From the Right Brain of God and the Left Brain of Mr. S.


I write posts for this blog. And when I do I know and accept the fact that whatever I write can be picked apart and disagreed with right here next to my words. I like that. It isn’t because I like contention. I don’t. I like it because it helps us all to learn. Anything that is true can be seen as truth even when opposing information/ideas are viewed also.

Now you can comprehend and feel the truth of that simple concept. And other people can also. So when I read a blog which deals with spiritual and religious matter and there are no comments I wonder. Then I realize the author does not allow comments. Do they understand what I just wrote? Yes they do. And here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.

This was the experience I had when I visited Denver Snuffer’s blog. I tried to comment and yet nothing is ever allowed to be seen by his audience. Why does he not allow comments?

The writer is like a magician, the modern trickster type not the worker of spiritual powers. The magician literally sets the stage so he can make the audience “see” what he wishes them to see. He spends many hours perfecting his illusion. His audience comes prepared only to receive a show. They have not taken the time to study all the ways the magician can produce effects which seem supernatural.

So it is with a post on religion. The writer has taken the time to build a structure which he presents as inclusive and grounded in truth. He spends time to make it believable. The reader might require hours, days or even weeks to find the flaws in the author’s post. And many readers will never actually see the lies for what they are. But if comments are allowed then there are those who know the scriptures and truth well enough to reveal the deception.

If it was just a magic show no harm is done. If you are speaking of the things of God and putting forth an idea as truth when it is actually deception it is a serious crime against your readers. True followers of God and Jesus do not do such a things.

I have praise for this LDSA site where people feel free and are free to disagree with anything they read here. I like this because I like the truth to be known.

There can be lots of excuses for not allowing the comments on your post be seen. But I believe they are all false. A writer could say, “I don’t want to foster contention.” You mean the way God fosters contention by giving everyone a mind and a mouth? So you believe that preventing others from expressing their ideas is being righteous?

What if I said, “There will be no commenting on this post.”? I think some one would be asking LDSA to revoke my status as contributor. In any case it is prideful. Yes Jesus did take and answer questions. Yes there were times when he challenged them to answer his question first or gave them an answer which defied their understanding. In this way he pointed out that they were not being honest in their questions or with their audience.

So in the spirit of pointing out truth and arming you against being deceived by a trickster posing as a man of God I take exception with a post I read from the desk of Denver Snuffer.
This is the post I read.

It was posted July 1st of 2012 and is entitled The Lord Delights in Chastity. A little background on Denver Snuffer. A web page called Mormon Podcast Stories says of him, “Denver Snuffer – A Progressive, Fundamentalist, Non-Polygamist Mormon Lawyer Who Claims to Have Seen Christ.” Well you can see he is getting some accolades and surely he has a following. He has written a few books about gospel subjects with titles like The Second Comforter: Conversing With the Lord Through the Veil and Passing the Heavenly Gift. I understand he is an active member of the LDS church.

If Mr. Snuffer allowed comments I would have addressed the issue there. But in studying this circumstance I have found a communication to us from the scriptures which I believe will help counter the lies perpetrated by Mr. S. This post maybe faulted as if all I am doing is trying to tear someone down. But if it is a sin to point out a lie when it is seen then I am going to sin. I write this that the truth may be known.

I had read parts of posts by Mr. Snuffer and thought some of what he said made sense. I became aware of this post when it was shared on FB. So when I read it I was stunned.

It is about polygamy. Mr. S quotes scripture and makes reference to historical events. But the scriptures which are left out and the facts of history which are left out create a deception for the readers. After he places this misinformation in the reader’s mind he then demonizes those who practice polygamy. And the icing on the cake is he uses fear to motivate his readers to not even think about acting on the principles of plural marriage. So misinformation, false accusations and fear are the cards played in his post. If you recognize those tactics then you know who the real author of this post is.

I will go over what I am talking about briefly. You can read the post yourself and see if I am telling the truth.

There are only two quotes from the scriptures in the entire post. Both in the first paragraph. And both are from Jacob chapter two. If you talking about polygamy and only quote two scriptures and they are from Jacob 2 you are not trying to communicate the truth. You are trying to lead your audience astray. This is exactly what Mr. S did. He said that Jacob’s sermon condemns taking multiple wives. In any one’s mind the term “taking multiple wives” and “practicing plural marriage” would mean the same thing. How can a prophet of God condemn that which God does not condemn? We could spend a lot of time talking about what Jacob chapter 2 says about polygamy and it has already been done right here on this blog. Justin can get you the reference. Thanks Justin. But suffice it to say the first paragraph is a communication calculated to deceive. So one paragraph one lie.

In the post Mr. S uses the following terms to describe the practice of polygamy by those other than Joseph: promiscuity, indiscriminate breeding, exploitation of women, abomination, whoredom, adultery, fornication, gratification, vanity, and foolishness. Well bashing plural marriage in that way is very popular in the LDS crowds these days. It is also very popular to do this among the famous and well loved of the world. Interesting how the LDS church and Idumea now have the exact same view on this subject. If you want to be in good standing with the governments of the world and well liked by the world you better be against polygamy. And Mr. S is totally against polygamy.

In the second paragraph Mr. S states that David lost his exaltation by offending the law of plural marriage. Really? Wow, how is that possible? The unpardonable sin is clearly defined in section 132:27 and it must include as part of it the shedding of innocent blood. David shed innocent blood when he had Uriah murdered to cover up David’s violation of Uriah’s marriage with Bathsheba. If David had just been intimate with Bathsheba and offended the law of plural marriage he could have repented and not lost his exaltation. Case in point Solomon did offend the law of plural marriage by taking wives which God did not want him to take. And yet the scriptures do not state that Solomon lost his exaltation. Okay paragraph 2 lie number 2. You will find that Mr. S is very consistent in that practice, lying that is.

In the third paragraph Mr. S communicates the idea that very often murders and violence are the fruit of those who live plural marriage. No percentages or numbers used he just states it as if it were common knowledge. Yes there are a few small sects of polygamists where violence and murder occurred. Do I hear you saying those LDS fundamentalist are not small groups? They might be seen as big in Utah but compared to the world population of Muslims, 2.1 billion (Christians in this estimate were 2 billion) the Utah polygamists are miniscule. Even if only 1 Muslim in 1000 practiced polygamy that would be 2 million people. The point is the groups where murder has taken place are by no means representative of people who live polygamy in the world today nor in the past. The words of Mr. S in this paragraph are just sensationalism. This communication is also calculated to deceive so I say he is 3 for 3 so far.

There is one more bit of misinformation that I will mention. Mr. S makes it seem as if Joseph Smith barely even practiced polygamy at all. He said Joseph’s plural wives were  “governmental”. “Governmental”? What is Mr. S alluding to? Perhaps he is trying to make us believe that Joseph Smith was like the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt. In ancient Egypt polygamy was allowed but not practiced much by the common folk since in their slave state economy they couldn’t afford more than one wife. However the Pharaohs did have multiple wives as a way of building ties to other kingdoms or ensuring an heir. So what is Mr. S saying? Is it that Joseph was a step above all other converts to the restored gospel, that he was one of the elites like the Pharaohs, designated to build up God’s family on the earth? Well here is the quote. You decide. “For Joseph, the multiple wives were governmental, sealed to him to construct the family of God on earth. Tying together lines of what was to be a single family, with himself as the patriarchal father of a new branch of the Family of Israel.”
I think that is exactly what Mr. S would have us believe, that Joseph viewed himself as one of the elite chosen by God to do things that if other men did it would be “a matter of lust and physical gratification.”
That is arrogant and completely contrary to the ways of God and at odds with the historical record. And I for one want the record to show that I testify that Joseph Smith had no such arrogance nor ever set a hypocritical double standard for himself. Mr. S passes on the lie that plural marriage was supposed to be for just a few select super righteous people. Yeah? So how does this work? Maybe it was just for those who claim to have had a vision of Christ or have written books.

Now you might be thinking that Mr. S did not demonize everyone who practiced polygamy as I said earlier because he didn’t demonize Joseph. Or maybe you were thinking about that strange episode of Teletubbies, hey let it go, they were all strange. But Mr. S did demonize even Joseph’s practice. He knows what he has passed on does not endear anyone to Joseph. It makes Joseph out as a hypocritical elitist. It causes division and malice between people. Surely it is that spirit of superiority which was the cause of murder among those mentioned.

But the truth is God is no respecter of persons. All are alike unto Him. If God commanded Joseph to practice it then He can just as easily inspire any man to practice it. And if it is inspired of God it is just as covenantal and sacral, and would not involve indiscriminate breeding of multiple women. Mr. S is not rehabilitating Joseph or helping him come clean. He is building a perversion of the real Joseph and placing a false concept into his mouth. Did Joseph deny practicing polygamy? You bet he did! If he had not they would have killed him even faster than they did. And there is no doubt that it was because Joseph did teach others his belief in plural marriage even polyandry that he was arrested and then killed while in jail. But what Joseph taught in private and we have to this day in the historical and scriptural records is the opposite of what Mr. S is leading people to believe.

Enough of discussing here what came from the left brain of Mr. S. You can read it yourself and if you are honest about it you will see that after the misinformation comes the accusations and then the fear mongering.

