriptures.” And sure enough, they’re two completely independent, different efforts. So, I’m not going to take the time to soldier through two different editions. I schedule a meeting, and it was during the Christmas holidays of that year. I got both groups to meet together at my law office and to bring their two different versions, and we sat down, and we looked at it, and I said, “I want this effort to be combined if we’re gonna do something with this. Let’s combine the efforts together.” And so these two independent groups began to work together, and what they discovered is they… Some had isolated one problem, some problems had been identified by both groups, and some had been identified only by the other group—but all of them were issues that required further effort, at which point, a united effort began for the very first time to go through and to solve all of this. And having heard about it, we had more people join in the effort. I got people to work together. I got them to adopt a “unanimous” mandate. The “majority” wouldn’t work; we’re talking about Scripture! I got them to agree that if we could not unanimously agree on something, that we would either eliminate it or we would leave it alone. I managed to get what was potentially a contentious, argumentative, divisive effort to be united, collegial, and a group effort that led to an outcome. I didn’t drive the boat. I didn’t drive the effort. For any historian to impute a motive, a desire, an ambition to me is actually quite opposite to the truth. I have one and only one interest and that is to obey the Lord insofar as I can understand what it is that the Lord wants from me or expects from me. But past that, I have no goal, I have no ambition, and there are numerous things that I had been asked to do and that I have done that I don’t find enjoyable or preferred. To me, this entire effort is an unwanted sacrifice that I’m making out of devotion to God and not out of any hopes that I’m of any significance at all. I’m interested in pleasing the Almighty with the choices I make and the things that I do, but I’m allowing Him to be the one that controls. I don’t have any ambition. The structure that… I have looked at all of the churches—and it doesn’t matter which one it is or how small it is; I’ve looked at all of them—as soon as you introduce a profit motive, you’re inviting corruption, ambition; you’re inviting people to want to get ahead and to put other people beneath them. We don’t have a structure, we don’t have a hierarchy, and I don’t consider myself above any single member of what we are doing as Covenant Christians. If we get a revelation, I’m just as bound to it as someone else is; and the content of a revelation may be better understood by someone else than it is understood by me. I’ve had people explain revelations that have come through me to have meanings that I didn’t understand when I received it, but readily see the wisdom, the understanding, the light, and the truth in what they have pointed out by it. I am not a big, ambitious, religious leader. I was content to remain a Latter-day Saint until they kicked me out, and I’m content to associate with the good people that are trying to follow God that have gone to the trouble of helping to put this set of Scriptures together. So, the one criticism that I would level at him and at everyone else that has, you know, commented on it is that they have badly, badly misunderstood me. They do not understand at all what I’m about. I’m a follower of the Lord, trying hard to please Him by the choices I make and the tasks I undertake; and many of them come at a price of my time, my effort, my resources, my energy that—left to my own—I’d never undertake. So, having said that, he made the… Okay, I shouldn’t be that emotionally connected to it. He made, in passing, a comment about the Passing the Heavenly Gift and “published for a profit” motive. That book wasn’t advertised. It doesn’t make money. The purpose of publishing it was to try and reclaim the testimony in the Restoration of a son who had strayed from belief in the validity of the Restoration into, essentially, agnosticism. And the book was written to try and help him and others similarly situated. It was not done… I mean, if he knew… I don’t make money on books. I’m a… I’m working for a living, and I spend money to get things done. I wouldn’t allow any of the books to be advertised. I don’t do book signings. I don’t do book promotions. And even the content of the earlier books were written while I was an active Latter-day Saint. They were done to try and promote faith in the church and in the validity of what the church was teaching—only to find out that after The Second Comforter: Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil had been out and in print for some time, they had the “Boise Rescue,” with Richard Turley and Dallin Oaks going up and denouncing the Second… They’ve actually changed the footnote in the LDS Scriptures to eliminate the reference to the Second Comforter as Jesus Christ, and they denounce the Second Comforter as a heresy. The book remains exactly like it was written when I was an orthodox, faithful member, as an archaeological preservation of an earlier theology that has subsequently been rejected by the LDS Church and denounced by them as another heresy. So, I guess I was doomed. Anything that I adopted, it was doomed to become heretical because the brethren insist that the brethren alone… It’s just the brethren that matter. And that’s sad, as well. I hate to see the LDS Church in the decline that it is in presently: doctrinally, historically, numerically. I hate to see the decline. I think that their preservation benefits Utah, Idaho, Arizona, even California, Nevada. I think a strong LDS Church is good for social order and good families and good life. And they’re pissing all that away, unfortunately. Anyway, that’s… I don’t like him imputing a motive. There is no profit to be made. His history is a little dated. And beyond that, I would have to get really granular, and we’d have to go through it one by one. But that’s just the overall bird’s-eye-view. SP: Yeah, I appreciate it. And by the way, if Benjamin wanted to get in touch with you, would I be able to get your… DS: Of course! SP: …contact information to him? Okay. So, Benjamin, I just want to let you know, I can facilitate a conversation if you’d kind of like to get to know Denver. I’ve spent hours with him off camera and on camera. And to me, it’s really important, you know, as people who are documenting history, that if we have the opportunity to speak to the person we’re writing about or doing work on, I think it’s always great to take advantage of that opportunity to kind of get a fuller picture. And that’s what we try to do here at MBR. So, hopefully we can facilitate a conversation with you and Benjamin. I just have one quick question, and then we’re gonna wrap this up. I just, you know, I’m really intrigued because your movement, I’ve been following for a very, very long time, way before I ever thought about doing a podcast or anything. I’ve always found you to be an interesting person. I’ve always found our interactions to be delightful. I see behind you, you have a picture of the Nauvoo Temple, and you have a picture of the Salt Lake Temple. DS: Yeah! SP: And I just wanted to ask you what your thoughts are with your movement in relation to temples. DS: I expect we will build one. One of the things that we learned in a passing comment from the Lord in a revelation is that His people are always commanded to build a temple. We believe that we will ultimately need to construct a temple, and I don’t think we’ll build more than one ever. I don’t think it’s appropriate to build more than one ever. And that the content of the temple really does need to be a house of the Lord; and for it to have legitimacy, I believe the Lord needs to come and to visit it. It is His house, after all, and I’m anticipating that we will receive a command to do so. A group of women have, on their own, begun to collect contributions, and there is a fund that is set up to which people can contribute, but they are doing that independent of me. But if a command is given, I expect to be involved in getting the project completed. And I do think that there was something… I don’t think that Joseph got to the point of completing what needed to be restored when he was working in Nauvoo. I think there was work left yet in his day, but some of it did get put on the ground in Nauvoo, and the LDS Church has perpetuated (although they’ve really reduced, and they’ve really edited, and they’ve really condensed, and they’ve really discarded what was there at the beginning). In fact, Steve, you ought to come over to the Colorado talk—Grand Junction, Colorado—where I’m gonna pick up and talk about this, about stuff related to this very subject. The fact is that a temple needed to be restored, and in that 1841 revelation where the Lord talks about “restoring again that which has been taken from you, even the fullness,” it required a temple to be built—which is another thing about Benjamin’s comments: I didn’t think the LDS Church was going to be put under condemnation because of me, and I didn’t think I was all that significant. And what he uses as a little highlight to quote from me is actually what I was told by the Lord. He had planned something that I was unaware of. I learned about it after the fact, and that statement by the Lord after the fact was intended… By way of background, I wrote The Second Comforter: Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil for my family. I did not intend that book to ever get into print. When I finished with the manuscript and I put it away, I felt condemned because it was now hidden in a drawer. As a result of prayer, I reluctantly took the manuscript and gave it to a fellow. He was the head of publication at Deseret Book. He had previously been the president of Bookcraft, and he was the head of publication, son of an apostle, someone I knew from law school. I took the manuscript to him because he was the head of publication, and he told me that it would take about 30 days to let me know—because they have readers, and the readers will get through it quickly, and they’ll either decide “yea” or “nay.” 30 days came and went, I heard nothing. About day 45, I called him, and I asked him, “What’s up?” And he said, “Yeah, can we have a little longer?” And I said, “Well, yeah. Sure.” I didn’t know how quickly they turned around most people’s books, except I was told that. And so, it appeared to me from what I was told that this was now an exception, and maybe that was something that would result in print. I was sort of half thinking, “I hope it doesn’t get into print because there’s some personal stuff in that book, and I don’t really look forward to having my space invaded.” I got a call at about the two-month mark. We talked again about the three-month mark, about the four-month mark, about the five-month mark. It took seven months before Deseret Book declined to publish The Second Comforter: Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil because they believed the content to be too sensitive to be put out on the market. But they encouraged me to go ahead and to try and find someone to put it in print; they just didn’t want to deal with something that they considered that sensitive. Ultimately, it was turned down by a second publisher down in American Fork. They’ve since been acquired by Deseret Book—like all the publishers are because they don’t want competing publication of LDS material to go on. And it wasn’t until a law school classmate of mine who had founded his own publishing company said, “Oh, I’ll publish it for you.” And I said, “Well, I don’t want it advertised. I don’t want to do book signings. I don’t want it really becoming a commercial product.” He said, “So what you’re talking about is really a vanity press.” And I said, “Well, it’s really for my family. I’d like to get it into print and give it to my kids.” So, he persuaded me that he could get it into print, and we could do it anonymously—well, not “anonymously,” but without attracting attention. So it took a while. It’s a lot more work to put a book into print than to write a book. It took quite a while to be able to get it into a format, but he told me, “You have to pay for the cost of publication. You have to pay for the cover art. You have to pay for a review by a book editor. And you have to do all of that before we’ll put it out.” And so, I sunk a whole lot of cost into getting the thing into print before it ever saw a conclusion and made its way into print. And so, from my perspective, this was an enormous financial hole to print a vanity piece for my kids and my grandkids. So we submit the manuscript to this print-on-demand company out in North Carolina called BookSurge. And while it is in the hands of the BookSurge folks, Amazon—the world’s largest bookseller—purchases BookSurge so they can do print-on-demand books. And it rolls out The Second Comforter: Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil as a phrase or a word or a title that will show up on any search on anyone’s computer anywhere in the damn world because Amazon has put it in their inventory of stuff. And so dozens, dozens, hundreds of people searching “the Second Comforter” stumbled across a book titled, The Second Comforter: Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil. I mean, Amazon’s acquisition of the print-on-demand thing changed this quiet little vanity piece into something… SP: Interesting. DS: Yeah, I mean, it… I don’t know, I haven’t looked for years. Last time I looked, there were over 20,000 copies that had sold in an LDS book… “Bestseller” today is like 4,000. I was actually horrified by the turn of events. And I felt then (I still feel now) like my space got invaded. I think people who, from a distance, look at what I’m involved with and make a complete misreading of me. They have no idea who I am or what I’m about. They have no idea that I’m far more inconvenienced and put upon, and left to my own, I would be far more private than any of this stuff allows me to be. And I have a lot of discomfort. And I do it not because I expect to be understood; I don’t. But I can tell you, my kids read nonsense about me on the Internet that is so belittling, demeaning, misreading that because my kids know who I am, understand who I am, they just laugh about it. I don’t defend myself, because the people that I care about know what nonsense they’re putting out about me. And, you know, I let it be. Just it’ll “out” eventually. SP: Interesting. DS: I’ve enjoyed time that we’ve spent together… SP: Absolutely. DS: …but I feel like you have been more open, less prejudging, more curious, less presuming that you can, you know, impose a stereotype on someone and willing to say, “Hey, define yourself.” SP: Yep! DS: And that’s kind of refreshing in this area of religion. Because in religion, strongly held opinions are gospel truth, even when they’re nonsense. SP: Absolutely. No, I agree with you entirely, Denver. First of all, thank you so much for coming on the show today. And I would like to get out to Colorado for your conference. I think that would be… I’ve always been wanting to get out to some…. DS: It’s in July. SP: …you know, and of course, I really enjoy the people of your movement, Covenant Christians. And let’s just pull up that website one more time for everybody real quick, so they know where to go. Yeah. And so you guys have been using the term “Covenant Christian” for over a year now, from my understanding, and it was done at one of your conferences last year. And so it’s not, you know… They were referred to in the past as the Remnant, or as Snufferites, or whatever. But actually, these are Covenant Christians. That’s their name. And so I think people, we need to respect them and use the name that they have been given. And this is their website with all their different resources on here, including where you can actually order these Scriptures that we talked about. So Denver, anything else about this website that we need to be aware of, or any other links that you would like for me to put in the description as well? DS: Well, there’s www.denversnuffer.com where you can… SP: I’ll put that in there. DS: Yeah, you can access for free all of the papers. A great deal of the material is available as a PDF downloadable there. SP: Wonderful. And of course, folks, you don’t have to spend hundreds of dollars for these Scriptures either. They’re actually available for you to read today. And so check that out, because not everybody has that extra money. But for those of you who do, there will be links in the description for the few remaining copies that do exist. And just remember the most important thing is this: All the voices of the Restoration will be heard here on Mormon Book Reviews. The post Mormon Book Reviews – An Interview With Denver Snuffer appeared first on Restoration Archives Blog.

   May 25, 2026·2h 12min
   Play
2. 2
   Number 2: Dwindling in Unbelief: How Stupidity is its Own Punishment

   The following talk by Stephanie Snuffer was given in St. George, Utah at a conference held on 12 April 2026 at the Dixie Convention Center. Good morning. I didn’t actually plan to start ‘til 10, so maybe I’ll do those jazz hands that Annette wanted. Woo hoo. [Jazz hands.] Okay! As… oh, down way lower? [moving the microphone]. Okay. I’m gonna correct something. I am not speaking until noon. I will speak ‘til 11, and there will be a break, and then Denver will speak. So… Okay. Oh, I… In talking about culture, I think I have to explain something. The name of my talk, apparently, is pretty cool. “Dwindling in Unbelief: How Stupidity is its Own Punishment.” Now, that makes perfect sense to me, because part of our family culture is the phrase, “Stupidity is its own punishment.” And so, if you live in my house, you would have heard that over and over and over again as something that your parents would have told you when you were making choices that are going to result in a consequence, and that consequence may or may not be, you know, in your best interest. We have a lot of them. “The more you wear, the less you carry.” Make sense? Take a handful, a passel of kids skiing, and if they’re not wearing their hats or their coats or their gloves, they’re asking you to carry them for you. So the more you wear, the less you carry. So these are just some of our family cultural phrases. I’m sure you have your own. I will end there, but that’s the explanation of why my talk is called “Dwindling in Unbelief: How Stupidity is its Own Punishment.” Having said that: When one prizes his or her errors…holds them as true (when they are not), one dwindles in unbelief. Unbelief is often used in connection with losing truth, forsaking doctrine, and therefore “dwindling.” The phrase “dwindling in unbelief” is the Book of Mormon’s way to describe moving from a state of belief, with true and complete doctrine, to a state of unbelief, where the truth has been discarded. Miracles end because men dwindle in unbelief. (“Dwindle in Unbelief,” Glossary of Gospel Terms) And that’s from the glossary. So I have a working theory, and my working theory is that, well, let’s start here: Scriptures give powerful teachings about how to live, but how do we actually put those teachings into practice when we are hurting, when we are anxious, when we are depressed, or when we are stuck? People have been reading scriptures for more than 2,000 years. That’s a long time. That’s a lot of scripture. And what is the fruit? Wars are fought over scripture. What is the fruit of scripture in your life? I don’t know… Shahram has 57—57!—weaknesses, which is… I wish I only had 57 weaknesses. And I read my Scriptures, and I’m not sure how to make this all come together, because truthfully, we are still a very, very long way from any realistic hope of being a Zion community—because we don’t do a good job of implementing what we learn in the Scriptures. And that’s okay. It’s not easy. It’s actually quite hard. And so my working theory is that modern psychology and therapy provide the practical tools that help us implement scriptural principles. So imagine my delight to listen to Dr. Otteson yesterday. Imagine my delight to hear the things that have been talked about this weekend and how, in my brain, it’s all about the implementation of tools and skills and interventions to help marry those things together. Our Scriptures frequently speak about our inner lives, our thoughts, our feelings, our relationships, forgiveness, humility, renewal; and modern therapies study those same domains and teach methods to affect them in a positive way. The overlap is not a coincidence, because both of these things—scriptures and psychology & mental health principles—aim at human flourishing. God wants us to thrive in this life, not just strive our way through it. And if you can learn how to implement scriptural principles into your life, you will thrive the way your God wants you to. So I have three separate parallels I’m gonna make. And the first one is the concept of: RENEWING THE MIND, WHICH IS COGNITIVE BEHAVIORAL THERAPY In Romans 1:59 RE, And be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God is. Philippians 1:15 RE, Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are honorable, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are a good report — if there is any virtue and if there is any praise — think on these things. Those things which you have both learned and received, and heard and seen in me, do, and the God of peace shall be with you. Mosiah 2:6 CE, However, I can warn you that if you don’t remain vigilant and play close attention to your thoughts, words, and actions, and if you don’t follow God’s commandments and maintain your faith in the Lord until the end of your life, you will perish. Alma 9:4 CE, Our words will condemn us, our works will condemn us, our thoughts will condemn us, and we can’t be found spotless. In that awful condition, we won’t dare to look up to God. Cognitive behavioral therapy helps people notice and reframe their distressing thoughts that lead to harmful feelings and behaviors. So what is the spiritual experience of a young lady who struggles with self-worth, self-harm, and self-loathing? Her religious life might be filled with grief and guilt and shame because she knows what she’s supposed to do, but she struggles with all of these other things. Cognitive behavioral therapy helps identify those thoughts, test their evidence, and practice alternative statements and strategies, enabling this young woman to engage in the spiritual practices that require self-regard, self-respect, empathy, and hope—the things that she hears week after week that she’s supposed to be doing, but she can’t. Cognitive behavioral therapy can help that. All right, the second one: FORGIVENESS AND RELATIONAL REPAIR Colossians 1:13 RE, Put on therefore as the elect of God, holy and beloved, hearts of mercies, kindness, humility of mind, meekness, long-suffering, bearing with one another and forgiving one another. If any man have a quarrel against any, even as Christ forgave you, so also do you; and above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness. Ephesians 1:16 RE, And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake has forgiven you. (Oh, I forgot to tell you, my scripture references will be some Covenant of Christ, some Book of Mormon, some you’ll have to figure it out.) [T&C] 51:3, Wherefore, I say unto you that you ought to forgive one another, for he that forgives not his brother his trespasses stands condemned before the Lord, for there remains in him the greater sin. I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. Mosiah 9:7 CE, Are you willing to help carry each other’s burdens, to lighten them for one another? Are you willing to mourn with those who mourn, and comfort those who need comforting? And there are plenty of others. Scriptures mandate forgiveness, reconciliation, bearing one another’s burdens. Attachment theory/relational therapies describe how early relationships shape our expectations and our reactivity as adults in relationships. What is the religious experience of a person who has been abused by a trusted adult, or whose relational wounds by parents/siblings/church leaders make it hard to trust or forgive? They can read scriptures all day and still struggle to implement the principles. These individuals can benefit from attachment-informed therapy, which helps regulate their fear responses and build safe relational patterns so forgiveness and trust that is mandated in the Scriptures actually becomes possible. I meet with people who can’t do this stuff, no matter how much they want to. My job is to offer them tools so they can live the spiritual life they want to. Third one: EMOTIONAL REGULATION AND SELF-CONTROL This is a DBT and mindfulness practice. Proverbs [16:32 KJV], He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city. (See also Proverbs 2:216 RE.) Galatians 1:22 RE, But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. Against…there is no such law. Alma 18:4 RE, Use boldness, but not overbearance; and also see that ye bridle all your passions, that ye may be filled with love. See that you refrain from idleness. Mosiah 2:6 RE, And see that all these things are done in wisdom and order, for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength. And again, it is expedient that he should be diligent, that thereby he might win the prize. Therefore, all things must be done in order. Many scriptures call for self-control, patience, and being calm in the face of provocation. Dialectical behavioral therapies teach concrete emotional regulation skills, distress tolerance, and mindfulness, which make the virtues you are aspiring to possible. What is the religious experience of someone who grew up in a house where emotions were ignored or suppressed? This individual might have big emotions, and they might express them in very unhealthy ways. They might not understand what they’re experiencing. Often, they show up volatile and intense. This person apologizes and repents over and over for this behavior, but is loath to change it. Learning distress tolerance and mindfulness allows this person to pause and choose the responses that are aligned with the scriptures that they believe in. Why does this matter? Why is this important? Because scriptures give the ideals, and therapy gives the method. Scripture very often states what we are to be. We are to be charitable. We are to be kind. We are to be tempered. We are to be godly. We are to love. We are to… I mean, on and on and on and on. Therapy shows us how to do those things. Mental health principles show us how to do those things. Psychology shows us how to do those things, especially if we are traumatized, habituated, or somehow neurobiologically have some kind of interference. We have our ideals, and we must have actual implementation. I am weary of scriptural ideals void of implementation. I am exhausted of scriptural ideas void of implementation. Scriptural imperatives are necessary, but they are not always sufficient for people whose brains and bodies are patterned by trauma, depression, anxiety, or other entrenched behaviors. Therapy, good mental health principles, those… (psychology) …provide the rehearsed practices, skill acquisition, and structured change processes, like behavioral activation, exposure therapy, skills training, so that people can live according to the ideals they sincerely endorse and want to live by. There are numerous studies that show the therapies of CBT and DBT and trauma therapies reduce symptoms, improve functioning, provide people with healthier mental states, which increases capacity for spiritual activities like prayer, service, and forgiveness. This empirical effectiveness, the fact that I stand up here and tell you that there are studies that do this, does not replace faith. It doesn’t replace the work of engaging in God’s word, but it does show that God’s creation responds to skillful interventions and community support. SO WHAT OF THIS HORRIBLE THING WE CALL THE ARM OF FLESH? Oh, my goodness. Psychology: the arm of flesh. This is a legitimate worry. It is okay to be concerned that you are relying too heavily on something that is not godly. Let’s talk about that. 2 Chronicles 16:31 RE, With him is an arm of flesh, but with us is the Lord our God, to help us and to fight our battles. Okay, some of these will sound very much cherry-picked, and that’s okay. You are welcome to go find your own supplemental scriptures to bolster this idea I have, but I want to break this down into these small pieces so that you understand. In this particular scripture, I think the key is the arm of flesh, being human strength alone. Okay? I think we would all agree that human strength alone is nothing. We have heard repeatedly this weekend that with God, all things are possible. Absolutely. God must be part of this. But in this particular scripture, when it goes on to say, “…but with us is the Lord our God,” we are utilizing divine help beyond human ability. Human effort will never be sufficient. So in 2 Nephi 3:8 CE, O Lord, I’ve trusted in You and will trust in You forever. I won’t put my trust in the scholarly arrogance of man, because I know those who trust in arrogant fools are cursed. Indeed, those who put their trust in the vain teachings of a man and trust them as if they were truth are cursed. There are some very strong words there: “arrogant,” “vain.” I agree. We should not trust arrogant, vain men who don’t also trust the Lord. But that doesn’t mean that everything outside of our three volumes of Scripture is arrogant or vain or foolish. The arm of flesh—the phrase “arm of flesh”—is an admonition not to make human means ultimate. But our scripture traditions and our Scriptures also teach the use of additional means (like medicine, study, service) alongside dependence on God. So how do we use means (medicine, study) alongside faith to make us more comfortable that we are not relying on the arm of flesh? James 1 talks about faith. What profit is it, my brethren, for a man to say he has faith, and has not works? Can faith save him? Yea, a man may say, I will show you I have faith without works. But I say, show me your faith without works and I will show you my faith by my works. For if a brother or sister are naked and destitute, and one of you say, Depart in peace, be warmed and filled — notwithstanding he give not those things which are needful to the body — what profit is your faith unto such? Even so faith, if it has not works…is dead, being alone. Therefore will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead and cannot save you. (James 1:11 RE) “Even so faith, if it ha[th] not works…is dead, being alone.” “Yea, a man may say, thou hast faith, and I have works. Show me my faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.” Okay, long scripture, basically to talk about “talk, talk, talk, talk, talk.” But if you don’t actually do something about your “talk, talk, talk, talk, talk,” your faith is pretty vacuous and empty. The work of self-awareness, the work of therapy, the work of reading books about mental health principles is an act of faith. It is an act of faith. In 1 Timothy 1:15 RE, it says, Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your often infirmities. All right, well, that’s a pretty simple scriptural statement saying, “Hey, take a little bit of wine here and see if you can make yourself feel better.” Okay? Well, that’s an “outside means.” T&C 26:11, And whoever among you that is sick and has not faith to be healed, but believes, shall be nourished in all tenderness with herbs and mild foods, and that, not of the world. Again, a temporal intervention. Using temporal means is an approved part of God’s plan for healing—all temporal means. That’s why Shahram had a doctor’s appointment, because he was using temporal means. Article of Faith 13, We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed…if there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy, we seek after these things (T&C 146:33). Psychology used as a tool for good, therapy used as a tool for good, mental health principles used as a tool for good, fits this mandate. There is plenty of historical precedent in religious communities and traditions, where multiple disciplines—fasting, confession, pastoral counseling, secular tools, medicine, education—are all part of faithful living. So how do we integrate these things? How do we integrate these things if we have been afraid of them? How do we integrate them if we have had bad experiences with them? Because I’m certain some people have. I don’t doubt that. Philippians 1:15 RE, Be afflicted for nothing, but in everything, by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God, and the peace of God which passes all understanding shall keep your hearts and minds through [Jesus Christ]. Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are honorable, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are a good report — if there is any virtue and if there is any praise — think on these things. This is prayer and action. Prayer should be part of any kind of integrating new truth, new ideas. Pray; ask for guidance and inspiration and discernment. You don’t have to believe everything you read. Proverbs 2:46 RE, Where no counsel is, the people fall; but in the multitude of counselors there is safety. Seeking wise counsel—including therapeutic counsel, including therapeutic resources—is prudent. God expects us to use the brains He gave us and the discernment that we have access to, to figure out how to implement all truth. 2 Nephi 14:3 CE, Because if you are willing to listen to the Spirit that teaches a person to pray, you would know you must pray. Because the evil spirit doesn’t teach a person to pray; on the contrary, it teaches a person they must not pray. But I tell you that you must always pray and not be discouraged, and you must not begin to work on anything for the Lord unless you first pray to the Father in the name of Christ that He’ll consecrate your performance to you, so your performance can be for your soul’s well-being. Again, pray. Prayer is the constant, as other tools can be used. T&C 86:29, …seek diligently and teach one another words of wisdom, yea, seek out of the best books words of wisdom. Seek learning, even by study and also by faith. I don’t even have to say anything about this one. Therapists, psychology texts can be sources of wisdom. Any kind of material that teaches you truth is advocated. I have mentioned this before: scripture reading, all my life, all the things. And I went back to school (and I don’t remember what year it was), but I learned more about gospel principles in my textbooks than I had learned in my entire life of reading scripture. I don’t know if I’m acknowledging something I should be condemned for. You might start shooting arrows and darts and say, “Okay, that’s your problem.” But I also believe wholeheartedly, God opened my eyes and showed me truth so that, today, my scripture reading informs my work, informs my scripture reading, informs how I seek for wisdom in the best books. If I had given up my textbooks during that time period to read my scriptures as a priority, I would have missed out on all that God was teaching me. The other thing you can do is choose good resources. You can choose good therapists. You can choose good books. Using mental health skills and principles as part of a holistic plan—that includes prayer, scripture study, fellowship, rituals, all the things that you do—you never have to reduce your reliance on God while you practice these other means. Pray and act. And learning the skills is how you act after you have done all of the other things. It is not an either-or. It is a “both and…” It will always be a “both and.” OKAY, SO I HAVE SOME SCENARIOS FOR YOU: So I imagine some of you have people in your life who you maybe know are depressed. And if you know a depressed person, there are some characteristics that depressed people have that are fairly universal, okay? They have lack of motivation. Sometimes, a depressed person may have had a lot of passion about what they used to do, but nothing brings them joy anymore. They’re sort of flat. They isolate. It’s really hard for them to engage in things. They’re hopeless. They have a really hard time following through on counsel, okay? How does a depressed person implement scriptural mandates if they can hardly get out of bed in the morning? That’s kind of hard. And so they’re filled with shame and guilt and self-loathing because the community they’re in has some expectations. Oh, “Just read your Scriptures; you’ll feel better,” okay? An intervention—a behavioral activation intervention—which includes really, really tiny things, tiny achievable activities, okay? Matthew 11:17 RE, Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your Lord. Behavioral activation is about being faithful over a few things. A cognitive behavioral intervention for depression would be: Shower every day, Cook one meal, Reach out to one friend. Alma 17:8 CE, But I tell you, great things are accomplished by ordinary, simple things. And simple methods, in many instances, prove the wise are wrong. The Lord…can use anything to accomplish His great and eternal purposes. Again, admonition to do small things. Scheduling one small, achievable activity is a small and simple thing. I have many clients for whom that intervention would make so much sense. And they would love the reference to the Scriptures about small and simple things. It would make them feel like their scripture understands them, gets them, knows that their life needs to be improved by these tiny, little things. The more you do, the more capacity you have, the more connection you have. Okay, case two, trauma or the inability to forgive or trust. Perhaps the problem includes flashbacks, hypervigilance, avoidance, relational rupture, okay? Lots of interventions: attachment work, paced exposure therapy, building relational trust, perhaps mentor support or, you know (we don’t have “clergy” specifically, but, you know), fellowship support. The Scriptures call for healing and reconciliation. Trauma work removes the barriers that make reconciliation impossible. If you are hypervigilant because of abuse or trauma, you cannot forgive or trust. And it’s not your fault. This scripture… So this scripture is related to that: The spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound… (Isaiah 23:1 RE) Now, I just had an emotional reaction to that because I have read this talk and this scripture, I don’t know, a dozen times. I just realized that’s me. I am providing a resource to people to help bind up their broken hearts, to help them proclaim liberty to the captives, and help them open the prisons that bind them so they can open up to trust and forgiveness. 3 Nephi 10:3 CE, O you afflicted, storm-tossed, and suffering one, know that I will provide a foundation as sturdy as rock and beautiful as sapphire. I’ll make your towers more valuable than rubies, doors that are precious, surrounded by heavenly designs upon the walls. God promises to rebuild the afflicted, and therapy can be a tool to help support that divine rebuilding process. 2 Corinthians 1:18 RE, Therefore, if any man live in Christ, he is a new creature (old things are passed away; behold, all things have become new), and receives all the things of God, who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and has given to us the ministry of reconciliation — namely that God is, in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them — and has committed unto us the word of reconciliation. The goal is reconciliation. And therapy, mental help, all of those things can be part of that ministry by healing the wounds that prevent it. T&C 4:7, Wherefore, learn of me and listen to my words, walk in the meekness of my spirit, and ye shall have peace in me, Jesus Christ, by the will of the Father. Trauma therapies can help people clear away the noise of hypervigilance and fear and mistrust to finally be able to listen and walk in peace. All right, chronic anger and reactive behavior. So you’ve got a problem: repeated hurtful responses. Maybe somebody is really volatile, really aggressive. Interventions: dialectical behavioral therapy, emotion regulation, distress tolerance. The Scriptures teach us that we should turn the other cheek. We should show meekness, self-mastery. Skills give us the capacity to live those teachings. 3 Nephi 5:[30] CE: Accept life’s injustices gracefully, and when someone hits your right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone sues you under the law to get your coat, let them have your overcoat too. And whoever orders you to go a mile, go two. Give to any that ask of you, and if someone wants to borrow from you, never turn them down. This teaching requires immense emotional regulation, which is a skill taught in DBT. And if you don’t have it, you don’t have it, and that’s okay—but you can learn it. Proverbs 4:23 RE, He that has no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down and without walls. Anybody know anybody who’s emotionally reactive (poor emotional skills, poor emotional regulation) and the need for walls? Okay? Therapeutic interventions can help provide the walls so that the emotionally dysregulated have confined containment. Mosiah 1:16 RE, For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be for ever and ever but if he yields to the enticings of the holy spirit, and putteth off the natural man, and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child: submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. The spiritual goal here is to be submissive, to put off the natural man. Therapy, mental health principles, psychology provide the practical skills to put off the reactive natural man. T&C 139:6, No power or influence can or ought…be maintained by virtue of the priesthood; only by persuasion, …long-suffering, …gentleness …meekness, …by love unfeigned, …kindness …pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul; without hypocrisy…without guile; reproving betimes with sharpness when moved upon by the holy ghost, and then showing forth afterward an increase of love toward him you have reproved (lest he esteem you to be his enemy), that he may know that your faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death; your bowels also being full of charity toward all men, and to the household of faith; and virtue garnish your thoughts unceasingly. This is the ideal of interpersonal conduct. My, what a daydream, what a fantasy to see this kind of behavior in interpersonal conduct among ourselves, our families. Ah! Give me a minute. Mmm. Therapy teaches concrete skills of persuasion, gentleness, and effective communication to replace reactive anger. So those are three scenarios, fairly common scenarios. I, you know… If you know people at all, you know someone who falls into one of those categories. So we need to bridge the gap and figure out: HOW SPIRITUAL PRACTICES AND THERAPY COMPLEMENT EACH OTHER. Prayer plus therapy homework, scripture plus cognitive reframing: How do we make these concepts work? Well, there’s two ways: I’m gonna focus on the individual; we can bring in congregations and community too, but I’m gonna focus on the individual for now. So individuals can use scriptures, prayer, discernment to seek out wisdom, counsel, and stewardship. So you would start by reflecting on your needs, honestly, before God. So that would mean everybody would have to take an inventory of what their weaknesses are, where they are struggling. You might ask a trusted friend. You might ask “client A” if you’re “client B” [referencing Dr. Otteson’s talk from the prior day] to help you figure out if you’re client B or client A. …which reminded me of a little side note—because I watched a video several years ago by a woman who talked about self-awareness, and she wrote a whole book on this. And so she did a lot of research, and part of her research findings were… She was trying to test for self-awareness. So the part of her test was: You had to claim you were self-aware, and then you had to have three other people in your life confirm that you were self-aware. Okay, her research showed that 85% of her study subjects believed that they were self-aware, and only 15% actually were, which means that the rest of us are lying—are walking around lying to ourselves—about what we know about ourselves. So in order to really utilize scripture, discernment, prayer, you have to start by figuring out, more or less, what’s wrong with you. And that can be really hard. I was watching Dr. Otteson’s presentation yesterday, and I realized that there were a handful of things wrong with me that I didn’t know were wrong with me. So every opportunity you can find to figure out what’s wrong with you, I suggest you do so. And then Psalms 139:4 RE says, Search me, O God, and know my heart. Try me and know my thoughts. And see if there is any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting. A prayer honestly asking God, “What lack I yet?” is the first step of implementation. Alma 16:35 CE, Therefore, may God grant you, my friends, that you begin to exercise faith followed by repentance, so you begin to call on His holy name so He can give mercy to you. Pray to Him for mercy, because He is powerful to save. Humble yourselves and continue praying to Him. Pray out loud to Him when you’re in your fields, over all your flocks. Pray out loud to Him in your houses, over all your household — morning, midday, and evening. Pray aloud to Him against the power of your enemies. Pray aloud to Him against Satan, who’s an enemy of all the righteousness. Pray [out loud] to Him over the crops of your fields, that they thrive for you. Pray aloud over the flocks of your fields, so they can increase. But this isn’t everything. You must pour out your souls in…private rooms and secret places and in…secluded retreats. And when you don’t pray aloud to the Lord, let your hearts be full, drawn out in silent prayer to Him continually for your well-being as well as the well-being of those around you. Prayer is where we take our most vulnerable, raw, unfiltered struggles, including all of our mental health challenges or struggles. He is there to help guide you. I have a lot… I worked for an agency who had a profoundly LDS clientele, just a lot of LDS, some very active, some sort of coming and going, some having faith crisis. All of the therapists that I worked with in that place honored and respected and valued and revered their clients and their clients’ faith. I had a lot of conversations, a lot of consultation, a lot of meetings with these therapists, and—whether they were in the church, out of the church; members, not members—these people were stellar therapists who valued people’s spiritual journeys. That—in my world—that doesn’t seem like a rare find because of where I worked. I suppose it could be a rare find. But you can find therapists and resources and materials that do not challenge or undermine your beliefs. There is a lot of crappy information out there. There are a lot of crappy therapists out there. There are crappy doctors and accountants and lawyers and all kinds of things. You can find the good ones. But you must seek for them. Proverbs [19:20 KJV], Hear counsel and receive instruction, that thou mayest be wise in thy latter end. (See also Proverbs 2:289 RE.) Okay? Seek a therapist as an act of wisdom for your future, for your children’s future, for your children’s children’s future. There’s a lot of stuff we have to get rid of. There’s a lot of stuff we have to get rid of in our lives that, I’m sure, individually we’re aware of. There’s a lot of stuff in our lives that we have to get rid of, we haven’t even… We’re not even aware of it. Proverbs 2:46 RE, Where no counsel is, the people fall; but in the multitude of counselors there is safety. A mentor, a religious leader, a best friend, a spouse, a sibling, a therapist, a book: There’s lots of ways to find help and support and increase safety in understanding that we are all broken and in need of wise counselors. T&C 90:5, Search diligently, pray always, and be believing, and all things shall work together for your good, if you walk uprightly and remember the covenant wherewith you have covenanted one with another. So again, search for help, find good people, find a good therapist, find good resources. This stuff that I’m putting together—I mean, other than finding the scriptures and putting it together with the scriptures—this is nothing new. I am using resources from people and therapists and psychologists and psychiatrists, Christian, non-Christian, who are already doing this work, who are already putting this stuff together. I have just felt very strongly that it needs to be put together with our Scriptures and our understanding so that we don’t have to be so afraid of this. You can easily combine therapy with spiritual disciplines—easily. I do it all the time. 1 Thessalonians 1:13 RE, Wherefore, comfort yourselves together and edify one another, even as also you do. I can assure you, my work is edifying. Having a trusted friend you can talk to about your difficulties is edifying. Going to lunch with someone that you can be vulnerable and honest with and share your struggles is edifying. Do not hide and avoid and suffer in isolation; you’re not helping yourselves, you’re not helping your family, and you are not helping a community you want to belong to. 2 Timothy 1:9 RE, And all scripture given by inspiration of God is profitable — for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Again, scripture provides the instruction, and therapy can provide the furnishing of the skills to live it out. I’ve been in the neighborhood that we live in and the ward that we go to occasionally, we’ve been there 30 years; some new, some old, whatever. But as of late, a lot of the women in Relief Society are being a lot more open about their struggles (and this is a little side note), but I have been amazed at how many women are now willing and open about acknowledging their anxiety, or their depression, or how hard it is to come to church, or how they haven’t felt God’s love in decades because of their anxiety or their struggles. And to see these women (who are easily in their 60s and early 70s) acknowledging this for the first time both fills me with immense joy and breaks my heart. I heard one woman talk to another woman and say, “I knew God loved you, but I had no idea He loved me.” And I don’t know, it just feels crazy to me. Mosiah 9:7 CE, Are you willing to help carry each other’s burdens, to lighten them for one another? Are you willing to mourn with those who mourn, and comfort those who need comforting? These women are in their 70s before they are willing to look to their church community for comfort and support. A spiritual mentor, a congregation, a fellowship: These are support systems we should be using. We shouldn’t feel ashamed, or embarrassed, or guilty for our struggles. We should not shame others for their struggles. We need to press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and all men (2 Nephi 13:4 RE), regardless of their weaknesses. Therapy, mental health, psychology, Scriptures, prayer: These are the ways we press forward when we feel spiritually and emotionally stuck. So let’s again talk about small beginnings. What else can we do? Zechariah 1:10 RE, For who has despised the day of small things? Okay, cherry-picking scripture: a powerful reminder not to despise small things. There is a small step that always needs to be taken first. It could be practicing a new skill. It could be taking your medication. It could be calling and making an appointment. It could be reaching out to a friend. Small things make a big difference. Matthew 11:18 RE, You have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord. Celebrating our small acts, faithful acts—like praying twice a day, completing your therapy homework—these are divinely approved behaviors and activities. God wants us to thrive. Alma [17]:8 CE, But I tell you great things are accomplished by ordinary, simple things. And simple methods, in many instances, prove the wise are wrong. Okay, second scripture for the same thing: T&C 51.8, Wherefore, be not weary in well doing, for you are laying the foundation of great work, and out of small things proceeds that which is great. This is a perfect scripture for encouraging a therapeutic process or reaching out into new areas of wisdom. A small thing—like a weekly appointment, a chapter in a book, a podcast—is the foundation for a great work of healing. So those are the kinds of things that individuals can do. I’m gonna lump the congregational stuff or the fellowship stuff just in one thing. First of all, educate yourselves. Do not believe because you have one person who tells you that their experience with therapy or psychology was a disaster, that that will be everybody’s experience. Okay? Feel free to think for yourselves. Feel free to pick up a book, read a chapter. If you don’t like it, put it down. Feel free to test the spirit, determine through discernment, whether this is something that God wants you to pursue or learn or read. But take a step. Talk to other people. Find people who’ve had positive experiences with these things. Find out how they ended up with positive experiences. Use your resources in your fellowships and in your families and in your neighborhoods to learn some things. Encourage a culture where seeking help is seen as a stewardship, not a weakness. Help people help themselves. And sometimes the last thing a person needs to hear is for someone to tell them to pray more and read their Scriptures. Sometimes that’s actually not helpful! It CAN be, as you bring in more tools; it WILL be, as you bring in more tools. Provide resources that have been vetted. Okay, if you’ve read a great book and you’re like, “This was great!”, recommend it to someone. If you’ve got a good podcast you love, recommend that to someone. If you got halfway through a book and you didn’t really like it, maybe don’t recommend it. But use each other as resources. Denver put a resource list up on his blog a few days ago, and you know what I heard? I heard a lot of, “That wasn’t him; that had to have been Stephanie.” Well, maybe. Gotcha. Create support structures. Okay? We’re all in this together. A lot of it you have to do alone. Zion is internal before it is external. So a lot of it you have to do on your own. But a lot of it you have to do in community. Okay? There is no Buddhist monk who lives on the top of a hill who will ever understand conflict resolution or emotional regulation because he has the pleasure and the virtue—pleasure and the, I don’t know, resources—to stay away from the people who bug him! This doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens in relationships. Sitting home reading your Scriptures and then writing blog posts or talking about them in fellowships or patting yourself on the back for how much scripture you read will never get us to Zion. Doing that and being in relationship and working out your conflict? That will. Scriptures give us our ideals. I love the Scriptures. I love the ideals that the Scriptures give. I love reading my Scriptures with all I have learned because I see so much of God in the work I do. Every day I see it. Mental health principles—which can include therapy, medication, books, resources—can be (IS) a faithful means when used with discernment and integrated with our spiritual practices. Psychology is not a replacement; it is a supplement. Dwindling in belief is not just one thing. When one prizes his or her errors and holds them as true (when they are not), one dwindles in unbelief. Unbelief is often used in connection with losing truth, forsaking doctrine, and therefore “dwindling.” The phrase “dwindling in unbelief” is the Book of Mormon’s way to describe moving from a state of belief, with true and complete doctrine, to a state of unbelief, where the truth has been discarded. Miracles end because men dwindle in unbelief. (Supra.) Don’t for one minute kid yourselves into thinking that disregarding the principles of good mental health and psychology—which are true principles of all who claim to follow God, as found throughout all the Scriptures—isn’t its own version of dwindling in unbelief. And the stupidity of rejecting those principles will certainly be its own punishment. In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. The post Dwindling in Unbelief: How Stupidity is its Own Punishment appeared first on Restoration Archives Blog.

