A Visit with Denver Snuffer


40-years-in-mormonismKnowing I would be on vacation in Northern Utah this week, I asked Denver for the opportunity to meet with him to clarify a few questions I had been pondering from the Mesa lecture and his talk on Plural Marriage a few months ago. He was gracious in allowing me to do so, as well as to record it and use it here on my blog.

I want to emphasize Denver has no spokesman. I am not trying to interpret what he has said. I simply want to understand the message a little better. I realized I would not have time to transcribe his responses, so I decided to make the MP3 recording available online if you want to listen to it on your drive to the retreat this weekend.

Fellowships and Churches

I hope to share a few additional posts based on the 100 minutes of the interview, but I want to mention two things now that impressed me about our time together. First, I was impressed with how much he deemphasized his role in all this. You will hear him mention several times, this is not about him. Focus on the Savior.

Second, and this was a major light bulb moment for me, you’ll hear him refer to the churches that are forming. I called them fellowships. He calls them churches just as the New Testament authors did when writing letters to the churches in the years following the death and resurrection of the Savior. That clarifies so much.

Transcription Not Yet Is Now Available

After I listened to the recording I realized I didn’t enunciate clearly on some of the questions. Others we did not read in the interest of time, so I have included them below. There were originally twenty questions prepared but we only had time for fourteen of them. Maybe someday we can ask him for his answers on the last six.

Original source material is always best when digging into a topic. Thus, I felt it appropriate to make the recording available to those who are interested. I think you’ll find the answers provided amplify some of the main points shared in PTHG as well as the Phoenix lecture. If anyone wants to transcribe this, please do so.

Update: Not one, but two readers have transcribed the Q&A session. I include them both in links below. One of the readers even sent the transcription to Denver for his review. He added some clarification and additional material from his notes that didn’t make it into the original session due to time constraints.

Transcript One: http://3tcm.net/a-visit-with-denver-snuffer-transcript.pdf

Transcript Two: http://3tcm.net/tim-malone-QA-with-denver-snuffer.pdf

Link to the MP3: http://3tcm.net/Denver_Snuffer_QA_13May2015.mp3
Note: The file is 60MB. It’s best to right-click on the link to download it.

One: In a recent talk (3-22-15) on plural marriage, you said (page 39), “There have been many signs given by God that He was about to do something new from the time of the death of Joseph Smith till today. All that was left at the end was for a witness to be appointed, to come to declare, ‘Now it has come to an end.’ In the last talk in the ten lecture series I said, the witness has now come, and I am he. It has come to an end with something new now begun. One of the signs of it having come to an end was the passing of Eldred Smith.”

Will you elaborate on the significance of the passing of Patriarch Eldred G. Smith on April 4, 2013 and how or why we should take this as a sign that something has come to an end? In particular, what has come to an end? You are declaring you are a witness of an end-time event. This seems vital. What is that event, how are you a witness, why is it important for us to recognize this event and how should we, or how do you think God expects us to acknowledge such an event in our own lives?

Two: In the lecture on Christ, the Prototype of the Saved Man given in Ephraim (6-28-14), you said, “…either I am a liar, and you ought to forget everything I’ve said, or I have been sent by someone greater than I am. If I have been sent and you reject and quibble over the things I declare to you, it is at your peril! It ought to be that way. I ought to be damned if I’m a pretender, and I ought to be damned and rejected by God if I’m saying things about which I know nothing! But I bear witness to you I know what I’m talking about. I have no reason to lie to you. I have no reason to pay to reserve a place to speak to you, and ask nothing of you but to listen. It requires a sacrifice to do what I am doing. I have no other reason to do this than to tell you the truth. Joseph Smith testified to these things and I am come as a second witness. Therefore you now have two proclaiming the same doctrine.”

You bring up Joseph Smith. Joseph testified the heavens are open. He bore witness of God the Father and His Son as two separate and distinct personages possessing glorified and perfected bodies. He also testified he was an instrument in the hands of Christ to bring about a restoration of things hidden since before the foundation of the world. You say you know what you are talking about. Do you mean this in the same sense Joseph Smith declared his knowledge, that it was received through revelation, vision and the visits of angels? As a second witness, how is the Savior working through you to continue the restoration He began through Joseph Smith?