I now will talk about comes to us from the right brain of God and those He inspired to practice plural marriage. This is information which Mr. S did not want his readers to think about.

Many of you know about the split brain concept explained on this blog. It is here.
If you have not read it I suggest you do. You won’t be sorry for the time you invest to learn this concept.

The left mind uses words to communicate. That is it’s forte and its weakness. Language is not real life. It is abstract symbols used to convey meaning. It can not convey full reality. The right brain has no abstract symbols for written or verbal language. The right brain communicates in imagery, emotions and actions. In the scriptures we don’t have the full record of events and scriptures are all written so they are left brain communications.  But what we do have is very significant and by looking not at what was said or written about plural marriage but at the actions of the people who practiced it and God’s reaction to those actions we have a non verbal right brain communication.

Abraham

God spoke to a man and established his covenant with this man, Abraham. Abraham lived plural marriage. The promise of a numberless posterity and all the other promises of God to this man are being fulfilled. And it is not true that all people who have lived have an ever growing posterity. This is demonstrated in the last few paragraphs of the post.

Isaac

We have no record of Isaac, Abraham’s birthright son as having more than one wife. Isaac had born to him twin sons and he favored the older over the younger. And yet Isaac’s wife had revelation that the younger was to be the birthright son. As the years went by the older son did not value God’s ways yet Isaac did not of himself reconsider who should be the birthright son. To his credit after Isaac had been tricked into giving the younger son the birthright blessing Isaac though blind began to see the light.  So on the whole the record supports believing that Isaac may not have listened real closely to what God was saying. Or at a minimum for whatever reason God’s purposes had to be fulfilled through Rebecca, Isaac’s wife rather than Isaac being open to receive the inspiration. Isaac was not condemned but neither has he been highly praised by God. And again we don’t even know for sure that Isaac did not have other wives.

Jacob

God established his covenant with Jacob, Abraham’s grandson. Jacob had 4 wives. Jacob was highly favored of the Lord and all the faithful people of God have been invited into a tribe named for this man, Israel.

Moses

For the next 400 years we have no record of plural marriage as being outlawed by God. Yet we are given the account of a person born in the house of Israel nearly 400 years after Israel finding fault with polygamy. It is noteworthy that she had been born and raised in the state sponsored slavery of Egypt. This person was Miriam, Moses’ sister by birth. She found fault with Moses specifically because he had two wives. He had married an Ethiopian woman and also married Zipporah daughter of Reuel (also known as Jethro Priest of Midian). The Lord stated that he did not like Miriam finding fault with Moses and smote her with leprosy. She was healed after she withdrew the fault finding. Moses was praised by God as being like unto the only begotten. He was given the privilege of not tasting death but being translated and remained in his body to appear to Jesus on the mount of transfiguration. God has highly praised Moses ever since.

Children of Israel under the Law given to Moses

Moses’ life in Egypt and among the people of Midian was all done prior to the Lord altering the covenant to be under the law given to Moses. And yet even under that second law given through Moses God did not call polygamy an abomination or a whoredom. The opposite of condemning it God made it a practice that if a man’s brother died he was to take the widowed sister in law as a wife, in addition to his other wife/wives. That established the practice of plural marriage as widespread and not requiring any case by case special dispensation for its practice. The children of Israel for all their folly were loved and succored by God for 1500 years and much like the remnant of the Lamanites (who by the way also practiced and many still practice  plural marriage) the blood descendents of Jacob have been promised to be restored to righteousness in the last days.

Jacob’s in laws and Esau thrown in for good measure

But speaking of not requiring any special dispensation let’s look more closely at Jacob’s experience. Jacob was sent to live among his mother’s family because they were followers of God. This was to help ensure he married in the covenant. Unlike his brother Esau who married women from families who did not follow the ways of God as taught to Abraham. And yet even Esau had three wives (one of the wives might have been from a covenant people family in an attempt to please his parents. I couldn’t be sure and didn’t spend the time to verify it). And even though Esau wept bitterly about not getting the birthright blessing and Isaac said he had no blessing to give, the reality was Esau did get a pretty good blessing and was even promised that he would not be under Jacob’s yoke forever. Yes Esau did get mad and planned to kill Jacob but when the time came he repented and set aside his anger and loved his brother.
Back to Jacob’s experience. Jacob was married to Leah by the act of being intimate with her. If there were even any vows spoken by Jacob prior to the wedding night they were void because Jacob was speaking them in his heart and mind to Rachel. If they had a big party and ceremony it was still all under deception for Jacob. If the ceremony made them married then it would have easily been voided. But the act of being intimate with Leah would not be so easily brushed aside. But we have no record of anyone lodging any complaints about Jacob taking Rachel as a second wife nor any complaints when he took their handmaidens as wives also. So all these people on Jacob’s mother’s side had no problem with polygamy. It is only rational to believe that all those people were at liberty to practice polygamy.  And what is important to us is that God did not complain or condemn these people. He didn’t even condemn Esau who took wives without any hint of heavenly inspiration in the matter. Or was there? God did give Esau the miracle of being able to forgive and by all we know of the gospel that means he too was able to be forgiven which is just what Isaac’s blessing indicated. Esau’s descendents were many and are still among us. And as we all know God blessed Israel above measure.

Ruth

Ruth was married to a man who died due to a real big famine. Her mother in law said to her and the other widowed daughter in law, You girls are young still. Go to your home lands and you can find a husband who will support you. I am too old to marry so save yourselves. Ruth who was not from the tribe of Israel, said no and chose to stay with Naomi. She said your people will be my people. Kind of covenant entering thing huh? Ruth was blessed to become one of Boaz’s wives. Boaz said he would marry her to preserve the name of the dead in the land. This was surely a reference to the requirements of the law and would be a public explanation of why Boaz was taking another wife. A man of Boaz’s wealth in a time of so much famine was surely married and likely had several wives already. He was following the Lord’s law from Moses. Ruth and her mother in law were saved from starvation and Ruth was given the honor no only of having a child but of being one of the ancestors of Jesus. Ruth’s name has become synonymous with faithfulness and devotion.

Many people of the LDS believe that the practice of plural marriage must be done under the direction of a presiding authority. Why would anyone be surprised about this? The LDS believe that all blessings required for salvation must be received under the direction of an external presiding authority. I would say that is the defining characteristic of members of the LDS group. They do not trust themselves to be directed personally by God in matters effecting their salvation. For that reason none of the members of the LDS Church can be as Alma was.

But let us look at the record of events.

In the case of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, the generations of people in Jacobs mother’s family and 1500 years worth of the Lord’s people under the law of Moses who was it that received the revelation that it was approved of God to practice plural marriage?

The individuals who practiced it.

And what were the motivating circumstances? Here is some examples of the motivations which are known from the record.

The motivation is followed by the person’s name:

We want a child/Abraham and Sarah

We want more children/Leah speaking in behalf of herself and her handmaiden

I need a husband/Ruth

She needs a husband/God via the law given to Moses

I love her and she loves me/Jacob and Rachel.

Now we have read Mr. S’s teachings on why Joseph Smith took additional wives. Here is a review. Mr. S says it was “governmental” for the purpose of “Tying together lines of what was to be a single family, with himself as the patriarchal father of a new branch of the Family of Israel.”, very Pharaoh like to be sure. Time for a reality check. I do not tear down Joseph. Rather I lift up as Godlike the common desires of the heart of many righteous men throughout the ages of the world. They are desires placed there by God Himself. And no man under any circumstance should be using pressure or deception to have a woman marry him. Neither should any woman for that matter. I don’t care who did it unless it was a unusual revelation from God to do it (ie Nephi being told to kill Laban) pressure or deception in this thing will need to be repented of. I do not think for a second that Joseph’s was a desire for self aggrandizement or the pride of the Pharaohs and kings of the world. Just the honest love of a man for a woman and the desire to be a husband to her. A desire which God did not limit to just one person in either men or women. A simple and yet pure desire which has been vilified in our minds by all the devil has at his disposal. And yet I believe the historical record shows it was there in Joseph’s pure heart.

Joseph’s first polygamous wife was Fanny Alger. Before Joseph married Fanny she came into the house of Joseph and Emma as a maid at the age of 16. Joseph and Emma were 26. Sometime in her 18th year Fanny was forced to leave the house when Emma found out that Joseph had married her. This information is taken from this website and you can see the sources listed there. Fanny left the house in between 1833 to 1835. It was 5 years before Joseph took another plural wife.
Fanny Alger was not taken as wife by Joseph for “governmental” reasons. I respect the reason which I assign for the marriage. I believe God respects it also. And that is why He answered Joseph’s prayer on how the people in the Old testament were justified in practicing plural marriage. I think Joseph knew he loved Fanny and knew that Fanny loved him. He probably asked what to do about it and wondered if he could be allowed to marry her with God’s approval. So to the motivation list I add:

I love her and she loves me/Joseph and Fanny.

Now if you look at these motivations and see a bunch of people simply justifying themselves in committing whoredoms I am sorry for you. But when you read Mr. S’s post it is crystal clear that he wants his readers to view those who practice polygamy as self justifying men who exploit their wives and treat them like property and are bent on practicing an abomination and reducing their relationships to a whoredom. I am practically quoting him there. And you thought I was rough to call the man a liar? The post wants you to feel that people who choose to practice polygamy are just whoremongers. Mr. S especially wants you to feel that if you want to practice polygamy you are a whorermonger.