   May 17, 2026·1h
   Play
3. 3
   Number 3: This, That, and the Other Thing

   The following talk by Denver Snuffer was given in St. George, Utah at a conference on 12 April 2026. I want to thank the organizers for putting this conference together. Unless you have organized a conference, you don’t realize just how much work is involved in getting something like this put together, organized, the facilities rendered. This is only done by volunteers. And so anyone that decides that they’re going to volunteer and arrange for a conference is shouldering a fairly significant burden in order to get it up and done. And so it’s really an achievement. And there will be a group of people who have helped out on this that will sleep better tonight than they did for the last several months. But I want to thank them. There’s a matter of business I want to conduct. And before getting to the culmination of that, I want to start with an explanation about a tradition that began at the time of Adam. Following the Fall and three years previous to his death, he gave a patriarchal blessing, and that set a precedent that has been followed a number of times throughout history, whenever there has been a dispensation of the gospel underway. The original organization of the entire world was familial. There was no church, and there was no State. It was just a family. The grandfather and the grandmother would be the ones in charge of what, in our vocabulary, would be a city (or a ward in a church). The great-grandfather and great-grandmother would be the ones who took care of the branch of the family that we would regard as a county or as a stake. The great-great-grandfather and grandmother would be the ones who would preside over the state. Adam and Eve were the ones who presided over the entirety of what would be regarded as a church or a nation. There was ten generations that were alive at the same time when Adam gave his patriarchal blessing. (I’m gonna look that up real quick since I have a new set of Scriptures, and I want to make some use of them.) This is from paragraph 19 of the Teachings and Commandments [section 154]: Three years previous to the death of Adam, he called Seth, Enos, Cain[an], Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, and Methuselah, who were all high priests, with the residue of his posterity who were righteous, into the valley of Adam-Ondi-Ahman, and there bestowed upon them his last blessing. And the Lord appeared unto them, and they rose up and blessed Adam, and called him Michael, the Prince, the Archangel. And the Lord administered comfort unto Adam, and said unto him, I have set you to be at the head; a multitude of nations shall come of you, …you are a prince over them forever. And Adam stood up in the midst of the congregation, and, notwithstanding he was bowed down with age, being full of the holy ghost, predicted whatsoever should befall his posterity unto the latest generation. (T&C 154:19-20) In this instance, the blessing that was given was prophecy, and the prophecy was fulsome, reaching down to the latest generations that would live on the Earth. Much of the subsequent prophecy that we get from other prophets in later dispensations are a reiteration of something that had originally been pronounced by Father Adam three years previous to his death. In paragraph 21, it says, Now this same Priesthood, which was in the beginning, shall be in the end of the world also — [and] in other words, at the end of the world, the final dispensation will restore again the pattern of the first, or Adam’s, dispensation. (Ibid. ❡21, emphasis in original) You can also see that same prophecy in Genesis chapter 3, paragraph 14. I’m going to talk more about that in July in a conference in Colorado, but part of what needs to be addressed today needs to have reference generally to this topic. Apostasy ended the first line of the patriarchs and, therefore, terminated the government of God. Later, after there had been a restoration, there was another example of a patriarchal blessing that we find at the end of Genesis (the book of Genesis—in traditional numbering, it is Genesis chapter 49, the entirety of that chapter; and in the RE edition that we have, it’s in Genesis chapter 12, beginning at paragraph 19). And there, Jacob goes through each of the 12 sons and gives to them blessings about what would befall them and what would befall their posterity. The other example that we can read is in the example of Lehi giving blessings to all of his sons that you can find in 2 Nephi chapters 1 and 2 (it’s also in the LDS numbering in 2 Nephi 1:1 – 3:25). Blessings are given by the oldest father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and so on. And it’s because it’s the traditional role of that eldest father that they’re called patriarchal blessings. It’s the role of the mother to choose what blessings someone would receive or what appointment they would get, but it’s the role of the father to provide the blessing. And patriarchal blessings have generally included instruction; they’ve included advice, they’ve included a call to repent; prophecy; revelation; and they’ve included warning. The father in the family should be the one to give it, but among us, it is sometimes the case that there is no father or grandfathers who are part of the faith, believing, and in a position to provide a patriarchal blessing. And there are some fathers who just outright refuse—but they shouldn’t. It’s a responsibility, and it belongs to them. But there are circumstances in which there are people who deserve to have the opportunity to receive a blessing from, in effect, a surrogate (or a replacement to provide the blessing) when they cannot, within their own family, go to a believing father or a believing grandfather to secure a blessing that would properly come within the family unit. It is not appropriate for us to have a patriarch that supplants a believing father or grandfather. That role belongs to and should be required to be occupied by the father or the grandfather. But we have a requirement that when anyone is baptized, part of the responsibility has been to gather the names of the people who have been baptized and those names kept in a book, and the names belong to the Lord. The book is our responsibility to maintain, and therefore, after baptism, the name of someone who has been baptized needs to be submitted so it can be added to the book. The book is not electronic. It is handwritten. It is only a name. It doesn’t have contact information, because the requirement imposed upon us by the Lord is to keep the names. He hasn’t asked us to keep any personal data, and He has not required of us to prepare something that could be hacked. There’s only one copy. It is handwritten, and it is maintained by what’s called the Recorder’s Clearinghouse, which is essentially a place you can send [it] in [to], but you can also telephone, or you can send a letter to the recorder of the entire movement—and that is Keith Henderson. If someone’s name has not been submitted and they have been baptized, then they need to get their name into the book. But the book is closed out annually in terms of the list. So if you got baptized years ago and you did not submit your name, you really need to go get re-baptized and submit your name now in order for it to be kept annually with a turning of the page. If the name is not recorded at the Recorder’s Clearinghouse, then the requirement at the time of the baptism to submit the name has not been met; and if there is no name in the Recorder’s Clearinghouse, then it isn’t appropriate for the patriarchal blessing to be provided. We do not expect any blessing to be given to someone whose name isn’t in the book or who doesn’t come personally to present themselves in order to receive the blessing; it’s not something that ought to be done over the phone or by Zoom or remotely. So, I’ve had a number of people for a number of years asking me if I would give a patriarchal blessing, and I’ve consistently refused to do so, but I’ve known that this is an issue that at some point needed to be addressed. Consequently, it began to weigh on my mind a great deal lately, and as a matter of prayer and as a matter of inquiring of the Lord about the matter, we had someone last month identified to me by the Lord as the man to whom we should send those who qualify to receive a patriarchal blessing. And Thursday, I set him apart to perform that role. But that role is not one that is appropriate for the community without first taking a vote. And in consulting with and being guided by the Lord, it is not a matter that is to be accomplished by common consent (that is, by a majority vote). It’s something that needs to happen by a unanimous mutual agreement, and therefore, I need to take a vote at this point to find out if we do have mutual agreement. The individual who was identified by the Lord to me earlier this week is our recorder, Keith Henderson, who I asked to be here today. [Speaking to Keith] And you told me you didn’t want to stand up, but would you stand up so those who don’t know what you look like can admire your visage? Yeah. [Laughter as Keith removes his hat.] It’s one of those things where hair and brains don’t stick together. So with that, I would like everyone who can approve the assignment that has been given to him to fulfill the role of providing a patriarchal blessing to indicate… I’d like you to do two things: I’d like you to raise the hand when you vote, and I’d like you to be audible and to say, “Yes,” if you’re voting in favor of this. So, all of those who can approve the assignment that has been given by the Lord to Keith Henderson, would you please raise your hand and say, “Yes”? [Numerous “yes” votes.] Okay. Those who are opposed to this, would you similarly raise your hand and say, “No”? Any “no’s”? [Silence from the audience.] Well, I’ll be damned. [Laughter, cheering, and clapping.] I don’t think we’ve ever been able to attain mutual agreement on whether it’s daylight or nighttime! Okay. So since… I mean, “This, That, and the Other Thing.” I’m done with “This.” We’re moving on to “That.” Since “The Perfect Mousetrap,” some have assumed that that talk gave them permission to insult and berate others, improperly focus on others, and refuse to look inward, disclose just how to project onto others what is within themselves, oblivious to their identical conduct. In Paul’s letter to the Romans, he wrote, Therefore, you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are, that thus judges; for wherein you judge another, you condemn yourself — for you who judges does the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them who commit such things. And do you think this, O man who judges them who do such things and does the same: that you shall escape the judgment of God? That’s a description given by Paul of something that is called ‘projecting’; that is, you see on someone else what is really in you, and it bugs you because you’re unwilling to acknowledge it within yourself. But you see it in them clearly because it’s part of you, and therefore, you project onto them, and that results in accusing. And one of the sayings that I really like is that “accusing is admitting.” And if you think about that and you contemplate the things that you have accused others of, you might have some reason for reflection. I believe that most have instead chosen to reflect in private upon their own shortcomings. Upon realizing their own failings, they’ve chosen to repent; and obtaining forgiveness from God, that they have in turn forgiven others all of their offenses. I trust God will divide the sheep from the goats and gather the sheep peaceably into a society of equals. And I trust the Lord to allow the goats to continue to butt heads. I want you to remember that the talk includes this statement, quoting from “The Perfect Mousetrap”: I’ve read some of what people believe to be discussing their disagreements. Instead of identifying assumptions and stating needs, people have used insults, demanded apologies for imagined offenses, employed emotional manipulation, and worn their self-justification on their countenances. Conversations go nowhere. No attempt is made to understand the other viewpoint. No questions are asked, and emotional outbursts are hurled at the other side. When things like this happen, progress is impossible. We should all realize that we may well misunderstand the other person, and only they can help us. If we give them a chance, we can learn that they’re not irrational, not our opponent, and not preventing any of us from getting to Zion. The perfect mousetrap being developed for us has begun to catch us in its snare. But if we awake and arise, we can bypass the trap and emerge stronger, more godly, and more unified. It can be an opportunity to advance one heart, one mind, and unify our society. But that requires us to recognize the trap for what it is and what it has succeeded in accomplishing. (“The Perfect Mousetrap,” paper, pg.33) I think the talk helped us to clarify and identify one another. I think it served a godly purpose. We are not under the control of a hierarchy. We have freedom, and therefore, we are required to make choices; and for those choices, we become accountable. “The Perfect Mousetrap” was intended to direct your attention inwardly. To the extent that it’s failed to do so, re-read the talk. So, there’s “That.” Now, I want to talk about some background information that might help people understand. Because I believe that what has happened in my life is not atypical of what has happened in the lives of many of the people that identify today as Covenant Christians. I was an active Latter-day Saint for 40 years. And it was a very difficult thing to become a Latter-day Saint. I didn’t grow up in Tehran, but I did grow up in Idaho, and everything is polarized in Idaho. I mean, the “damn Mormon legislature” was a phrase that just went together. You didn’t hear about the legislature without hearing damnation for Mormons, because the Idaho legislature was dominated by people of that faith. And I was not part of that community. I had friends who were LDS, but they never proselytized. I think the town I grew up in had a huge stake center, and it didn’t have a baptismal font in it, which just goes to show you how insular they were. They built another branch building out at the Mountain Home Air Force Base—just off base—and they put a font into that building. But they didn’t have one in the stake center, which was pessimism on stilts, I suppose. It was hard for me to become a Latter-day Saint because my mother had indoctrinated me into the Baptist viewpoint, although I didn’t join the Baptist church. But there was a book called The Kingdom of the Cults that my mom, you know, prominently displayed, and Mormonism was included within The Kingdom of the Cults. And I had listened to Dr. Walter Martin, a notorious anti-Mormon. And I had a lot of anti-Mormon background, even though I was indifferent to the whole thing. So, when I was in the military and stumbled upon missionaries in New Hampshire, that was a real novelty to me. I mean, what on earth was a Mormon doing out in the wilds of New Hampshire? I thought they were confined locally to a corridor, starting in Alberta and running down to the colonies in Mexico and occupying, you know, the western corridor. When I joined, I left behind friends, family. It took an enormous cost to convert to become a Latter-day Saint, but I felt an obligation to God to do so. And so, joining the LDS Church was an act of profound sacrifice. Essentially, I was giving up everything in my life and hopping into something new. And I really didn’t identify much with the culture and the people and their wholesomeness. I mean, we entertained ourselves in Idaho (growing up) with keggers on the weekend, much of the alcohol procured through the assistance of the local police department in Mountain Home, Idaho. And so, you know, teetotaling… And my friend and I went to one of the discussions in an LDS family’s home, and we brought a six-pack of beer and cigars with us to listen to the missionaries that evening. And so this was an enormous cultural, religious separation that was going to completely alter the course that my life took. But I thought God had answered me in prayer, and therefore, I dared not offend God by refusing to be baptized. Whether I could endure to the end was a-whole-nother matter. I was not expecting to be able to achieve that. But I did keenly feel the obligation to be baptized, and I took that sincerely, and I was baptized. And things changed. My mind being enlightened as a consequence of the baptism, I read the Scriptures, and they came alive to me. I comprehended things that had been hollow and superficial and not comprehensible until after baptism. And then it appeared to me, for all the world, that whatever was going on in the New Testament text in the days of Paul and James and Peter, it was going on again now in the form of a religion founded by a martyred prophet, Joseph Smith, and breathing life and intelligence, light and understanding. And as it turned out, instead of it being problematic, difficult, and alien, I fit immediately and comfortably into the community that I had joined by baptism. I spent 40 years as a member of the LDS Church, and in all candor, I loved every minute of it. I liked the people. I liked the meetings, the social gatherings. I liked everything about it. I did, however, immediately upon being baptized, begin to study the faith that I had now adopted. I bought a history (Documentary History of the Church) that was attributed to Joseph Smith (it was gathered by B.H. Roberts). And then I read the Comprehensive History of the Church by B.H. Roberts, six and seven volumes each. I bought and read the biographies of every single one of that first generation, insofar as they had biographies available. There was a sister in the ward who had back—what was called back then—a 70’s Mission Bookstore. And I went to her house and bought, as soon as I read one and finished it, I went and I bought another. And I began to aggregate a library about the history and the content of the doctrine of the church that I had now joined (first church; the only one that I’d ever belonged to) and began to plumb the depths. They asked me to become a gospel doctrine teacher, and I got stuck in the role of being a gospel doctrine teacher and taught classes in wards in Pleasant Grove, Utah; Alpine, Utah; multiple locations in Sandy, Utah. Got called to be on the Stake High Council. I was the one on the High Council who gathered all of the materials for the rest of the High Council to be able to give a talk on High Council Sunday. And I went to BYU Education Week as an instructor on multiple years and taught in BYU Education Week. They had a failing graduate institute program at the law school at the University of Utah. And the second in charge of the institute program was a member of a ward where I had taught gospel doctrine, and he asked me if I’d be willing to go teach institute at the University of Utah Law School. And I did that for a little over two years. I agreed to do it for a year, and we got such a good response. By the end, we had 100 kids coming every week to hear an institute class. But I continued to examine the faith. I never lost track of the purpose behind the conversion. I wanted to know, study, embrace, and expand my understanding of truth. As I increased in understanding, it became increasingly apparent to me that the institution was not candid, honest, and forthright in the claims that it was making, in the history that it was presenting, and in the authority claims that they make. That was something I was perfectly willing to live with as a matter of internal awareness and the contradiction between what the church was saying and what the truth was. I could live with that. I used to look at anti-Mormon stuff as a lark (primarily to see what new foolishness the devil was offering in opposition to truth), but some of the anti-Mormon stuff actually… They actually landed on a point or two worth keeping. I went to the open house for the Nauvoo Temple when it was rebuilt: rented a motorhome; learned that you really do need to fully insure the motorhome if I’m going to drive it. I think we had part of the rooftop air conditioner left; the awning was dysfunctional; and I turned the rear bumper into a pretzel. So if you insure it, then you can happily go to Nauvoo and back with your family. (And I won’t tell you about offloading the black stuff in the… I made a mess of Missouri.) Anyway, the visit to the Nauvoo Temple, we parked the motorhome right in front of a store that had been rented out by a group of anti-Mormon zealots, and I sent two of my sons into the anti-Mormon literature place to gather any pamphlet against Mormonism that they could find to bring it back out in the motorhome. They did that; they brought them out. I said, “Okay, now you figure out what’s wrong with these, and if you can’t figure it out, ask me.” And so they poured over the anti-Mormon stuff, and we had a great discussion. There were only a handful of things they couldn’t figure out on their own. I was an apologist for the church, and I knew where the soft spots were. Increasingly, it became apparent that there were very big problems with the LDS narrative. However, it didn’t alienate me. I was still paying tithing. I was still holding a temple recommend. I was still, you know, on their team. I had a son who (my only son that went on a mission) came back, lost his testimony, asked for his name to be removed. He didn’t tell me about it for years because he was worried about what my reaction would be. And when I finally found out that he had drifted off into disbelief and had lost any affiliation either with the church or the Restoration, I sat down, and I wrote a book to reclaim and re-instill faith in that son and other friends who had departed from the faith. That book was called Passing the Heavenly Gift. Now, Passing the Heavenly Gift is not easy history if you are unacquainted with the problems of the church’s narrative. In fact, there’s a great deal in there that anti-Mormons had not yet stumbled upon, but I went ahead and included it because I wanted people to know that I’ve taken a careful look. That book was intended to preserve faith, to keep people affiliated with the LDS Church. However, if you’ve never stumbled across problems in LDS history, you’d probably be shocked. Now, the book was not advertised. It wasn’t promoted. I didn’t go asking anyone to read it. I gave it to people that I thought would be interested in solving problems of faith in a circumstance in which your institution is faithless and has abandoned significant parts of what they should have been preserving. I wanted to preserve faith. I had a law partner at that time. He had been on a high council. He had been through church courts (just like I had been through church courts), and he had realized that the proceedings and the treatment was somewhat un-Christian. And he had left the LDS Church, and he became a Catholic lay-deacon and still held on to religion, but it just wasn’t the LDS Church. I gave to him a copy of Passing the Heavenly Gift and asked him to read it. He read the book, and he said, “If I had read this before I departed from the church, it would have kept me in the church. But I am not going back.” My son’s faith was restored. However, a bunch of LDS priesthood men (probably should be called ‘ladies-in-waiting’ because they behave like effeminate men incapable of confronting a dilemma head-on and dealing with hard issues that this world presents to you), these ladies-in-waiting—and it came down from the very ‘top’—sent out Russell Nelson (then president of the Quorum of the Twelve) to release the former stake president who defended me and to call a new stake president, at which time, in the hallway, Russell Nelson of their Twelve handed my records (my church records) to the newly-called stake president and said, “The committee has decided that this man needs to be dealt with,” whereupon a year and a half of dialogue took place between me and the new stake president, with him presenting the problems that they had funneled to him, and me responding to the complaints that had been handed off. He would not proceed, because he got adequate answers from me. It got to the point where he was getting pressure from downtown, but he was getting answers from me, and he felt that I had overcome the problem. So he called his two counselors in, and so the entire stake presidency met with me, in which they were going to interrogate me in order to build a case to justify the excommunication. I sat and answered their questions for 20 minutes, maybe, I don’t know, and I finally said, “We’re not getting anywhere. You don’t know what you’re looking at. You just don’t understand what the hell is going on here. OK? Let’s go in the high council room.” We went in the high council room. I took the board—it was a large white board—and I walked them through issue after issue that I thought that they needed to address, and they needed to understand. One of the stake presidency afterwards came up and hugged me, and he said, “We cannot lose someone like you,” and all of them were content; all of them were satisfied. And so I got called by the stake president to then visit with a returned missionary attending Brigham Young University who had lost his testimony, and he wanted me to see if I could help this now faithless young man attending BYU. I left the stake president’s office and stopped at that kid’s house on my way home, and we made an appointment. And he came with his list of problems, and he had a list. And I said, “Well, let’s start with your first on the top of the list. Let’s deal with that one.” And we started with polygamy. So we dealt with polygamy for about a month, at the end of which he said, “Okay, I’m satisfied,” and then we moved on to a second problem. By the time we had addressed the first two problems, over a two-month period, he threw all the rest of his complaints away, and he returned to activity and happily went back to BYU and got his temple recommend, and he was on his way. In the meantime, the stake president was called in for training. [Imitating Church Leadership:] He was reminded “by those in authority” of The Church Handbook of Instructions, which not only strays from the gospel of Jesus Christ but imposes a new edict of control over those who would want to be members. And so, having been instructed, he called me in and said, “Here’s the problem: This is the definition… [in the church handbook] …this is the definition of apostasy. You were denigrating the church authority, Heber J. Grant.” And I said, “Well, okay, wait. Heber J. Grant’s mother told him that he was too much concerned with worldly things and that he was not a spiritual enough man to occupy his role. She said that to him (her son); he wrote that in his journal about himself that his mom had said. I quoted Heber J. Grant’s journal. So if you’ve got an ax to grind with someone, you’ve got to go to Heber Grant’s mom or Heber Grant. All I’m doing is telling you what he put in his own journal.” Well, it wasn’t sufficient. So they proceeded to hold a court to kick out a person who would never have left if they’d left me alone. I’m telling you this because, in my view, the LDS Church liberated me from obligations that I respected and honored, and once they liberated me from that obligation, I no longer felt the necessity of pulling punches, of being cautious. Don’t get me wrong; I do not cheer on the current decline in the LDS Church. I believe that that institution helps a community. Very often, when people depart from the LDS Church, they depart into agnosticism or atheism, and I wish it were not so. But the LDS Church is its own worst enemy. They inflict upon themselves wounds that are unnecessary to suffer. More and more people are realizing that there’s a lack of candor about the history that they tell, about the teachings that they offer, about the consistency that they hold with what Joseph Smith had originally restored. And the gulf is widening, and not only widening, it’s alienating progressively more year after year. The book, ultimately, the edict came down that I must either withdraw the book from publication or my membership would be revoked. And I knew that the book had helped people retain faith in the Restoration. It may have diminished (somewhat) people’s view of the people who are leading the church, but that’s inconsequential. Faith needs to be in God, in the Restoration, in the Scriptures, in a relationship with the Almighty—the kind of relationship that had brought me aboard in the first place. I felt like there were things that needed to be said and things that needed to be taught. And the Lord was imposing upon me to do and say some things that, in my view, as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it would be disloyal for me to do so. And so I prayed and told the Lord, “If I do what you’re asking that I do, I believe I will violate agreements that I have made between myself and this institution. And if I do that, I’m compromising ME. And if I compromise me, you can’t use me, because I’m not solid. I’m not consistent.” And I told the Lord if what he wants is a broken man, that that seems ill-fitted for anything that He could ever thereafter use. And the Lord said to me, “I’ll take care of it.” And so, 12 members of a high council and three members of a stake presidency—on the date that I had been a Latter-day Saint for 40 years—unanimously had agreed upon and then announced to me that I was no longer a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whereupon I continued driving to Boise, Idaho, and delivered the first of the ten talks, because that was the anniversary date of having been 40 years in Mormonism. But I didn’t leave because I was faithless. And I didn’t leave because I disbelieved in the Restoration or in the things that had brought me aboard in the first place. They did not even ask that I return my temple recommend (and this was long enough ago that they couldn’t deactivate it by, you know, pushing a button; there was no bar[code]; there was nothing other than all the signatures). Heavens, the whole time they were interrogating me, I had an active temple recommend and could (and often did) go to attend a temple session. While this storm is brewing, my son reconverted. I believe that almost all of the members of the High Council who were involved in that, along with several of the members of the stake presidency, the reports I get is that (overwhelmingly) the children of those men have departed from the faith. I believe if they had defended me and given that book to their children, that many of their children would have been preserved in the faith. Admittedly, it’s tough history. It’s unpleasant material. But it gives you a reason for faith. And it’s no more disturbing than the Old Testament. I believe many who have, are, and will leave the LDS Church would have remained if they had read Passing the Heavenly Gift. Instead of suppressing that book, they should have put it into the Deseret Bookstores and recommended it as reading for people interested in the faith. I’m here to tell you that, in my view, the LDS Church has forsaken the Restoration! Your LDS Scriptures are corrupt. In the LDS Scriptures’ Doctrine and Covenants 84 (or the Teachings and Commandments 82)—this is about a year and a half after that; this is September of 1832—a revelation came to the Church of Jesus Christ (I don’t think they had added “Latter-day Saints” yet: And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received, which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation. And this condemnation rests upon the children of Zion, even all, and they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon, and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say but to do according to that which I have written, that they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom. Otherwise, there remains a scourge and a judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion, for shall the children of the kingdom pollute my holy land? …truly I say unto you, Nay. (T&C 82:20, emphasis added) So this condemnation happens in September of 1832. Also in September of 1832, there is a project that the Lord gives as a commandment: And a commandment I give unto you… This is the Lord speaking to Sidney Rigdon. …a commandment I give unto you …you shall write for him [that is, for Joseph Smith], and the scriptures shall be given, even as they are in [mine] own bosom, to the salvation of [mine] own elect. (T&C 18:6) So a project then began in what is now called the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. That was commanded in eight revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, and it would be addressed in another seven revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. And that project that Joseph Smith was commanded to undertake is called the “fullness of the scriptures.” In October of 1831, at a conference, Joseph Smith warned, “…except the Church receive the fullness of the scriptures, they would yet fall.” That’s preserved in The Joseph Smith Papers, Documents, Volume 2, on page 85. The fullness of the scriptures was a project that Joseph Smith undertook, but which never got published during his lifetime. It was left in Nauvoo in the possession of Emma Smith, who would later turn it over to the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. And then the Reorganized Church would later, through a committee, eliminate some of what Joseph