I believe Denver Snuffer’s post of July 1, 2012 was designed to have the effect of putting fear into the hearts of people who want to practice plural marriage. I believe without question that is the intent behind his post. I don’t even know if he is aware of it. But the true author of that post is very aware of it.

You might point to Pearl of Great Price Moses chapter 5 verse 3 to validate the idea that monogamy is the standard of God’s people from the beginning. It says, “3 And from that time forth, the sons and daughters of Adam began to divide two and two in the land, and to till the land, and to tend flocks, and they also begat sons and daughters.”

No that verse should not be viewed as the ways of God. Why? Because ten verses later the records says of these same people “13 And Satan came among them, saying: I am also a son of God; and he commanded them, saying: Believe it not; and they believed it not, and they loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish.”

To be accurate you must say that the people who began “to divide two and two in the land” later “loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish.”

The scriptures do not support the notion that monogamy has been God’s standard from the beginning. What we have been given in the scriptural record shows over 2,000 years of God giving His blessing to plural marriage among the largest group known of God’s people and Him saying no to one isolated branch which lasted for less than 1,000 years and in fact destroyed themselves by their pride.

Prideful and selfish people can not live the law which requires unselfishness in its deepest form. Pride and Selfishness continued does lead to becoming carnal, sensual and devilish. Selfish people can not even comprehend what the law is about. They accept lies about it and say it was a very limited practice with strict narrow limits. They see it as something which requires a license. A license is a grant from a ruling authority to practice an act which is sinful. Yes in the minds of those who see plural marriage as a sin they see a God who says, “Do not practice plural marriage unless I say so.” But God’s actions in the scriptural record show He allows all people to practice plural marriage unless he has told them not to.

Now would you like a left brain language communication of God proving that monogamy was not the way things started out?

“David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.” (D&C 132:38)

So if you believe that God was speaking there then it is clear that He said it was plural marriage which was from Him from the beginning of creation. That is even before the fall. Funny that Mr. S did not quote that verse.
Mr. S bashed Brigham Young for converting the principle of plural marriage into a mandatory practice for exaltation. He also bashed Brigham for bragging about his ability to get wives. Frankly that is something that can be repented of. But since plural marriage was there from the beginning how could it not be a principle for all people as soon as they will accept it? And is it mandatory? Nothing in all God’s universe is mandatory in terms of Him forcing us. In terms of if you want B you must do A that is the nature of existence itself requiring it. God simply puts it into words so we can receive His blessings if we are willing.
And in that way D&C 132:3 says “Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.” And what are the consequences for not obeying this law once it is revealed to us?  “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 they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent…” (D&C 84:54-57). It is a damnation(!), until we repent and then move forward again.

And as we read the left brain communication of the actions of the people and God’s reaction to their actions we see a pattern emerge. We see two different way of acting regarding this principle and two different results.

On the one hand we have people who in one form or another obey the injunction of the Lord in D&C 132: 32 “Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.” They practice some form of polygamy and their posterity remains in the earth growing forever. And many of them have continued to have their societies last for thousands of years.

Then you have people who are prideful and set up laws against polygamy. They set up governments of men none of which last for more than 1000 years because they become filled with secret combinations. The Book of Mormon covers a quite small portion of the earth and tracks three main groups of people. And two of them follow this path of setting up governments and being so prideful that they can not be trusted with any form of plural marriage. The result is that eventually all their descendents are wiped off the face of the earth and their family lines stop.

I do not trust a man who lies, falsely accuses and puts fear in to other people’s hearts.

One final note the name Mr. S does not refer to Denver Snuffer. It refers to Mr. Satan.

Advertisements

40 Comments

  1. Some of the readers of this blog “know” in both halves of their brains, if not simultaneously, at least separately, that the term Satan as used in scripture is synonymous with the State. We could add the term Statanic to the list of LDS Lingo Liberation. If we will not know in full, it is only because we refuse to get our Right and Left Brains truly acting in unison.

    The House of David[e] is funny in that way. We prefer to spend our time explaining why we should remain attached to something that has attached itself to the State and corrupted the true union of the Body of Christ till it is only blob of weakened and atrophied members called upon occasionally to move themselves closer and closer to destruction, under the orders of a false and lying head. The work that is required of us in admitting our error and REpenting, RE thinking, RE turning to the natural ways is too daunting I guess.

  2. Are you calling Denver Snuffer a liar in the overall sense that he is trying to lead astray readers of his books and those who read his blog?Or are you referring to him being a liar or lying and purposely trying to decieve readers on the subject of plural marriage?Soz these questions are for the author of this post dyc4557

    Hi dyc4557 my inquirery is sincere and genuine,and that intention is to truly understand your opinion of what DS writes about and what he also proclaims on a vast and exstensive variety of topics one subject in particular which he often comments on and writes about,that being recieving the Second Comforter of which he proclaims to have recieved and also claims to have had a personal audience with the ressurected Lord and Savior,Jesus Christ himself on multiple occasions.

    I am a very interested reader of DS books,having read all of them in the space of 2mnths,and follow his blog everyday as i do this one and have become accustomed to many of the authors of this blog,soz i mean their articles and comments they post,and obviously enjoy it.
    So i became very intrigued when i read your article bro as i have wondered what you and the other guys LDSA,Justin,Elder CD etc…think of DS and what he has to say.

    I hope this helps you to see the sincerity in my inquery

    tepukakamanu

  3. tepukakamanu
    I take your inquiry as sincere. A coupe of things I want to point out from the post but I will be open and speak plainly.
    Yes I do believe the post I read was an attempt to lie to people. and place fear in their hearts. Keep in mind two things. Because I had read a little of Denver’s writings and knew a little of his background I was honestly stunned when a post on polygamy was so deceptive, accusatory and fear mongering.
    Now do I think it was Denver who was lying? Yes in a way since he knows that Jacob chapter 2 is by no mean the Lord’s standard on plural marriage. But more accurately Satan was working through Denver in this thing.
    So is Denver a liar over all in his writings? I don’t know all of Denver’s writings. But I do know Satan’s voice when I hear it you can see his voice print in your own life and in the experiences of others. He will give false information, he will accuse and he will place fear in your heart and make you feel bad about yourself.
    When the Lord speaks to us He tells us he loves us, he gives us hope and if He tells us to change it is in a positive non accusatory way and the knowledge He gives is accurate and plain never misleading.
    What I see happening is the LDS Church is becoming more anti plural marriage all the time. This is a continuation of what the government of the US inspired by Satan has been working to accomplish since the practice of plural marriage was first revealed anew to Joseph Smith. Satan working through the US government
    is doing all he can to eliminate any vestige of this doctrine. Satan did not want to destroy the corporate LDS Church he wants to destroy certain key doctrines. And he has worked hard to get the US government and all other governments to eliminate the practice of plural marriage. But to destroy the doctrine Satan must work from within the Church. Before he died Gordon B Hinckley gave interviews where he said plural marriage was wrong that the church had to repent of it. To Larry King he said ” I condemn it, yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal.” He also said “”More than a century ago God clearly revealed unto His prophet Wilford Woodruff that the practice of plural marriage should be discontinued, which means that it is now against the law of God.”
    I have not seen that revelation. I was raised and taught by the Church that the manifesto was a revelation, it is in the D&C right? But in recent years I looked at it objectively. And the talk that went with it. Wilford is crying to the Lord “I don’t want the Church to be destroyed by the Government sanctions. I don’t want the horrible arrests and disruption of our lives and the disruption of the temple work to take place. So please reveal to me how this can be stopped. If we tell the government that we don’t practice polygamy or even teach it anymore with that stop the destruction of the Church and all its assets?” Now think about that. Can the real church of the Lord ever be destroyed? The church as defined by the Lord in D&C 10:68 will withstand anything and everything. Loss of life, liberty, property, money, reputation all these had already taken place in Ohio, Missouri and Illinois. Did it destroy the real church who are the humble followers of Christ? Nope.
    So what was Wilford actually trying to preserve? Check out the last link in the post and read what Michael Quinn found in research about what John Taylor said and did when faced with the same dilemma as Wilford.
    I will place here in a little idea that the church will not have to wait till it bows down to physical idols or planets in worship for the Lord to disown it.
    How about when the church removes the 132nd section of the D&C from the scriptures and stops sealing multiple women to men whose wives have died or women to all their deceased husbands? IN other words the Church in every way denies the doctrine which was with God from the beginning of creation?
    Just a thought.

  4. PS to my comment for everyone to understand.
    We talk about those who are true saints sanctified, who have been fully converted to the ways of the Lord. That does not mean that they will be without mistake making even to the point of sinning in things they do not know are sin. They are still learning and do not have all knowledge of which things they have yet to repent of.
    But people who are rational enough to be accountable know when they are deceiving others. And people who are true followers of Christ do not intentionally deceive others unless God commands them. Section 132 and the Old Testament still exist. If you know what is in them then you will not leave out that information unless you want to deceive your readers. True followers of Christ will not do such things. So I do not believe Denver Snuffer is a true follower of Christ.
    I could be wrong but based on that post I don’t believe he is.
    I advise all to beware of his leavening.