Smith had done, and then the committee added some things of their own, and they would publish that as the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. Right now, the only publication of the Joseph Smith Translation—the fullness of the scriptures, that set of Scriptures without which “the Church will fall”—is only in our possession. We are the only ones that have ever: eliminated the emendations of a committee, included everything that Joseph put in there, and gone to the trouble of finding other places where Joseph Smith had said, “I could give a plainer translation” of some passage in the Bible during talks in Nauvoo. Those were gathered and added into the Joseph Smith Translation. So if you believe in the ministry and the divine calling of Joseph Smith and the revelations that were given through him about the importance of having the correct Scriptures in order to know the mind of the Lord (or the Scriptures as they exist “in mine own heart,” according to the Lord), then you need the Scriptures that we alone put into print. We have the fullness of the scriptures. Only us. Period. The “Old Covenants” (which is volume 1 of our Scriptures) is the Joseph Smith Translation of the Old Testament. Because it does not end on a signature, to finish out the signature at the back of the book, we have lined pages for people to write notes in. But that is the Joseph Smith Translation of the Old Testament. The New Testament is in volume 2: the Joseph Smith Translation of the New Testament. But in addition, volume 2 includes the Book of Mormon—not the version that is published by the LDS Church, which descends from an (essentially) bootleg copy that got reprinted and retyped/set in England while the Twelve were over there as missionaries, and then they brought those to Salt Lake. And that’s what they handed down and gets printed through the Deseret Book auspices. We went to the trouble of going back, insofar as the original translation survived (and only about 22% of that survived) and the printer’s manuscript (which is entirely available), and it allowed us to look at what Joseph Smith was doing in 1840 when he was going through and making corrections to the book: He was trying to bring what was in print back into conformity to the original translation. But we only have 22% of that. We have 100% of the printer’s manuscript. But we know from what we’ve got of both that they made about one mistake every page and a half in copying errors. We also know (and everyone knows this) when the printer’s manuscript was handed off to E.B. Grandin’s print shop, the entire thing was typeset by John Gilbert, and it was one long sentence that Gilbert punctuated. And so all of the punctuation in today’s LDS-published Book of Mormon is punctuation supplied by John Gilbert, an employee of E.B. Grandin. We eliminated a lot of the punctuation. One of the things that we did—and I did this in a talk (one of the ten talks)—I pointed out that the Trinitarian mischief that you see in the Book of Mormon comes from John Gilbert’s placement of commas and periods and semicolons. And if you eliminate or allow me to repunctuate it, I can make it read consistent with Lectures on Faith. So our version of the Book of Mormon eliminates a lot of the punctuation to give the reader more material to deal with in their own choice of punctuation. You can put whatever commas or periods or semicolons you want to in there. The version that we have printed of the Book of Mormon in our Scriptures is the most correct version that you will find. Volume 2 includes not only the New Testament (Joseph Smith) and the Book of Mormon in its most correct form, but it also includes what’s called a “Glossary of Gospel Terms,” which is a gathering of material that will give you a better theological education than many schools of divinity would give you. If you read through the “Glossary of Gospel Terms,” it helps you understand the vocabulary that gets used in scripture. And that’s volume 2. Volume 3 includes… Called “Modern Covenants,” volume 3 includes revelations that were given to Joseph Smith in the form that Joseph Smith provided. When the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants were being put together for publication, Oliver Cowdery had gone over to Missouri and they’d established a press there (one that got broken up, by the way, by a mob), and he had put together a Book of Commandments. He felt it was within his stewardship to be able to revise and to be able to editorialize, and so he made a number of changes in the Book of Commandments to the things that Joseph Smith had received. Those were taken back to Kirtland (where the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants was being put together), and the Book of Commandments got incorporated, and it was put together by a committee who also felt like it was their prerogative to do some editorial enhancement of the revelations that Joseph had received. In the meantime, Joseph Smith had spent months working on the doctrine that would be added to the Book of Commandments. The doctrine was a series of lectures that had been given in the School of the Prophets in Nauvoo. So doctrine is put first, and covenants is put second (and the covenants reflect Oliver Cowdery’s mischief in Missouri and the committee’s mischief in Kirtland, Ohio, before it went into print). And Joseph Smith, so far as the historical record tells us, didn’t look over there; he trusted them. He spent his time revising, correcting, improving, and making clear the doctrine, or the Lectures on Faith. So the Lectures on Faith went in first; it’s the first part of the book (Doctrine and Covenants in the first edition). It’s not only the first part, it’s printed in larger type. It’s first in the book, it’s larger in print, and the revelations appear after that. What we did was restore the Lectures on Faith back into the modern revelations. It was canonized by a vote that was taken in 1835, but it was never removed by a vote of the people. We put it back in, but we put it back in with a vote of the people. We also went through the revelations that Joseph Smith had received, and we pared it down to what he actually got as a revelation. Consequently, many of the things that appear both in the Doctrine and Covenants, on the one hand, and the Teachings and Commandments, on the other hand, are significantly shorter in the Teachings and Commandments because what’s in the Doctrine and Covenants is editorially expanded. It’s inflated. It’s suffered from ‘revelation creep.’ The volume 3 of the book also includes a project that took years to complete that is a modern English version of the Book of Mormon called the Covenant of Christ. And all of that is intended by us to be the statement of our faith. Scriptures anchor God’s Word. Without them, changing leaders provide changing messages. Leaders always sound an unsteady note if they are not controlled by, subordinate to, and respectful of scripture. The problem that institutions that allow men to speak, propound, and declare is that once you unanchor it from scripture, you’re tossed by every wind of doctrine. These Scriptures—and we know they’re not perfect; we know that there are weaknesses in men, and there are weaknesses in everything that we do here on this side of the veil—but these Scriptures, and these alone, are endorsed by the Lord. “These scriptures…” and I’m quoting the Lord, These scriptures are sent forth to be my warning to the world, my comfort to the faithful, my counsel to the meek, my reproof to the proud, my rebuke to the contentious, and my condemnation of the wicked. They are my invitation to all mankind to flee from corruption, repent, and be baptized in my name, and prepare for the coming judgment. (T&C 177:3) After years of effort… I tried to do the math; it was only based upon estimates, based upon all those that were involved. A century of effort, of combined effort by the people, went into producing these. After years of effort, I’m now in a position to tell the world, you have been warned! First, the Joseph Smith fullness of the scriptures is now available. Second, if you don’t understand the scriptures, we’ve provided you a glossary of terms that will help you comprehend their content. Third, if you don’t understand the history of the Restoration following Joseph and Hyrum Smith’s murders, Teachings and Commandments section 156 is an inspired prayer on 9 July 2017 that recounts the history. That prayer was given by God to us as the prayer we offered, and that prayer is the Lord’s retelling of the history of the Restoration. You want to know what went on? Read Teachings and Commandments section 156. Fourth, if you don’t understand the Book of Mormon language because it’s turgid and early modern English, our Scriptures include the Covenant of Christ written in modern English. Access to the Scriptures is available free to anyone, anywhere in the world, at the website www.scriptures.info. You can purchase print-on-demand copies of the Scriptures through Amazon. There is a body of materials available through the Restoration Archives at www.restorationarchives.com. They preserve numerous talks, including the ones that will be given… well, the ones that are ending today. So, I can say with absolute confidence to anyone, anywhere in the world, you have been warned! Now, it doesn’t matter that you don’t care, that you’ve ignored it, or that it didn’t come to your attention. The Lord’s obligation is to sound the warning. Then the burden shifts. If you were really interested in Him and what He’s up to, you would have paid attention. You would have done something to inform yourself. Failing to do that, it is not His fault that He is going to proceed with exactly what He has foretold He intended to do. So, you are now accountable. Before I move on to another thing, I want to take just a moment and tell you about a little gal, a pretty little blonde-haired girl sporting a ponytail in the back of the room, who came to her parents as a gift from God and who is profoundly handicapped. And I took a few minutes yesterday talking with her father. Her parents would love to contribute more to the ongoing effort, but little Sophia requires a lot of care, a lot of time, a lot of attention, and that prevents them from doing more of what they would like to do because of the amount of care required on her behalf. I told the father that, really, he ought not worry about making a greater contribution, because Sophia is a gift that was given not only to them but the entire community. And if we really understood what God was up to, Sophia would not be the burden that she is upon her parents. She would be a gift for the entire community, and the care that she needs would be shared by others who likewise view her with charity and with love and with kindness. And so, we have once again an opportunity presented to us—this time in the form of Sophia—to give us a chance to exhibit the very things that my wife read from King Mosiah this morning about bearing one another’s burdens; because a child with such profound needs should attract the concern, the care, the attention, the support, the love of an entire community if that community actually be Christian. So, going back, I want to be clear that I believe Joseph Smith was, first of all, a good man, not responsible for introducing polygamy—in fact, was opposed to it—that he brought disciplinary proceedings to excommunicate those that he found to be involved, and that I believe that part of the record that says he intended to bring Brigham Young before the high council when Brigham returned from his mission because of the allegations that Brigham Young was involved in this wrongful conduct. Second, I believe that Joseph Smith was called by God to do a work. I believe he translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God. I believe he received revelations and authority from God. I believe he restored scripture, expanding greatly what we know about pre-Earth eternities in the creation; Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses; the scattering of Israel; and events that will happen before the Lord’s return. As a group, we have taken seriously and are working to bring the Restoration to two groups identified in the Book of Mormon as targets for the Restoration: the Jews and the Native Americans. The modern English version of the Book of Mormon is called the Covenant of Christ. We are a body of believers, but are non-denominational. We would accept anyone of any faith to be baptized. We intend to build a temple. We meet informally; we meet in houses or in borrowed/rented facilities like this one. We don’t spend money on structures. Our fellowships are voluntary, gathered in houses or in public places. Tithes that we gather are dispersed to those in need, and 100% goes to help people. No one is paid; everything is voluntary and not compensated. For conferences, some contribute to help, and the organizers are not paid. We reject polygamy as a principle. That being said, if a polygamist wants to join us, we would allow them to do so and would baptize them. But the purpose of the Restoration is to gather all truth. I have found that the Restoration is invigorating, joyful, exciting. It’s fun! This thing—this gathering of truth—there’s nothing more exciting or nothing more edifying than the Restoration. We invite everyone to be baptized. We plan to welcome the Lord’s return in glory. Now, look, I want to talk about another subject, which is prophecy. The Lord comes right out and tells Isaiah the purpose behind prophecy: The purpose behind prophecy is not to tell you something before it happens in order for you to play the right stock market choice, or you to buy property in the right location, or you to invest in a prudent scheme that will further the Lord’s purposes and make you rich! Prophecy is not intended to tell you beforehand the details. No matter how much detail you may think that there’s there, it’s not enough. The purpose of prophecy is not to tell you beforehand what you need to prepare for or do, or where you should buy your food storage, or how much medical stuff you want, or ammo. (You need ammo. I mean, we all know that, ok?) That’s not the purpose! The purpose is, after it has happened, for you to be able to say, “While man didn’t know it, God certainly did,” because He told us it was going to happen. We didn’t recognize it when it happened. So, I want you to think about the primary objectives of all scripture. Primarily, it focuses upon two events, the first coming of Jesus Christ and the second coming of Jesus Christ. There are a lot of little intermediate prophecies that take place. Primarily, it is those two things. So, how good a job did the scriptorians, the scribes, the Pharisees, the lawyers, how good a job did those people do with their study, their intensive fidelity to the Scriptures? How well did that help them recognize Jesus Christ when He came? I mean, they killed Him. Clearly, their Scriptures didn’t do… I was going to say it didn’t do a damn thing for them, but it did damn them. So, their Scriptures did a damnation for them. So, it probably worked just like it should have. They didn’t get it. They didn’t get on board with it. They didn’t recognize the Lord. They opposed Him. They criticized Him. They rejected Him. He was too much this, and He was too little that. And He clearly couldn’t be [sigh], “A carpenter from Galilee? Now, what good thing comes out of Galilee?” So, the Scriptures did not help. In order for the Scriptures to help, it would have required an absolutely dramatic vantage point change. There was a Pharisee. That Pharisee’s name was Saul. He came from Tarsus. He was well-read; he not only opposed, based on scripture, everything that Jesus stood for and did, he also wanted to assist in the process of eradicating Christians. And so he stood by, holding the coat at the time of the stoning of Stephen, consenting to his death because Saul of Tarsus was absolutely secure in his scriptural viewpoint and his scriptural understanding. Then he encountered the Lord on the road to Damascus, got a new name—Paul. And that same Pharisee who was befuddled, misled, enraged, and opposed became a suffering convert who sacrificed to preserve, perpetuate, and spread the Christianity that had come to him only by conversion on the road to Damascus. So, think about all of the rather grandiose, lofty, impressive descriptions that were given in the prophecies about the coming of the Lord the first time, when He came as a sacrifice. And then think about how modest and how de minimis (it’s a phrase you learn in law school; it means “the minimum”), how almost undetectable the entry of Jesus Christ into the world, His life and teaching, and His death was to the contemporaries. Now, a very small band of the contemporaries preserved and testified of it, and the resurrection of the Lord helped spread it, and Christianity became a dominant—absolutely dominant—cultural, religious, and social juggernaut. But that took centuries and a couple of millennia. That single generation to whom Christ came and personally ministered, He was hardly a ripple on the surface of the pond, because so few were believing; and those who believed in the same religion as Him did not believe the form the religion took in Him. They wanted nothing of it. So now, think about what is the absolute minimum. What is the most modest? What is the least that could happen to fulfill the prophecies leading up to the second coming of the Lord? Now, His return, all mankind will behold it; but the overwhelming majority will become ashes under the feet of those who are prepared for His coming. The prophecies require that the overwhelming majority never figure out what is happening right now under their noses—because I’m telling you, if you want to see what it is that fulfills the prophecies leading up to the return of the Lord, you had better pay attention to what we’ve been doing, because prophecy after prophecy, promise after promise, foretold event after foretold event has been occurring. And once again, I repeat to all the world, it doesn’t matter if you notice or you don’t. You have been warned. And it won’t be any more dramatic than what we’re doing now and what I’m saying today. We still have things to do. We can use help, and we can use assistance. But if we don’t get it, we’re going to soldier on, and we’re going to get it done because the Lord is backing us. So now here’s another thing. I want to talk to the young people. The adults can eavesdrop. I want to talk to the young folk, the people who have not yet solidified in their hard hearts like these cursed adults have become and are still looking forward to a future, the level of uncertainty about which increases daily because of events happening in Washington, D.C., and in the Persian Gulf, and in the laboratories of the artificial intelligence people. I think to prepare for life, you ought to consider practical skills. There are still going to be enormous needs that will never be displaced by automation or by artificial intelligence. Practical skills. I heard someone talking the other day that the wealthiest people from their high school were either plumbers or anesthesiologists. The electricians, the practical skills that are necessary to keep a community functioning, those things ought to be looked at. They’re not only going to be solid and enduring for, still, your lifetime, but they will be necessary if we’re going to create a survivable community. Artificial intelligence is programmed to give you an answer. And so when you engage with artificial intelligence and you pose a problem to it, you’re going to get an answer. But artificial intelligence does not concern itself with truth. It will give you an answer, but the answer that you get may not be true. Therefore, separate and apart, you can use artificial intelligence to give you suggestions. Never trust it with an answer that you haven’t also studied out in your own mind and gone to the trouble of understanding. Studying and developing the ability to think critically is absolutely necessary, because all around you, in the generation that you’re growing up in, all around you, the kids that are growing up today are not developing the ability to think critically, to understand, to evaluate. Just driving here this morning, my wife went in and bought a couple of cups of tea, one for her, one for me, on our way here this morning. And she paid the guy with a $20 bill. Now, it was an older guy, okay? And he was kind of amused that money would be used to make a payment because he thinks that’s going to, he said, “That’s gonna go away.” But he counted out the change. Then he told my wife a story that he had gone into a store, and he had bought something, and he had given more dollars in bills than the bill required, but the change he had given separately. So let’s assume it’s $15.33. He gave a $10 bill, a $5 bill, and 50 cents. And the gal at the register handed it all back to him and said, “Tell me how much change I need to give you if that’s your bill.” And she could not do the arithmetic. Arithmetic! This is what schools are producing! You need to be able to read and write cursive. You need to be able to read and understand. You need to be able to think. You need to be able to challenge the result or the answer on AI and evaluate it independent of the computer to determine whether or not you agree or you disagree. There are lawyers who have been disbarred because they used artificial intelligence to write briefs, and artificial intelligence insists on giving you an answer. The answer cites to a fictional case with a fictional ruling and a fictional outcome that the lawyer is offering up to the judge. And the judge checks: There’s no such case in the library; there’s no such holding; there’s no such rule of law. And he wound up in serious trouble, and his license got revoked. Comprehending is far more important and far more valuable than answers. You need to be able to comprehend. You should make it an absolute rule in your life that you are going to compose your own letters, your own papers, your own essays, and your own documents. You compose them! You can turn them over to AI after you’ve done the work, and you can let AI edit it (don’t turn it loose, even with editing, without critically looking at what edits were made and whether you agree with or disagree with them). Because AI is going to make cripples of your peers. Cripples. There’s no reason for you to join them in that problem. Oh, here’s something for you young people. And I want to be obvious and blunt. They are called “reproductive” organs because they are intended to produce offspring. That purpose should only be accomplished within the confines of a marriage. You will only get offspring with a male and a female. You can write down the equation: male + female = offspring (…and you’ve done a little bit of arithmetic right there). Don’t be confused about the things that are in this world. Family is more valuable than anything that can be bought with money. Family will frustrate you, challenge you. It will make you, well, eventually you’ll look like Keith Henderson if you’ve got a family, because it’s just gonna use you up, chew you up, and spit you out. But you know what? You’re gonna recover from that, and you’re gonna get older, and you’re gonna get grandkids. And holy crap, is that better than kids! Your role, young people, is to revolutionize the world. You are supposed to establish a new order of things. To overthrow the existing order is absolutely necessary. But it’s going to fail on its own. We don’t need to go try and bring it down. The consumption decreed is going to make a full end of all nations. That’s gonna happen. Your job is to be prepared to stand in the gap after it fails and to form a new society that is based upon faith, hope, and charity; one that really will endure for a thousand years. So with that, here’s a few other miscellaneous thoughts as I wrap up. [phone dinging] They need to hold my texts while I’m here. I’m going to turn that over so I don’t… If you have my number and you’re texting me, pox on you. So when the early days of the Restoration were underway and they were trying to get the Book of Mormon into print, Martin Harris had agreed to ante up, to pay E.B. Grandin, and to get the book into print; and then they were gonna sell the copies of the Book of Mormon, and they were gonna repay the obligation that had been incurred: the pledge by Martin Harris. And in a revelation to him, the Lord told Martin Harris this: …you shall not covet your own property, but impart it freely to the printing of the Book of Mormon (T&C 17:7). I thought that was an interesting way for the Lord to put it, to put it in terms of “covet[ing] your own property.” There are plenty of opportunities to sacrifice on behalf of the Lord, on behalf of the work that is underway; don’t ever deprive your family in the process of doing so. But when you have means to do so, keep it in mind that we can covet our own property. Joseph Smith in Liberty Jail had the voice of the Lord come to him and say (among other things) this to him, while in Liberty Jail: …fools shall have you in derision, and hell shall rage against you, while the pure in heart, and the wise, and the noble, and the virtuous shall seek counsel, and authority, and blessings constantly from under your hand. And [the] people shall never be turned against you by the testimony of traitors, and although their influence shall cast you into trouble, and into bars and walls, you shall be had in honor. …your God shall stand by you for ever and ever. (T&C 139:7) Joseph Smith right now is being held in derision by the LDS Church. If you read their essays about justification for the obscenity, the abomination of polygamy, you will find that they accuse the prophet Joseph Smith of sexual coercion of minors. It is rubbish. It is nonsense. It is bad history. It is untrue. And there is no reason for the Lord to say that the wise and the noble and the virtuous are going to constantly seek blessings from under his hand—that is, under the things that were composed: his revelations—they’re gonna constantly do so? Why would anyone ever seek blessings under the hand of someone who is as the LDS Church defames and portrays him? They hold him in derision. They will be held to account for that. It is a lie, and I’m telling you that the Lord has said, “…your God shall stand by you for ever and ever” to Joseph Smith while making no such similar promise to ‘the brethren.’ Well, that’s this, that, and the other thing, and I want to thank all of those who have talked before me. I thought that the talk that was given by Ianthius had some really great material in there, and I think if you didn’t hear what he had to say, it’s been recorded. It’s gonna go up. You ought to listen to it. I thought Dr. Otteson did a good job of introducing my wife. And I thought Micah Spicer did some great things. And I’ll talk to Shahram in due course about his mischief. (You know, there are people that were not vetted that got in from Iran, and we’ve now got you on video here; so it was a great talk, but he still has family back there too, so you should guard you and your family). Let me end by just taking a moment to say that it really is true that the Lord is behind what we are doing. He is the author of what’s currently underway. It may seem modest and underwhelming, but I’m telling you, what was happening when Jesus was here appeared modest and underwhelming. Rumors were flying about, and the typical attitude that was held by the religious establishment was that He was some kind of a sorcerer employing the devil’s power to render cheap magic tricks, and that He certainly wasn’t the Messiah. Well, I’m telling you, God is behind this work. He is the author of the things that have and are going on. The production of our new volume of Scriptures is in itself only made possible by the Lord’s direct help. Many volunteers assisted, but the Lord was directly involved. It is miraculous that we have gotten as far as we have in as little time as it has taken. And we know we are going to soldier on, fully expecting that we’re going to receive a command to build a temple, with every intent of doing so. One of the strides that we have made was taken today. It’s not just in making possible a substitute for those who have no father or grandfather to give them a patriarch’s blessing. It’s not just that. It’s that we have, by mutual agreement, agreed to accept that. Now, you might think that I shouldn’t spring such things on you when something as serious as that is going to take place in a conference. It ought to be advertised. It ought to be told beforehand. You were all invited to this conference. We might do stuff like that again without announcing it in advance. So maybe instead of sitting home and watching it on the YouTube, you ought to show up, make your voice be heard, and participate in the ongoing movement of the Restoration forward. There’s going to be a talk (I have worked on for some time) given in July, on a subject that has suffered collapse in the Restoration—but it’s returning in due course. But before it returns in fact, you need to understand what it is, and why it is, and where it once was, and why it’s coming back again. Between now and the next conference that we have, some of what I said today was intended not just for your ears to hear, but as material that you can use—you can show the recording of this conference if you like—but something you can use so that those who are fleeing from the LDS institution have a place to land, rather than winding up atheist or agnostic, and faithless and unrooted. I believe that from Alberta, Canada, through Idaho, Utah, Arizona, into northern Mexico, and over to Nevada and Colorado, that whole communities are benefited by activity in the LDS Church and having a religion. I believe that the decay of the LDS Church, which is taking place at an accelerating rate, injures all of those communities. Anything that the LDS Church can do to slow that, I welcome. I encourage people, if they can, to remain a part of an organized faith. We aren’t trying to co-opt or steal members of any church from any other denomination. We just believe in accepting the truth, in being baptized to follow Christ, and then to pursue the course of truth wherever it takes us. If that allows you to fellowship with a Presbyterian or a Catholic, do so, but be unmistakable about where the truth lies. The truth is HERE, and God’s work has commenced among us. And while there are many corners of the earth on which God is engaged in activities, the fulfillment of the promises and the prophecies are going to happen in a very modest way among this people. When I was finishing law school at Brigham Young University, they offered to make a class ring for you if you were willing to ante up the money to do so. I didn’t have the money to do so, but I had an old class ring from high school, and I wondered if they would exchange, and they agreed to exchange it. So I traded a high school class ring for a law school class ring; and I don’t always wear it, but it’s from the J. Reuben Clark Law School. Because law school had made everything arguable—I mean, you might be representing the plaintiff, or you might be representing the defendant, so everything was arguable—the entire world was reduced to gray. So when I ordered the class ring, I got white gold and black onyx, so I had something still black-and-white left in my life after law school. What I have found is that there still are places of black and white. There still is truth and error. If your tolerance for error is increasingly creating a gag reflex for you in the LDS Church, don’t throw the Restoration away. Look over here. See if you can preserve your faith—because we still respect, honor, believe, and trust in the restoration of the gospel that came through Joseph Smith. And I testify, I proclaim, I affirm, I declare unequivocally, God is talking to us! We have His word, and it is ongoing. He does not forsake us. The events that happened today are as current as the moment we’re living in right now. The Lord’s work is afoot. Whatever mistakes, whatever shortcomings, whatever difficulties we have, the Lord says He owns it. He stands by it. It’s His word. It’s His warning. It’s His counsel. It’s His guidance. It’s His comfort. He has sent that to us, and He intends that we be the grateful recipients of that. None of us are ever going to achieve perfection in this life. Unfortunately, all of us are expected to achieve perfection “by and by.” But that’s like Homer Simpson eating mayonnaise with a large spoon out of a jar, being told, “That’s gonna ruin your health,” and him saying, “That’s a problem for future Homer. Boy, I feel sorry for that guy.” The game afoot right now does not require us to do anything more than to repent, have faith, be faithful to His purpose, and support His work. We may do that poorly, haltingly. We may do it with regrets every time we lay down at night thinking of what might we have done better that day. Bear on, carry on, soldier on—because the ultimate end of this is a victory, not for us, but a victory for the Lord. Our victory merely consists in being able to survive the burning! Let me close by bearing testimony that Jesus Christ lives, speaks, is engaged, has His eyes upon all the earth, and many of the details that you think are happenstance in your life are not so. The Lord is involved everywhere, and He is involved in every life. I bear testimony of that in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. The post This, That, and the Other Thing appeared first on Restoration Archives Blog.

   April 21, 2026·1h 52min
   Play
4. 4
   Number 4: Preserving the Restoration

   This lecture by Denver Snuffer entitled “Preserving the Restoration” was originally recorded in Mesa, Arizona on September 9, 2014, in front of a live audience. Transcript This is the concluding part of a single talk. This has been going on beginning in Boise, and now, concluding here. It’s all one talk—and it really helps if you have heard 9/10ths of the talk that preceded today—but they all stand alone; it’s just that you’ll understand things better, I believe, today if you’ve got in mind what went before. All of this has been about Zion. The whole purpose of this endeavor is limited to that one subject: Zion and seeing that Zion comes again. I wanna clarify a couple of things preliminarily. If you go to the testimony that John the Baptist gave of Christ that is recorded by John in the third chapter of John—it runs on for a number of verses from 27 to 36, but I want to only take out of that one reference that John makes to our Lord. He says that Christ had the Spirit given to Him without measure (see John 3:34), meaning that when our Lord was down here accomplishing what was expected of Him, He had to have access to the Spirit in a degree to which none of us can equal. That was necessary in order for Him to fulfill His responsibility. We are in a very different state—all of us, even the very best of us. We are being “proven.” Christ came to prove us; we are here to be proven. As a result of that, all of us (according to the scriptures) are given weakness. You are not going to perform in this estate at the same level as our Lord performed in this estate—period. You are given weakness, and He was given the Spirit without measure. And so, adding to what went on before (about the ascent up Jacob’s ladder and the arrival to the state at which you’ve completed the course and you’ve “attained unto the resurrection”), understand that our Savior—who accomplished that—did it in this world using a very different criteria and experience by which to live His life from the one in which we live ours. And that’s just the way that the plan operates, the way that the development operates. Now, it’s clear when it comes to “the gospel” that the gospel has—as its standard—absolutes. Doctrine and Covenants 1 section [verse] 31 says: For I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance (emphasis added). And if that’s not a troubling enough idea, then if you go to King Benjamin in Mosiah 4, verse 29, it says (this is King Benjamin talking): And finally, I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them. So, there’s an infinite supply of opportunities with which to commit sin, and God cannot look upon that with any degree of allowance. It’s sort of a formidable challenge for us to look at, but there is a Divine purpose underlying that. And that Divine purpose is to bring us—in humility—to God, recognizing that there’s a gulf between who and what we are and what it is that is expected of us in order to be truly holy. Think about all the ways that there are to err. In the warnings that are given in section 121 of the Doctrine and Covenants concerning priesthood: [It can] be conferred upon us, [it’s] true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or…gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness… (D&C 121:37, emphasis added). And by the way, “any degree of unrighteousness”—it tells you in verse 41 how power or influence is to be affected, and it is not by virtue of the priesthood; it is only by persuasion, …long-suffering, …gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; [By pure] By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy (D&C 121:41-42). This presents an opportunity for everyone, every time, to fail. In addition to all this, if you go to Second Nephi chapter 26, at verse 29: He commandeth…there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold, priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion. Zion can only come about as a consequence of consecration and sacrifice and not as a result of seeking to get gain. In fact, when you’re in the employ of the Lord, you ought to be sacrificing. It shouldn’t be gainful. It should cost you in order to serve. To accomplish purity, there are absolutes that are necessary. Sacrifice is absolutely necessary, and equality is necessary as well—or at least there be no poor among us. My guess is that, among us sitting in this room here today, there are those who have significant issues with financial needs—and there are some sitting here today who could help in solving those. [Phone rings] Oh, hey—hold my calls, will ya? [laughter] In Alma chapter 1, it talks about a circumstance in which the priests served. Alma 1, beginning at verse 26: And when the priests left their labor to impart the word of God unto the people, the people also left their labors to hear the word of God. And when the priest had imparted unto them the word of God they all returned again diligently unto their labors; and the priest, not esteeming himself above his hearers, for the preacher was no better than the hearer, neither was the teacher any better than the learner; and thus they were all equal, and they did…labor, every man according to his strength. And they did impart of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted; and they did not wear costly apparel, yet they were neat and comely. (Alma 1:26-27) You see, they prospered in this, and they were blessed because of it. We should learn from their example, when they were prospering, about what it was they did that was right that brought it about. The ideal is not to have a professional class of clergymen. The ideal is to have every one of us being equal. In our own day, in a revelation given through Joseph, Doctrine and Covenants 52, beginning at 39, it says: Let the residue of the elders watch over the churches, and declare the word in the regions round about…and let them labor with their own hands that there be no idolatry nor wickedness practiced. (D&C 52:39) Labor with their own hands means that they’re not professionals—because as soon as you turn them into a professional clergy, people idolize them; and the object is to avoid idolatry, to avoid the professional class of clergy to whom people look for blessings at their hands. That there be no idolatry nor wickedness practiced—“wickedness” because when you have people elevated that have control… Almost invariably, the existence of control tends to lead, invariably—to lead, inexorably—to abuse. Because if all you have with which to work is persuasion, you’re gonna find out that there are a lot of people who you will never persuade. There are a lot of people who will never get aboard. Therefore, if you’re limited to persuasion alone, you have to afford people the freedom to reject, to be contrary, to raise their hand and make a contrasting point, and not have someone say, “Your point isn’t welcome here. You’re not doing what you need to do!” And remember in all things the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted, for he that [doth] not these things, the same is not my disciple. (ibid, vs. 40) And isn’t it interesting that both in the case of Alma (talking about how their system worked with their priests) and in the modern revelation (talking about how things should be among us), there is no such thing as a “professional clergy,” followed immediately by, “remember the poor, remember the needy”—in both instances. That’s not happenstance. Well, I’m talking about priesthood because I want to remind you of a few things about priesthood conceptually. The priesthood was restored by John the Baptist before there was any organized church. Therefore, it is before, and it is independent and has never required a church in order for priesthood to exist. If you go to Doctrine and Covenants section 84, verse 6: And the sons of Moses, according to the Holy Priesthood which he received under the hand of his father–in–law, Jethro… Now, just to remind you about this, Jethro was a Midianite. He was a descendant of Midian; Midian was the son of Keturah. Keturah was the wife of Abraham after Sarah. After Sarah died, Keturah bore him children, one of whom was Midian. The birthright had already been given to Isaac. See, there is so much about the priesthood that has yet to be clarified (and I think that is a good thing, and I’m not going to clarify enough for mischief to ensue). But the fact of the matter is that that priesthood which Abraham handed to Midian—which then descended down and came to Moses—did not possess the birthright; didn’t possess that. Therefore, it was not the same thing as the priesthood that had belonged previously to the Patriarchs. It was something less, and it was something different. But Moses obtained that priesthood through Jethro, a Midianite—not even an Israelite, because Midian was named at the same time genealogically as Isaac, and it would be Isaac’s son, Jacob, who would be named Israel; and it was Israel who possessed the birthright that descended down. And so, Moses inherited a form of priesthood that was, by its very nature, lesser. It’s one of the reasons why the prophets of the Old Testament all had to be ordained directly by heaven in order to obtain what they obtained. In any event, this point is only this: priesthood exists independent of Israel; it exists independent of a church; and while the church may be dependent upon priesthood, priesthood is not and never has been dependent upon a church—period. I hope you understand that. Priesthood is not and never has been dependent upon a church! These are two entirely different topics and very important to be understood for our purposes here today. In addition to this, I hope you all understand that the Holy Ghost can and does speak to everyone—Baptists, Lutherans, Catholics. C.S. Lewis could not have written and comprehended what he wrote and understood unless the light of the Holy Ghost shown upon that man’s mind. Period. There is no organization which controls the Holy Ghost. It is untrue to say that there is some organization(which itself must be dependent upon the existence of priesthood for its order) has the authority to control the priesthood in all the world! That is utter rubbish! And the practice of the missionaries demonstrates the “rubbish-ness” of it all—because when the missionaries come and teach about the Book of Mormon, they get out Moroni chapter 10, verse 4 and admonish you to pray and ask God…if these things are not true; and …[God] will manifest the truth of [that] unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. To the unbaptized, to the unwashed, to the uninitiated… They’re invited to come and listen to the Holy Ghost. And if they submit and if they do that, the Holy Ghost will speak to them. And the Holy Ghost does, can, will speak to anyone. You need these concepts in your mind in order to understand. The Holy Ghost and the claim of owning a franchise is hollow, and the idea that the Holy Ghost can be controlled is false. The fact that LDS Mormons have some acquaintance with the Holy Ghost means very little. It does not distinguish Latter-day Saints, and it should not separate you from the Holy Ghost and its ministrations. The Holy Ghost does not thrill you; it informs you. It gives you understanding. If you want to be thrilled, I can get that from Braveheart (because the Bruces are in my ancestry; Alice Bruce is one of my ancestors, and I was glad to see the repentance of the son who led the rebellion). In any event, thrilling music can do it. A great TV show can get you thrilled and feeling goose-bumps. And that’s not the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost enlightens your mind; it enlivens your senses; it brings light into your life; you understand something anew. There are some people who have the Spirit with them in such a degree that to be in their presence is to understand things better—understanding, comprehension, light and truth. I have never said this publicly, but because of what I think will ensue after this talk, I’m going to say it (not for my sake and certainly not for the sake of anyone who believes the truth or has the Spirit)—but I say it only to benefit those who may view things completely otherwise. The Lord has said to me in His own voice, “I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you.” And therefore, I want to caution those who disagree with me to feel free—feel absolutely free—to make the case against me. Feel free to disagree, but take care; take care of what you say concerning me. I talked about paying and ministering your own tithes. I wanna remind you if you do that, that none of it should go to the priests. None of it should go to any other than to helping with the poor. And if—after all is done to help with the poor—there’s money left over, well, we’ll talk about that before we finish today too. A great deal is made of Joseph’s first vision and almost nothing made of his last one. But I wanna turn to his last one, given on the morning of the martyrdom. Joseph’s last vision, taken from The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, beginning on page 393. This is Joseph—it’s being recorded and recounted by someone else, and I’m not sure that they got everything right in the way that they recounted it, but nevertheless, this is the best source we have of Joseph’s last vision. “I…”—this is Joseph speaking: I was back in Kirtland, Ohio, and thought I would take a walk out by myself, and view my old farm, which I found grown up with weeds and brambles, and altogether bearing evidence of neglect and want of culture. I went into the barn, which I found without floor or doors, with the weather-boarding off, and was altogether in keeping with the farm. While I viewed the desolation around me, and was contemplating how it might be recovered from the curse upon it, there came rushing into the barn a company of furious men, who commenced to pick a quarrel with me. The leader of the party ordered me to leave the barn and farm, stating it was none of mine, and that I must give up all hope of ever possessing it. I told him the farm was given me by the Church, and although I had not had any use of it for some time back, still I had not sold it, and according to righteous principles it belonged to me or the Church. He then grew furious and began to rail upon me, and threaten me, and said it never did belong to me nor to the Church. I then told him that I did not think it worth contending about, and that I had no desire to live upon it in its present state, and if he thought he had a better right I would not quarrel with him…but leave; but my assurance that I would not trouble him at present did not seem to satisfy him, as he seemed determined to quarrel with me, and threatened me with the destruction of my body. While he was thus engaged, pouring out his bitter words upon me, a rabble rushed in and nearly filled the barn, drew out their knives, and began to quarrel among themselves for the premises, and for a moment forgot me, at which time I took the opportunity to walk out of the barn about up to my ankles in mud. When I was a little distance from the barn, I heard them screeching and screaming in a very distressed manner, as…appeared they had engaged in a general fight with their knives. While they were thus engaged, the dream or vision ended. Joseph did not live long enough after receiving this vision to offer up any comments upon it. But I can tell you that if the “farm” is the church he established, that today Joseph would have no welcoming arm within it. It would suffer from a curse in its present state, and they would quarrel with him and tell him to leave if he came among the church today. I believe that the farm in the last vision was the church. God’s house is a house of order, but that does not mean what you think it means. God follows patterns. He establishes and ordains things according to one pattern, and then He takes them down again according to another pattern, and He does not vary. There is no guarantee when He establishes a house in one instance that that house cannot rebel and reject and be neglected by Him at another. Just because God undertakes one work doesn’t mean that He cannot undertake yet another. And just because He ordains one system at one time it does not mean that, when that system becomes abusive, He will not deal with that system according to its own standards in order to bring about the result that He warned about. He follows a pattern and therein is the house of order. At the time I was excommunicated, I was in good standing with the Lord. I had nothing amiss in my personal life. There was no sin warranting church discipline. As a former member of the High Council for years, every church disciplinary proceeding I attended that resulted in excommunication, always involved serious moral transgression, betrayal of marriage covenants, and in some cases criminal wrongdoing. In contrast, the reason for my discipline was a book [I’d] written about church history, in which I attempted to align the events of the Restoration to the prophecies of the Book of Mormon and…Doctrine and Covenants. The stake president admitted to me and my wife before the Council began, that I was then worthy of a temple recommend. By any standard of moral conduct, I was an innocent man, whose only offense was believing the scriptures revealed our condition before God. On the evening of May 1, 2014, the Lord gave me further light and knowledge about His work in His vineyard. The Lord is in control over the church, men, and all things. When He undertakes to accomplish something, “there is nothing that the Lord God shall take in His heart to do, but what He will do it” (Abr. 3:17.) Often the means used by the Lord to accomplish His “strange act,” and to perform His “strange work” (D&C 101:95), are very small indeed. “Now ye may suppose that this is foolishness in me; but behold I say unto you, that by small and simple things are great things brought to pass; and small [things] in many instances doth confound the wise. And the Lord God doth work by means to bring about his great and eternal purposes; and by very small means the Lord doth confound the wise and bringeth about the salvation of many souls.” [That’s Alma 37:6 and 7.] It is almost always the case that the Lord uses simple things to confound the mighty. I can think of nothing smaller or simpler and less important than myself. Inside the great church to which I once belonged, I was obscure. However, I lived my religion, attended faithfully, served to the best of my ability, upheld church leaders with my prayers, paid tithes, fasted, observed the Word of Wisdom, and helped answer questions for those needing assistance with troubling issues. There was no reason to regard me as a rebel who should be singled out for discipline. Nevertheless, the Lord chose to use a faithful and believing member to accomplish His design. Only someone who is devoted to His will could accomplish what the Lord had in His heart. Now He has accomplished it. The Church has Doctrine and Covenants 121, verses 36 to 40, to warn it about abusing His authority. There is an “amen” or end to authority when control, compulsion, and dominion are exercised in any degree of unrighteousness. Therefore, when using authority, great care must be taken. In any case, the church was careless. Therefore, those involved, are now left to kick against the pricks, to persecute the Saints and…fight against God. Section 121 is a warning to church leaders. It is addressing the powerful, not the powerless. It is addressing those who occupy the seats of authority over others. Only those who claim the right to control, compel, and exercise dominion, are warned against persecuting the saints, who believe the religion and practice it as I did from the time of my conversion. My excommunication was an abuse of authority. Therefore, as soon as the decision was made, the Lord terminated the priesthood authority of the stake presidency and every member of the High Council who sustained the decision, which was unanimous. Thereafter, I appealed to the First Presidency, outlining the involvement of the 12 and the 70. The appeal gave notice to them all. The appeal was summarily denied. Last general conference, the entire First Presidency, …12, …70, all other general authorities and auxiliaries, voted to sustain those who abused their authority in casting me out of the church. At that moment, the Lord ended all claims of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to claim it is led by the priesthood. They have not practiced what He requires. The Lord has brought about His purposes. This has been in His heart all along. [He’s] chosen to use small means to accomplish it, but He always uses the smallest of means to fulfill His purposes. None of this was my doing. The Lord’s strange act, was not, could not, be planned by me. Was not, could not, have been controlled by me. It was not anticipated by me, or even understood by me, until after the Lord had accomplished His will, and made it apparent to me on the evening of May 1, 2014. He alone has done this. He is the author of all this. (Journal of Denver Snuffer, Vol. 8, entry of May 2, 2014, pp. 29-33, emphasis added) Well, just because something is true at one moment does not mean that it is true at another moment. Things change; decisions matter; what we do matters. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not the same thing as it was when I joined in 1973. And at this moment, it is not even the same thing that it was in 2012. Now, prophecy… Prophecy is not given so that you know the details beforehand. Prophecy is only given so that after the event takes place, you can look at the scriptures and understand what the Lord meant to accomplish. Its purpose is not to allow you beforehand to know the events with enough specificity so that God’s will cannot be accomplished. If you knew what He was up to, you could prevent it. But because you don’t, when the prophecies are fulfilled, then you know that the Lord has acted. God can use any means He chooses to accomplish His promises. Everything that God is doing is not disclosed at the time He’s doing it. We all know and accept John the Baptist because history tells us that we ought to accept John the Baptist. But it was not until a revelation was given through the Prophet Joseph Smith that we understood the greatness of the effort behind the scenes that were involved in bringing to pass the mission entrusted to John the Baptist. We knew none of what I’m gonna read to you at the time that John acted, but we know it now. Doctrine and Covenants section 84, beginning at verse 27: Which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of carnal commandments, which the Lord in his wrath caused to continue with the house of Aaron among the children of Israel until John, whom God raised up, being filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb. For he was baptized while he was yet in his childhood, and was ordained by the angel of God at the time he was eight days old unto this power, to overthrow the kingdom of the Jews, and to make straight the way of the Lord before the face of his [coming], to prepare them for the coming of the Lord, in whose hand is given all power. (D&C 84:27-28, emphasis added) It was because of this that Joseph observed concerning John: John “wrested the keys, the kingdom, the power, the glory from the Jews, by the holy anointing and decree of heaven.” It’s from the Teachings of the Prophet [Joseph Smith] on page 276. Did the Jews notice? In like manner, God’s house is a house of order. He does it according to patterns. It is not God’s purpose to abandon the Restoration; it is His purpose to preserve the Restoration, which at this moment is in terrible jeopardy. The Restoration itself must be rescued. Well, baptism has always been required, from the days of Adam until the present. Baptism is always the sign of acceptance of what it is that God is doing, of penitence—that is, turning and facing God and then walking in a new path. From the days of Adam, it will continue through the end of the millennium. And whenever there has been a believing people upon the earth, they have always been invited to partake of the ordinance of baptism as a sign of their faith. Authority was restored as part of the ministry of Joseph Smith and should be remembered. In fact, everything that was accomplished by the Lord through Joseph should be both remembered and respected. We should not abandon anything that has been given by heaven, but we should also not neglect anything that has been given or commanded by heaven. We should not be forgetful. It is a sign of ingratitude when we forget and neglect. And no church organization or man claiming authority should hijack your obedience to God. You’re accountable to Him. You’re accountable to only Him, not to me and not to any man. When Joseph wanted to know what his state and standing was before God, he asked God. It is to God alone that you must answer, and it is to God that you must be grateful. And before Him, you must be humble. That having been said, religion—when it exists—always exists in its true form as a community of believers. Community is required. If we don’t have a community then we cannot be willing to mourn [for] those that mourn. We cannot comfort those that stand in need of comfort. We cannot stand as [a] witness [to one another] of God at all times and in all places. We cannot bear one another’s burdens that they may be light (Mosiah 18:8-9), as is required by the Gospel and by the covenant of baptism. None of this can be done without fellowship. However, we do not need a new church. The only thing we need is a community of fellowship. Legal entities, when they are formed, become prey to the law; legal entities can become controlled by men who have ambition—sycophants, brown-nosers, people who are willing to do whatever is required of them in order to show that they are desperately submissive to the one above them so that they might join them in having control over others. This is the way that organizations go. In the “Sunstone Conference,” I wrote a paper; I presented part of it there called Cutting Down the Tree of Life to Build a Wooden Bridge (it’s available on my blog with all of the footnotes—I think the footnote version is much better than what I was able to do verbally). But that process is the inevitable result. Aspiring men will always corrupt whatever there is that is organized on the earth. So ask yourself, what can remain pure? Even here, in this awful world, what can remain pure? Because there are three things that can remain absolutely unmolested and uncorrupted: the truth, which is fixed and cannot be touched by us; God’s love, which is free and available to all. Neither the truth nor God’s love requires effort on our part. But the third thing that can remain pure here is our desires. That, however, requires effort. Nevertheless, it is possible that perfection can touch each of us, as well, if we have the right desires. The fact is (as I began), however, we all have weaknesses. We all need rest. We all need food. We all wear down. There are things that trouble each one of us, and even your desires are gonna be better than you are. At least I hope they are. But these three things can be perfect, and they can be pure: the truth, God’s love, and our desires. You do not need to leave anything behind that is good or noble or virtuous. And you (and we) do not need to establish another entity. You can serve wherever you are. However, to preserve the Restoration itself, starting now, we need to more closely follow the pattern of scripture. The baptism prayer was given by Christ. This is in Third Nephi chapter 11, beginning at verse 19: And Nephi arose and went forth, and bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet. And the Lord commanded him that he should arise. And he arose and stood before him. And the Lord said unto him: I give unto you power that ye shall baptize this people when I am again ascended into heaven. And again the Lord called others, and said unto them likewise; and he gave unto them power to baptize. (3 Nephi 11:19-22, emphasis added) I’m not gonna take the time to do it, but if you wanna check this out, you can check this out on your own: Christ did not touch them; He said to them, “I give you power to baptize.” When Christ touches them (which will be later still in the narrative), the fact that He touches them is so remarkable in the narrative that the verse talking about it repeats three times that the Lord touched them. The presence of God touching them being so significant that it’s mentioned three times in the narrative when it happens drives home the point that it’s missing here. How then does the authority to baptize come? Well, once John the Baptist came and laid his hands on Joseph, we’ve had a practice of continuing that—and we ought to continue that. But before any of you baptize any other of you, do this. Do this! It’s the same thing that Alma did in Mosiah chapter 18. If you go back to Mosiah chapter 18, before he baptized, Alma took Helam (this is Mosiah 18:12): stood forth in the water, and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart. And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him (Mosiah 18:12-13). He got the authority to baptize. If you’re going to use the priesthood, (no matter what the Church has told you, and no matter what quorum leaders and respected others—including your own father, perhaps—have taught you), before you do so, ask God to give you the authority. And if you get it, you get it from Him, and then you’re not dependent upon someone else. But get the authority from Him. Power is required. It must come from Christ. The pattern must be followed. John the Baptist—when he restored the authority (in Joseph Smith verse 69… Joseph Smith History 1:69)—said that it …holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken…from the earth until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness. The Gospel of repentance is returning to face God. Baptism by immersion is for the remission of sins. And John’s declaration does not say that it will not be taken from the church; it says it will be [not] taken…from the earth. It was restored to remain on the earth. And no matter what happens among those that choose to abuse one another, it needs to be preserved by a faithful few so that it doesn’t cease from the earth. It is still here—though it has been much neglected, and it has been much abused. But with you, renew it. Renew it using Alma’s example. He’d been previously ordained as one of the priests in wicked King Noah’s court. And he’d been ordained by him precisely because he was wicked: he qualified; he was corrupt. Noah wanted him, and so he got ordained. But before he undertook to use the authority, he asked God to give him power. And God, seeing penitence on the earth, respected it and poured out His Spirit upon him so that Alma could baptize with authority. And the proof of that consisted not merely in what it was that Alma experienced with the Spirit empowering him to perform the ordinance, but it consisted also in the effect that the ordinance itself had upon both Helam and Alma (who himself went into the water at the same time). The Spirit was poured out upon them. Renew it. Likewise, we need to renew a community—not an organization, but a fellowship; not a hierarchy, but a group of equals. The community needs to be renewed. Men who have been ordained already should renew this in the manner I just described. In my disgust and in my personal preference, I asked that priesthood get extended beyond the confines of the men who have continually abused and neglected it. And I was told that priesthood is confined to men because of the Fall and that until we reverse things in the Millennium, that’s the way it’s going to remain (as to the ordinances thus far given in public). I asked the Lord to change that order. And it’s not going to change. Here is how, then, you should proceed: Even if you have already been ordained—as part of the community, the community itself needs to recognize that someone is authorized. However, given the fact that men have abused and neglected the priesthood that they’ve been given, and given the fact that if men are only going to hold the priesthood that there ought to be some other independent check, I would suggest—and it is agreeable to the Lord—that when it comes to sustaining men to perform as priesthood, only women should vote. No man should be allowed to vote to sustain another priesthood holder—period. If only men hold it, then only women should sustain them. The saying pleased the Lord, but He set a criteria. He said if that is to be the case, then there must be at least seven women who vote. Call a conference. In the conference attended by a minimum of seven women, at least seven women must vote to sustain. When that’s done, all seven who vote to sustain should sign a certificate. If you look in the Joseph Smith Papers, these were just handwritten things. But they did it, and they did it in the early church, and you can look, and it was the practice back then—except back then it was men. We’re gonna change that. Call a conference, at least seven women vote, all seven sign the certificate. If the man is married, his wife must be among the seven women. If his wife will not sustain him, he is unworthy. When you ordain, you should ordain no one to an office; you only confer the priesthood. Have no offices among you. Let everyone be equal. Be without ranks. Keep your lines of authority—it reckons from the one ordaining—but power can only come from Christ. And without ratification (from the Spirit) of your ordination, wait until the Spirit ratifies it before you act. After April 2014… After April 2014 General Conference, only reckon your line of authority in these proceedings—not from LDS Church lines after April of 2014. All ordained keep a record of your line of authority and pass it down. And be prepared to defend your line of authority because of the records you keep. All of the women who vote to sustain: Put it in your diaries and in your journals. Let the records be kept so that if anyone questions, there will be an abundance of witnesses. Conferences can be called by any who desire it, but you must have seven women if the business includes a priesthood ordination. There’s absolutely no need to purchase a building. You can meet anywhere, including in your own home. You can meet in parks. Continuing then with what Christ said: And he said unto them: On this wise shall ye baptize; and there shall be no disputations among you. Verily I say unto you, that whoso repenteth of his sins through your words, and desireth to be baptized in my name, on this wise shall ye baptize them—Behold, ye shall go down and stand in the water… (3 Nephi 11:22-23) I would recommend, if it is at all possible, that the water for a living ordinance be living water. I would not perform this… I would get out of the buildings that are built by the hands of men, and I would use the things of God. You’re trying to connect to God. Use the things that He has made. I recognize there may be circumstances where that becomes impossible. I‘ve been baptized twice—once in the Atlantic and once in a stream in the Little Cottonwood canyon. Both times it was so cold my lips were blue. And I recognize that some of you hardy people may not want to experience a baptism that invigorates you to the point of turning your lips blue. But I would recommend when you go down and stand in the water that it be living water. …and in my name shall ye baptize them. …now behold, these are the words…ye shall say, calling them by name, saying: Having authority given me of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. (Ibid, vs. 24-25) When I was baptized into the LDS Church, the baptismal prayer was: “Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father….” When I was re-baptized, I was re-baptized by one who had authority from Christ; therefore, in that baptism the words were: Having authority…of Jesus Christ. If all you’re going to do is baptize someone again according to the LDS pattern, with a commission in a Church, don’t bother doing it. But if you follow these principles and if the Spirit empowers you to baptize, then baptize having authority from Christ, and follow His words. We’ve deviated long enough. It’s time to return. Then shall ye immerse them in the water, and come forth again out of the water. And after this manner shall ye baptize in my name; for behold, verily I say unto you, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one. And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. (Ibid, vs. 26-28) I’m telling you, in the name of the Lord, that that commandment is renewed again by Him today to you. This is His command. Do it on this wise. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been. For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another. Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another. (Ibid, vs. 28-30) Do it… Do it in this way. If someone disputes and says, “They ought not be doing it, and you ought not be doing it,” leave it alone. Don’t fight. Don’t quarrel. Invite; persuade. And if they’re unpersuaded, let them go. If you invite and they will not come, let them go. If you entice—if you entreat—and they say, “We will not hear your entreaty…” If they mock you, let them go. There is no need to harbor ill-will and to fight with people. Any—any—who desire to be baptized, should be baptized. If you have this authority and you practice this and anyone comes to you, baptize them. Refuse no one. Freely you get from God; therefore, freely give to others. Do not charge to perform an ordinance. The ordinance is between them and God. And they need to have it performed between them and someone God has asked to do it. You become the people God asks to do it. Before baptism, teach them the Doctrine of Christ, which Christ immediately discusses following His instruction on baptism. Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine. And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me. And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God. And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost. (Ibid, vs. 31-35, emphasis added) That’s the purpose of the baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. The doctrine of Christ is connected to this so that, once baptized, you can have the testimony of the Father concerning His Son shed upon you by the power of the Holy Ghost. And again I say unto you, [you] must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things. And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them. Therefore, go forth unto this people, and declare the words which I have spoken, unto the ends of the earth. (Ibid, vs. 38-41, emphasis added) This is Christ’s doctrine—nothing more and certainly nothing less. This is His doctrine. This is the power of redemption. This is the means by which the Holy Ghost is given. And it is the Holy Ghost which, when given, bears record of all things. It is the Holy Ghost by which you learn. Believe in Christ, repent, be baptized, receive the Holy Ghost, and become as a little child. There is no more inquisitive a creature on the planet than a little child. That’s who you’re to become. You should hunger and search for understanding. This is all of the doctrine. There is no more doctrine. This is not all of the teachings; this is not all of the tenets; these are not all of the precepts; this is not all of the covenants; this is not all of the commandments; and this is not all of the principles. But it’s all of the doctrine. There is no more doctrine than this. Joseph F. Smith wrote a book called Gospel Doctrine. Joseph Fielding Smith wrote a three-volume work called The Doctrines of Salvation. Bruce R. McConkie wrote Mormon Doctrine. Bruce R. McConkie wrote The Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, which is multiple volumes. Millet, Fronk, Skinner, and Top wrote LDS Beliefs, A Doctrinal Commentary. There’s The Development of Temple Doctrine. There’s Unlocking the Doctrine of the Fall. There’s The Doctrines of the Kingdom—that’s Hyrum Andrus. There‘s The Doctrinal Developments in the Early Church. If you go to Deseret Book and you search the word “doctrine,” they will sell you 791 items. Whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock (ibid). I haven’t titled anything I’ve written “doctrine,” but I do admit that we use the word “doctrine” very sloppily. And sometimes we apply the word “doctrine” when we really mean a tenet, when we really mean a teaching or a precept or principal or a covenant. Well, Christ has sort of narrowly-defined what we ought to be declaring as His doctrine, and I’d suggest that He did that on purpose in order to avoid com[ing] of evil (ibid). (Do we have to take a break because of the recording? Is that… Oh, okay. We’ve been just a little over one hour. I think we will take a short break in order for them to serve up the next disk in the recording. So, let’s take a five-minute break.) [In answer to a question about a single man, and the recording began mid-sentence] …then, I don’t think there’s any impediments to conforming with the pattern and being ordained in the absence of having a wife—but if you add a wife? You better add a wife who’s going to sustain you. But that’s your problem. “Does this mean you have to leave the Church?” . Of course not. I said this is to add to anything that you already have. There is no reason why you can’t be part of this community and part of a Lutheran community and part of a Catholic community and part of a LDS community. I wouldn’t leave until they throw you out—but they’ll probably throw you out. But I wouldn’t leave. I don’t… If you find value in service there… I think the youth programs are wonderful… I sent my son because (the winning-est high school baseball coach moved from Taylorsville High School to Juan Diego Catholic High School)—and I wanted my son playing for him. And so, my son played baseball at Juan Diego Catholic High School. And they had devotionals, and they had, you know, Catholic stuff going on. And while he was at Juan Diego Catholic High School, he heard a bunch of Catholic stuff. And he’d come home, and we’d talk about it. There’s nothing wrong with letting your kids learn within the LDS community. I wouldn’t run away from it. Though, if they find out that you’re participating in another community (particularly one that says that there’s been some loss of authority), my suspicion is that immediately—at a minimum—you’re gonna forfeit a temple recommend, and you may suffer more than that. “What about ordinations that occurred before April [2014]?” . Yeah, I would respect them and keep them in place. God didn’t do this until April of this year. It’s His act. It’s not mine. It’s His purpose. It’s not a man’s. And so when that’s accomplished… If I had a son and I were still attending, if I were serving in a position in the church and I continued to serve and I ordained my son in the regular course of events in the LDS Church, I’d go ahead and participate in that. And then I’d come to one of these conferences, I’d get the vote for my son (including with my wife being one of those who sustained him), and I would have him ordained again, and I would have the seven women certify the new ordination. And I would tell him this is your LDS Church ordination, and this is your ordination according to the pattern of God. And I would hold onto both of those. I wouldn’t abandon… For goodness sake, some of the people that need to hear what you have to bear testimony to are ideally situated within the LDS church. And then the question is… “Do you lay on hands?” Yes, I would follow everything that has been given to this point. We’re “adding to”; we’re not throwing away. We’re trying to preserve, and we’re trying to return, and we’re trying to renew. We are not trying to tread under our feet anything that is useful, laudable, worthy, desirable, or that came down from the Restoration. It is not God’s purpose to abandon the Restoration. But it is His purpose to preserve it. There are changes presently underway that are going to jar the LDS community more and more in the coming years. If you are not prepared to preserve what has been given, everything will be lost in what will soon happen. It’s necessary that there be someone who seeks for some community that tries to preserve in its purity what is rapidly becoming at an accelerating pace more and more corrupted. It has to be preserved. Every one of you have some issue that you would say to yourself, “If this, then I would no longer follow.” All of the “if this”-es are in the wings. Inexorably, they are coming. It has to be preserved. And it has to be preserved in a manner in which it can remain pure. In modern revelation, once again, the Lord clarified, in Doctrine and Covenants section 10, verses 67 and 68, exactly what He said to the Nephites. Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church. Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church. So, if the LDS Church chooses to do more or chooses to do less (and they are choosing to do both), then His church will consist of those who choose instead to do what He says. It’s what He said to the Nephites; it’s what He said in modern revelation. It is exactly the same. Not only does it appear there (as if that were not enough witnesses), Nephi taught it as well. In Second Nephi he explained the Doctrine of Christ. Second Nephi chapter 31, beginning at verse 5, he talks about the need of baptism. The Lamb of God…being holy, [He needed] to be baptized; therefore, don’t we likewise need to be baptized? And then after baptism, …if [you]…follow the Son, with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that [you’re] willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism—yea… following your Lord and your Savior down into the water, according to his word, behold, then shall ye receive the Holy Ghost; yea, then cometh the baptism of fire and…the Holy Ghost; and then can ye speak with the tongue of angels, and shout praises unto the Holy One of Israel. But, behold, my beloved brethren, thus came the voice of the Son unto me, saying: After ye have repented of your sins, and witnessed unto the Father that [you’re] willing to keep my commandments, by…baptism of water, and have received the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, and can speak with a new tongue, yea, even with the tongue of angels, and after this should deny me, it would have been better for you that [you’d] not known me. And I heard a voice from the Father, saying: Yea, the words of my Beloved are true and faithful. He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved. And now, my beloved brethren, I know by this that unless a man shall endure to the end, in following the example of the Son of the living God, he cannot be saved. (2 Nephi 31:13-16) Then He goes on to talk about—all the way through—the “way”: There is none other way nor name given under heaven… this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and…the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen. (Ibid, vs. 21) It was what the Doctrine of Christ consisted of at the time of Nephi. It was what the Doctrine of Christ consisted of at the time of the Restoration. It was what the Lord taught in His own voice to the Nephites in Third Nephi. That is the doctrine. Baptize. Preach Christ’s doctrine; any who will receive it, baptize them. I don’t care if they’ve never been a member of any church. I don’t care if it’s a Catholic priest that comes to you. I don’t care if it’s a Mormon Apostle that comes to you. If they come to you and they’ll accept the Doctrine of Christ, baptize them. One other thing is required. The other thing that’s required is a record of the names—not email addresses, not vital statistics, not phone numbers, not any contact information—only names. Therefore, after you have complied and someone is being baptized, choose a recorder—someone that has to record who the names are. Faithfully record the names every time there is a baptism. There will be various recorders in various locations. The various recorders need to submit them to a single, central, record keeper on an annual basis. Have the recorders identify themselves (and I can give them some further direction), but there should be annually compiled a single volume which will be deposited in a temple when it is built. Because there will be a temple ultimately built. Grand Junction had a talk in which I spoke about tithing. I talked about organizing yourselves, collecting your own tithing, and managing it yourselves among yourselves, and for you to assist the poor who are among you and to do this by the voice of your own local group—do it by common consent—and to provide for those who need housing, food, clothing, healthcare, education, and transportation. Do it without a leader but by the voice of the united agreement of you all. Since that time, there have been several groups that have begun. Two groups are assisting single mothers with their needs. One group is assisting a family. One group has no needy among them, and they’ve accumulated for large charitable purposes, and they bought for a quadriplegic a sophisticated electric wheelchair with the tithing money that they’ve gathered. There is no reason ever to pay for priesthood service. Serving should require sacrifice, always and continually. We do not pay for ministers. I would recommend that if you choose to participate in a tithing group, that you do it in the same manner that was described in Grand Junction, and you do it among yourselves. Community is necessary. I don’t know how you can bear one another’s burdens without administering your own tithes, without administering your own fast offerings, without doing things to help people in need. It’s hard, I think, to give away what you have to an organization that is purchasing real estate and farms, and purchasing and developing shopping centers—and then have anything left over to assist with the poor among you. But if you choose to do that, that’s fine too—but try and care for those among you who have needs. As to the Sacrament, only an anti-Christ would forbid you from partaking of the Sacrament in the way commanded by your Lord. That is an abomination. If you get together, even if it’s only in your own family, partake of the Sacrament together. Let no one forbid you from partaking in remembrance of Christ, because He commanded that you do it. Follow the pattern that is given to us. In Doctrine and Covenants section 20, verse 76, one of the things that used to be practiced (that has since been abandoned and ought to be renewed among you) is that when the Sacrament is blessed, kneel. Kneel. Kneel with the church. Remember it. Keep it. Do the things that have been instructed in the pattern that He commanded that they be observed. If you partake of wine and for some reason you either are opposed to alcohol or, alternatively, you have some medical condition, use grape juice. Use red grape juice. Use the symbol of the blood of our Lord. I can tell you that, generally, red wine is bitter for a reason. And partaking of that bitter wine in remembrance of the blood that was shed is apt. Here is the doctrine that is required for us to be gathered. Doctrine and Covenants section 10, beginning at verse 57: Behold, I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God. I came unto mine own, and mine own received me not. I am the light which shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not (D&C 10:57-58). Even today, He is the light that shines in the darkness, not comprehended because there’s just too much darkness. We forbid His presence by quenching the Spirit and not allowing utterance in our meetings. That’s where we should be hearing from the Spirit and edifying one another. Yea, and I will also bring to light my gospel which was ministered unto them, and, behold, they shall not deny that which you have received, but…shall build it up, and shall bring to light the true points of my doctrine, yea, and the only doctrine which is in me. And this I do that I may establish my gospel, that there may not be so much contention; yea, Satan doth stir…the hearts of the people to contention concerning the points of my doctrine; and in these things they do err, for they…wrest the scriptures and do not understand them. Therefore, I will unfold unto them this great mystery; For, behold, I will gather them as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, if they will not harden their hearts; Yea, if they will come, they may, and partake of the waters of life freely. Behold, this is my doctrine—[whoso] repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church. [Whoso] declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church. And now, behold, [whatsoever is of my church] whosoever is of my church, and endureth of my church to the end, him will I establish upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And now, remember the words of him who is the [light and life] of the world, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Amen. (D&C 10:62-70) There is… Priesthood is confined because of the Fall to the way in which it presently operates. But when He gathers… When He gathers them together, every time He refers to that gathering, the identity of the sex changes. It’s not as a rooster; it’s as a hen—and she preserves her chicks. There is something more to be looked forward to, if there should ever be a gathering. Christ taught this. Nephi taught this, anciently, at the beginning of the Nephite dispensation. Christ taught the same doctrine, and modern revelation reaffirms it—not only there [in D&C 10] but earlier, in March of 1830. This is in Doctrine and Covenants section 19: I command you that you [shall] preach naught but repentance. (D&C 19:21) And then 29: And thou shalt declare glad tidings, yea, publish it upon the mountains, and upon every high place, and among every people that thou shalt be permitted to see. And thou shalt do it with all humility, trusting in me, reviling not against revilers. And of [the] tenets thou shalt not talk, but thou shalt declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sins by baptism, and by fire, yea, even the Holy Ghost. (Ibid, vs. 29-31) That’s the Gospel. That’s what needs to be preached. That’s what needs to follow. But there are tenets. There are tenets to the faith. And those we’re commanded also to search into but not declare as doctrine necessarily. The things about which we need to have unity and absolute agreement is the Doctrine of Christ. Every dispensation of the Gospel has left only a remnant behind. Christ’s work is designed to preserve a remnant and, at the end, gather all remnants together again. The Restoration that was given through the Prophet Joseph Smith has likewise put itself in a position where, now, it can only produce a remnant—but one that will be preserved and not abandoned. In Third Nephi chapter 21, the Lord talked about some things that become exceptionally relevant in light of what we’ve covered today. And verily I say unto you, I give unto you a sign, that [you] may know the time when these things shall be about to take place—that I shall gather in, from their long dispersion, my people, O house of Israel, and…establish again among them my Zion [this is addressing all of those various remnants, wherever that they may be found, so long as they are some residue of the house of Israel]. And behold, this is the [sign] which I will give unto you for a sign—for verily I say unto you that when these things which I declare unto you, and which I shall declare unto you hereafter of myself, and by the power of the Holy Ghost which shall be given unto you of the Father, shall be made known unto the Gentiles [see, the Gentiles had to first receive some things] that they [the Gentiles] may know concerning this people who are a remnant of the house of Jacob, and concerning this my people who shall be scattered by them [the Gentiles]. Verily, verily, I say unto you, when these things shall be made known unto them[some constituent group of Gentiles] of the Father, and shall come forth of the Father, from them unto you… (3 Nephi 21:1-3) It can’t come from any source other than from the Father—the Father and Christ being one—the authority to minister and to deliver it coming from Them, the power to baptize being brought forth from some remnant of the Gentiles who care to bear it. For it is wisdom in the Father that they [the Gentiles] should be established in this land, and be set up as a free people by the power of the Father, that these things might come forth from them unto a remnant of your seed, that the covenant of the Father may be fulfilled which he hath covenanted [with this people] with his people, O house of Israel. (Ibid, vs. 4) “O house of Israel” is much more. “O house of Israel” is that same inclusive of all bits and remnants, wherever they may be found. I talked about covenants when we were in Centerville and about the fulfillment of the covenants. All of the covenants which apply to people scattered everywhere, all of those included within the previous remnants—they need to be gathered into one constituent group. Therefore, when these works and the works which shall be wrought among you hereafter shall come forth from the Gentiles… (Ibid, vs. 5, emphasis added)— Not their “book”; their works. Not their “book”; the works: bringing to pass the Doctrine of Christ, establishing repentance, declaring and baptizing by the authority of Christ, having people visited by fire and the Holy Ghost—these are the works. These are the works. …shall come forth from the Gentiles, unto your seed which shall dwindle in unbelief because of iniquity; For thus it behooveth the Father that it should come forth from the Gentiles, that he may show forth his power unto the Gentiles. (Ibid, vs. 5-6, emphasis added) That’s what He needs now to do. That’s what He intends to do—if you will receive it. For this cause that the Gentiles, if they will not harden their hearts, that they may repent and come unto me and be baptized in my name and know of the true points of my doctrine, that they may be numbered among my people, O house of Israel. (Ibid, vs. 6, emphasis added) You can’t get there except through the power of the doctrine and the power of the ordinance that God has given, in the way that is has been given, performed with the exactness, fidelity, and language that has been given to us by Christ Himself. When these things come to pass that thy seed shall begin to know these things—it shall be a sign unto them, that they may know that the work of the Father hath already commenced unto the fulfilling of the covenant which he…made unto the people who are of the house of Israel. (Ibid, vs. 7) All of them. It’s a witness that His work has commenced. And when that day shall come, it shall come to pass that kings shall shut their mouths; for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider. For in that day, for my sake shall the Father work a work, which shall be a great and…marvelous work among them; and there shall be among them those who will not believe it, although a man shall declare it unto them. But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring [it] forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant. …[whoever] will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ. (Ibid, vs. 8-11) These are Christ’s words. We touched on these words all the way back in Boise. It was quoted by the angel Moroni, referring to Joseph Smith. Acts 3, verses 22 to 23: For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. That prophet is Christ. It doesn’t say Christ is going to come and deliver His words; it says, His “words.” Those who will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, …they shall be cut off (3 Nephi 21:11). And the angel Moroni said to Joseph, in verse 40 of the Joseph Smith History, The day had not yet come when ‘they who would not hear his voice should be cut off from among the people,’ but soon would come. That prophet is Christ. His words are what I’ve spoken to you today. And my people who are a remnant of Jacob shall be among the Gentiles, yea, in the midst of them as a lion among the beasts of the forest, as a young lion among the flocks of sheep, who, if he go through both treadeth down and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver. Their hand shall be lifted up upon their adversaries, and all their enemies shall be cut off. Yea, wo be unto the Gentiles except they repent; for it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Father, that I will cut off thy horses out of the midst of thee, and I will destroy thy chariots; And I will cut off the cities of thy [lands], and throw down all thy strongholds; And I will cut off witchcrafts out of [the] land, and thou shalt have no more soothsayers; Thy graven images will I also cut off… (3 Nephi 21:12-17)— Graven images are people you worship. Graven images include men to whom you submit as objects or idols of authority in whom you trust, thinking that they can deliver you by some magic, using some key that they purport to hold, whether Catholic or Mormon or Fundamentalist. Graven images—they’re going to be cut off. ...thou shalt no more worship the works of thy hands; And I will pluck up thy groves out of the midst of thee; so will I destroy thy cities. And it shall come to pass that all lyings, and deceivings, and envyings, and strifes, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, shall be done away. For it shall come to pass, saith the Father, that at that day whosoever will not repent and come unto my Beloved Son, them will I cut off from among my people, O house of Israel [that’s all remnants gathered together]; And I will execute vengeance and fury upon them, even as upon the heathen, such as they have not heard. But if they [speaking of the Gentiles—if they] will repent and hearken unto my words, and harden not their hearts, I will establish my church among them, and they shall come in unto the covenant and be numbered among this the remnant of Jacob, unto whom I have given this land for their inheritance. (3 Nephi 21:17-22, emphasis added)— …because every time there’s a covenant, there is always a land. And this is the land that God covenants He will give. And the people to whom He will give it are those that come back and receive the covenant, including the Gentiles in whose ears this first shall sound…if they will come. And coming unto the covenant—that is not yet possible. It requires more than has at present been given. It is possible to come in and become part of His church. It is possible, if you follow as you’ve been instructed today, to become part of the church He recognizes and will preserve. But coming fully into the covenant… That will require more than has at present be given. It will require a covenant. It will require adoption. It will require sealing. It was what Joseph looked forward to have happen at some point in the future during the days of his prophecy. And they shall assist my people, the remnant of Jacob, and also as many of the house of Israel as shall come, that they may build a city, which shall be called the New Jerusalem. And then shall they assist my people that they may be gathered in, who are scattered upon all the face of the land, in unto the New Jerusalem. And then shall the power of heaven [in this case, it is the singular—it’s not the “powers”—because when you have Him present with you, you have all the authority—then shall the power of heaven] come down among them; and I also will be in the midst. And then shall the work of the Father commence at that day… (Ibid, vs. 23-26) Christ will come. Once the covenant has been renewed, the city of Zion will follow. The Lord’s presence will come, and then the final stage begins. …even when this gospel shall be preached among the remnant of this people. Verily I say unto you, at that day shall the work of the Father commence among…the dispersed of my people, yea, even the tribes which have been lost, which the Father hath led away out of Jerusalem. Yea, the work shall commence among all the dispersed of my people, with the Father to prepare the way whereby they may [be]come [in] unto me, that they may call on the Father in my name. Yea, and then shall the work commence, with the Father among all nations in preparing the way whereby his people may be gathered home to the land of their inheritance. And they shall go out from all nations; …they shall not go out in haste, nor…by flight, for I will go before them, saith the Father, and I will be their rearward. (3 Nephi 21:26-29) It’s not gonna happen in haste. And the work of the Father that will commence in those nations, to commence the possibility for the gathering, will involve destroying a great deal of political, social, and military obstructions that prevent the gathering, prevent even the preaching to those that would gather if they could hear. But the work of the Father (and it’s always masculine when it comes to destruction)… The work of the Father is going to bring this to an end. All the scattered remnants will be brought back again. The original, unified family of God will be restored again. The Fathers will have our hearts turned to them because in that day, once it’s permitted to get that far, we will be part of that family again. Our day is filled with darkness and deception. Our day is the day about which Nephi wrote. If you turn to Second Nephi chapter 28, beginning halfway through verse 4: …they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance. (2 Nephi 28:4) This is why the ordinance has to be renewed. This is why the pattern has to be followed. This is why the light has to be turned on. Because the Holy Ghost has not assisted with the kind of robust assistance that it can if you’re penitent. God cannot dwell in unclean vessels, and so He remedies that by cleaning the vessel, cleaning it in accordance with the pattern that He’s given, thereby making it possible that the Holy Ghost can give to you utterance. And they deny the power of God, the Holy One of Israel; and they say unto the people: Hearken unto us, and hear ye our precept; for behold [there’s] no God today, for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done his work, and he hath given his power unto men [you can hear that every Sunday if you want]; [But] behold, hearken ye unto my precept; if they…say there is a miracle wrought by the hand of the Lord, believe it not; [for his day] for this day he is not a God of miracles; he hath done his work. (Ibid, vs. 5-6, emphasis added) See, God doesn’t do miracles—but if there’s a miracle done, then that’s the devil. So, the only one that’s responsible for anything miraculous is necessarily the devil, and you’re following the devil. …there shall be many [that] shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. (Ibid, vs. 7) Indulge yourself. You needn’t be caring for the poor,. You needn’t be attentive to their needs. You don’t need to minister to those who are in want. Eat, drink, and be merry! It‘s gonna be well with us! There shall…be many which [will] say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; …lie a little, take…advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; …do all these things, for tomorrow we die [and that’s, by the way, how you get ahead: digging a pit for your neighbor]; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God. (2 Nephi 28:8) “Don’t worry; there is no hell. There is no hell, no awful pit, there’s just degrees of glory. Don’t worry about it!” …which suffering caused myself, …the greatest of all, to shrink…to bleed at every pore, …how sore you know not…how hard to bear you know not, how exquisite you know not… (D&C 19:15,18). There is no hell. There is no need for repentance. There is no need to come to Him to be redeemed and to seek to remove from us the awful burden of sin: …there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord. (2 Nephi 28:9) How might one better “hide their counsels from the Lord” than to conceal all the money that’s gathered from the tithes, all the revenues that are paid to the authorities of the church, and even admonish the paid mission presidents that they must never disclose the revenue benefits that they are receiving? How better to hide your counsel than to conceal it from the very sheep that are being shorn by the people who sit in positions of authority, claiming they have the right to come to the stake that I lived in, as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, and to hand my membership record to the Stake President and insist that there be disciplinary council held against me. Now, I know, President Hunt, that I told you that I wouldn’t mention that, but I have no intention from coming back again. Therefore, for us, it’s over. The Church seeks deep to hide their counsels. I participated in that conspiracy when I agreed that I would conceal that Elder Russell M. Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve came on the day that he called my new Stake President and handed to him my membership record and instructed him that I was to be excommunicated. And to his credit, President Hunt took 18 months fighting that decision (because he knew I was an innocent man) before he submitted. I will no longer participate in concealing the counsels that are kept from the public! It’s wrong! President Hunt shouldn’t do it. Elder Ballard, Elder Russell Nelson should not do it. None of them should do it! They should come clean. When Elder Neil Maxwell (with whom I had correspondence) died, shortly after the funeral, Elder Dallin Oaks showed up at the widow the widow’s home and demanded the journals that Nelson [Neil] had kept—because one of the conditions of the agreement that General Authorities must sign is that all of their diaries become the property of the Church once they become a General Authority. And Elder Oaks went and gathered back the personal diaries of Elder Maxwell (because a great deal of information about what goes on spilled out into the public when the diaries became public). Seek[ing] deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; and their works shall be in the dark is exactly what the authorities of the LDS Church now do! It is exactly a description of the hierarchy of Mormonism. Put your budgets online. Disclose your revenue. Show us what you do with the poor. Don’t hide… We don’t even know what the revenue is. …seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; …their works shall be in the dark [indeed]. And the blood of the saints shall cry from the ground against them. …they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted. Because of pride, …because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up. They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; …they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up. They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men. (2 Nephi 28:9-14, emphasis added) The dedication of the first book I wrote, The Second Comforter, Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil, was dedicated to “the few who are the humble followers of Christ,” and it cited this verse. Some people say, “Well, he was, you know, enlightened at one point, and then he fell victim to a dark and evil spirit, and now he’s an apostate!” I’m closer to the Lord at this moment, than I’ve been at any time when I was a member of the Church. I know His will more today, and I understand it better than I’ve ever understood it before. It is not a different spirit than the one that brought me into the church, and it is not a different spirit than the one that animated The Second Comforter, Conversing with the Lord Through the Veil. At the time I wrote that, I was keenly aware of the fact that, from among us, there were only a few who were the humble followers of Christ. And I understood that we were, nevertheless, led that, in many instances, we err. Working within the system, I did everything I could to preserve the doctrine, to preserve the truth, to testify of Christ, to teach the precepts, to remember the covenant. I would still do that today if I were left alone by them. Clearly, those of you who think I’m a rebel don’t get it. God knew exactly what He was doing. I would’ve taken a bullet for Spencer Kimball. I was among the most devoted of Latter-day Saints. I viewed the Church as a source that had rescued me from a life that was headed into something terrible. I had friends I grew up with who became alcoholics, drug-abusers, whose lives were in tattered ruins. One of my… One of my good friends in Elementary, Junior High, and High School died, stopped his heart with cocaine abuse when he was 26. The LDS Church introduced me to a form of cleanliness-in-living that I have nothing but high regard for. And if every one of you choose to remain active in the LDS Church while you do these other things, you won’t hear me complaining or criticizing. You’ll hear me praising. It’s a community trying to do good, but they are led, that in many instances they do err, and you should not go partake of that. Accept whatever is good, and hold onto whatever is good, but seek for something higher and better. These are the kinds of precepts. “Hearken to our precept,” “hear my precept,” “hear my precept.” This is where we get into all of the mischief. The precepts, if they’re not true, are not worth having. And it is the doctrine, above all, that saves. Go to Isaiah chapter 29—this is beginning at verse 13: Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me [that’s where the Holy Ghost must reside, in your heart] and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: “You better stay in line! You better get approval! If the bishop hasn’t authorized that, you’re being… What?—You cannot pass the Sacrament in your ho… You’re an apostate! You‘re just an apostate!” Fear, taught by the precepts of men! Be free. Be free. Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid. (Isaiah 29:13-14) Their precepts are nonsense, and they don’t save. And they change from handbook to handbook and leader to leader. It is so unstable a reed that if you lean on it, it’ll break and pierce your hand, to use Isaiah’s analogy. Now, let me remind you of what precepts—false precepts—include, because this is an example Christ gives: And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? This is, I don’t know, somewhere in the New Testament. I photocopied and put it in my book, and I didn’t write down the cite. So, you’re just gonna have to trust me and use a word search when you get home to find out where this is at. And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. [And] for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. And he [said] unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery. (Mark 10:2-12) This is Christ talking about a false precept—the false precept being divorce. One of the reasons why the wife should sustain in order for a man to be worthy (and one of the reasons for the comments that were made in St. George) are because that is a false precept. And I have to tell you, if you’ve read The Second Comforter, you know that I had a wife divorce me. And you know that I viewed myself as an absolute failure. I was still worthy for a temple recommend, but I had the words of President McKay echoing in my mind—you know, “No other success can compensate for failure in the home.” And so, while I teach this and while I know this to be true, the only thing I can be thankful for is that it was not I who set her aside, but she who chose to do so. Zion will require a worthy people. There’s a Second General Epistle as we’ve got it preserved for us in Peter 2—Second Peter—in which he talks about what he would like to see. I’m gonna begin at verse 5. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they [shall] make you that ye shall [be] neither…barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-8) This was a great admonition, and this is a great path. And I think Peter thought this through because he knew that this was a progression that actually follows in almost this order in almost every life. However, those Saints of that day did not have Zion, despite this admonition. Therefore, if you’re going to see it in your day, you have to do something more. We have to be more holy than were they. We have to be more disciplined than were they. You see, the word “discipline” and the word “disciple” come from the same word. We need to have greater virtue than they did. I read this before, and it belongs again right here. This is Joseph Smith, writing from confinement in Liberty jail. This is after Joseph has been confined in the Liberty Jail and had months of opportunity to reflect upon what it was that had gone on among the Saints while he was still free and living among them: The things of God are of deep import; and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and solemn thoughts can only find them out. Thy mind, O man! if thou wilt lead a soul unto salvation, must stretch as high as the utmost heavens, and search into and contemplate the darkest abyss, and the broad expanse of eternity—thou must commune with God. How much more dignified and noble are the thoughts of God, than the vain imaginations of the human heart! None but fools will trifle with the souls of men. How vain and trifling have been our spirits, our conferences, our councils, our meetings, our private as well as public conversations—too low, too mean, too vulgar, too condescending for the dignified characters of the called and chosen of God. (A letter to the church signed by Joseph Smith Jr. and four others on 20 March 1839, from Liberty Jail, Clay County, Missouri) Don’t waste your time when you’re with one another! Learn, study, testify, search the scriptures. Worship God. If you are still LDS, use whatever good you find there. But I’ll tell you the definition of an active member of the LDS Church: it’s someone who has attended one meeting every ninety days. They measure it every three months. And they only report Church-wide activity based upon two quarters: that quarter which has Easter in it, and that quarter which has Christmas in it. And if anyone comes to one meeting during that time period—that quarter—they’re considered active and will not become inactive until more than ninety days has passed. Therefore, activity rates are skewed and overstated. The LDS Church claims it has approximately 16 million members. Activity—they claim to be somewhere between 4 and 5 [million] members. That’s less than 33% of the Church in activity rates. People who self-identify (depending upon which poll you look at) are between 3 and 4 million. That means that there are less than 22% who self-identify. Therefore, the greatest majority of Latter-day Saints don’t support the Church or its programs. “Follow the majority.” “Stay with the majority.” I’m quoting them when I say, “Follow the majority.” If you choose to remain an active Latter-day Saint and you’re a minimalist (going once every 90 days), just remember you cannot delegate the responsibility that you owe to teach your children to someone else. You have a duty to teach your children, and it is a duty that is imposed upon the parents…in Zion (D&C 68:25); it is non-delegable. You have to do it. In many respects, what I’m doing in these talks is addressed to children who no longer live at home. You cannot delegate the responsibility that you have. You do not need buildings to hold meetings. Joseph Smith only built one building— completed the Kirtland temple, got the Nauvoo temple started. Joseph Smith only built a temple. Tithing is for the poor. It is not designed to pay for a professional-clergy class. If we have no buildings, more money can go to assist with the needs of people. In this day and in this economy, anything that can be done to assist with the poor is a good thing. If Joseph Smith were here today—looking at the Latter-day Saint church—he would have (and I am quoting from his last vision), “no desire to live upon it in its present state.” Now, we’ve looked at Joseph’s admonition that people were depending upon the prophet and, hence, were darkened in their minds in consequence of neglecting the duties devolving upon themselves. Ask yourself this: If Joseph Smith had it all to do over again—and if Joseph Smith had no desire to live upon it in its present state and wanted to avoid the problem that darkened the minds of those he left behind—how could you go about accomplishing that? I mean, there seems to be one very obvious conclusion: Refuse. Just refuse to do so. If he handicapped us by taking too much on himself—and we refused to not handicap him—then the best thing would’ve been if he’d kept riding when he crossed the Mississippi river with Hyrum (and he had his horse)… He should‘ve just kept riding to the Rocky Mountains. The weak things are always preferred by God because it requires faith for the weak things to succeed. It’s only when you’re placed in the most vulnerable spot that you realize that you’ve got to rely on God. And the only way that you can become strengthened is if you rely on God and not some man. Because when you depend upon a man, what you do to that man weakens him as well. The… [It is] by sad experience [we learn that when] men…get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to do things that are inappropriate (D&C 121:39). I’m personally tired of all the sex and all of the wealth and all of the abuse and all of the nonsense that has gone on in the name of religion by people claiming that they ought to be respected as some giant, freaking, priesthood-key-holding, omni-competent bafoon. I’m tired of that. I don’t want any more of that. I’ve had enough, and that’s what you get when you submit to the rule of a man. But when you submit to the rule of God and you place yourself in a position in which you must be dependent upon Him, every one of you realize your own weakness. Every one of you has to grapple with the uncertainty. Is this right, or is this wrong? Every one of you has to grapple with the fact that in answer to some questions there is silence, and you’re forced to choose—and if you choose right, you don’t know that you chose right, because He refused to tell you; and then you act in reliance on that going forward, only later to be told, “If you’d made the mistake, I would’ve corrected you; but you needed that experience.” God answers prayers, and sometimes He forces you to make choices. And very often (I can’t tell you how often…), very often I make the wrong choice. It’s almost like I got a compass pointing south; I don’t know what the deal is there. I choose wrong, and then I get an answer—but I got an answer because I made a mistake. I have no clue (other than the fact that I was so converted and faithful to the LDS Church) why the Lord would’ve chosen me to accomplish what He’s accomplished. Because I sincerely believe that most of you here are just genuinely better people than I am. And that I have nothing but weakness to offer. Weak things are used by God because that requires faith, and faith requires that we have a correct belief and then that we take action. That’s from the Lectures on Faith. “A correct belief,” and then we take action. If you’re converted to everything that is said in this meeting today (and in all nine of the preceding sessions of this one talk) and you do not take action, then you do not have faith. But if you do take action, then you will receive the reward from your faith. Do not rely on man. You need to baptize because the LDS church no longer preaches the doctrine of Christ, but they have added to it the commandments of men. In the baptismal interview, the second question that is asked is: “Do you believe that [current church president] is a prophet of God? What does this mean to you?” You can find that on page 206 of Preach My Gospel. As a condition, therefore, today of being baptized into the LDS church, you must offer up, as a catechism, your confession that the current church president is a prophet of God and explain what that means to you. This has been added and, therefore, does not conform. Therefore, you need—as part of preserving the Restoration—you need to practice in the way that we’ve outlined today. (Well, there’s one more section of this. This is a good moment to start—I’m getting signaled that we only have a few minutes left on the disk. We’ll take a five-minute break for the disk transition, and then we’ll wrap this up in a final session.) “What do you do if you’re alone, you’re the only person, and there is no priest available to administer the Sacrament?” It’s a commandment that we partake of the Sacrament. It’s a commandment that we do it— and do it frequently. In fact, if you read the record in Third Nephi, one of the things the Lord did was to administer the Sacrament with surprising regularity. One time He did it in a miraculous manner because it was that important an ordinance to have take place. I think if I were alone, and I didn’t have any authority, I think I’d bless the Sacrament and partake and then ask to be forgiven afterwards. I think it’s like the fruit of the Tree of Life—you know, probably one of those things that ought to be done. I was also asked, “What do we do to get started?” Look, I mentioned conferences. You can call conferences in your home, anytime, anyplace. All you need is to have a minimum to sustain that will sign and say that they’re sustained. In terms of those who are already ordained? You can function as a priest in the LDS Church. It’s just if you’re going to begin to function under this system among this community with these people, have a conference, and get sustained. You don’t need to be re-ordained if you were ordained before April of 2014. If you were ordained after April of 2014—I don’t care if you got ordained in the LDS Church or not—you should get ordained as a consequence of these proceedings among this community with any group that has the required number in order to create the vote necessary and to have the signatures to prove it. There is nothing special about us…YET. But there can be. We do not need numerous temples, but we will need one to which Christ can come. We do not need to perform endless work for the dead until after there has been a covenant made for us. We must be first connected. Only then can we do something to liberate them. I’ve written so much on that, I won’t repeat it. There is so many opportunities to go off the rails that I want to remind you of some of the early problems in Kirtland. In Doctrine and Covenants section 50: Behold, verily I say unto you, that there are many spirits which are false spirits, which have gone forth in the earth, deceiving the world. And also Satan hath sought to deceive you, that he might overthrow you. Behold, I, the Lord, have looked upon you, and have seen abominations in the church that profess my name. But blessed are they who are faithful and endure, whether in life or in death, for they shall inherit eternal life. But wo unto them that are deceivers and hypocrites, for, thus saith the Lord, I will bring them to judgment. Behold, verily I say unto you, [that] there are hypocrites among you, who have deceived some, which has given the adversary power; but behold such shall be reclaimed [not the hypocrites; He’s gonna reclaim those that are deceived]. But the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death, even as I will; and wo unto them who are cut off from my church, for the same are overcome of the world. Wherefore, let every man beware lest he do that which is not in truth and righteousness before me. And now come, saith the Lord, by the Spirit, unto the elders of his church, and let us reason together, that ye may understand; Let us reason even as a man reasoneth one with another face to face. Now, when a man reasoneth he is understood of man, because he reasoneth as a man; even so will I, the Lord, reason with you that you may understand. Wherefore, I the Lord ask you this question—unto what were ye ordained? To preach my gospel by the Spirit, even the Comforter which was sent forth to teach the truth. And then received ye spirits which [you] could not understand, and received them to be of God; and in this [ye are] justified? Behold ye shall answer this question yourselves; nevertheless, I will be merciful unto you; he that is weak among you hereafter shall be made strong. Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? And if it be…some other way [it’s] not of God. And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? If it be some other way [it’s] not of God. Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth? Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together. And that which doth…edify is not of God, and is darkness. That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day. And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you; He that is ordained of God and sent forth, the same is appointed to be the greatest, notwithstanding he is the least and the servant of all. (D&C 50:2-26) This is what we should be. This is how we should teach. This is how we should edify one another. This is how we should be preparing our children. This is what we should lay hold upon: truth, light, understanding, edifying, growing in knowledge of the principles of truth. You should not waste another three-hour block of time fiddling around with nonsense, because you don’t have permission from God to do that. Preach the principles. And if you don’t think you know enough to do anything else, get together and read the scriptures out loud. In the early church, when they… In this dispensation, when they got together, one of the things that they regularly did was they got together, and everyone prayed in turn. Everyone prayed. And the meeting would last until all had prayed. They called it a “Prayer Meeting,” oddly enough. One of the early brethren didn’t like that. He didn’t feel like he could pray vocally around other people. There’s a section in the Doctrine and Covenants admonishing him in a revelation that he needs to pray. If you don’t have any wisdom to impart to one another, get together and pray; get together and read the scriptures; but don’t get together and read out loud out of any recent publication from Deseret Book. If we are going to begin again, it must be in conformity with the Doctrine of Christ; it must be taught by the spirit of truth; and it must follow the pattern that was given in Kirtland for us to follow. Now, having said all that, let me read to you some things which the Lord said concerning this moment, because He’s talking about an event that will happen. This is from Matthew chapter 22, beginning at verse 2. The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son. And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage. But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise. And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go…therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So [the] servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests. And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen. (Matthew 22:2-14) Now, several things about this: This is one of those places in scripture in which “remnant” is used in a negative way. A remnant. God invites all to come to the wedding feast of His Son. This is when the kingdom is going to be established in the last days. He invites all to come. And from among all of those people who had been invited, there’s a remnant of those who still hold onto the Restoration, and they are the worst of all. They have the hardest hearts. They are the ones who will not come. And after the Lord deals with them, then He goes out and invites everyone to come. Everyone! Come in! And included among those that are invited in are as many as they found, both bad and good. They’re all invited to come in. And there’s no excluding the bad (speaking after the judgments of this world). Bad people get invited in! And when they come and when they arrive, it’s not whether they’re a bad person or a good person that determines whether they get to stay or not. It’s the presence or absence of a wedding garment. Well, turn to Luke chapter 18. This is Luke chapter 18, beginning at verse 10. Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, …the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. (Luke 18:10-14) Didn’t matter that he was a “bad man.” Didn’t matter that the other was a “good man.” I tell you, at the wedding feast, it would be the publican who wore the “wedding garment.” The first wedding garment, if you want to call it that, is the original garment that was given to Adam and Eve in the Garden to cover their nakedness and to cover their shame before God—all of which is an allegory. The covering required the sacrifice of an animal to teach them the principle of sacrifice and to foreshadow the death of our Lord that would be required in order to restore us back to a state before God. And so, what the covering given to Adam and Eve in the Garden represented was the sacrifice of our Lord. It was our Lord’s atoning sacrifice which makes it possible for us to be covered, so that our shame is no longer there. Instead, God looks upon the righteousness of His Son who has clothed us and not upon our own guilt and our own weakness and our own shortcomings. He beholds the image of His Son in the garment that we have put on. And so it is that, in the wedding feast to which people are invited, the first who got invited would not come. But even the bad ones, even the bad ones who are out in the byways, even the ones… There’s… There’s about 13 million inactive Latter-day Saints. There’s a lot of “bad ones” out there who are only kept from the truth because they haven’t heard it yet. If I had the means, I’d buy an ad space in the Los Angeles Times, and I’d say, “Here’s the Doctrine of Christ.” And I would quote Third Nephi. I would say afterwards, “If you believe this doctrine and you want to be baptized and get the Holy Ghost, meet me at…” and I would put a location. And I would hope that included among those who came would be gang members, inner-city people who live lives of desperation and violence who want a way out. Can you imagine what would happen if you sent someone back into an abusive neighborhood clothed with the power of repentance and the Holy Ghost? We can’t fix this world by legislating, but we can fix anything by changing hearts. Those that are invited will not come. They’ll even abuse those who try to take them in. But there are plenty of folks in the byways who are only kept from the truth because they don’t know where to find it. This is your responsibility. This is your work to do. This is the day in which these things need to be done. Oddly enough, in our own day… In our own day, the Lord tells a slightly different version of exactly the same stuff, prophesying how it’s going to happen among us in our day. Go to Doctrine and Covenants section 58. This is talking about… Well, I’m gonna begin in verse 7: And also that you might be honored in laying the foundation, and in bearing record of the land upon which the Zion of God shall stand. I’m gonna put this into some footnotes when I finally get around to publishing, in a book- form, the talk that was given in Grand Junction. But I’ll stick it in here because we’ve touched on the words: the land upon which the Zion of God shall stand. I pointed out there all of the historical reasons why Zion could exist somewhere other than in property owned in Jackson County, Missouri and could, in fact, be constructed elsewhere. Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, in their first trip out to Jackson County, Missouri, came there in order to confirm and ratify that this was the place where Zion would be built. And they got language and revelation that said this was “the land of Zion.” And so everyone since then ‘til now are all relying upon that language saying, “It’s gonna be Jackson County, Missouri.” That same month that Joseph and Sidney went out, Sidney Rigdon gave an explanation of what the geography of that “land of Zion” was. He said it began at Kirtland, Ohio, and it ran to the Pacific Ocean. So, the land of Zion is rather flexible in where the Lord might choose ultimately to locate it. So, there’s gonna be some land where Zion will stand. And also that a feast of fat things might be prepared for the poor [so the feast that is being prepared has a highly specific audience in mind in the revelation, it’s “the poor”]. Yea, a feast of fat things, of wine on the lees well refined, that the earth may know that the mouths of the prophets shall not fail; Yea, a supper of the house of the Lord, well prepared, unto which all nations shall be invited. First, the rich and the learned, the wise and the noble; And after that cometh the day of my power; then shall the poor, the lame, and the blind, and the deaf, come in unto the marriage of the Lamb, and partake of the supper of the Lord, prepared for the great day to come. Behold, I, the Lord, have spoken it. (D&C 58:8-12) Did you get that? First they invite the “rich” and then the “learned”; and the nations shall all be invited. The “wise,” the “noble”—doesn’t say they enter in. Doesn’t say they’ll partake. It was prepared, after all, for the “poor.” And the people who will enter in?—who do finally make it into Zion where they get to partake?… Then shall the poor [that’s who it was prepared for], the lame, …the blind, and the deaf, come in unto the marriage of the Lamb, and partake of the supper of the Lord, prepared for the great day to come. (Ibid) Every time you partake of the Sacrament, it’s a reminder of the promise that there will, at last, be some great wedding feast. It’s not just in remembrance of the blood and of the body, but it’s also a preliminary to the final feast that the Lord intends to offer. Well, who are the “rich?” Who are the “learned”? Who are those that are presently considered “wise”? And who are those that make the claim that they are the “noble,” the “elect”? They do not enter into the wedding feast in Zion. And who is it that is the “poor?” Who is it that is derided—even in today’s vocabulary—and accused of being “lame”? Who is it that is considered to be “blind” and misled? Who is it that is referred to as being “deaf” because they cannot hear and respect all the great wisdom that pours forth from these empty cisterns, having nothing but drivel to offer, quoting one another endlessly—as if one misled man on a false path can offer light to a fool following after him. I hope we are the “poor.” I hope I am speaking to the “lame.” I hope you are counted among those that are considered “blind,” and I hope that you have ears not for what any man has to say but for what the Spirit alone has to confirm to you. I hope you’re “deaf” to everything in this world but have ears for what our Lord has to say. This is the day in which, at long last, it is possible for what God intended to happen before His return to actually begin. The Gospel is not supposed to be merely a record of how God dealt with other people at another time. Joseph Smith talked about how we can’t read the words of an old book and then apply those words (in an old book that were meant for someone else at some other time) to us and then restore ourselves back to God’s grace. That is just as true of the revelations given in the days of Joseph Smith as it is true of the revelations given in the New Testament. It becomes really apparent when you read them out of the scriptures. Because all our footnotes and all of our chapter headings and all our cross-referencing, it sort of gives you an impression that this stuff is talking about us—right here, right now. When you read them as they were written in the Joseph Smith Papers, it really becomes clear that when God is talking about how the church is “living” and “alive” and “approved,” it’s because He’s talking to Joseph Smith. And the church is listening to what Joseph Smith had to say. And “rolling forth” is the voice of God in that day. And Joseph Smith commissioned people to go out and to take it. And they took it, and they went out, and they preached it; and when they preached it, others were converted. And the people that were converted actually had experiences and came to know God. But that’s because God acted to set it in motion in the person of Joseph Smith. Joseph had a covenant given to him by God. Therefore, Joseph could testify to these words, and they were true, and God owned them. And people who follow them received the wages of those who follow God. It worked! We can’t mimic that and have the same effect. God has to say, “This is what I want to do.” And if no one else will say it to you, I’m saying it to you. Everything that has been said in this talk—which began in Boise and concludes here today—everything that has been said is, in fact, exactly what happened when God offered something through Joseph. He’s offering something again, right now, in our day, to you—to any that will hear, to any that will listen. The work is beginning again. I suppose it was necessary that what began in Joseph’s time had to run down to the condition that it’s in at present—that it had to become a leaky ruin of a farm that Joseph himself no longer even wanted—before it was possible for the Lord to say, “At this moment, we turn a new leaf.” But… My word! Can’t you see the signs of the times? Can’t you look about and see that the whole world is waxing old like a garment? Can’t you see that there is right now a balance of things that are kept at bay only to preserve the possibility that a remnant might be claimed? God promised He would do this. Until today I really haven’t done anything more than read scriptures and bear testimony to you that they’re true. This wasn’t my idea, and I can’t tell you how happy my wife and I will be when we conclude this and this project is done. There’ll be some… This transcript, and they’ll be… I’m gonna edit them all and put them into a book. And the book, in order to be readable, has to have run-on sentences and grammar and everything fixed, so it has to be readable in its own way. So, there’s that still left to do. But the project and the labor and the work that needs to be done is you. If you don’t lay hold upon this, if you don’t move this forward, if you don’t rise up, then I suppose He’ll find another people. But you ought to allow yourself to be found, and you ought to allow yourself to be numbered among those who choose to have that Gospel live again. The Gospel shouldn’t be the words of an old book. The Gospel should be alive in you, rolling forth with new vigor, every day a revelation of His involvement in your life and in the lives of those around you. I know it’s not easy to let yourself stand out. It’s… For some of us, it’s really unpleasant. I’m a trial lawyer, but you have to understand that what that means is I’m usually engaged in an intellectual fight in a room with six or seven people in it. If we have a jury, we may have up to 18 in the room. What I do, I don’t do in front of big crowds. And this is not a pleasant thing for me. I enjoy the law; I particularly enjoy appellate argument, because there it’s just a three-judge panel or a five-judge panel, depending on which court you’re in. It’s just a small, intellectual undertaking in which you’re trying to reason something through. This is not pleasant for me, but I suppose that what you’re being asked to do will be even more unpleasant for you—because all of you have your families; you have your friends; you have your neighborhoods; and you have your wards. And many of you are faithful members of the church, and I commend you for that. And I wouldn’t… I wouldn’t want to be the source of creating a problem there. But the Lord has in His mind a way of doing things in which, if we follow the pattern, we get authority from Christ. We may get ordained by a line of authority that comes down from another man laying hands on our head, but authority to activate that comes from heaven, by the voice of God. If you follow that pattern, the fruits will follow. Whether or not these talks make any difference at all does not depend upon how well I‘ve spoken at these things. They depend entirely upon what you now do. If there is any fruit to be born, the fruit of that is not me talking—or CDs, a book, ultimately. That’s not the fruit. The fruit is to be found in your lives. The fruit is to be found in your influence, in your family with your children, in the light that comes into your lives and the lives of those that know you. This process can be so informal that when we conclude today (if there’s still time left), everyone who wants to can call themselves a conference and begin doing some things right now today. It’s that informal. There’s at least seven women here. And some of you brought your wives. That’ll teach ya, for not bringing her. I brought mine. Let me end by testifying to you that, however improbable or unlikely all of this may seem to those of you who spend any time at all thinking about this, it was just as improbable when John was baptizing. It was just as improbable when Christ taught. It was just as improbable when Joseph Smith said, I [saw] a vision; I knew it, …I knew…God knew it, …I couldn’t deny it, neither dared I do it (JS-H 1:25). It may seem improbable. It’s true! Now, in order to conform with the burden that has been laid down, I need to turn time over to Keith Henderson. (Keith, if you’ll come up…) Because he has something which he necessarily must add as part of all this. So, Keith—it’s all yours. KEITH HENDERSON: 52 years ago, I came to this area on a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I came to bear testimony of Jesus Christ and the Book of Mormon and the Prophet Joseph Smith. Today I stand before this people again of this area to again bear testimony. My growth in these 52 years has been great, but my testimony still remains very simple. My name is Keith Henderson. At the time I bear this testimony, I am still an active member in good-standing with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I’m grateful for this opportunity that I’ve received to lift up my voice and bear my witness and testimony before the Most High God, before His holy angels, and before all of you who would be witnesses with me that this talk given this day by our friends and God’s servant is a message given from God to all men and women everywhere who will hear or read. I so witness that I know that it is. I have attended every portion of this talk, making now ten in total. I have listened time after time to the recordings, and I have read every transcript made up until this one. I bear solemn testimony that I have received a message by God’s voice of their truthfulness and also of His desire for us to believe in and act upon these things that have been spoken. I stand as another witness with Denver in the law of witnesses that these things are true, and I expect to be held accountable for this in the days and the eternity to come before God and my Father and to all men. I bear this testimony humbly and solemnly but in the power of the most holy priesthood, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen. AUDIENCE: Amen! The post Preserving the Restoration appeared first on Restoration Archives Blog.