  5. “David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and IN NOTHING DID THEY SIN SAVE IN THOSE THINGS WHICH THEY RECEIVED NOT OF ME.” (D&C 132:38)

    “Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion. Will I accept of 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?”
    (D&C 132:8-11)

    “So with Solomon: first he asked wisdom, and God gave it him, and with it every desire of his heart, even things which might be considered abominable to all who understand the order of heaven only in part, but which in reality were right because God gave and sanctioned by special revelation.

    A parent may whip a child, and justly, too, because he stole an apple; whereas if the child had asked for the apple, and the parent had given it, the child would have eaten it with a better appetite; there would have been no stripes; all the pleasure of the apple would have been secured, all the misery of stealing lost.”
    (Documentary History of the Church, Vol 5, pg. 256)

    There is more than one way to steal from God. Taking wives he has not given you is stealing.

    “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor ADULTERERS, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor THIEVES, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”
    (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

    And how do you know if God has given you a wife?

    “All covenants…not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, OF HIM WHO IS ANOINTED, both as well for time and for all eternity…are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead”
    (D&C 132:7)

    It’s pretty simple really, but too many will ignore this warning because they’ve already rationalized to themselves the need to take wives without the approval of the priesthood authority which God has set up on this earth. Bypassing God’s priesthood is the same as bypassing God. They will wake up on resurrection day thinking they are going on to glory, but instead will find themselves stripped of their wives and children. What a sad day it will be for all parties involved. If only they could have had the integrity to believe the truth instead of the lie.

  6. A few things.

    First, Denver used to allow comments but there was one post in particular where people were really discussing the issue brought up in his post, and there were people for and people against, or people were going off on tangents and unfolding the subject further or speculating or something, basically, a lot of discussion, and Denver didn’t like it or thought it was too much contention or something, and then he shut down comments for the entire blog. I think the reason he gave was that he was blogging to teach people, and not to have people listen to each other in the blog comments. Or something to that effect. But initially he did allow comments.

    If I remember correct, I think the topic of that one post that caused him to shut down comments was on polygamy. But I might be wrong on that. At any rate, I stopped reading his blog once the comments shut down.

    Secondly, I think your wording of how the Lord views polygamy is brilliant:

    God’s actions in the scriptural record show He allows all people to practice plural marriage unless he has told them not to.

    Lastly, your highlighting of this scripture was equally brilliant:

    David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me. (D&C 132:38)

  7. Thanks LDSA I had help. But I had not noticed that before “from the beginning of creation”. Wow I love God so much it has been there for all of us, but wow. Now I know why I have felt the way I do.

    John Peterson you are proving my point about the LDS of today not being capable of being like Alma. But the verse you use to prevennt you from acting has a problem or perhaps you should look at it as an opportunity in it.
    I was going to give you a link to LDSA’a post “Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed” I pulled it up in another tab and went to check the date and whoops I see you were one of the first to comment on it. But hey brother I think you missed the point.
    here is what LDSA said. Not that he is always right but in this thing I believe he is exactly correct.

    Of course, such an interpretation wrests these scriptures, for the Lord was not speaking of any earthly anointing. When the Lord says, “Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed,” and also, “Wo unto them; because they have offended my little ones”, and also, “Wo unto all those that discomfort my people, and drive, and murder, and testify against them,” His anointed and His little ones and His people are all the same group of people, even those who are sanctified, justified and purified, known to us as saints and little children.

    So “sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, OF HIM WHO IS ANOINTED,” is talking about true saints of God. And this from my post here.
    If God commanded Joseph to practice it then He can just as easily inspire any man to practice it. Perhaps you would understand it better if I said,
    If God commanded Joseph to practice it then He can just as easily inspire any true saint to practice it.

    I didn’t always think this way. In 2010 I was wondering where we could get the authority to live this law. I have learned a lot since then. For example there is a man named Bob Foster. He started a polygamous community in southern Utah. How did he do it? He was inspired by God to do it. I heard a recording of him talking. I have contacted some of his followers. I just can’t find it in my heart and mind to say this man is or will be condemned by God. There is too much good that has transpired from his actions. the spirit of his ministry is just too good to reject as a person living counter to God. But that doesn’t mean all other forms and groups of polygamy are wrong either.

    And your comment says those who don’t do it right will “wake up on resurrection day thinking they are going on to glory”, whoa, whoa! Do you think God will allow someone to labor under a false understanding for say 100 years or 1000 years in the spirit world and never teach them the truth, so he can slam them with a surprise damnation on the day of their resurrection?

    Not the real God, not my Father, not my Jesus. Why would They do that?

  8. Thanx dyc4557,like the Lord you have given me so much more to my initial query,but unlike the Lord all that has been given im not to sure if it is of benefit to me and my initial query.

    Yes i accept and respect your clarification on you believing DS puposely deceiving and willfully leading others astray on the topic of polygomy and also clarifying you being unsure of all his writings,kool i all good with that.That was a few lines of your reply to my iquery,the bulk of your reply was devoted to the “BIG P”,of which i think you have an awesome understanding of witch many of your post of this topic being backed up with scripture and verifiable references,which benefits those who read i being one of them,however the other part of my inquery was about DS claims of having recieved the 2nd Cftr,or have you covered that with labelling him as not a true follower of Jesus Christ?Btw he has recently posted that he had an audiance with the Lord during a regular temple session,which was after the post that inspired your post.

    Bro this is i believe the HOTTEST topic to those who really are seeking further light and knowledge well at least me anyway,i hope you and others on this blog might direct more of their obvious light towards engaging on this topic because at the mo DS is the front runner and youve pretty much just bagged him out,cause bro if you are going to do that,i mean if you are going to intentionally,knowing and willingly discredit a person who is the handsdown front runner on a particular subject or topic (in cyberworld anyway)then by reason you must be the possessor of superior knowledge or light.Also it could be said that you are now spokesperson for Mr “S” for Mr “S” knows that if he can get a person (you)to discredit another person (DS)who is a true authority on a major major topic such as receiving the 2nd cftr,if DS has and is,by catching him out on a far lesser topic,such as polygomy,which it is i mean a far far lesser important topic than RTSC almost insignificant in comparison,then that would go along way to discrediting DS writings on that subject also,RTSC that is.

    You see bro i am not particularly interested in DS the man but rather in his writings in particular the subject of RTSC,so when i read your post this is why i was so intrigued and furthermore it is the topic of RTSC that i defend Mr”S” not DS the man.

    dyc4557 i am greatful for your scriptual knowledge which far far surpasses my extremely limited knowledge bank and i hope that if you reply to these comments it will be to shed further light and knowledge on the subject of RTSC.

  9. Alma may have independently led a group for awhile, but the story doesn’t end there. The people under Alma were righteous enough to detect the wickedness of King Noah, but still had a lot of growing up to do. They came under bondage for several years due to sin (bondage is a covenant curse). When they had repented sufficiently God took them out of bondage and led them back to the main body of the Church led by Mosiah.

    God did not set up his Priesthood on earth for the last time only to have a bunch of factions each leading their own group of followers. God’s house is a house of order and unity and not a house of disorder, division and confusion. Why did Abraham seek out “the fathers” to receive the priesthood? Because that’s the order God had set up? Why did Moses seek out the priesthood at the hand of Jethro? Because that’s the order God had set up? Why did Jesus go to John the Baptist to get baptized? Because that’s the order God had set up. Why did Jesus instruct Saul to seek out Ananias to receive the Holy Ghost? Because that’s the order God had set up. The only reason Joseph Smith had to receive the keys from an angelic being is because the order God had set up had so thoroughly apostatized that no living man on earth held the keys talked about in D&C 132. However, God assured us that this is the last time the keys of his kingdom would be given (D&C 90:2), so we know that the order that existed in the days of Jesus and Saul must still exist in our day. If any man claims priesthood, he must either be claiming to be the head of this order that God has set up or one under his authority. All others are pretenders, liars, or greatly deceived.

    Let’s return to the example of King Noah. Do you not think that Noah believed himself to be in the right? King Noah was just as affected by scripture as were the Saducees and Pharisees of Christ’s time. When Abinadi pointed out his sins, King Noah pointed to scripture to prove that he had the right to enjoy the wives he had taken. However King Noah quaked inside at Abinadi’s conviction, not having in himself such a strong conviction. For several days he debated with Abinadi (just as the scribes debated Jesus) until fear crept into his heart. He must have realized that some of his followers would see through his lies, so he needed a way to kill Abinadi, but look righteous in doing so. This is the same difficulty the scribes had with Jesus. How do you kill an obviously righteous man?

    You asked:

    “Do you think God will allow someone to labor under a false understanding for say 100 years or 1000 years in the spirit world and never teach them the truth, so he can slam them with a surprise damnation on the day of their resurrection?”

    Do I think God would allow a man to labor under a delusion? Yes, quite certainly! King Noah was just such a case. After all, it’s not God who blinds men. It’s their own sins which lead them into believing lies and drag them down to hell. It’s their own sins which bind them.

    Until you can truly humble yourself before God and receive the Holy Ghost you will never find his priesthood and you will always labor under a lie and you will eat the fruits of your labors. There is nothing more damning to a man than experimenting with God’s higher laws without proper authority. This is why God used such harsh language against King Noah, for indeed his actions were abominations in the sight of God. Priesthcrafts abound in our day and without the spirit you will think many men are good. Do you not think that those who follow Warren Jeffs believe him to be the epitome of righteousness?

    There are three tests men must pass to enter the kindgom of God, as shown in the parable of the sower. First a man must be humble enough to receive the word (a broken heart). Next he must be strong enough to endure the persecutions that come upons him for believing and following the word (strength of conviction from persistence in study, fasting and prayer). To come to where you are now, you no doubt have been through these tests. The last and final test (which tests you for the caliber of the Celestial Kingdom) is this:

    “And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.”

    King Noah fell prey to this final test. He was choked out of the kingdom. Not by any wrongdoing by God, but by his own rejection of God’s words through the prophet Abinadi.

    I leave a final warning to you (which goes equally for me and all men): Repent of your sins or rationalize them away and die under their weight.

  10. tepukakamanu I can assure you that Denver Snuffer has NOT received the Second Comforter. It is a worthy goal, but it is only given to those who fully live up to their First Endowment covenants. Denver Snuffer can’t live up to those covenants because he can’t live the law of Consecration as prescribed by the Doctrine and Covenants.

    “The other Comforter spoken of is a subject of great interest, and perhaps understood by few of this generation. After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and LIVING BY EVERY WORD OF GOD, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has THOROUGHLY PROVED HIM, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure, then it will be his privilege to receive the other Comforter, which the Lord hath promised the Saints, as is recorded in the testimony of St. John, in the 14th chapter, from the 12th to the 27th verses.”
    (Documentary History of the Church, Vol. 3, pg. 380)

    Don’t let your lack of understanding cause you to believe just anyone. I would encourage you to prayerfully search out the scriptures yourself so as not to be deceived.

    “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—Wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me IF HE OBEY MINE ORDINANCES. He that speaketh, whose spirit is contrite, whose language is meek and edifieth, the same is of God IF HE OBEY MINE ORDINANCES.”
    (D&C 52:14-16)

    “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.”
    (Matthew 6:33)

    You can’t get to the Second Endowment until you fulfill your covenants in the First Endowment. Line upon line, precept upon precept.

  11. as i have wondered what you and the other guys LDSA,Justin,Elder CD etc…think of DS and what he has to say.

    I too [like LDSA] used to read his blog with some regularity until I saw the post where he said he was going to shut comments down. Since then, I’ve only read posts of his that others have brought to my attention in a link or something.

    I bought and have read his Second Comforter book. But I don’t really have that much of an opinion on him, one way or the other. I’ve both agreed and disagreed with things I’ve read from him — so I wouldn’t consider my self a Snufferite, but I don’t find him particularly objectionable either.

  12. I would second what Justin said above about Denver, namely, that I also have “both agreed and disagreed with things I’ve read from him,” except that I have not read any of his books. In fact, I haven’t read enough of his writings to really make a determination one way or another about his claims.

    My own claims of heavenly manifestations have always been met with skepticism, so I usually give everyone the benefit of the doubt when hearing of their own claims to manifestations, except insofar as those manifestations disagree with my own gospel understandings, derived from my own body of manifestations.

    I do not know all the particulars of Denver’s experiences, so I can’t really comment fully on them. It almost sounds to me like he is reluctant to lay it all out, but perhaps I am wrong on that. Perhaps he has gone into full detail in one of his books.

    In my own experiences with the Holy Ghost, I’ve never, ever, been put under charge to not tell anyone of what I’ve received. (In the last six or so years, I’ve been given instructions to keep my mouth shut in another area of life, but that is a different situation and has nothing to do with not telling people what the Holy Ghost tells me.) So, my own experience indicates that the charge to “not tell” is an exception, and not the rule. In other words, that we are given these manifestations that we might bear witness to the world, that they might give glory to God.

    So, whenever I find someone who is reluctant to tell of his or her experience with the Spirit, a red flag goes up. I had a missionary companion like that, who would always say he had an experience that gave him his testimony, but would never say what the experience was. I’d be telling people left and right of the baptism of fire I had (which nobody believed, not even my companions) and that that was how I knew the church was true and he’d just say he knew the church was true and leave it at that. When people would ask, “How do you know the church is true?” I’d give my reasons and a description of what happened to me and he’d just say, “I just know, is all you need to know.” I thought it was very strange and still think it was strange, for when the Holy Ghost manifested to me, in every single occasion throughout my life, I felt like shouting praises to the Lord and telling the whole world what was communicated to me. I couldn’t understand his reluctance to talk about his manifestation and this made me wonder if, indeed, he was all that sure that it was from the Holy Ghost. Or, maybe he saw the ridicule heaped on me when I bore my testimony and didn’t want to the same to happen to him. To this day I don’t know.

    Now, again, I don’t know all the facts about Denver, what he has divulged, etc., but I don’t recall reading anything about him receiving a baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost and the ministration of an angel. All I’ve heard is rumors that he has seen the Lord, that the Lord has visited him. This strikes me as strange. Where is the account of this baptism? Maybe there is one and I just haven’t read about it.

    There is one other red flag that comes to mind with Denver, but none of these flags mean that he is not telling the truth about his experiences. In other words, I haven’t read enough to really come to any firm conclusion whether he’s just blowing smoke or giving real information.

    The only thing I know is what the Holy Ghost has indicated to me about how to obtain divine manifestations. It’s a fairly simple, straight-forward process, but exceedingly difficult to sustain, because of the many distractions modern man is continually assaulted with. It doesn’t require books and books to explain it. Perhaps what Denver has written jives with what the Holy Ghost has indicated to me. But I wonder why the need for so many words?

  13. LDS Anarchist,

    I share your concern with many words. I lean towards the Einstein phrase, “When the answer is simple, God is speaking.”

    There are times when an idea is so complex or a subject so broad that it’s hard to share without many words, but I don’t generally believe that to be the case. I see men so often trying to support flimsy evidence by swamping their thesis in a sea of words, hoping the reader won’t have the perception to call them on their bluff, but instead be awe-stricken by their handle on the English vocabulary.

    On the other hand, I think there are a lot of people who are just wordy and they need to write a lot in order to come up with what they are trying to say. They often do have nuggets of truth, I just wish they would learn to edit as a courtesy to the reader.

  14. I find the best way to get the Holy Ghost is to lock my computer, close the door and say a prayer starting something like this, “Lord, please forgive me for I have sinned.” And then confess the sins I’ve committed recently. There’s nothing that will break the heart quicker than confession and the Lord draws near to a broken heart.

    The other way is to engage yourself in a righteous cause. I find often times after a day of hard work serving God or my fellow man, that I have all sorts of inspirations hit me. It even happens during work sometimes.

  15. John Perterson

    Correction Alma and his people did not become subject to the church under Mosiah. Mosiah saw that Alma had so much from God that he, Mosiah gave all authority over church matters to Alma and Mosiah and his people were converted and baptized into the church God had set up through Alma.

    You said without the spirit we may see men who are not doing good as being good. You are so correct. Are you being thus deceived? And I am also sure that without the influence and spirit of God we will find fault and see others and sinful when they are not. The church leaders at t5he time of Jesus saw Jesus as the most sinful man so much that they sought his death.

    My life is not absent of the Spirit of God nor do I refuse to humble myself and my heart is continually broken and my spirit is contrite. The cares of this world and lust of this world do not bind me and prevent me from following God’s will and receiving His blessings. Thank you for your concern though.

    God loves us all. Each of us can only believe what we allow ourselves to believe. Joseph Smith had an interesting quote. He said a man would be damned more easily for believing too little than for believing too much.

  16. “And it came to pass that king Mosiah granted unto Alma that he might establish churches throughout all the land of Zarahemla; and gave him power to ordain priests and teachers over every church.”
    (Mosiah 25:19)

    You might just think this is a governmental mandate similar to the decrees made by Cyrus or Artaxerxes, but the phrase “gave him power to ordain priests and teachers over every church” makes it obvious that this was the granting of ecclesiastical authority, authority granted by God, not the state.

    “Now king Mosiah had given Alma the authority over the church.”
    (Mosiah 26:8)

    Again this was the conferral of ecclesiastical authority. In all likelihood this is the same thing Joseph Smith did when he set his brother Hyrum to be the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator of the Church. This really confused the saints at that time. Was Joseph stepping down? Abdicating the throne, so to speak? Not in the slightest. The President of the Church is not above the President of the Priesthood. Remember, there are three offices (that we know of) in the Celestial Kingdom: Prophet, Priest, and King. Joseph was merely having Hyrum take one of his many hats. And so we see that Mosiah here also gave Alma one of his many hats.

    As evidence of Mosiah’s priesthood authority prior to the reunion with Alma:

    “And again, it came to pass that when king Benjamin had made an end of all these things, and had consecrated his son Mosiah to be a ruler and a king over his people, and had given him all the charges concerning the kingdom, and also had appointed priests to teach the people, that thereby they might hear and know the commandments of God, …”
    (Mosiah 6:3)

    We can see from this that King Benjamin not only conferred the political kingdom to his son Mosiah, but also the ecclesiastical kingdom (so much for the division of church and state). Also, we see that there were already priests in the land, so what Mosiah was asking Alma to do, wasn’t anything new. It wasn’t like they didn’t already have churches set up. It’s just that they had recently had a huge influx of new people, the Mulekites under King Limhi. And we find it is this people of Limhi who were baptized by Alma. Although there would have been nothing wrong with Alma baptizing the original people of Mosiah (since Mosiah had given him that authority) it is not stated in the record that he did so at this time.

    Chapter 25 of Mosiah just confirms what I’ve been saying. Alma was not acting on his own authority, but he was acting under king Mosiah.

  17. The church of Christ was “regularly organized and established agreeable to the laws of our country” in 1830, by commandment of God, so, if this is a pattern from antiquity, it would mean that Alma and people, when they joined Mosiah’s people, would need to regularly organize and establish their church agreeable to the laws of Mosiah’s country. As Mosiah was the monarch, they would need to register this new church with him. That covers the “and it came to pass that king Mosiah granted unto Alma that he might establish churches throughout all the land of Zarahemla” part.

    Undoubtedly there were other churches (of other faiths) established among the people of Mosiah, as they had religious freedom. For example, Mosiah 26:1-4 speaks of just such another faith among them.

    Mosiah was a seer and the presiding high priest over the Nephites. When Alma came in with his converted group, he being the presiding high priest (and prophet) over the group, Mosiah essentially integrated Alma into the priestly structure already in place in the land. Mosiah retained for himself the seership and kingship, and gave to Alma the priestship, if you will.

    Alma and Mosiah were both prophets and high priests, but Mosiah was a seer and also the king. The law Nephite law itself was not man-made, but given by God, so this was not a political kingdom, or a man-made institution, but a revealed government, so even Mosiah’s kingship was of divine origin. In other words, it was an ecclesiastical office. For this matter, Mosiah had authority over Alma both ecclesiastically (as seer is greater than a prophet) and ecclesiastically (as he was the divinely appointed king.)

    Up until then, the people of Nephi had not been organized as churches, but God was doing something new through Alma, his other high priest, and this was recognized by Mosiah.

    Basically what was set up was the system that John Peterson explained, which was repeated in the Joseph/Hyrum split of duties, which scriptures, strangely enough, I was just studying over the past couple of days. This first elder, second elder system, instituted among us Gentiles, seems to have been patterned after Moses and Aaron, and perhaps even further in antiquity, and repeated by Mosiah and Alma.

    That Alma still looked to the Lord’s seer for direction, even after his re-ordination by Mosiah, is shown in the record when he didn’t know what to do with all those of the church who were taken in iniquity. He wanted Mosiah to judge them, but Mosiah had given all ecclesiastical judgment into his hands. The whole thing is jurisdictional. A jurisdiction had already been given to Alma and now he had to deal with it. Could Mosiah have used the Urim and Thummim to inquire of the Lord? Sure, but that would have short-changed Alma’s growth. As it turned out, Alma didn’t need Mosiah’s help, for he was able to obtain revelation from the Lord himself, showing that Alma was both a prophet and a revelator already. In fact, for all we know Mosiah said to him, “Here, take the Urim and Thummim and inquire of the Lord yourself.” So, maybe after pouring out his heart to the Lord in prayer, he used the Urim and Thummim and received the revelation he got, showing that Alma was also a seer. In other words, he was obviously the man for the job.

    Another way of looking at this was that the people of Nephi, from the time of Nephi onward, were churchless. They participated in the ordinances of the gospel, but lived it tribally. Nevertheless, as religious freedom was the norm, anyone could establish their own church, as long as their church didn’t break the laws of the land. There were churches in the land, but the Lord didn’t have His own, for His people lived the religion tribally. Alma had the privilege of establishing the first church of Christ according to the laws of the land, being inspired of God to do so. No one prior to him had been so inspired. So, now God had a church presence among the other churches. This was the start of the gathering of the people of the Lord, which undoubtedly fulfilled a host of Nephite prophecies.

    This new innovation among the Nephites, given by God, of a church of God, would not go away for the rest of their history, it becoming a permanent fixture in the kingdom of God. And this makes sense, since God is all about permanence.

  18. Denver re-opened comments to the point that the comments are read by him. If the question is one he thinks several people have, or if he thinks it is useful to several/many people, he will address it on his blog. Sometimes it may take a month for him to get to it.

    He has been given a commission by the Lord, Himself, to teach. Unless YOU have seen the Lord face to face, I doubt you are qualified to condemn or judge the man as having not seen the Lord, nor to condemn as demonic something he teaches.

    You are free to disagree with him, of course (that is why the Lord chose someone outside of the hierarchy – people would feel compelled to believe a general authority out of fear of going to hell; they feel no qualms for having contempt for someone like Denver Snuffer), but I would be very, very careful of claiming he is of the devil.

    Our understanding of things is not perfect. Is DS correct in his understanding of polygamy? Well, not once that I have read has he said or implied that the Lord told him to say this, or even that it was absolute truth. Quite the opposite, I’ve read (and heard) that he says, “In MY mind,” I have resolved this issue.

    LDSA, you mentioned DS hiding his experiences. I would recommend that you read “Come, Let Us Adore Him.” It is my opinion that some of those insights could have only come from an eyewitness. Besides that, three chapters ARE an actual eyewitness that will sound like nonsense to the critical and darkened.

    Also, when DS shut down the comments, a lady on there was gaining quite a following for having claimed to “sup with” Jesus and the Father often. Though she pretended reluctance, it was obvious that she enjoyed “stealing the show” from the stated purpose (which was to fulfill the Lord’s charge to DS to bring souls to Christ).

  19. Okay thanx guys,LDSA,Justin for your replies.Just as a side DS has a post on his blog called comments which clearly and plainly explains the process he has in place for comments by any reader on anyone of his post yes it is different from this blog and others but it is not what all on this post have said it is or claimed it to be

    Once again thanx and keep up the good work

    To JP,bro read my comments i posted carefully before shooting off and trying to advise me about what you think i do or dont know,or for that matter presuming you know who i put my trust in

  20. I agree that Alma was a prophet. There are indications of this before he rejoined Mosiah’s group. Why do I say rejoined? If you look at the history of where King Noah’s group came from, you’ll see that they were a split off group from King Mosiah’s, which is probably what King Noah attributed to be the source of his authority.

    My argument certainly is not that Alma couldn’t be a prophet, but my argument is that God’s house is a house of order and that there is a hierarchy of prophets, just as in Moses’ day. Moses, being the most humble man on earth, was the prophet who spoke with God directly. The other prophets (even if they did speak with God directly) were under Moses’ lead. As Moses said, “Would God that all men were prophets!” It certainly would cut down on the contentions if we all received from the same Spirit.

    As the book of Mosiah explains, although there be many churches, there is but one church, the church of God. All these churches being under the one Priesthood authority structure which God has set up and therefore all of them shared the same doctrine and ordinances. All other churches belong to the great and abominable church of the devil. The book of Mormon is very black and white about this issue and so must I be. There is a pattern to all things under the heavens and God is consistent in following his pattern throughout all ages.

  21. Mosiah 18:18 And it came to pass that Alma, having authority from God, ordained priests; even one priest to every fifty of their number did he ordain to preach unto them, and to teach them concerning the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.

    This was prior to Alma going to Zarahemla or meeting with King Mosiah.

    After this Alma and his people left the land of Nephi or where Noah’s people were. They went 8 days travel in the wilderness and stopped at a place they called Helam. Then the record says this,Mosiah 23:19 And it came to pass that they began to prosper exceedingly in the land; and they called the land Helam.
    20 And it came to pass that they did multiply and prosper exceedingly in the land of Helam; and they built a city, which they called the city of Helam.

    This indicates the passage of some time maybe more than a year, certainly not only 2 or 3 months.

    Now the Lord did lead them to Zarahemla and the people under Mosiah. But look at what happened.
    King Mosiah read the records of the people of Zeniff and Alma. And then had Alma preach to them. Yes Mosiah was a seer and a prophet. But he didn’t have much of a church organization going there. And Alma baptized the people of Limhi before any mention is made of Mosiah granting him authority.

    Mosiah 25:19 And it came to pass that king Mosiah granted unto Alma that he might establish churches throughout all the land of Zarahemla.

    How can you establish what is already there?

    No LDSA you are wrong. Mosiah did not incorporate Alma into the churches Mosiah was over in Zarahemla. Mosiah did not preach to the people he had Alma do it. Alma needed no authority from Mosiah except as a King to allow the establishing of Churches. Did Mosiah agree with the new churches yes. But Alma did not need any priesthood authority to establish those churches, He already had it from God.

    Yes the people under Mosiah were keeping the law of Moses but Alma had something more. And he didn’t get under the hands of Mosiah.

    And regarding the DS post, yes my mind is made up on the matter. A true follower of God and Jesus will not knowingly lead others to believe a lie. Say what you want. Nothing you say or do will break that truth.

    Oh hey LDSA check this out. The Book of Mormon states lots of times when Alma heard the voice of the Lord but not one instance of Alma seeing an angel. His son Alma the younger in his wickedness saw an angel.