   February 10, 2020·2h 49min
   Play
5. 5
   Number 5: Priesthood

   This lecture by Denver Snuffer entitled “Priesthood” was originally recorded in Orem, Utah on November 2, 2013, in front of a live audience. Transcript Oh, welcome, welcome Saturday morning. I guess in some parts of the world, in some groups (subgroups), it’s Sabbath morning even still. 40 years ago, I had been a member of the Church for almost 2 months. Bishop Ernie Ellsworth (he would be transferred—he worked for the Navy, although he was a civilian—he would be transferred to Hawaii shortly after I left New Hampshire, but he was still Bishop at that point), and he called me to be the ward newsletter writer for the Portsmouth, New Hampshire Ward. That was the first calling I had in the Church. Although, before that, I had… The fellow who ordained me to the Aaronic Priesthood (George Hoger, he was the Elders Quorum President; he ordained me—I mean, his line of authority… A topic that we might look at a little today…), and he had made me a home teacher, and then he took me home teaching. And I had a route that required that I leave the state of New Hampshire in order to go home teach (’cuz the wards and stakes back in New England, particularly in those days, were enormous). And so, I had to leave the state in order to home teach. I had a fellow who was inactive and kinda hostile and lived up in Maine. And I went to home teach him with George, and he was kind of angry and upset and hadn’t had a home teacher in a while and wanted to know what the crap we were invading his privacy for. Ya know, this was, ya know, my first impression of what home teaching was all about. And after he had vented a little while, and me (in the zeal of my recent conversion), I asked him, “Well, why the hell are you a damn Mormon, then, if you’re gonna act like this?” Well, he showed up in the Portsmouth Ward shortly thereafter, and he said, “I got home taught. My home teacher wanted to know why the hell I was a damn Mormon.” He said he thought that was interesting enough that the Church probably has some new characters in it. He was gonna show up and see what this was all about. Well, today we’re talking about priesthood—a topic about which probably everyone in this room thinks they know a whole lot and can recite a whole lot of history and give a whole lot of details and explain everything there is to know about it, in so far as the Restoration and what Joseph has said and what the scriptures tell us are concerned. And I’m gonna ask you, for purposes of today, to assume that what you know is riddled with incompletions, omissions, gaps in the storyline. And, in fact, Joseph Smith never set out to give—ever—a comprehensive accounting of the subject of priesthood. He gave snippets. He gave a grab here and a grab there. And in the process of doing so, he left things that have been filled in by the imagination of people—but not necessarily by anyone who, like Joseph, knew what he was talking about. Therefore, as you run into (and you will throughout the talk today) things that you think I’m off-base with or I’m making a mistake because it doesn’t agree with what you think you already know, I would ask you to be patient enough to hear the whole matter through today. And then be further patient enough to take it back into the scriptures, and prayerfully look at it. Because it’s just possible—in fact, in my view, it is probable—that you know things that are wrong, and you need to abandon them. And so, I’d ask you to be patient as we go through this today, and at least… at least try it on for size, and see if something doesn’t click. Joseph Smith said, “All priesthood is Melchizedek, but there are different portions or degrees of it. That portion [which] brought Moses to speak with God face-to-face was taken away, but that which brought the ministry of angels remained. All prophets [had] the Melchizedek priesthood and were ordained by God himself.” That’s in The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith on pages 180 to 181. Ask yourself if there is a possibility that when Joseph speaks about “different portions or degrees” of priesthood, that he’s talking about something altogether different from the offices in the Church of Elder, Priest, Teacher, Deacon, Bishop, Seventy, Apostle, High Priest, yada, yada… Because even in the understanding of the Church, the way in which we ordain today (and the way that we once ordained, before an interruption that lasted over two decades) was to lay hands upon someone and to confer upon them, alternatively, either the Aaronic priesthood or the Melchizedek priesthood; and then to ordain them to an office. And the way we phrase it today is an “office within that priesthood,” but they confer, on the one hand, Aaronic or, on the other hand, Melchizedek priesthood. I would like you to entertain the idea that Elder, Priest, Teacher, Deacon and so on aren’t priesthood at all; they are offices in the Church—and that they occupy the position in the Church (of these various offices) with or without the presence of priesthood. When the first missionaries went out and preached, teached, exhorted, and expounded, they did so because they had been sustained by common consent to an office within the Church. And since the Church had been organized by the command of God, the offices within the Church had the authority to go and to implement the program of the Church. Therefore, I would like you to entertain the idea that an office in the Church is not coincidental with priesthood. There is no such thing as the priesthood of Deacon. There is no such thing as the priesthood of Teacher. There is an office in the Church called “Teacher.” There is an office in the Church called “Deacon.” And the occupant of that, out of tradition, is supposed to have Aaronic priesthood in order to discharge that. However, within the Church, we also sustain as “teachers” (for example, Gospel Doctrine teachers) females who hold the office of “Gospel Doctrine teacher” within the Church. What is the difference between the office of Gospel Doctrine teacher (that we sustain by our common consent), on the one hand, and Teacher in the Aaronic priesthood (Teacher held by someone with the Aaronic priesthood), on the other hand? We make a big deal out of the offices in the Church which are associated with Aaronic priesthood. However, they are offices in the Church. They were offices in the Church to begin with; they are offices in the Church yet today. And priesthood and offices in the Church are not necessarily coincident with one another. So, when Joseph says that there are different portions or degrees, that all priesthood there is… All priesthood is Melchizedek, but there are “different portions or degrees” of it—I wanna suggest to you that he is not talking about offices in the Church. I wanna suggest to you that, instead, what he’s talking about is a continuum that I hope, by the end of today, we have some greater appreciation or understanding of. So, if we turn to the oath and covenant of the priesthood that’s contained in Doctrine and Covenants 84—and that’s something about which we all think we know because, as parents, we’ve heard our kids go through this; as adults, we’ve had it parsed through—but if you look at it with the idea that all priesthood is singular and that there are merely different portions or degrees of it, starting at verse 33 of section 84: For whoso[ever] is faithful unto the obtaining [of] these two priesthoods… (D&C 84:33) Now, I wanna pause there for a moment because here (in revelation, given through Joseph Smith) is a statement by the Lord in revelation to Joseph in which he calls it two priesthoods. And yet Joseph explains there’s only one. There’s only one, and the one is Melchizedek, but there’s different portions of it. Here in the revelation, it’s dividing it into two. Therefore, there are two portions of it or two distinctions. And the possibility that those two distinctions are significant enough that they warrant treatment in the plural instead of the singular shows up right here in the revelation. I think Joseph knew what he was talking about. And I think the Lord knows what He’s talking about. Because they’re trying to get ideas across into our minds that we tend to resist. Now, I should mention as a footnote that there were… There were discussions in the leadership of the Church about what was required in order to pass along priesthood. And during the administration of Heber J. Grant, for a period of over two decades, he ceased the practice of conferring priesthood upon people—but he had them only ordained to an office in the Church. Therefore, whenever someone was ordained to priesthood during that two-decade-plus time period, they were ordained to an office. After the death of Heber J. Grant, the practice was reverted again, and they began to confer priesthood in addition to ordain into office. But that is something that Heber J. Grant, at least, did not think occupied any significance. So, when I tell you there is a difference between an office in the Church and the priesthood, Heber J. Grant, at least, would say that I’m dead wrong on that point, and I don’t know what I’m talking about. But entertain the idea, and see where it takes you. There are in the church, well… Whoso is faithful unto the obtaining [of] these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling… (Ibid) See, priesthood is not simply “yada, yada, yada”; “ipso facto”; “conorus mundorum”; there you are! It requires… See, ya get it, but then, “faithful to obtain”; and then, “faithful to magnify”—and faithful to magnify it as a calling (calling being an operative word there that means service)… …are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies… (Ibid) “Sanctified by the Spirit”; “renewing their bodies”—these things have meaning. Perhaps we’ll get to that at some point. They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God. (Ibid, vs. 34) See, they become—but they become as a consequence of having been sanctified. They become sanctified because they magnify their calling. They had to first obtain the priesthood, and the obtaining of the priesthood requires something that is “faithful.” And you oughta ask yourself, Faithful to what? And always it is faithful to Him, to our Lord, the One who redeems. All of these things flow together as one continuum. It’s not just “I got ordained.” Doesn’t matter that you got ordained. There’s a process that’s involved after ordination in which you follow these steps. We read it as one sentence and say, There it is; he was faithful. I mean, he passed the Bishop’s interview; he obtained it. That is, he sat down there, and they got a certificate. I mean, when I was on the High Council, I was the one responsible for fetching the Melchizedek priesthood certificates and delivering it to ’em. And that was a definite point in time at which we could point and say, On this day, this person gave this authority to this guy on this occasion… And when that happened, he also got a line of authority. When I got ordained to be a High Priest, the Stake President handed me a line of authority which, when I looked at, I found mistakes in. And I went back, and I did the research, and I corrected the line of authority. Then I went back to my Stake President, and I said, “You gave me your line of authority, but it was wrong; here’s the right one.” And then he had to go find all of the people that he had ordained and correct that. (Some fellow in the line had thought it would be more commendable to have been ordained by Marion G. Romney after he was an apostle rather than as he was: when Marion G. Romney was called to be the Bishop. And he called this fellow to be his counselor, and so Marion G. Romney was ordained to be a High Priest, to be the Bishop, and he ordained this other fellow to be a High Priest and his counselor. And then, subsequently, when Marion G. Romney got to be an apostle, this guy hailed his priesthood line from the date on which Marion G. Romney became an apostle, which screwed the whole line up.) And therefore, I had to fix that, and President Pugh was grateful. But it imposed upon him the obligation, then, to go back and straighten out all those whom he had ordained. Well, that’s neither here nor there. They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God. (Ibid, emphasis added) I spoke in Centerville about what it meant to be the seed of Abraham. You ought to listen to that talk. We don’t have time. We have to accumulate, we have to aggregate information. And we gotta assume that you’ve “got” what we’ve talked about before, so that we can press on. Once you have done those, …also all they who receive this priesthood… (Ibid, vs. 35) Now it’s in the singular; now it has been reduced back to the unitary. Now we’re talking about that which is the fullness—we’re now talking about something other than the different portions. We’re talking about this priesthood. …receive me saith the Lord. (Ibid) We take that to mean that not actually the Lord, for goodness sake—but to mean, rather instead, that if you have this priesthood, somehow the Lord has received you. Somehow, if you’ve got this, you belong to Him in some metaphysical sort of fashion in which, “On account of having priesthood, I am received of Jesus.” Take the words literally, and say to yourself: if you’ve got this, if this is what you have managed to accumulate, then one of the evidences of having accumulated it will be receiving the Lord. For he that receiveth my servants receiveth me. (Ibid, vs. 36) I suggested in Centerville that the word “servants,” in this context, meant angels. An “angel”… The word is derived from a Greek word that simply means “messenger.” And the messenger can’t be on their own errand. They have to have a message that is being brought from another, the other being the Lord. Therefore, if the message originates with the Lord, and the message is delivered by a messenger, it does not matter if the one delivering the message is a mortal, as we find in the Book of Mormon where someone says, Last night… King Benjamin, I believe, said, Last night the Lord told me this; or, Last night the angel taught me this, and so today I’m going to teach you this (see Mosiah 3:2-23). In that context, King Benjamin was the angel. And therefore, as long as they bear a message from the Lord, they fit the definition. …he that receiveth my servants receiveth me. (D&C 84:36) That is, if it’s the voice of God and it’s coming to you from Him and it’s authentically His message and you receive it as if it were from His own mouth, then you’ve received from Him at least His voice. But it doesn’t end there. He that receiveth me receiveth my Father. (Ibid, vs. 37) In this context, what he’s talking about is the same thing that you find in the 14th chapter of the book of John, in which Christ says that He will not leave you comfortless, but He will come to comfort you. And then He and His Father will take up their abode with [you] (John 14:23). This is not an abstraction. The idea that this is something that happens in your heart (you can read in the Doctrine and Covenants) is an old sectarian notion and is false (see D&C 130:3). It means a literal appearance of these holy beings to minister, to comfort, and ultimately, to take up their abode. …he that receiveth my Father [and I would add, while yet “in the flesh”] receiveth my Father’s kingdom; therefore all that my Father hath shall be given unto him. And this is according to the oath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood. (D&C 84:38-39) And what is that oath and that covenant? It is the Father’s word which cannot be broken. It’s not something you aspire to, but it’s something that you accept by the conditions that are set out in Doctrine and Covenants section 84. It is something which, received by an oath and a covenant, given by the One who can give covenants (just as we talked about in Centerville)… It’s a covenant which originates from God. It is His word which cannot be broken (see Ether 3:12). Therefore, when the Father covenants that you’re going to inherit, it is a covenant that will surely come to pass. Therefore, all…who receive the priesthood [singular, implying it in its fullest manifestation], receive this oath and covenant of my Father… (D&C 84:40, emphasis added) This is not talking about abstractions, quorums, churches, organizations, orders, choruses. This is talking about a direct, covenantal relationship established by the Father with this—this priesthood—the one about which today I would like to speak—this priesthood… …which he [the Father, he] cannot break [because if He were to break this once He has made this covenant with someone, He would cease to be God, and He cannot do that—therefore, this covenant cannot be broken by Him] neither can it be moved… (Ibid) That is, once the Father has made that covenant, earth and hell cannot make it otherwise. But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor…the world to come. (Ibid, vs. 41)— …a curious statement if your view of “this priesthood” is the mechanism you understand through the agency of the Church and the various quorums that result in someone becoming Melchizedek priesthood holder and an Elder. Does that mean that when an Elder drifts off into inactivity in the Church that he is not going to have forgiveness of sins in this world or the world to come?! It doesn’t mean that at all. It’s not talking about what has gone on in the Church, and it’s not talking about receiving an ordination and participating in an Elders Quorum or (thank God) a High Priest group. The string of obscenities that parse through my mind during any given High Priest group just… It’s a good thing that you’re not always talking out loud. Sometimes I want to and then say, “Did I say that? Or did I just think that?” I bite my tongue. But here in 42, now… 41 is talking about the condition of having arrived at the point in which the covenant has been established with the Father—that covenant. If you turn from that (because you are turning from the Father), you’re in a state, at this point, of willful rebellion against He who has called you to be His son—against Him who sits on the Throne, in the midst of all eternity, from whose Throne He sustains everything that exists, including everyone in this room and this creation itself (see Mosiah 2:21). You have been in contact with Him, and you’ve turned from Him. It’s not the same thing as an Elder drifting into activity [inactivity]. It is standing in the light of the noon day sun and denying that it is light. It is rebellion—and it is rebellion against knowledge. That’s what that verse is talking about. But look at verse 42: And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood… (D&C 84:42, emphasis added) So, there is a “wo” associated with that. It is not: “wo, wo, wo.” It’s not a threefold condemnation. It is not a dreadful, despicable, wretched outcome. It’s simply disappointment because the invitation has been extended to you, and if you do not rise up to receive that invitation, then you will suffer disappointment. You will come to the point in which your condition is woeful, because there’s something that you know that you might have obtained, and you did not. Then we get to some words which I think are critical to understanding the topic, and we’re gonna spend a lot of time on today: …which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; …even [as] I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels charge concerning you. (Ibid) Oh my! You see, the priesthood is being conferred—and the priesthood is being conferred, not by the laying on of hands, but by the voice of God given to those who were present on this day. On another occasion (this is section 84, which is in September of 1832)… On another occasion, there was a conferral of priesthood (in June of 1831). One of those upon whom it was conferred on that date, by the voice of God out of heaven, was Ezra Booth—Ezra Booth, who would later drift off into inactivity and write a series of nine letters that were published in a newspaper explaining why he rejected Mormonism. And so, he had had the conferral—by the voice of God—in June of 1831, and we get all the way down to January 1841 and we find out that the fullness had been taken away, at least as it pertained to the Church (see D&C 124:28). Well, so we wanna focus on those words in [D&C 84:]42, but we’ve got some other things to look at in order to get there. First of all, I want to go to Joseph Smith Translation of Genesis chapter 14, which… I’m gonna need to borrow from someone. Does someone have Old Testament that I can use? (Yeah. I’ve taken that, and I’ve stapled it separately, and apparently, it’s in my bedroom. I blame my briefcase.) So, in Genesis chapter 14… This is in the back of your Bible. Verse 26: Now Melchizedek was a man of faith… (JST Genesis 14:26) By the way, Melchizedek is a title; it’s a name-title. It’s a compound of two words. One is “king,” and one is “priest”—and therefore, in one sense, it’s a name-title, and in another sense, it’s a new name. And it’s not the birth name given to someone, rather it is the new name/title which is fashioned after Christ because Christ is the great King and the great Priest who’s the King of Kings, and He is the Great High Priest. And so, Melchizedek is really a name-title that belongs to Christ, it being used as a substitute to prevent the frequent repetition when you’re talking about the Holy Priesthood—that the correct full name would be the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God. But to prevent the too frequent repetition of that, Melchizedek (which is a name-title for Christ) got used as a substitute. But Melchizedek—that is, the person who grew up to become the one that got that name-title, …was a man of faith, who wrought righteousness; and when a child he feared God, and stopped the mouths of lions, and quenched the violence of fire [this is Melchizedek as a child; this is Melchizedek doing something by faith]. And thus having been approved of God, he was ordained [that is, ordination occurred after faith]… (Ibid, vs. 26-27, emphasis added) Can a man heal by faith without priesthood? Of course they can. Can Melchizedek, as a child without priesthood, stop the mouths of lions? Yes, the scriptures say so. Can “by faith” a man (Melchizedek being one who did so) quench the violence of fire without priesthood? Yes. Therefore, is it evidence that… Oh, what was the guy’s name in Oklahoma? The evangelical minister whose ministry was largely based upon healings? Can he heal? Can he do so without priesthood? Yeah, of course. I mean, these are two different things. These are altogether two different things. So, Melchizedek accomplished these things by faith. And then, having accomplished these things by faith, God ordained him: [a] high priest after the order of the covenant which God made with Enoch. It being after the order of the Son of God; which order came, not by man nor by the will of man… (Ibid, vs. 27-28) That is, we can’t vote in that guy. We can’t ‘hope and pray and sustain with our prayers and faith and confidence’ that guy. We can’t have our will bundled into that guy. That guy comes as a consequence, exclusively, not of father, not of mother, not of the will of man, but by the will of God. This is, after all, sons of God that we’re talking about. … neither by father nor mother; neither by beginning of days nor end of years; but of God… (Ibid) …because God is endless; therefore, His word is endless, and His covenants are endless, and His commitments are endless. And if you lay hold upon it, you lay hold upon something which is itself endless. And it was delivered, just as we saw in Doctrine and Covenants section 84: And it was delivered unto men by the calling of his own voice, according to his own will, unto as many as believed on his name. For God having sworn unto Enoch and unto his seed with an oath by himself; that every one being ordained after this order and calling should have power, by faith, to break mountains, to divide the seas, to dry up waters, to turn them out of their course; To put at defiance the armies of nations, to divide the earth, to break every band, to stand in the presence of God. (Ibid, vs.29-31) Now, take that impressive list of things, and read it in light of this: …to do all things according to his will, according to his command, subdue principalities and powers; and this by the will of the Son of God which was from before the foundation of the world. (Ibid, vs. 31) See, such persons holding such power are not freelancing. And in fact, evidence of the possession of this power does not come as a consequence of someone displaying every one of these things, but if they display any one of these things… For example, Nephi (when he was bound in the desert and left to die by his brothers) broke every band that bound him, having been strengthened by God (see 1 Nephi 7:16-18). And that same Nephi, bound to the mast when the storm came that threatened the survival of the ship, not only could not break the band, but when they finally got around to relieving him, he said his hands were much swollen as a consequence of the trauma that he’d suffered (see 1 Nephi 18:15). Nephi—who had power given to him by God to break the bands that would’ve cost him his life—was left subject to the bands because it was not according to the Father’s will or the word of the Son when he was bound to the mast. And so, had Nephi called upon that power and not suffered, Nephi would’ve been offending—and not conforming to—the will of God. And he would have had to suffer some loss. Moses had power to divide the seas. And he did that by the word of God (see Exodus 14:15-16, 21). And yet, when Moses used the power to cause the rock to bring forth water (and not at the command of God), he suffered some loss. Possession of the power does not mean you freelance. Because in the very statement about the possession and the capability and the capacity, it says it’s according to His will. Therefore, in order to be someone who can be trusted, you have to be someone who will subordinate to His will. The Lord was not mis-stating the case, when He said, “No man takes my life,” because the Lord had the capacity, at His own word, to prevent the entire armies of Rome from doing any harm to him. “Don’t you know,” he asked Pilate, “if I asked, there’d be twelve legions of angels?” (see Matthew 26:53). You know, you don’t even need a legion of angels to take on a legion of Rome, much less a little Centurion’s cohort in Galilee (or in Judea, rather). When you have someone who arises to this point and can be trusted, they nevertheless can be slain. Because, like our Lord, they don’t get to use… Well, they are trustworthy enough so as not to misuse what has been entrusted to them. Therefore, the fact that they can “hold at defiance the armies of nations” means that they will do so only in accordance with His will—because sometimes it is His will to destroy the children of Israel, when they have sinned against Him. And then, they have to detect the error and repent of it before they can go forward. Well, [all] men having this faith, coming up unto this order…were translated and taken up into heaven. (JST Genesis 14:32) …that being a statement about not today but the moment of Melchizedek’s ordination, his day, and those that had lived before him, in their day. Translated and taken up into heaven—we will get to the point later where we’ll find out that this same authority that was in the beginning is going to return at the end of the earth, also. But its return at the end of the earth has a different purpose. At the beginning of the earth, this was the purpose. And now, Melchizedek was a priest of this order; therefore he obtained peace in Salem, …was called the Prince of peace [that is also is one of the titles given to the Lord, the Prince of Peace]. …his people wrought righteousness, and obtained heaven, and sought for the city of Enoch which God had before taken, separating it from the earth, having reserved it unto the latter days, or the end of the world. (Ibid, vs. 33-34) See, and you wonder what they’ve been doing for lo these many thousands of years; and yet, if you understood the physics of it all, you’d realize that you can go out and back in a hurry, and it’s overnight if you travel fast enough and far enough and return. There’s really… Ah, well, that’s another matter altogether. And [He] hath said, and sworn with an oath, that the heavens and the earth should come together… (Ibid, vs. 35, emphasis added) See, they… That city of Enoch is reserved until the latter days of the end. It was separated from the earth, but it’s going to come again in the latter days. And the Lord swore, …with an oath, that the heavens and the earth should come together; and the sons of God should be tried so as by fire. (Ibid) …meaning that when they return again, those sons who remain standing are going to have to be able to endure the fire that is coming. They who come shall burn them up—we talked about that briefly in Boise, and we’ve been trying to track that down through Idaho Falls, and now we see it again here. Therefore, this priesthood has something to do with all of the talks that I’ve been giving up to this point and where we go from here. And this Melchizedek, having thus established righteousness, was called the king of heaven by his people, or, in other words, the King of peace [because he brought peace to them]. And he lifted up his voice, and he blessed Abram, being the high priest, and the keeper of the storehouse of God; [whom] Him whom God had appointed to receive tithes for the poor. [And] Abraham paid…him… (Ibid, vs. 36-39) …and so on. In any event, Melchizedek established priests/established righteousness; his city was a city of peace. (And if you don’t mind, I’m gonna hold onto this for a minute ’cuz we’re gonna go back there, and so… Is your name on it? Oh, good; your name’s on it. I’m using Carol’s scriptures. And if you see me walking around with a set of scriptures that have Carol’s name on it, you know I’ve stolen them.) Priesthood is not a franchise. Priesthood is not something that is given in order to control others. Priesthood is an opportunity—afforded you by God, in its highest form—to serve and to bless others. (That’s not true of it in other forms, and we’ll get to that.) But in its highest form, it is a call to service. It is a call to save; it is a call to redeem; and it is a call to rescue. Now I want to suggest a new definition for priesthood. And I wanna go to Doctrine and Covenants section 121 and read some old familiar words—and then see if today we can pour some meaning into this. This is Doctrine and Covenants section 121, verse 36: That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. (D&C 121:36) I wanna suggest to you that the word “powers of heaven” is a proper noun and not just a phrase incorporatingencompassing some abstraction. Powers of Heaven: oooo yada yada, can you feel it? Go get a pyramid, put it over your head. Ohmmmm, got some, got some… I can feel it! That’s not it. Powers of Heaven is actually a proper noun. If you are an Elder or you are a High Priest or you are a Seventy or you are a member of the Quorum of the Twelve… Whatever that office is, it is appropriate to refer to you by the nomenclature “Elder.” “Elder” LeGrand Richards, “Elder” McConkie, “Elder” Nelson. (Hmm. Good thing we can’t hear thoughts.) In any event… There is—within the structure of the afterlife—different rungs on Jacob’s ladder. And they leak through in our scriptures, though Joseph never bothers parsing them. And whether you are talking about an Angel or an Archangel or a Principality or a Power or a Dominion or a Throne or a Cherubim or a Seraphim, it doesn’t matter which one you are referring to, it is appropriate—just like it is appropriate to refer to all those offices as Elder—to refer to any and all of them as Powers. The Powers of Heaven: Whatever rung these ministers may be upon, they are all Powers. So, I wanna suggest to you that the real definition of priesthood is an association between mankind, on the one hand, and those on the other side of the veil, on the other hand. It is a brotherhood. Oh my! And it is potentially also a sisterhood. And it is a fellowship. And it is a ministry, if you will, in which there is connected together (and the real definition of priesthood is the connection between) a fellowship between the Powers of Heaven, on the one hand, and you, on the other. We can form a fellowship—and have, among ourselves. And we’ve ordained one another in our various fellowships, and we’ve called ourselves Elders Quorums. And we’ve called ourselves High Priest Group. And we have called ourselves all kinds of different bodies of fellowship. And they are, I suppose, a form of priesthood. There are others who have formed different kinds of associations, and they are a form of priesthood. But the scriptures are talking about a relationship between Powers of Heaven and the recipient of authority—that is, priesthood is fellowship. And when you do something to sever that fellowship, then you have done something that damages, injures, hinders, or altogether departs from the fellowship that you had. and…the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon…principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, [it’s] true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; [and] the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man. (Ibid, vs. 36-37) So then, if one has this fellowship and has this authority (or is in fellowship with that group from which such power reckons), how is it, then, that you exercise that authority? Well, the answer’s also contained in the same revelation. No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, …by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile. (Ibid, vs. 41-42) So, if you find someone who is armed with this, what you’re gonna find is someone whose tool is persuasion and who offers knowledge—and whose knowledge will not reckon merely from the writings, the theories, and the philosophies of men, but it will reckon, rather, from a higher place. I wanna turn to Doctrine and Covenants section 132 and take a look at that because in here we then run into a brief description of some of that “Powers” that exist. This is in Doctrine and Covenants section 132, verse 19. And it’s about in the middle of that verse. It says you come forth in the first resurrection [to] inherit [and here are the words] thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths. Those are, in fact, referring to different steps in the process of rising up to the place where God is. This is telling you something about the map to the afterlife. This is telling you something about how there is a hierarchy that is organized there. And you proceed, as Joseph said, from one step to the next. When you begin to climb a ladder, you always begin at the bottom, and you go step-by-step until you reach the top. Well, there are those… And I’m not gonna vouch for this, but I’ll find it useful to use today. And I use this not because I’m trying to originate anything, but rather, this is already out there, and so I don’t think I’m speaking out of turn. Rather like what Nephi did with Isaiah, if I can lay it at the feet of someone else, I can say, Well then, I didn’t break any confidences. In any event, the ranking goes: Angels, and then Archangels, and then Principalities, and then Powers, and then Dominions, and then Thrones, and then Cherubim, and then Seraphim… (The Seraphim being those who dwell in everlasting burnings, the glorious ones, the ones who are flaming. For a description of them, we’ve already looked at that in Doctrine and Covenants section 109, [verse] 79. I’m not gonna go there.) But in any event, here you have (in section 132) a listing of some of the things which get inherited. And you think that we have a singular afterlife that consists of heaven and hell or —oh, no! You’re Mormons; therefore, you got three of them. You got your Telestial (which kingdom you’re presently occupying, by the way). You’ve got your Terrestrial (we hope to manage to get there sometime during the Millennium, also occupying this same globe). And you got your Celestial (which you know, apparently, you’ll be all garbed up and glowing and wearing a robe and nicely put). However, this is suggesting a much more complex afterlife in which, literally, the ascent is by degrees as you move upward. As Joseph said (and I read that in Boise), it’ll be a great time after we have crossed through the veil before we will have learned all that needs to be learned in order to qualify for our salvation and exaltation. Well, let’s go to Moses chapter 7. This is Moses chapter 7, verse 27: Enoch beheld angels descending out of heaven, bearing testimony of the Father and Son; and the Holy Ghost fell on many, and they were caught up by the powers of heaven into Zion (Moses 7:27, emphasis added). There they show up again—“the powers of heaven”—plural, in the same verse where it’s talking about angels descending. This is the kind of thing that is littered throughout the scriptures if you have the eyes to see it. Because there is actually a structure there. There are, within what we regard as priesthood, two brotherhoods or two fellowships: One is between men (or women). It is a fellowship that exists among us here on this side. There is a second one. There is a second fellowship. That exists with us to the other side, and on that other side, there is a fellowship or a priesthood. And by and large, when the scriptures speak about priesthood having authority/priesthood having power, that is connected by a mortal with a fellowship that extends into the immortal, to the other side. It’s a relationship with the “Powers of Heaven.” So that you can be clear in your own mind about this, let’s look at Doctrine and Covenants section 107, and go to verse 52: Noah was ten years old when he was ordained under the hand of Methuselah. Okay? So, Moses [Noah] got priesthood as a consequence of the hand of Methuselah having ordained him. That is a priesthood (or fellowship or brotherhood) on this side of the veil. Now, go back to Moses chapter 8. In Moses chapter 8, verse 19, it says, And the Lord ordained Noah after his…order, and commanded him that he should go forth and declare his Gospel unto the children of men, even as it was given unto Enoch—or in other words, in the case of Noah, the fellowship that originated as a relationship between him and his older brethren here [was] extended by God ordaining him also to a fellowship on the other side. Therefore, he belonged not merely to the priesthood held by men but to the priesthood held by the immortals. Go to Doctrine and Covenants section 107, and look at verse 48: Enoch was twenty–five years old when he was ordained under the hand of Adam. (D&C 107:48) So, he got that when he was 25. But look at what happened when he was 65: He was sixty–five and Adam blessed him. And he saw the Lord, and he walked with him, and was before his face continually; and he walked with God three hundred and sixty–five years, making him four hundred and thirty years old when he was translated. (Ibid, vs. 65) And so, there is the ordination at 25, which allowed him to join in the fellowship (the brotherhood, the association, the priesthood) that involved men. And then at 65, there is another priesthood, there’s another association, there’s another fellowship. Jethro, the father-in-law, ordained Moses—D&C 84. Look at that. D&C 84, verse 6: And the sons of Moses, according to the Holy Priesthood which he [that is, Moses] received under the hand of his father–in–law, Jethro. (D&C 84:6) Okay? Then go over to verses… Beginning at 21: …without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh; For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live. [For] this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God; But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory. Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also. (Ibid, vs. 21-25) If you go to Moses chapter 1, beginning at verse 1: The [word] of God, which he spake unto Moses at [the] time when Moses was caught up into an exceedingly high mountain, …he saw God face to face, …he talked with him, and the glory of God was upon Moses; therefore Moses could endure his presence. And God spake unto Moses, saying: Behold, I am the Lord God Almighty [threefold; three titles], and Endless is my name; for I am without beginning of days or end of years; and is not this endless? And, behold, thou art my son. (Moses 1:1-4) And so, he was ordained by man, and he was ordained by heaven. You can see it in the case of Jacob. We’ll look at that, and then we’ll stop. Jacob—go to 2 Nephi chapter 5, verse 26, And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did consecrate Jacob and Joseph, that they should be priests and teachers over the land of my people. Then, if you go to Jacob chapter 1, and you look at verse 17 of Jacob chapter 1, you see Jacob saying, Wherefore I, Jacob, gave unto them…words as I taught them in the temple, having first obtained mine errand from the Lord—because Jacob didn’t go out and commence a ministry of teaching (even to his own people over whom he had been consecrated as a priest) until he had first obtained that second ordination. Well, you can find it throughout if you look for it. The fact is that there are two levels, one of which requires a connection beyond the veil and one of which is here. It is not enough (and you ought never be content) to simply have the association that exists here. If you go to Doctrine and Covenants section 84, verse 26, it talks about the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel. Even the lesser priesthood holds some connection with heaven. Even the lesser priesthood holds forth the opportunity to have some link with the Powers of Heaven. Therefore, in the lesser priesthood there is an association—a fellowship—that is anticipated. And, of course, the greater priesthood (that we looked at before in those verses describing what Moses…) is that a priesthood that has a power of godliness that gets manifest unto men, in the flesh—For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live (D&C 84:22)— Don’t let anyone deceive you into believing that this association is merely meant for the afterlife. If it were so, the wordsin the flesh would not appear here and other places in the scriptures that I pointed out to you as I’ve gone through these various talks. It was meant to be laid hold upon here. And as a consequence of laying hold upon it here, you qualify to receive that in the world to come (see D&C 76:118). And if you fail to lay hold upon that here, then wo unto [you]. That doesn’t mean that you are condemned forever. That just means that you’ve wasted an opportunity—and therefore, the struggle for you will continue. Put it away; get it done. The question was asked, and I read it before (I read the answer, not the question). The questions was: “Was the priesthood of Melchizedek taken away when Moses died?” Joseph said (and it was in this context where I began earlier): “All priesthood is Melchizedek, but there are different portions or degrees of it” (TPJS, 180-181). I’m hoping that now when we read that, you say to yourself, “Different portions of degrees of it has reference to these different fellowships, these different associations that one can have with those Powers of Heaven which exist on the other side”—because there is a level of growth, a level of development, and an entrustment of the authority and the power of godliness that continues on into eternity, until at last you arise at the point… Joseph calls it “attaining to the resurrection.” And attaining to the resurrection, in that context, means to inherit everlasting burnings so to be able to dwell in a position of glory, from which descent is well-nigh impossible. But remember, “all priesthood is Melchizedek but there are different portions or degrees of it. That portion which brought Moses to speak with God face-to-face was taken away but that which brought the ministry of angels remained” (ibid). Then he added, as I read, “All the prophets had the Melchizedek priesthood and were ordained by God himself” (ibid). Possible, I suppose, to pass along “Melchizedek priesthood” in a fellowship between men, but invariably, it is the case that when you find someone in possession of the Melchizedek priesthood in the form in which Joseph was referring to it in this answer, it is always the case that all prophets had the Melchizedek priesthood and were ordained by God Himself. Always the case. Now, all priesthood is perishable. We saw that in Doctrine and Covenants section 121, verse 37: That [it] may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, …gratify our pride, our vain ambition, …to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness… And let me couple that with: What is the tool? How do I get to use the priesthood? How is it that I do get to exercise some influence? No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned (ibid, vs.41). I thank God I do not preside over any of you. I thank God I have no responsibility for any of you, my family aside. (Yeah, okay. We’re getting close to the first break.) Let me tell you that even within my own family, I don’t feel it is my prerogative to do anything other than to use persuasion, to use long-suffering, to use gentleness and meekness and love unfeigned, and to try—kindly—to use pure knowledge to lay the matter out. But it is ever so much better to lay that out when the question is asked rather than it is to lay out the answer and force-feed it to someone who doesn’t even have the idea occur to them that there’s an issue to be discussed. One of the reasons why I solicited questions was to find out to what extent you’re ready to hear something about something that confuses you. And some of the questions are quite poignant, and we’ll hopefully be able to solve a number of them as we go along. Priesthood is perishable. Even that priesthood conferred by the voice of God is perishable, if you are unwilling to restrain and to contain yourself within the bounds which the Lord has prescribed. As we get to sealing power (and we will get there before the day is up), there are some things about that you need to have parsed, and you need to understand. But the fact of the matter is that when we talk about priesthood, we throw about lavish claims among ourselves because we have a vocabulary. And as a consequence of possessing that vocabulary, we think, then, that we have understanding when, in fact, the scriptures are telling us a whole different story. And that whole different story is what we’re pursuing here today. Hopefully, when we get to the end of this today, you’ll walk away saying, “I need to go back and study my scriptures, ’cuz it sounds like there’s a whole lot in there about priesthood that makes distinctions which I had not heretofore appreciated.” (So, what we’re going to do is take…? What? Five minutes? We’re gonna take five minutes, and when they signal me, we’ll begin again.) (Okay, we’re good to go.) As a reminder that all priesthood is perishable, if you look at Doctrine and Covenants section 124, verse 28, it says, There is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood. Now, that’s a verse that (at this moment) I’m not prepared to get into all of the implications of. I just want to use it as a reference point for the proposition that something given can be taken away—that priesthood is, in fact, perishable. While we are here in the mortal realm, it is possible that a person fall away. (Carol, I returned your scriptures because I found it on my iPad. So, even though I resist the iPad as a source of scriptures—and mocked those who were early adopters in the lessons I taught—I nonetheless have a set of scriptures on my iPad.) Okay, so, this then leads me to the next topic that I wanna try and get through—a topic about which some of you may be completely unaware, but one that has occupied a lot of attention of a number of very careful and thoughtful people (and with whom I will probably disagree—but it’s not because I don’t view their efforts to parse this topic as unworthy or worthless; it’s because I reckon my understanding from a different point from which I triangulate on this topic—and not merely the record that we have before us). This is from The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. And The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith were a reduction (into a singular account) of a variety of note-takers’ accounts of Joseph’s words. The original note-takers’ accounts have been gathered together in Andy Ehat’s book, The Words of Joseph Smith. And so, if you go to the Andy Ehat version and you look at what all the note-takers say, you can see—and you can contrast—what the note-takers have and then what The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith have. For my purposes, it’s not important today to parse all the different accounts. It would take too long, and I find what’s inThe Teachings of the Prophet [Joseph Smith] to be adequate in order to talk about the topic. But it doesn’t mean that I commend this as a great reconstruction—because, in fact, in many cases there’s doctrinal significance to the difference between the note-taker’s accounts; and you can almost feel that (from the varying accounts) that they’re listening to Joseph and then recording their notes based upon their understanding, measuring Joseph’s words against what they believed the doctrine to be—as opposed to, instead, allowing the words of Joseph to inform them. And then the compiler of The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith has made his own consolidation. But once again, this is adequate for my purposes today. I’m reading from page 322 of The Teachings of the Prophet [Joseph Smith]. Beginning there: Respecting the Melchizedek Priesthood, the sectarians never professed to have it; consequently they never could save any one, and would all be damned together. There was an Episcopal priest who said he had the priesthood of Aaron, but had not the priesthood of Melchizedek: and I bear testimony that I [have never] found the man who claimed the Priesthood of Melchizedek. The power of the Melchizedek Priesthood is to have the power of “endless lives”; for the everlasting covenant cannot be broken. (see also DHC 5:554-556; August 27, 1843) See, Joseph here is referring to that covenant given when you obtain that priesthood by the Father who swears by Himself about the results of having attained unto that priesthood. So, it holds that power of endless lives—for the everlasting covenant made by the Father cannot be broken. The law was given under Aaron for the purpose of pouring out judgments and destruction. (Ibid) So, the Mosaic law was given, and the priesthood was accommodated in order to pour out judgments and destruction. If you go to Doctrine and Covenants section 1, there’s this interesting set of verses beginning in verse 8 of D&C 1: And verily I say unto you, that they who go forth, bearing these tidings unto the inhabitants of the earth, to them is power given to seal both on earth and in heaven, the unbelieving and rebellious; Yea, verily, to seal them up unto the day when the wrath of God shall be poured out upon the wicked without measure—Unto the day when the Lord shall come to recompense unto every man according to his work, and measure to every man according to the measure which he has measured to his fellow man. (D&C 1:8-10) These are all negative. These are all sealing up unto destruction. These are all condemnations. These are all, in a word, Aaronic. But bear in mind, the Aaronic priesthood is not without hope, because within it is the power to baptize, which is an ordinance of hope. Primarily, however, the purpose of the Aaronic priesthood is to condemn. There are three grand orders of priesthood referred to here. 1st. The king of Shiloam (Salem) had power and authority over that of Abraham, holding the key and the power of endless life. Angels [now, remember what I said earlier about there being different ranks, Angels] desire to look into it, but they have set up too many stakes. (DHC5:554-556; August 27, 1843, emphasis added) See, the angels were unwilling to receive what they might have received, and as a consequence of that, they could not go. Look in Doctrine and Covenants section 132, verse 16: Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. Angels, in this context (if you will hear it), are included within Joseph’s description of “angels desire to look into it, but they have set up too many stakes,” as a consequence of their unwillingness to receive what God freely offers to all. And they’re hedging up their own way by their failure to develop that faith and confidence necessary to lay hold upon the blessings of heaven, because they believe that those blessings are reserved for others and not for them; because, as the (de-canonized now) Lectures on Faith suggest, they fear that they do not have the power to lay hold upon all the blessings which were entirely reserved and promised to them (see Lectures on Faith, Lecture Third, paragraph 23). Because they have not that faith required, they become limited in what they seek for and, therefore, what they obtain. God cursed the children of Israel because they would not receive the last law from Moses. The sacrifice required of Abraham in the offering up of Isaac, shows that if a man would attain to the keys of the kingdom of an endless life; he must sacrifice all things. When God offers a blessing or knowledge to a man, and he refuses to receive it, he will be damned (DHC 5:554-556; August 27, 1843)— …which is why when the Lord sets something in motion and begins to declare the truth again (and He offers a message that needs to be received, and it is not received by those to whom it is offered), the results are ‘they refuse to receive the blessing or knowledge that is offered to them, and therefore they will be damned’—damned in the sense meaning that they hedge up the way, that they limit the ability of God to confer upon them what they might have received. They partake of, ultimately, the sufferings of the damned because the pain of the mind is exquisite when they realize that they have not laid hold upon what God freely offered to give unto them, and therefore, they are their own condemnor, and they are their own judge. The Israelites prayed that God would speak to Moses and not to them; in consequence of which he cursed them with a carnal law. (Ibid) Can you imagine?! If the children of Israel in that day were cursed by God because they said Moses must talk to God and not us, how much greater must be the damnation upon those who say, “You must not talk to God, because we have one who does so for you! And you’re not entitled to receive anything beyond the bounds of your limited position in this beehive we’ve constructed!” Damnable heresy! Doctrines of devils! Propounded by those who are purveyors of a false priestcraft! Unauthorized by God! Unsanctioned by Him! They suffer not themselves to enter in, and they will hedge up the way if you will heed them. There is no man… There is no man on his own errand in this world who can offer to you salvation. But if God sends a message, you’d better heed it, even if you find it difficult to hear. What was the power of Melchizedek? ‘Twas not the Priesthood of Aaron which administers…outward ordinances, and the offering of sacrifices. Those holding the fulness of the Melchizedek Priesthood are kings and priests of the Most High God, holding the keys of power and blessings (Ibid)— …because the Aaronic holds and is given for judgments and destruction. The Melchizedek is given for blessing. And when someone claims to hold Melchizedek priesthood and they use it in order to offer up judgment and condemnation and control and compulsion and authority over the souls of men—and they refuse to constrain themselves, to use persuasion only and gentleness and meekness—then you know you’re listening to an Aaronic and not a Melchizedek authority. Because the office and the authority and the keys of the Melchizedek is to bless; it’s to enlighten; it’s to raise and to bring to you light and truth. In fact, that Priesthood is a perfect law of theocracy, and stands as God to give laws to the people, administering endless lives to the sons and daughters of Adam. (Ibid) Because, once again, it is always genealogical. It is always familial. It has always been “turning the hearts of the children back to the fathers”—the final father in that chain being Adam. Abraham says to Melchizedek, I believe all…thou hast taught me concerning the priesthood and the coming of the Son of Man; so Melchizedek ordained Abraham and sent him away. Abraham rejoiced, saying, Now I have a priesthood. Salvation could not come to the world without the mediation of Jesus Christ. How shall God come to rescue…this generation? He will send Elijah the prophet. The law revealed to Moses in Horeb never was revealed to the children of Israel as a nation. Elijah shall reveal the covenants to seal the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers. (Ibid) This talk, on this day by Joseph Smith, is seven years after the 1836 Doctrine and Covenants section 110 incident. So, Elijah shall reveal the covenants to seal the hearts of the fathers to the children and the children to the fathers. The anointing and sealing is to be called, elected, and made sure. “Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, …made like unto the Son of God, abideth a priest continually.” The Melchizedek Priesthood holds the right from the eternal God, and not by descent from father and mother; and that priesthood is as eternal as God Himself, having neither beginning of days nor end of life. (Ibid) That is not to say that because one receives that priesthood that they cannot fall from that. Because while you are in this world, as Paul put it, you stand in jeopardy every hour. Here is the place in which the trial, the test, the temptation, the burden of mortality exists. And it exists for so long as you have the flesh. You do not… Even if you possess the authority, you do not have that abide with you continually on into eternity until you have finished the course, until you have resisted the temptation, until you have completed the race and finished the work. Only when you lay down the burden—here—successfully having completed it, are you permitted then to take it up there, as a matter of right. But here, although the priesthood is endless, although the covenant of God is eternal, a man may fall from it; and therefore, you proceed recognizing that you proceed with eternal peril. The 2nd Priesthood is Patriarchal authority. Go to and finish the temple, and God will fill it with power, and you will then receive more knowledge concerning this priesthood. (Ibid) Now, there is a controversy in which, almost to a man, all of those who have researched the subject have reached the conclusion that Melchizedek priesthood is greater than Patriarchal priesthood and that Levitical priesthood is inferior to them all. So that if you were (as those who have researched it) ranking them, you would say it is Levitical and then Patriarchal and then Melchizedek. And that that’s the way in which it’s parsed. I disagree with that. I disagree with that for two reasons. First of all, I do not believe that this talk, given by Joseph Smith, in the order in which he expresses it is top, middle, bottom. I believe it is middle, top, and then he picks up the bottom (with Levitical). The other reason why I think Patriarchal ought to be viewed as the highest form is because the priesthood which began with Adam was priesthood which was after the Order of the Son of God. And that that priesthood after the Order of the Son of God descended from Adam down to the time of Enoch, and then it got renamed the Priesthood after the Order of Enoch. And then later it got renamed the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek or the priesthood of Melchizedek. When Adam promises that the priesthood that was in the beginning is going to return at the end of the world also, he is talking about a return at the end of the world of that priesthood which was held by the original patriarchs—a time when, for generations, it was unitary (there was only one) and that the designation (the correct designation) of that priesthood is the “Holy Priesthood” or the “Holy Order after the Order of the Son of God.” It’s a long name, but it was that priesthood that was held by the patriarchs. As a consequence of it being that priesthood, held by the original patriarchs, which was in the beginning of the world and is to return at the end of the world also, I prefer to regard the highest order under the name designation of Patriarchal priesthood. And so, when I use the term, I’m referring to that priesthood originally held by Adam, that priesthood held by Enoch, that priesthood which is more correctly called the Holy Order after the Order of the Son of God. Therefore, if you are going to say Patriarchal priesthood as a scholar and parse the words differently, you need to understand that I’m using them in this way. And I disagree with you. And I have my reasons for doing so. And I think that Joseph had reasons for doing so also, because of what I just read you. Go to and finish the temple, and God will fill it with power, and you will then receive more knowledge concerning this priesthood. (Ibid, emphasis added) I’m suggesting to you that something which, by its nature, required the completion of the temple and required the presence of God, which relates to the revelation given in January of 1841 that I read a few minutes ago—For there[‘s] not a place found on the earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fullness of the priesthood (D&C 124:28). It requires Him—God—to come to that place, and for Him—God—to restore to you that which has been taken away—the fullness. Go to, and God… You finish the temple, “God will fill it with power…you will then receive more knowledge concerning this priesthood.” Even in the words of Joseph, taken together with Doctrine and Covenants section 124, [verse] 28 that I just read to you, it suggests that the highest form—the one which brings you into contact with God in His holy temple—that one, that priesthood, is correctly designated “Patriarchal.” Therefore, in this talk, I don’t think he’s enumerating them by priority. I think he’s just giving you a list. He’s not trying to prioritize that list. The 3rd is what is called…Levitical Priesthood, consisting of priests to administer in outward ordinances, made without an oath; but the Priesthood of Melchizedek is [made] by an oath and covenant. (DHC 5:554-556; August 27, 1843, emphasis added) But the “oath and [the] covenant” is the oath and the covenant that is given by the Father—it’s not what we read to the newly-ordained Elder; that is an aspiration, and it’s very good to have aspirational notions preached to us in connection with the priesthood, but aspiration is not reality. And “knowledge concerning the content” is not possessing the same thing as the covenant itself. And therefore, if you’re going to receive the covenant which cannot be broken… The covenant which cannot be broken is obtained by—and from—the Father. The Holy Ghost is God’s messenger to administer in all those priesthoods. (Ibid) You see, it was by faith and the power of the Holy Ghost that Melchizedek did all that he did. And if someone gets possession of any or all of these priesthoods, the way in which the priesthood proceeds is in accordance with the power of the Holy Ghost. Joseph just said: it’s by the power of the Holy Ghost. So, let me ask you the question, and you answer it yourself: Let us assume the case that a woman is filled with the Holy Ghost—rather like Anna in the temple when Christ was brought; and Anna, by the power of the Holy Ghost, prophesies concerning the young boy, the babe, that was brought to the temple. Given the fact that the authority by which priesthood is to become operative (as Joseph just explained) is the Holy Ghost, what possible difference does it make if the prophetess Anna, standing in the temple, prophesying concerning the child who is brought in, cannot grab a knife and go over to the place they tied the animals and cut the throat of the sheep? And then divide it up and carry part of its carcass over and drop it on the iron at the top of the ramp on the altar where they burned? And can’t take the bowl and hyssop and walk around and splatter the four corners of the altar at the bloodline of the altar? Why would it be more significant that Anna was deprived of the outward ordinance performance than that she, as a prophetess, filled with the Holy Ghost, spake and prophesied concerning the Son of God on the day that He was brought to the temple, for the offering of the cleansing of Mary, having completed her day? You see, the Holy Ghost is God’s messenger to administer in all these priesthoods. Well, you envy the unenviable, and you focus on the irrelevant because, quite frankly, given the fact that the purpose of that Aaronic priesthood is to pour out judgments and destructions, and its purpose is to seal people up to condemnation, I can’t imagine… Well, I take that back—I can imagine why a woman would want to possess that. I have a partner who does divorce work. So, I can imagine. And she’s a female too. Jesus Christ is the heir of this Kingdom—the Only Begotten of the Father according to the flesh, and holds the keys over all this world. Men have to suffer that they may come [up unto] Mount Zion and be exalted above the heavens. I know a man that has been caught up to the third heavens and can say, with Paul, that we have seen and heard things that are not lawful to utter. (Ibid) Well, I believe that the purpose of the heavenly association is to accomplish two things: One is to have valid ordinances, and the second is to obtain answers or direction. I wanna read from The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith: Where did the kingdom of God begin? Where there is no kingdom of God there is no salvation. What constitutes the kingdom of God? Where there is a prophet, a priest, or a righteous man unto whom God gives His oracles; there is the kingdom of God and where the oracles [of God] are not, there the kingdom of God is not. In these remarks, I have no allusion to the kingdoms of [this] earth. We will keep the laws of the land; we do not speak against them; we never have, and we can hardly make mention of the state of Missouri, of our persecutions there, but what the cry goes forth that we [were] guilty of larceny, burglary, arson, treason, murder…which is false. We speak of the kingdom of God on the earth, not the kingdoms of men. (TPJS, 272; see also DHC 5:256-259) If you’ve read that paper I wrote, Brigham Young’s Telestial Kingdom, you’ll recognize in that that Brigham Young thought that the kingdom was to be an earthly institution. Joseph was denouncing that. He denounced a lot of things that we have subsequently taken up and said is really our cause. The plea of many in this day is that we have no right to receive revelations; but if we do not get revelations, we do not have the oracles of God; and if they have not the oracles of God, [then] they are not the people of God. But say you, What will become of the world, or the various professors of religion who do not believe in revelation and the oracles of God as continued to His Church in all ages of the world, when He has a people on earth? I tell you, in the name of Jesus Christ, [that] they will be damned; and when you get into the eternal world, you will find it will be so, they cannot escape the damnation of hell. (Ibid) …the “oracles of God” (meaning the revelations of God). And the revelations of God were given to us from Joseph Smith as the foundation, as the font from which we draw. But it was always intended that there should arise in you the power of obtaining oracles for yourself. As touching the Gospel and baptism that John preached, I would say that John came preaching the Gospel for the remission of sins; he had his authority from God, and the oracles of God were with him, and the kingdom of God for a season seemed to rest with John alone. The Lord promised Zacharias that he should have a son who was a descendant of Aaron, the Lord having promised that [this] priesthood should continue with Aaron and his seed throughout their generations. Let no man take this honor upon himself, except he be called of God, as was Aaron; and Aaron received his call by revelations. An angel of God also appeared unto Zacharias while in the Temple, and told him that he should have a son, whose name should be John, and he should be filled with the Holy Ghost. Zacharias was a priest of God, and officiating in the Temple, and John was a priest after his father, and [he] held the keys of the Aaronic priesthood, and was called of God to preach the Gospel of the kingdom… The Jews, as a nation, having departed from the law of God and the Gospel of the Lord, prepared the way for transferring it to the Gentiles. But, says one, the kingdom of God could not be set up in the days of John, for John said the kingdom was at hand. But I would ask if it could be any nearer to them than to be in the hands of John. The people need not wait for the days of Pentecost to find the kingdom of God, for John had it with him, and he came forth from the wilderness crying out, “Repent ye, for the kingdom of…[God] is nigh at hand,” as much as to say, “Out here I have got the kingdom of God, and you can get it, and I am coming after you; and if you don’t receive it, you will be damned”; and the scriptures represent that all Jerusalem went out into John’s baptism. There was a legal administrator, and those that were baptized were subjects for a king; and also the laws and oracles of God were there; therefore the kingdom of God was there; for no man could have better authority to administer than John; and our Savior submitted to that authority Himself, by being baptized by John; therefore the kingdom of God was set up on the earth, even in the days of John. (Ibid) John was a legal administrator. Christ recognized him, even though there was an existing priestly authority He also respected who were in control of the temple at Jerusalem. (That’s me—I’m inserting. That’s not reading from TheTeachings of the Prophet [Joseph Smith].) There is a difference between the kingdom of God and the fruits and blessings that flow from the kingdom; because there were more miracles, gifts, visions, healings, tongues, &c., in the days of Jesus Christ and His apostles, and on the day of Pentecost, than under John’s administration, it does not prove by any means that John had not the kingdom of God, any more than it would that a woman had not a milk pan because she had not a pan of milk, for while the pan might be compared to the kingdom, the milk might be compared to the blessings of the kingdom. John was a priest after the order of Aaron, and had the keys of that priesthood, and came forth preaching repentance and baptism for the remission of sins, but at the same time cries out, “There come[s] one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose” and Christ came according to the words of John, and He was greater than John, because He held the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood and kingdom of God, and had before revealed the priesthood of Moses, yet Christ was baptized by John to fulfill all righteousness; and Jesus in His teachings says, “Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” What rock? Revelation. Again he says, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter…the kingdom of God;” and, “heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” If a man is born of water and of the Spirit, he can get into the kingdom of God. It is evident the kingdom of God was on the earth, and John prepared subjects for the kingdom, by preaching the Gospel to them and baptizing them, and he prepared the way before the Savior, or came as a forerunner, and prepared subjects for the preaching of Christ; and Christ preached through Jerusalem on the same ground where John had preached; and when the apostles were raised up, they worked in Jerusalem, and Jesus commanded them to tarry there until they were endowed with power from on high. Had they not work to do in Jerusalem? They did work, and prepared a people for the Pentecost. The kingdom of God was with them before the day of Pentecost, as well as afterwards; [as] it was also with John, and he preached the same Gospel and baptism that Jesus and the apostles preached after him. The endowment was to prepare the disciples for their missions unto the world. Whenever men can find out the will of God and find an administrator legally authorized from God, there is the kingdom of God; but where these are not, the kingdom of God is not. All the ordinances, systems, and administrations on the earth are of no use to the children of men, unless they are ordained and authorized of God; for nothing will save a man but a legal administrator; for none others will be acknowledged either by God or angels. I know what I say; I understand my mission and business. God Almighty is my shield; and what can man do if God is my friend? I shall not be sacrificed until my time comes; then I shall be offered freely. All flesh is as grass, and a governor is [no] better than other men; when he dies he is but a bag of dust. I thank God for preserving me from my enemies; I have no enemies but for the truth’s sake. I have no desire but to do all men good. I feel to pray for all men. We don’t ask any people to throw away any good they have got; we only ask them to come and get more. What if all the world should embrace this Gospel? They would then see eye to eye, and the blessings of God would be poured out upon the people, which is the desire of my whole soul. Amen. (Ibid) This is Joseph in January of 1843. Joseph Smith also said, “John wrested the keys, the kingdom, the power…the glory from the Jews…by the holy anointing and decree of heaven.” That’s The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, page 276. Doctrine and Covenants section 84, verse 28 points out that John was ordained by the angel of God at the time he was eight days old unto this power, to overthrow the kingdom of the Jews, and to make straight the way of the Lord before the face of his people, to prepare them for the coming of the Lord, in whose hand is given all power. John was sent forth and, in part, was sent forth to be rejected of the Jews so that he could wrest “the keys, the kingdom, …the power and the glory from the Jews, and this by the holy anointing and decree of heaven.” Because an angel had established it and because it was the Powers of Heaven that were behind it. Well then, we have this also from Joseph: All men are liars who say they are of the true Church without the revelations of Jesus Christ and the Priesthood of Melchizedek, which is after the order of the Son of God. It is…the order of heavenly things that God should always send a new dispensation into the world when men have apostatized from the truth and lost the priesthood, but when men come out and build upon other men’s foundations, they do it on their own responsibility, without authority from God; and when the floods come and the winds blow, their foundations will be found to be sand, and their whole fabric will crumble to dust. Did I build on [an]other man’s foundation? [I’ve] got all the truth which the Christian world possessed, and an independent revelation in the bargain. That’s The Teachings of the Prophet [Joseph Smith], on pages 375 and 376. There are three priesthoods. There are three orders of priesthood. And if you turn to Doctrine and Covenants section 107, that same prophet (who described the existence of three priesthoods) said in the opening verse of Doctrine and Covenants107, There are, in the church, two priesthoods, namely, the Melchizedek and Aaronic, including the Levitical Priesthood(D&C 107:1, emphasis added). This is yet another reason why I think the third priesthood ought be called Patriarchal. And it’s not priesthood which one obtains by going and being sealed in the temple. It‘s one [that] one obtains by going and meeting with God in His temple. That greatest priesthood… Before [the days of Melchizedek] it was called [this is verse 3 of section 107] the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God. My view is that we’ve had enough… We’ve had enough name changes—that when the priesthood returns again in the last days, it will no longer be called after a man (or men or those who have held it in the past), but it will be called the Holy Order after the Son of God—that being, at the end of the world, in conformity with that which was in the beginning. Even Christ… Even Christ had to be ordained to this order. Look at Matthew; chapter 3 of Matthew, verse 16: And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased (Matthew 3:16). The other night, Margaret Barker suggested that if she were describing the voice, she would have that voice be the voice of a woman saying, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.” Which—I didn’t say it at the time—but if I were staging it, I would have the voice of a man and a woman, speaking in unison the words, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased”…if I were staging such a thing or attempting to portray it. Which reminds me of a conversation I’d had with her earlier that evening. They’re doing a conference on weaving and sacred fabrics, and she’s going to try and put together a veil—and was suggesting the depiction of cherubim as a winged disc (“winged disc” being the symbol of the feminine). And I suggested to her that if I were using that as a representation, I would have six feathers or six flutes on each wing to depict the state of ascent. And she liked that idea. So, if in her next presentation in the veil of the temple there is a winged disk cherubim being depicted and it has six flutes, I told her she can own that. That’s her idea. She can have it from me. Again, in the book of Hebrews chapter 5, verse 4, beginning at verse 4: And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him… (Hebrews 5:4-5). You see, Christ didn’t do this. It was done by he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day I have begotten thee (ibid, emphasis added). Okay. Just… I’m gonna do this. It’s a complete aside, but I really like the work that Bart Erhman has done because he’s tried to reconstruct the Christological debates of the Second and Third Century, in which they rewrote the New Testament in order to conform with their false Christological ideas and arguments. See, when Christ was baptized, the statement that was made to Christ (Bart Erhman has shown) is the statement that you find in Psalms chapter 2, verse 7, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee, which was changed to, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased (Matthew 3:17) in order to solve a debate going on in the Second Century over the idea of adoptionism (that Christ was merely mortal, and He was adopted by God through that statement). And so, that statement—which appears in Psalms chapter 2, verse 7—was really what was one time in Matthew in the words I read you before. But it got changed. And Bart Ehrman points, in part, Thou art my son, [to]day have I begotten thee… This is the Hebrew statement, because Paul was writing the book of Hebrews at a time… And I recognize there’s an argument over whether Paul is the author of Hebrews, but we’re just gonna take it as a given. Joseph didn’t quibble over it. I’m not gonna quibble over it. I don’t wanna go there; it’s a whole ’nother argument. Leave that to the damned scholars, because they surely are damned. This writing came at a time before the revisionism that occurred in those debates. And therefore, the words that we find here in Hebrews are the words that mirror the statement that you find in Psalms. It’s an earlier record. The Deuteronomists were busy not only during the time of the Old Testament Second-Temple-Period; they were busy post-New Testament era, before the formation of the great harlot. (And they are surely busy even today—we call them “correlationists.”) And so, He was begotten by the Father. That is a statement that was made to Christ at the time of His baptism. Go back to Moses chapter 1. I’ve already read it, but I wanna remind you that it’s there. In Moses chapter 1, it is the Lord speaking to Moses: Behold [this is verse 4], thou art my son; wherefore look, and I will show thee the workmanship of mine hands; but not all… (Moses 1:4). Look, this is another astounding example of what the purpose of God… The purpose of God is to bestow upon people the glory of God. And what is the glory of God? The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth (D&C 93:36). And what is truth? It is the knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come (D&C 93:24). Those are all in the scriptures, and you ought to all know that. That’s the purpose of God. And the glory of God is reflected when you know something (which is why I am trying to communicate something—so that you might have glory). Look what happens to Moses: Behold, thou art my son; wherefore look…I will show thee the workmanship of mine hands; but not all, for my works are without end, and also my words, for they never cease. (Moses 1:4) Look at that! God’s words never cease. Even when silence is caused to reign because the Powers of Heaven are so disgusted with humanity that they withdraw themselves, God’s words don’t cease at all. His words do not stop. And even if the angels refuse to minister, communicate, visit… Yet, will God still speak unto men. Some people asked the question about God speaking to Cain (as a result of the talk I gave in Idaho Falls referring to your privilege of talking to God because He spoke to Cain). It doesn’t say that God appeared to Cain; it says that God spoke to Cain. Cain heard the voice of God speaking to him. He didn’t get caught up to the throne of God; he did not have a throne theophany; he was not brought back and redeemed from the fall—but he heard the voice of God. God spoke to Cain after the murder of Abel. The angels withdrew from him. The angels were grieved. They would have nothing to do—and yet, God still spoke to him. His words are endless. I don’t care what malignancy you think you carry around within you. The fact is, none of you have done the same crap that Cain did, because Cain possessed greater knowledge than you did at the time of the murder that he committed. And yet, God spoke to him still. Therefore, have the confidence—even if you grieve angels—that God will talk to you. …My words, for they never cease (ibid). Yeah, God is talkative. God desires us to know more than we know—if we will receive it. And the minute we tell Him to be quiet and withdraw and leave us alone, we are in the very act of damning ourselves. Because what we’re saying is, “That which You offered unto us, we would prefer to be silence, instead.” Don’t do that. Abraham chapter 3, verse 12, we encounter God [Abraham] saying, And he said unto me [Abraham saying]: My son, my son (and his hand was stretched out), behold I will show you all these. And he put his hand upon mine eyes, and I saw those things which his hands had made, which were many; and they multiplied before mine eyes, and I could not see the end thereof (Abraham 3:12). Once again, you have (at the same instance that he is being acknowledged as a son) the outpouring of the intelligence of God, the glory of God, light and truth—knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come. Joseph—Joseph Smith—in Doctrine and Covenants section 121, verse 7: My son, peace be unto thy soul. Okay, if you view priesthood as a brotherhood or an association, then I want to suggest that the way in which you should parse the three orders of priesthood is to parse them this way: As among men, it’s merely a brotherhood of men. As between mankind and the heavens: the first order is an order in which there is an association between men and angels. The second order is an order in which there is an association between mankind and the Son of God. And the third order—the highest order, the Patriarchal order—brings one into contact with the Patriarch who (of all the names that He could choose to be called by) chooses to have us call Him our Father who art in heaven—the third grand order being sonship to the Father and association with Him who sits in the bosom of eternity and sustains all the creation. The highest priesthood is an association with the Father, brought about as a consequence of the Father calling: “My son.” It is the Holy Order after the Son of God because those who inherit that become, by definition, His Sons. They are the Church of the Firstborn because they are in association with—and made by the Father equal to—all those who rise up to be Firstborn. Go to Moses chapter 5 [6]. This is a prophecy given by Adam which constituted one of the covenants which I referred to in the talk given at Centerville. Moses… (Oh, excuse me; it’s chapter 6, verse 7): “Now this same Priesthood”—this is Adam speaking: Now this same Priesthood which was in the beginning, shall be in the end of the world, also. Now this prophecy Adam spake, as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost (Moses 6:7-8). Therefore, it was the power of the priesthood, animated by the Holy Ghost, which established, as a matter of right—and therefore, of covenant—the promise that this thing, this authority, this power, and this relationship which once existed in the beginning of the world is to exist again at the end of the world. And that that, too, arises as a consequence of the covenant given in the beginning. So, what kind of person receives that ordination? I’m going back to the Joseph Smith Translation of Genesis chapter 14. This is the kind of person: Melchizedek was a man of faith who wrought righteousness. You have to have faith. You have to wrought perform righteousness, which is not the same thing as virtue. Virtue… Virtue can be offended by righteousness. Virtue is… Virtue would never kill, okay? It just never would. But it is righteous—in the case of Nephi, at the command of God—to slay Laban. Virtue would never do any number of things, say any number of things, or behave in any number of ways in which John the Baptist behaved. [You] generation of vipers (Luke 3:7). Look, we translate that as if what we’re reading is some nicely-phrased King Jamesian version of an insult. If you were trying to put it into modern English… This is John the Baptist (a righteous man with whom the kingdom of God existed) essentially, in the language of their day, saying, “You sons of bitches!” Because in our vernacular, by saying, “…sons of bitches,” what you’re saying is your mother is a female dog; and therefore, you are a dog; and since you’re a dog, you are a cur, and you are unworthy. This is guttural language. We read, “You generations of vipers!” and we say, Oh, isn’t that a nice way to parse out that John’s thinks he’s talking to the bad guys. And yet, we look sometimes at righteousness, and we say it can never be so because it is not virtuous. Because we overlay virtue atop righteousness—and it does not work and never has worked that way. Righteousness controls, and virtue surrenders. And virtue yields every time to righteousness—else Abraham could never have been commanded to slay his son. Because that was not virtuous. Therefore, Melchizedek was a man of righteousness; …when a child he feared God [not man], …stopped the mouths of lions, …quenched the violence of fire. …thus, having been approved of God [not man]… (JST Genesis 14:26-27) In fact, to be approved of God, in many cases, will make you offensive to man. But the opinions, and the vagaries, and the fashions of men, the opinion-polling and the drifts of what is and what is not popular at one point