    So where is there a need to see an angel to be authorized by God to establish God’s church? Alma did it before he ever met King Mosiah.

  22. Let’s take a little closer look at the history to see if we can deduce potential lines of priesthood authority.

    Zeniff was a spy from sent from the land of Zarahemla (presumably by king Mosiah) who spied out the land of Nephi (Mosiah 9:1-2) . We can see that he believed himself to have the power of God, for he attributed the winning of a great battle to his and his men’s trust in the Lord (Mosiah 10:19-20). We also find that his son king Noah “did not walk in the ways of his father,” implying that Zeniff’s ways were righteous. We also see that his father had “consecrated” priests, because king Noah replaced the priests of his father with his own priests (Mosiah 11:5). Where did Zeniff get his priesthood? He very likely received it from king Mosiah, whether directly or under the hand of one of his priests before he left Zarahemla. If this were the case, Zeniff, king Noah and Alma all would have had a legitimate claim on the priesthood.

    Even if Alma didn’t receive his priesthood from Zeniff or king Noah (he might not have always been wicked), he may have received it from one other priest: Abinadi. There is no indication where Abinadi came from. Two good possibilities come to my mind: 1) He was a missionary sent from Zarahemla. 2) He was one of the priests of Zeniff that king Noah replaced. Whatever the case may be, there is a good argument that Alma received his priesthood from someone who received it through king Mosiah.

    It’s instructive to see the difference in the way king Limhi and Alma proceeded in regards to creating a church:

    “And it came to pass that king Limhi and many of his people were desirous to be baptized; but there was none in the land that had authority from God. And Ammon declined doing this thing, considering himself an unworthy servant. Therefore they did not at that time form themselves into a church, waiting upon the Spirit of the Lord. Now they were desirous to become even as Alma and his brethren, who had fled into the wilderness.”
    (Mosiah 21:33-34)

    “And now, Alma was their high priest, he being the founder of their church. And it came to pass that none received authority to preach or to teach except it were by him from God. Therefore he consecrated all their priests and all their teachers; and none were consecrated except they were just men.
    (Mosiah 23:16-17)

    Why was it that Alma was able to act with authority and king Limhi was not? Alma was once a priest of king Noah and Limhi was a son of king Noah. It would seem that both would have had equal access to the priesthood. This provides some circumstantial evidence that Alma received his priesthood from Abinadi while he was in prison. Possibly after Abinadi’s death, no one was left with priesthood authority whom king Limhi could have received it. At the very least none were gathered with king Limhi who claimed such authority at the time he desired baptism.

    So it seems rather probably that Alma received his authority in some manner through the priesthood of king Mosiah. He used this authority to create a church, which would at some later date rejoin the main body of the church under king Mosiah. Alma’s priesthood was legitimized by king Mosiah when king Mosiah gave him to authority create other churches in his kindgom.

    While it may be argued that king Mosiah merely held political power over Alma, it can be seen that king Mosiah was the leader of the church in Zarahemla before Alma returned and in fact he was not only a prophet (Mosiah 28:6-7), but also a seer (Mosiah 8:13; Mosiah 28:10-16)

    “And Ammon said that a seer is a revelator and a prophet also; and a gift which is greater can no man have, except he should possess the power of God, which no man can; yet a man may have great power given him from God. But a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come, and by them shall all things be revealed, or, rather, shall secret things be made manifest, and hidden things shall come to light, and things which are not known shall be made known by them, and also things shall be made known by them which otherwise could not be known.”
    (Mosiah 8:16-17)

    So let’s see, Alma was a high priest and king Mosiah was a prophet, seer, and revelator. What was Joseph Smith? What was Hyrum? I think the pattern is clear for those with eyes to see.

  23. Also, to say that there was no church under king Mosiah because one is not explicitly mentioned, is presumptuous. Obviously he had a people whom he was ruling who he inherited from his father king Benjamin and we know that king Benjamin was not only righteous, but he also led many righteous men (Words of Mormon 1:16-17), some who were even prophets. In fact in king Benjamin’s closing address he called a large body of people to repentance and had them make a covenant with God. and he recorded the names of all the people who made the covenant.

    “And it came to pass that there was not one soul, except it were little children, but who had entered into the covenant and had taken upon them the name of Christ.”
    (Mosiah 6:2)

    To think that this entire group of people who covenanted with God to be his people that day apostatized the moment Mosiah took the throne is inane and not worth any more investigation.

  24. John no one said that. I don’t think that and my comment doesn’t lead any rational person to believe that. So since my comments are irrationally misinterpreted I think it is best to not make anymore.

  25. Irrationally misinterpreted? I will quote what I was responding to:

    “Yes Mosiah was a seer and a prophet. But HE DIDN’T HAVE MUCH OF A CHURCH ORGANIZATION GOING THERE. And Alma baptized the people of Limhi before any mention is made of Mosiah granting him authority.

    Mosiah 25:19 And it came to pass that king Mosiah granted unto Alma that he might establish churches throughout all the land of Zarahemla.

    HOW CAN YOU ESTABLISH WHAT IS ALREADY THERE?”

    Your first statement might have lead me to think that maybe you believe there may have been somewhat of a church under king Mosiah, but your second statement obviously implies you think there was no church established whatsoever under Mosiah. Who’s being irrational? How else was I to read that statement?

  26. And in response to your question: “How can you establish what is already there?”

    Alma was establishing new churches, each being a member church of the larger church. It’s explained later in that same chapter. He wasn’t replacing Mosiah’s church, he was supplementing it with new members. Modern day vernacular calls these churches “stakes.”

  27. No LDSA you are wrong. Mosiah did not incorporate Alma into the churches Mosiah was over in Zarahemla. Mosiah did not preach to the people he had Alma do it. Alma needed no authority from Mosiah except as a King to allow the establishing of Churches. Did Mosiah agree with the new churches yes. But Alma did not need any priesthood authority to establish those churches, He already had it from God.

    There seems to have been some misunderstanding concerning what I wrote. Here is what I wrote:

    Mosiah was a seer and the presiding high priest over the Nephites. When Alma came in with his converted group, he being the presiding high priest (and prophet) over the group, Mosiah essentially integrated Alma into the PRIESTLY structure already in place in the land. Mosiah retained for himself the seership and kingship, and gave to Alma the priestship, if you will.

    In other words, he did not incorporate Alma into an already existing church structure, for there was no established church of Christ there, but he did integrate him into an already existing priesthood structure.

    My understanding is that the Lord’s kingdom operates jurisdictionally. Here is what I wrote in a previous post:

    The principle is this: When you enter the jurisdiction of someone else’s priesthood quorum, you essentially enter without priesthood. You may influence them, or attempt to influence them, but cannot do so by virtue of your priesthood office, nor can you remove the rights that pertain to their office, calling and quorum.

    So, Alma, despite being the high priest and prophet over his group, entered a “new ward,” in a sense, when they entered the land (or “jurisdiction”) of Mosiah. Mosiah was the man in charge of that land, not Alma. Alma, then, essentially entered “without priesthood” but was subsequently re-ordained by Mosiah, or had his priesthood acknowledged or re-affirmed, into the already existing priesthood order of the land.

    A modern analogy would be an ordained bishop entering the ward of another bishop. Who is in charge? The bishop of the ward is in charge. Regardless of the visiting bishop’s office and calling, he has no authority over the people there in that congregation, except insofar as the resident bishop authorizes him. Alma’s people, all of them, including Alma, when entering the land of Mosiah, came directly under Mosiah’s jurisdiction.

  28. Again, to clarify what I have said (and others may have a different take), my understanding is that the covenant people of the Lord, meaning those people who had been baptized and entered into a covenant to follow Christ, to take His name upon them, to always remember him, to obey His commandments, etc.–and such people had existed among the Nephite population from the days of first Nephi–none of these people had been organized into a church, meaning a corporate church. Yes, they were all a part of the mystical or spiritual church of God, but they weren’t a part of any organized, congregated body of believers, known as a church. That next step, the organization of a corporate body of believers, was taken by Alma. Alma, then, was the founder of the corporate church of God, which later on, received recognition by the king (Mosiah.)

    That doesn’t mean there were no corporate churches in the kingdom of Mosiah. There most likely were, but these were not churches of God. They were churches of other faiths. When Alma came in, having established a corporate church under inspiration of God, Mosiah recognized it under the law and for the first time there was a corporate church of God, and not just a mystical one. So, when Alma went around preaching to the people and adding to the church of God, those that joined included people who had never entered into a covenant with God and also people who had already entered into a covenant of God and been baptized, for all were now being gathering into an organization called church, or gathered into bodies called churches, being all of the same church.

    So, although the mystical or spiritual body of Christ existed among the people of Mosiah, Mosiah did not have an organized (corporate) church of Christ there. This is why Alma is always spoken of as the founder of the church of Christ. He was. Before him, no corporate church of Christ existed.

    Although it is true that Benjamin took the names of those who entered into a covenant with God, that is not synonymous with the establishment of a church. If anything, that was simply a list of names of those who were the spiritual or mystical church. But these people were not organized as a church, they still lived their religion only tribally.

    I realize that we modern LDS cannot conceive of our religion being lived without the organization of churches, but this is how it was done up until the time of Alma. We cannot merely take the model given to the Gentiles (us) and overlay it onto antiquity, and assume that since we are organized into churches, so were they. No, the Lord reveals line upon line, precept upon precept. So, later times will have more precepts that former times, thus we cannot force the later models to fit into the former models, for that wrests the scriptures. Also, the Lord tailors His laws to each group, so the Gentiles might have things that apply only to them, and not to any other group of antiquity.

  29. Oh hey LDSA check this out. The Book of Mormon states lots of times when Alma heard the voice of the Lord but not one instance of Alma seeing an angel. His son Alma the younger in his wickedness saw an angel.

    So where is there a need to see an angel to be authorized by God to establish God’s church? Alma did it before he ever met King Mosiah.

    Well, for starters, we’ve got an abridged account. All the record states is that Alma repented of his sins and that afterward he received power and authority from God to do many things. It doesn’t give any more details than that. Yet, the rest of the record indicates that when you begin to exercise faith, an angel ministers to you and/or you hear the voice of God. So, although it is true we can’t state definitely that Alma had an angel minister to him, we also can’t say definitely that one did not minister to him.

    What we do know is that Alma baptized, ordained priests and teachers, established a church, preached, taught, and also prophesied:

    And it came to pass that as I was thus racked with torment, while I was harrowed up by the memory of my many sins, behold, I remembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world.

    The spirit of prophecy and revelation, at least insofar as the Book of Mormon is concerned, seems tied up with the ministrations of angels. Also, Alma was a high priest, which, according to his son Alma, were ordained by the Lord God. All of this points to more than just “feeling inspired” to form a church.

  30. Oh hey LDSA check this out. The Book of Mormon states lots of times when Alma heard the voice of the Lord but not one instance of Alma seeing an angel. His son Alma the younger in his wickedness saw an angel.

    The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

    I wrote in Falling to the Earth as a Sign of Conversion that it’s my belief that the reason father Alma was so calm when son Alma was brought to him unconscious was:

    And now the astonishment of Alma was so great that he became dumb, that he could not open his mouth; yea, and he became weak, even that he could not move his hands; therefore he was taken by those that were with him, and carried helpless, even until he was laid before his father.

    And they rehearsed unto his father all that had happened unto them; and his father rejoiced, for he knew that it was the power of God. [Mosiah 27:19-20]

    When Alma saw his son being carried home by his friends, rendered completely unconscious – his first reaction was to rejoice because he recognized that as a manifestation of the power of God working.
    […]
    [There’s one thing] that explains why [Alma’s] first thought after seeing [his son] fallen to the earth unconscious was that the power of God was at work – [he] had first-hand experience with the miraculous works of the Father.

    I think it’s quite likely the reason he immediately knew that his son’s unconsciousness was due to an angel [answering his prayer], instead of an injury or something was because he had seen an angel and fell unconscious himself.

    Also — who has faith to call down an angel to visit a sinful person except for one with sufficient faith to have seen angels theirself?

  31. Amen to all that. Is not this the doctrine of seeing eye to eye?

  32. The path we come to see eye to eye isn’t because we argue until we all come to agreement. The only way that can be accomplished is if we can all get the same Spirit. The Spirit does not contradict itself, just as truth does not contradict itself. When two men have the Holy Ghost instructing them on the same topic they see eye to eye, otherwise you’ll almost always have some difference of opinion (war of egos). Zion won’t be formed until there are at least a few who have the Holy Ghost as a constant companion due to their righteousness. This is the oneness of Zion.

  33. The post as written, was well documented information, that surely suggests that Plural Marriage is condoned of God. The scriptures seem to leave no doubt of that when they are all placed in their proper context.

    Aside from the Left Brained good defense for God’s Approval for Plural Marriage, I think the likely reason for this being an honored principle in Heaven, is because in some cases it is necessary and in some cases it is desired to fulfill “some” righteous purpose.

    Either way, that becomes a Necessity for the parties involved, whether Commanded by God to do so, or to enter in that Covenant of One’s Own Accord.

    I further believe that common sense & a true understanding of it’s purpose is essential to it’s being condoned of God. But it would make sense to me that even though a man and women are capable of making this decision on their own, it would also make sense that a True Officiator of God would be necessarily able to determine it’s Worthiness and make it Official. Elsewise there would be no system for checks against unlawful lust. And many unlawful marriages would be entering Heaven.

    I think it could be a matter of God Commanding persons to enter into this Covenant as Joseph was, to show that in some cases, it is a Mandatory Practice to ensure all Celestial Candidates are afforded the Right of Eternal Marriage. I believe Joseph as a Prophet, representing the Laws & Ordinances of the Gospel in their entirety, was Obligated by the Lord to do this. And certainly WOULD have been commanded to do this. In his case, it would be a part of His Calling & Job as a Prophet to do this. He is called to ESTABLISH this Truth.

    And on the other hand, as was so eloquently shown by the author of this post, some will just CHOOSE to do this of their own accord. Not because it is required of God, but because it is DESIRED of the parties involved. Making that a “Requirement” of sorts to fulfill personal needs. They are establishing their PRIVATE Truth. Righteously of course. And according to God’s OK.

  34. Plural Marriage has sure been the achillies heel in it’s power to divide the members of the church from the very beginning. Beginning with Joseph and Emma.

    I would like to think they both came to grips with God’s Command and were able to settle their differences and renew their Love beyond the veil.

    From all that I have read of their tough go at Marriage, I believe in my heart, that Emma has returned to Joseph, as was the case of Her being buried at His Side. What a tough yet Beautiful Marriage they had. I hope it has been Made Whole by now.

    It sort of reminds me of the Marriage of Jacob to Leah. The circumstances were surely different. But Leah being the one to live out her life with Joseph after Rachel dies, and being buried by His Side, seems to show that God helps us PAST our Marital Differences in miraculous ways that only True Love can conquer.

  35. Plural Marriage would certainly not be for all couples. But for some…They may LIKE sugar on TOP of sugar coated cereal.

    Some like coffee black. Some like Cream & Sugar. OOPS ! Coffee was a bad example, but true.

    Some like mainly Blue as their color. Some have preference to ALL colors equally, or combinations there of.

    Some men & women choose not to see past EACH OTHER. Some men & women are capable of seeing into eternity FARTHER than others.

    Some gifts are known gifts recognized by ALL. Some gifts are ANNONIMOUS gifts known ONLY to those who give it.

    Point being…..NONE of these contrasts in PREFERENCE are wrong. As long as they are in accordance with Celestial Law.

  36. The Principle of Plural Marriage seems to me, to be a non issue, as far as arguments sake. If it IS a Principle of God, as it surely seems DOCUMENTED to be, then what is it to us, HOW many wives these men took upon them in the past, whether condoned of God or not.

    If this was entered into un righteously, then Hell will catch up to them through the wives they married. If done righteously but with difficulty, as first established, then SURELY God, time & Love, will settle those differences.

    Oh Ye of little faith…

  37. And aside from a Higher Purpose being served in Plural Marriage, I would also suggest that even basic NEEDS can be served by a woman who would otherwise not be ABLE to have a husband due to unavailability, or to enjoy the fruits of bearing Children & have an intimate relationship.

    True Sisters seem to be much more caring and sharing of their feelings and all that they possess. So the whole idea seems Rather Natural to me for those who can Comprehend it.

  38. Even in the animal world Plural Relationships far outnumber the monogamous ones, such as in the case of many types of birds.

    You say…”But they are ANIMALS & we are NOT “! I say they ARE animals, which God has Created & LOVES.

    And for the PURPOSE of ensuring the Healthy Promulgation of certain species, and so that they can enjoy THEIR Families in the wild….Some species have more than one wife.

    They are GOD’S Creation of a lower order but FOLLOW similar patterns of a HIGHER Order. We are ALL connected in the “Great Circle of Life”.

    If you think that Plural Marriage imitates the Animal Kingdom, then you OBVIOUSLY don’t understand the Nature of the Higher Orders which set the PRESIDENCE PATTERNS for Lower Orders to FOLLOW.

  39. It seems to me that the only difference in the behavior of Animals compared to Humans, is Awareness.

    A couple displaying excessive public affection would seem unnatural, but NOT SO for a pair of animals. It’s OK & Cool for THEM to do that because God MADE them that way. But God said he didn’t like the way some people immitate the ANIMAL aspect of UNBRIDALED behavior.

    So I think the debate over Plural Marriage, which is seeming Appalling to some, is because they are CONFUSING the WRONG ASPECT of Animal Behavior of unbridled passion, with that of Proper Human Behavior in Plural Relationships that seek a HIGHER CAUSE.

    It’s NOT that Plural Relationships are bad for Animals OR Humans. It’s just that there is a HIGHER LEVEL OF AWARNESS among People concerning this Concept, when viewed from GOD’S Perspective. The one the WE should adopt.

  40. By the way…This post is probably the best Left Brained argument for Plural Marriage that I have read. Good Documented Evidence and Sound Reasoning that connects the Dots of uncertainty & seeming contradictions, with Truth & Reality, when all evidence is placed in it’s Proper Context. Great Job ! You should be a Good Lawyer.


Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s