or another are damnable. They ought not even be considered. Righteousness does not give any regard to such things. And yet, it may be virtuous… It may be virtuous to be a limp-wristed, weepy, happy-go-lucky, “have a nice day” kind of chap… But righteousness will kick his ass everyday. …having been approved of God… (Ibid) It is God—and God’s approval alone—that matters. It is what God regards of you. It is what is in your heart, because God can detect what is in your heart. God knows why you do what you do. God knows why you say what you say. God knows what is in your thoughts. Therefore, to be approved of God is to be weighed against the standard of righteousness and not the whims of fashion. Fashion will come and go. Ideas will be popular or unpopular. Righteousness will endure forever. This. This. This is the kind of man upon whom the words get spoken, “My Son.” The fathers (about whom I spoke in Centerville) had this association with God. They had this fellowship with God. They had this sonship with God. And they had this priesthood from God. And the hearts of the children need to turn to the fathers, and that, too, because Elijah is coming to plant in the hearts of the children the promises that were made. Now, I wanna take another detour into parsing things in a way that you might not have considered before, and for this I wanna go to Doctrine and Covenants section 128, and I wanna look at verse 21. This is Joseph… This is Joseph writing a letter that got canonized. And he’s talking about all of the stuff that had gone on in the process of getting the Restoration fully established on the earth, and he mentions in this letter that he writes these things: And again, the voice of God in the chamber of old Father Whitmer, in Fayette, Seneca county, and at sundry times, and in divers places through[out] all the travels and tribulations of this Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! [So the voice of God has been there throughout all of this, as Joseph presided and as the Church rolled forth.] And the voice of Michael, [Michael], the archangel; the voice of Gabriel [“El” being the name of God], and of Raphael, and of divers angels, from Michael or Adam down to the present time, all declaring their dispensation, their rights, their keys, their honors, their majesty and glory, and the power of their priesthood; giving line upon line, precept upon precept; here a little, …there a little; giving us consolation by holding forth that which is to come, confirming our hope! (D&C 128:21) So, I wanna suggest to you that Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael are known to us as those who have come—though they were part of the El (or, in the plural form, the “Elohim”)—they came, and they served here. They came, and they ministered here: Micha-el descended, and he came to the earth, and he was known as Adam in mortality. Gabri-el came to the earth, and he was known in mortality as Noah. There is a big debate over the identity of Rapha-el. I’ll tell you what I think, and you can take it or leave it. Raphael is the name that was given to the man who in mortality we know as Enoch. Now there are four angels who preside over the four corners of the earth. And Joseph surely knew that. And Joseph mentions the names of three of the four, but he leaves the fourth one out. And I find the absence of the fourth one rather extraordinary. The fourth one’s name is Uri-el, also one of the Elohim. And although there are those who will absolutely cry heresy, throw dirt on their hair, and tear their clothes because they are scholars, and they are bona fide, and they know I’m talking out of my hat—but I’d remind you Joseph talked out of his hat, too—that fourth and missing, unmentioned angel is Uriel who, in mortality, was known to us as John. Adam is the one in the East, the angel who was considered the one who presides over and has control of the air—which is apt because unto Adam was given the breath of life in the beginning. Raphael is in the South, and he is associated with the power of fire—which is apt because of his fiery ascent with his people into heaven. Gabriel is the angel in the West who has the power over water—which is apt because, in mortality, he managed through the Flood. And Uriel, though not mentioned, is the one who, in the North, has the power over the earth—which is apt because he remains upon the earth, and he is the guardian at one gate, with Elijah at the other end. But you can take and leave all that as you will. I find the mention here (in this letter by Joseph) of these individuals and these powers—and these four (three of whom are named; the fourth of whom, potentially, is unnamed)—to be interesting, though he does mention divers angels, from Michael or Adam down to the present time (ibid). Now I wanna focus on… Are we out? Five minutes still? Okay. Now I wanna focus on… You think, and you hear, and you get beaten into your head on a continuous drum beat… I know, ’cuz I go to your meetings too. And I know this ’cuz you broadcast your general conference, and so, I can hear what you guys think. And—ohmm—here’s what you think: “Keys! Keys! Keys! Keys! Keys! Keys! Keys! Keys! We got keys! We got keys! We got… We got… We’re bustling with keeeeeeys! We got your keys!” Now, you tell me, Mormons… You tell me—you declare to me—what are your dispensations? Tell me what your rights are. Tell me what your keys are. Even John Taylor tried to develop the Book of Keys because he didn’t know what they were. You tell me what they are. Stop proclaiming that you own them, and tell me what the hell they are. If you got ’em, you oughta understand ’em. Tell me what your honors are. Tell me what your majesty is. Tell me what your glory is. Tell me, then, what the power of your priesthood is. Because if keys alone were sufficient, I rather think that Joseph Smith (who understood what he was writing) would not have gone to the trouble of parsing through the words dispensation…rights…keys…honors…majesty…glory, and…power (ibid) if it was all speaking to exactly the same thing. It is not speaking to the same thing. There is so much more that has to go on and be understood if you are going to save yourself and any soul in this generation in that kingdom which we claim we would like to inherit. And w e claim we would like to inherit it without any idea of the consequences of what it would take in order to ascend there—or without any regard to the fact that you don’t take one of the El and bring them down into mortality pain-free. You say that the Son of God condescended to come and be here. And I say, so did Michael, and so did Raphael, and so did Gabriel—because coming down and condescending to be here (on a rescue mission) by those who dwell in glory is an act of service and sacrifice that we simply take for granted out of the abundance of our ignorance. (Well, we’re in need of another break. We have to change the disk, so another five minute break, and then we’ll try and finish it.) (Should we start? Okay.) If you go to and you look at Doctrine and Covenants section 76, beginning at verse 50, and you read through the list of things that are descriptors of those that are going to inherit Celestial glory… Beginning at verse 50—and we don’t have time to go through all of the things that are there—but in 51 it says that these are people: …who received the testimony of Jesus [that is, Christ testifying to them that they’re saved], …believed on his name[these are people who]…were baptized after the manner of his burial, being buried in…water in his name, …this according to the commandment which he has given— That by keeping the commandments they might be washed and cleansed from all their sins, …receive the Holy [Ghost] by the laying on of the hands of him who is ordained and sealed unto this power [that sounds a little different than what we do]; And who overcome by faith, and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth…on all those who are just and true. [These] are they who are the Church of the Firstborn. [These] are they into whose hands the Father has given all things— [These] are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory [I hope you read those words now with a little different meaning than you did from before 9:30 today]; And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son. Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods… …all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs…they are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s. …they shall overcome all things [that’s in the future]. …let no man glory in man, but rather let him glory in God, who shall subdue all enemies under his feet. These shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever. These are they whom he shall bring with him, when he shall come in the clouds of heaven to reign on the earth over his people. These are they who shall have part in the first resurrection. These are they who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just. These are they who are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly place, the holiest of all. These are they who have come to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and Church of Enoch, and of the Firstborn. These are they whose names are written in heaven, where God and Christ are the judge of all. …just men made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant… …[bodies] whose bodies are celestial, …glory…of the sun [those who inherit everlasting burnings]… (D&C 76:51-70, emphasis added) These are those who are referred to as the “El.” These are those that were referred to when Moroni said that Elijah will come to plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the father (D&C 2:2) and when Joseph spoke in August the 27th of 1843 that Elijah will come. He will come. I’ve written a paper on this, and I’m not gonna repeat that. I do wanna talk about sealing authority because there have been questions asked about sealing. I intended to address that, in any event. And I wanna suggest to you that there are three kinds of sealing authority which are given. There is a first form of sealing power (and I’m talking about the kind of power not that can seal you up unto condemnation or judgment; I’m talking, instead, about Melchizedek sealing power, the kind that was designed to bless and to preserve). The first kind of sealing power is that kind which is given to someone when there is a dispensation of the gospel being founded. An example of that you can find in Exodus chapter 34 (involving Moses as a dispensation head) where, in verses 27 and 28, the Lord says, And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights… (Exodus 34:27-28) and so on. And so, as a dispensation head, a form of sealing power is given to that person which establishes a covenant that was intended to go beyond that individual alone. Take a look in Second Nephi chapter 1. And in Second Nephi chapter 1, we find Lehi speaking, Notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord. (2 Nephi 1:5, emphasis added) This is a covenant made by God with Lehi as a dispensation head, the beneficiaries of whom are beyond merely that dispensation head. It includes all those who come thereafter. They are beneficiaries of that. The covenant gets established through one; it is intended for others. Joseph, in Doctrine and Covenants section 22: BEHOLD, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this is a new and…everlasting covenant, …that which was from the beginning (D&C 22:1). So, through Joseph there was a covenant formed which would be binding beyond the person with whom God covenanted directly. Dispensation heads are given the power—the sealing power, the authority—the ability to use the power to “seal up” by embodying the covenant that is given to them by God into an ordinance. And that ordinance remains in effect after the death of Moses, after the death of Lehi, after the death of Joseph Smith, so long as it remains embodied within the ordinance. This kind of ordinance—or this kind of sealing authority—then requires, and gives rise to, the second kind. And the second kind is a sealing power that is embodied within authoritative ordinances. All dispensations of the gospel follow the covenant-giver’s ordinances. For so long as the ordinances that were handed to you through the dispensation head are kept intact, the covenant is kept intact. And the second form of sealing power is a sealing power which is not dependent upon the persistent presence of a dispensation head. It is only dependent upon keeping faithfully the ordinance that has been established and handed down by God through covenant. This second form of sealing power is the sealing authority which the Church claims to possess. It is the sealing authority that was referred to by Henry B. Eyring in the General Conference talk he gave in April 2012, “Families under Covenant,” in which he proclaimed that the Church has the authority to seal families together by using the ordinances that have been handed down. I’m quoting from his talk: The Holy Spirit of Promise, through our obedience and sacrifice, must seal our temple covenants in order to be realized in the world to come… “The Holy Ghost is one who reads the thoughts and hearts of men, and gives his sealing approval to the blessings pronounced upon their heads. Then it is binding, efficacious, and of full force” (Melvin J. Ballard, quoted by Harold B. Lee, in Conference Report, Oct. 1970, 111). I agree with what he has said. I believe that is a correct way to explain the limited authority to seal enjoyed by the Church and the condition that remains, even in the ordinance, requiring the faithfulness and the subsequent sealing by the Holy Spirit of Promise in order for those ordinances to endure. Nevertheless, the Church possesses that second kind of sealing authority, and it uses it in the temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The second form of sealing authority, however, has conditions upon it—because God is not bound by anything that differs one iota from His word. And that doesn’t matter who it is. God is bound by His word, not by man’s. Therefore, when you handle such ordinances, you need to keep in mind the admonition that was given in the prophecy of Isaiah: The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left. (Isaiah 24:5-6) It’s talking about a future time that is coming. But it’s lamenting a condition that you have to decide about its currency. That’s Isaiah chapter 24, verses 5 and 6. So, when you have possession of that second form of sealing authority, you have to recognize that the covenant handed down from the dispensation head can be broken. It was broken rather abruptly in the case of the covenant given to Lehi when, at the death of Lehi, his family fragmented into two groups—one of whom desired to preserve the covenant, and one of whom rejected it and walked away from it. Therefore, it was not to the ones that had rejected the covenant that the Lord would subsequently come to appear—but they, by and large, would have been destroyed. So, handling the second form of the covenant, after the dispensation head has established it, is a matter of fidelity to the word of God and faithfulness to the word of God and faithfulness in preserving and practicing the ordinance that has been established. There is a third kind of sealing power. And this third kind of sealing power goes beyond either of the first two. And it has absolutely unique application, and it is given only in rare circumstances and for highly specific purposes. That third form involves giving the authority to control the elements. This was authority that was possessed by Enoch. This was authority that was possessed by Melchizedek. This was authority that was possessed by Christ. This was the authority that Christ had to suspend (or not employ) in order to permit those who would kill Him to kill Him. This is the kind of authority which, in the case of every such individual, they give their lives up willingly. Their lives cannot be taken. An example—and it’s a good example, because it gives you insight into why such authority would ever be given to a man—is found in Helaman chapter 10, beginning at verse 5. This is the Lord speaking to Nephi, son of Helaman, son of Helaman. To Nephi he says: And now, because thou hast done this with such unwearyingness… And the “unwearyingness” is described in verse 4—that is, Nephi has gone, and he’s declared what the Lord has asked him to declare, and he hasn’t feared them, nor has he sought to protect his own life, but he has instead sought to keep the commandments of God. Therefore, because he has done this with such unwearyingness… …behold, I [this is God speaking to Nephi] will bless thee forever; and I will make thee mighty in word and in deed, in faith and in works; yea, even that all things shall be done unto thee according to thy word, for thou shalt not ask that which is contrary to my will. (Helaman 10:5, emphasis added) That’s not a commandment. That’s a description of the character and the nature of Nephi. That’s not saying, “I’m giving this to you, but be careful how you use it. Please don’t do anything that isn’t according to my will.” That’s the Lord saying, “I, God, have faith in you, Nephi—that you, Nephi, will not do anything other than my will.” You see… The whole thing turns on its head, at this point. You see, this is God having faith in a man. What manner of man, then, does God have faith in? Behold, thou art Nephi, and I am God. Behold, I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels. (Ibid, vs. 6) Because this decree in this circumstance may require those who are watching to obey the word of the man. Therefore, the angels (the Powers of Heaven) must give heed—because God is declaring it in the presence of the hosts who are standing before Him. I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels, that ye shall have power over this people, and shall smite the earth with famine, and with pestilence, and destruction, according to the wickedness of this people. Behold [that is a rather Aaronic behavior… Behold] I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye…seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; …whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people. (Ibid, vs. 6-7) This is rather Melchizedek because you can seal up unto eternal life. This is the positive side. This is the thing which those who are given this authority seek earnestly to do. …thus, if ye shall say unto this temple it shall be rent in twain, it shall be done. (Ibid, vs. 8) …because the temple is subordinate to the word of God. The temple is not the place that controls the word of God, the temple is the place which most of all ought be subject to the word of God. It’s not a place to innovate in ordinances. It’s a place to obey, to follow, to give strict heed unto, and to not vary. And if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou cast down and become smooth, it shall be done. And behold, if [thou shalt] say that God shall smite this people, it shall come to pass. (Ibid, vs. 9-10) And then, because he knows the nature and the character of the man involved in giving this authority, God commands him. He has to go out and deliver the message: …Except ye repent ye shall be smitten, even unto destruction. (Ibid, vs. 11) He didn’t wanna do that, because that’s not in the character of the person who, with unwearyingness, would go out and declare the word of God—because such people have in their heart one and only one objective, and that is the salvation of the souls of men. But now this troubling message has to be given. And when he goes and he delivers it, he doesn’t even use the authority that he’s been given. He simply asks the Lord if the Lord will smite. Look at Enoch in the book of Moses, chapter 6—because, once again, we’re looking at someone to whom this authority was given. Moses chapter 6, verse 34 (God speaking to Enoch): Behold my Spirit is upon you, wherefore all thy words will I justify; and the mountains shall flee before you, and the rivers shall turn from their course; and thou shalt abide in me, and I in you; therefore walk with me (emphasis added)—because it was Enoch’s purpose to abide in God. Therefore, when he speaks and the elements obey, they obey precisely because it is the word of God which Enoch is speaking. It is not Enoch out there innovating. Enoch would have forfeited his life before he would have said or done anything that was not in accordance with the will of God, as would have Nephi. Therefore, they are trustworthy. And then, we looked at Joseph Smith translation of Genesis chapter 14. As to these three kinds of authority, the first authority, given unto a dispensation head: only God can pass that to man. Man cannot pass that to man. The second kind of sealing authority that we talked about can be passed from man to man, from generation to generation—remains in full force and effect for so long as the covenant is not broken. The third kind not only cannot be given by man to man but is given as a consequence of that extraordinary combination of mortality and immortality, in which you find a person on the earth that God has faith and confidence in. You be that kind of person. Now, I wanna talk for a minute about sealing (as it manifests itself in some of the records of the Church) and parse some things that we find in the scriptures. Because in the minutes of Far West in October of 1831, Brother Joseph Smith, Jr. said that “the order of the high priesthood is that they have power given them to seal up the Saints unto eternal life. And said it was the privilege of every elder [present to be] ordained to the high priesthood,” which led everyone to think that they had the power to seal, and they ran about doing all kinds of sealing things which, again, I reckon that as authority given to a dispensation head, which at that point had not been embodied into an ordinance, and he was simply saying: We can do this stuff. At which point, those who thought they had that authority ran about doing that. Well, if you go to Doctrine and Covenants section 68, first verses 3 and 4: This is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost. And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation. Then go over to 12: And of as many as the Father shall bear record, to you shall be given power to seal them up unto eternal life. Amen. So, this is talking in the context of someone having authority to seal when moved upon by the Holy Ghost. And that is authority which anyone of you (and the prophetess Anna, in the temple at Jerusalem, when Christ came into the temple—a woman can use) when moved upon by the power of the Holy Ghost. And it is the word of God, and it is the power to seal if it originates from God. That doesn’t mean it’s the same thing as a dispensation head. It doesn’t mean it’s the same thing as an ordinance. And it doesn’t mean that it’s the same thing as the control of the elements, given in those rare cases. But what it does mean is that the word of God will always be respected, both in time and in eternity, if it is given by God, if it is the power of the Holy Spirit. There are those who have heard that their calling and election is made sure. And they’ve heard that as a witness from God. Don’t doubt the word of God given to you. However, don’t think for one moment that’s the end of the matter. Remember (that in the cases that we looked at before) that one of the purposes of ascending up into the presence of the Father is to be endowed with knowledge, with light and truth, and with intelligence, to possess a God-like mind and a God-like understanding. Therefore, no matter what you receive, you ought to always search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of God. Indeed, we’re commanded to do so, as I reminded you in Boise and won’t repeat again here. I’ve also read you previously and won’t repeat it again here—Doctrine and Covenants section 1, verse 8… 8 thru 10, the sealing power manifested in an Aaronic setting, in which it is sealed up unto condemnation. I want to mention that beyond there being a fellowship of man (or males) and a brotherhood, there is also a fellowship that is extended, as well, to women. If you find a woman in scripture who has had the ministry of angels, you have a sister who has joined in that association. I won’t take time to do so, but if you look in Judges chapter 13, verses 2 to 5, you have Samson’s mother being ministered to by an angel promising the coming of the one who would be a judge in Israel. You have in Genesis chapter 18, verses 9 to 15, Abraham’s wife with angelic ministrants. And the most obvious case being Mary in the book of Luke, chapter 1, verses 26 to 31, in which Mary is ministered to by Gabriel, one of the Elohim, who came to announce that she would conceive and bear a child, though she knew no man. Boy… Take note that there are, on a number of occasions, women who conceive and bear children, but the births are miraculous. In the case of Mary, the child that was born was conceived in a miraculous way. As also was Samson. As was John. Whether it’s infertility and barrenness, whether it’s being past the age of menopause, or whether it’s not having had intercourse, there are these beings who come into the world as a consequence of something other than the normal manner of conception. And yet, everything else unfolds biologically the same as a normal birth. The child that is born, obviously, inherits mortality and blood from the mother. Parse that in your own mind, and then take a look at what the Lord says in Abraham chapter 3 about the “souls” in the pre-existence who were good. And recognize that the definition of the soul (given in the Doctrine and Covenants) is both the spirit and the body. And yet, they are “souls,” and they’re coming into this world, but… Most people think of priesthood in a model that is given by the Church: that is, something that is passed from man to man; that it is something that involves a brotherhood among men; and that it can be removed by institutional shunning. It is probably better to think of priesthood in terms of—at one degree (that we would call Aaronic or Levitical)—possesses an association with angels. And another order that possesses an association with the Son of God. And yet another level at which the association is one that makes you a son of God, which is the Holy Order after the Son of God; that is, the status of the individual involved has been changed to themselves being a son of God, a bar-El. Now, how is priesthood communicated in every instance? If you go to Doctrine and Covenants section 20 to find out how you do ordinations… Ordinations (in section 20 of the Doctrine and Covenants): Every elder, priest, teacher, or deacon is to be ordained according to the gifts and callings of God unto him; ….he is to be ordained by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is in the one who ordains him (D&C 20:60, emphasis added). And so, it’s the power of the Holy Ghost that animates the one doing the ordination, and that ordination is to one of the offices in the Church that consists of Elder, Priest, Teacher, or Deacon. And that’s the manner in which these offices are supposed to be filled. In Moroni chapter 3: After this manner did they ordain… This is chapter 3, verse 4: After this manner did they ordain priests and teachers, according to the gifts and callings of God unto men; …they ordained them by the power of the Holy Ghost, which was in them (emphasis added). And therefore, if they have the power of the Holy Ghost, they had the power to ordain. At the beginning, when the Church was first formed, the notion that there was this integrated priesthood that animated everything was not present. And those that went out, went out because they had been chosen by common consent and ordained by those— through the Holy Ghost—to have the authority to go out and do these things. And they were supposed to preach, teach, exhort, expound, and so on. And they did so. And their baptisms had the required effect. When we… When you read the Book of Mormon, and you look at the baptismal prayer that’s furnished in the Book of Mormon, it says: Having authority of Jesus Christ I baptize you in the name… (3 Nephi 11:25) and so on. In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we say, Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father and…the Son and…the Holy Ghost (D&C 20:73, emphasis added). That was actually a word change. It’s a word change instituted by Joseph Smith, and it ought to give you confidence that since the Lord, in the first instance, commissioned The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (and He did so at a time in which priesthood had not been generally disseminated), that by commissioning the Church and giving to it the authority and the commission to go out and baptize, that the Church possesses the authority to baptize still. Also, when John came (and it doesn’t matter if you read the account that is given by Joseph in the Joseph Smith History, or you get it in the footnote in the Joseph Smith History, written by Oliver Cowdery—the words are, in effect, the same), that authority by Aaron to baptize, that’s going to linger. That is a far more persistent form of priestly authority. It’s gonna be around. But it’s a question that had been asked I want to answer; it’s been asked by a variety of people in a variety of ways, and probably the most blunt way of posing the question was this, “Is there any priesthood authority or power in most of the LDS Church?” I wanna remind you of an incident that we find in First Samuel—this is First Samuel chapter 1. Now, remember that Hannah is barren. Hannah cannot have a child. And Hannah is a faithful woman. She is a faithful, believing woman. And she goes up to the tabernacle presided over by Eli. (Eli, who raises despicable children, who will ultimately be slain by God; Eli, who will be replaced by Samuel—and replaced by Samuel on the same day that his two sons are slain in battle, the Ark is lost to the Philistines, his daughter—who was pregnant—miscarries the child, and he—Eli—falls over backwards and fractures his skull and dies; the whole family wrapped up in a holocaust of death on the same day. This is Eli. This is oft-times called the “wicked priest Eli.”) Well, Hannah goes up to the Tabernacle; and Hannah, in faith, is praying at the Tabernacle. And to give you an idea of the lowly state of the Tabernacle in that day, it’s so common-place a thing that when Eli sees her praying, her mouths lips moving but no words coming out, he assumes she’s like the rest of them there; she’s just drunk. And so, he’s a little upset that a drunken woman has joined in and is now here in the Tabernacle; and so, he complains. And she says… Well, Eli (in verse 14 of the first book of Samuel first chapter): How long wilt thou be drunken? put away thy wine from thee. And Hannah says, “No, I’m not. I’m not. I’ve come here to pray.” And verse 17, Eli answered and said, Go in peace: and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition that thou hast asked of him. A faithless, wicked, insubordinate priest (who will be slain by the hand of God with his sons and his grandson, all on the same day) is able—because of the worthiness of Hannah—to give to Hannah—because of her faith—a blessing from God. Because in the ordinances, the power of God is manifest; not because of some white-shirt wearing, dark-suit clad, institutional chap with a certificate and common consent is doing something; but because you come in faith to God, believing, and you wrestle a blessing from God, through the means that He has allowed it to be bestowed: by your faith. And you have God take note of your diligence and your faith. I want to suggest that if you go to a patriarch in the Church, in faith, believing that God is able, through any inspired man giving a blessing by the power of the Holy Ghost, without regard to priesthood—because priesthood is animated by the power of the Holy Ghost—therefore, if they have the power of the Holy Ghost, it comes from God. In large measure, your faith matters far more than you think it does. I know a great deal more than I knew at the time I went to the Jordan River temple to perform vicarious work for deceased ancestors, an incident that I recorded in one of the little vignettes in The Second Comforter. I went to the temple—in faith, believing—and I met eleven of my ancestors who were redeemed because of my faith. And they could use any condition in which they can find the rites, any tattered ruin left they could use, so long as there was faith upon the earth to act in their behalf. We think there’s some magic, whammy voodoo in possession of a franchise which the franchise-holders are able to use in order to push away or gather in, and so that their families and their insiders and their beneficiaries and their cronies can get supercharged Celestial blessings. And “the least” can be shunned and held away. And all they are doing is behaving like a parade of fools. Don’t be taken in. Your faith matters. Your confidence matters. Your driving the power of the Spirit into your life matters. You want an authoritative baptism? Go get someone to baptize you who claims that they know the ordinance and can perform it. And you go in faith, believing, and let the Holy Ghost ratify the event. The first missionaries sent out by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were not ordained to anything. And they baptized, and their names are on the record of the Church, and we’ve done some revisionism with our history, and we kinda, kinda, sorta put priesthood on ’em now. But if you go to the contemporaneous stuff, it wasn’t present. And yet, their baptism mattered—because the people came in faith, believing, repenting of their sins, and going before God to shed their sins. And they emerged from the waters of baptism, having been cleansed of their sins by the power of the Holy Ghost. At the end of the day, the ordinance that you receive by the laying on of hands is simply an admonition for you to go get it! In fact, if you pay real careful attention to the scriptures… You look this up; prove it one way or the other—the only ones that have the power to give the gift of the Holy Ghost in all of scriptures are apostles. Now, we conflate it—because in the same verse it says apostles, it says elders (D&C 20:38). An Apostle is an Elder, and we can go on…yadda yadda…and we say, “Gift of the Holy Ghost.” But the purpose of establishing the apostleship was to give someone (who had contact with the Second Comforter) power to be able to give the Comforter. And so, the laying on of hands authoritatively was originally restricted. But the admonition is given to all; and therefore, all have the ability to lay hold upon it by the power of the Holy Ghost. Lay hold upon it. So, well. Joseph Smith said on page 308 of The Teachings of the Prophet [Joseph Smith], “If a man gets a fullness of the priesthood of God, he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments, and by obeying all the ordinances of [the house of God] the house of the Lord.” I wanna suggest that if you define the house of God as a temple—a building with walls and a spire and an angel on top—if that’s your definition, okay, then there are an infinite number of things that can interfere with your ability to accomplish this, one of them being that the temple has been defiled. Another one of them being that the ordinances have been changed; and therefore, the covenant has been broken. Another of them being that the officiator who shows up has left his adulterous paramour to come in and perform the sealing. And so, there’s any number of ways in which you—at the altar, kneeling in good-faith—have no way of knowing whether or not you can do this, and therefore… Oh, oh, oh, you can let your doubts lay hold upon you. Let me read it to you again though and offer another definition. “If a man gets a fullness of the priesthood of God, he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments, and obeying all the ordinances of the house of the Lord.” I wanna redefine that “house”—not in terms of physical structure, but in terms of familial relationship, in which God alone establishes His house, and that too, by acknowledging who His sons and daughters are. That house can never be overtaken, touched, trampled, broken, forsaken, compromised, or adulterated, because man is powerless. And so, when the house of God is to be set in order in the last days, don’t think of that as a movement that you’re awaiting for someone else to accomplish. How do you not know that the One Mighty and Strong, to be sent to set in order the house of God, is not Jesus Christ himself, waiting to minister to all those who will come to Him? Because receiving our Lord is, in itself, an ordinance. Now, keeping in mind everything I’ve said, now we’re really gonna parse the scriptures in a way that may not yet have occurred to you, but I find perfectly delightful. Doctrine and Covenants section 132; I wanna begin at verse 8. And I want you to remember what I’ve said the house of God is. Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion. Will I accept…an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name? Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed? And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father ordained unto you, before the world was? I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord. And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, [or] by thrones, or [by] principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in [or] after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God. For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed (D&C 132:8-14, emphasis added). The Powers of Heaven. And this is the reason why that third form of priesthood is so rare a commodity—because even the angels desire to inquire into it, but the angels don’t possess it. And it doesn’t matter if, in that hierarchy of those that exist on the other side of the veil, you manage to wrestle something from those who are powers there and possess thrones or principalities. God is saying in this revelation—if you understand the words—that even His angels (and those who have ascended far up) must, in every case, only establish that which comes by the will and covenant of the Son and the Father: the Son, because He possesses the keys to do so; the Father, because He is the one from whom the original covenant began in the pre-existence. So, don’t think, because you’ve had an angel promise you something… In Doctrine and Covenants section 132, you have to connect up with the Father. In the first meeting at Adam-ondi-Ahman, Adam was not considered to be among those who were mortal because Adam had begun life in the Garden in the presence of God. Therefore, mortals who were born into the mortal realm in that meeting began with Seth. The seven who gathered at Adam-ondi-Ahman were mortal because they were born outside of God’s presence. And they were restored again into God’s presence at the meeting at Adam-ondi-Ahman. The fact is that that same thing that was in the beginning will be in the end of the world, also. That’s the covenant; that’s the promise; that’s the destiny—and God will surely fulfill that. I also think… We take a lot of comfort, and we spend a lot of money buying all of the stuff around Springhill, Missouri (valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman) because that was a place where Adam was. And it’s the place where God will come to once again. I wanna suggest that the wicked, the knavish, the proud, the boastful, those who seek the honors of men will never have possession of and be able to control or prevent the unfolding of God’s work. The words Adam-ondi-Ahman mean “Adam in the presence of the Father.” Therefore, any place that the Ancient of Days comes to, while Christ is there also, is by definition “Adam-ondi-Ahman.” Therefore, it doesn’t matter if a fallen and corrupt society owns a piece of real estate that they claim. God is not bound by the stratagems of men. Nor are His purposes controlled by the vanities of men. And yet, if they will repent and if they will hear what the Lord has to say, He can still work with them. But if not, then He’ll work with you—assuming you came and you’re willing to hear, and assuming your heart is soft and you’re willing to take in the things that God required to be included in what I’m saying today (some of which came as recently as this morning). I’m doing this to be faithful to the things that have been asked of me—not by man or men, but by God. I don’t even control the content of this material. I’m not parsing these scriptures because I think they are nice. I’m telling you what I know to be true, because it’s what I’ve been asked to declare by Him whose presence I have been in. In The Second Comforter, I told you that shortly after being baptized into the Church, I was told by an angel: “On the first day of the third month in nine years, your ministry will begin, and so you must prepare.” Well, a couple things about that: “On the first day of the third month in nine years,” I was called to be Gospel Doctrine teacher. And so it began, then and there, and in that setting, and among you good people! But it has never ended. It began by a calling from an angel; it continues still. And therefore, don’t think… Don’t think I’m just some vain fellow hoping to attract notice. Most of what I attract in my universe, in my setting, it’s… It’s negative, as some of you know. It has not been the source of delight. It’s been the source of profound discomfort. But there was a question I was going to answer: “How are you and your family doing since the excommunication? We worry about you.” Great. The blessings of God are without constraint. And you do not have, and no man can control, the outpouring of blessings upon those who will give heed to Him. And therefore, I’ve been surprised at how much of a rather non-event it has been, in many respects. There are a couple things that are a little different, and that is that I really gotta go out of my way to make some people feel comfortable inside my own ward, because they just don’t know how to behave. It’s the damnedest apostate they’ve ever run into, ’cuz “he still has a testimony and attends his meeting and all the rest of that.” But I feel worse for other people and their awkwardness. It’s like “Ummmmmm… What do we talk about now? ’Cuz we used to, like, talk about doctrine and stuff, and we’re not so sure that maybe your doctrine might be, like, like toxic waste. And so, if you say something, I might get poisoned by it. And so, ya know… How ’bout them Sox?” [laughter] Hey, how ’bout them Sox? I mean really! They were supposed to be last place, and they won it all. I mean, Farrell, that guy… He’s legit. Batting coach last year. World series manager this year. Things are great, couldn’t be better. We continue to preach, teach, exhort, believe, teach our children, go to Church, make compensation for the awkwardness with which people approach it. I even… Look, if I had not been excommunicated, in the chili cook-off I was going to make the habanero chili, and I was gonna win the “hottest chili” award. My wife—wise counselor that she is—suggested that that might be viewed by some as retaliation [laughter]. And so, that’s a difference. I toned the chili way down; we still had people, like, dancing around saying, “Oooo, ahhhh, oooo, ahhhh.” I mean, it was like the background to some of those do-wap songs. But, I mean, things are fine. Things couldn’t be better. And you know, my Little Leaguer is trying out again for the boys’ baseball team, having dabbled once again in softball and found them unworthy of her presence. She’s gonna go back to baseball, and so, we have things to do. And stuff to do. I wanna thank you for coming. We’ve gone on way too long. Doug wanted to make an announcement, but I’m disconnecting all the paraphernalia and going. The post Priesthood appeared first on Restoration Archives Blog.

   February 05, 2020·3h 11min
   Play