Three: In the Phoenix or Mesa lecture (9-9-14), you stated, “The Lord has said to me in His own voice, ‘I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.’ Therefore, I want to caution those who disagree with me, to feel free, to feel absolutely free to make the case against what I say. Feel free to disagree, and make your contrary arguments. If you believe I err, then expose the error and denounce it. But take care; take care about what you say concerning me for your sake, not for mine. I live with constant criticism. I can take it. But I do not want you provoking Divine ire by unfortunately chosen words if I can persuade you against it.”

In Genesis 12:3, The Lord said unto Abraham, “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.” Abraham was further blessed to be the father of many nations, that in him “shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Abraham was a prophet. Isaac and Jacob were prophets. Abraham referred to the Fathers going back to Adam. You spoke about that in the talk on plural marriage and elsewhere. It seems there is something significant about connecting to the Fathers. Abraham was a patriarch. The LDS Church no longer has a presiding patriarch, or even such an office. Is there a patriarch on the earth today who can connect us to the Fathers?

Four: In the same lecture, you quoted from your journal, describing the disciplinary process you went through, your appeal and the significance of section 121 which contains the phrase, “Amen to the priesthood of that man.” You then read, “Last general conference (April 2014), the entire First Presidency, the 12, the 70, and all other general authorities and auxiliaries, voted to sustain those who abused their authority in casting me out of the church. At that moment, the Lord ended all claims of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to claim it is led by the priesthood. They have not practiced what He requires. The Lord has brought about His purposes. This has been in His heart all along.”

This is an astounding declaration. It has been the subject of much discussion on the forums and blogs. It was and is a difficult thing for many LDS members to hear or read. FAIR and other apologetic sites have fallen all over themselves to show how impossible such a claim can be. The idea of a modern, living prophet, authorized and in possession of all priesthood keys held by Joseph is the bedrock of the LDS Church claims to be God’s kingdom on earth today. Your claim evokes emotional distress in some who consider it. It’s been a while since this declaration came out. Is there anything you would add now to help multi-generational members of the LDS Church deal with such a devastating, all-encompassing foundational claim?

Five: You have proclaimed God has ended the way he works with his children on the earth today. You have announced yourself to be a witness of this fundamental change. You have declared yourself a second witness of the many works of God through the prophet Joseph Smith. You have reaffirmed the importance of the Patriarchal Priesthood, the law of adoption or sealing to the Fathers in the family of God. You have announced the LDS Church can no longer claim to be led by the priesthood of God, virtually making it no different from any other church today.

Yet the title and focus of the last lecture in the series “Forty Years in Mormonism” is “Preserving the Restoration.” You have counseled those who have accepted this message and you as the Lord’s servant, witness or messenger in this great change, to be baptized. Specifically, you quoted 3 Nephi 11:26-27 and said, “I am telling you in the name of the Lord that commandment is renewed again by Him today, to you. This is His command … confirmed again today.” Thousands of individuals have been baptized at your invitation. Will you elaborate on how your declarations and baptismal invitation preserve the restoration, as opposed to tearing it down?

Six: You proclaimed Jesus Christ has revealed Himself to you. You declared you have seen Him, embraced Him and have been given specific assignments of things to teach, which you have done at your own expense in publications and lectures. The focus of these teachings is the establishment of Zion. You have counseled those who wish to prepare for Zion to institute fellowships for gathering and practicing the principles of Zion, specifically to use tithing as a means to help the poor. You have taught there is to be no new church, no legal entity to receive and centrally manage funds and property, yet you acknowledge the need for a temple.

A new website has been established for a central recorder, where those who have been baptized are encouraged to submit their names. The purpose of this gathering of names is to present them to the Lord in a temple. You said in Mesa, “We do not need numerous temples, but we will need one to which Christ can come. We will not need to perform endless work for the dead until first there has been a covenant made for us. We must be first connected to the fathers in heaven. Only then can we do something to liberate the dead.” You have already taught much on the sealing to the fathers, but will you take a moment to elaborate on the difference between the visit of Christ to an individual and the visit of Christ to a temple yet to be built?

Seven: I have heard your say, and read in many places in your books and on your blog, you dislike the public attention received as a result of performing the assignments given you by the Lord. You’ve been emphatic we should not replace one idol with another. Yet the people look to you for leadership. For example, in the Phoenix lecture you provided some direction on tithing, the sacrament, ordinations, worship or fellowship groups, and in particular, the requirement that the approval of seven women is needed to sustain a man in performing ordinances in public. You also said a man was unworthy – the Lord’s word – if his wife will not sustain him.

In the Jewish tradition, when questions arise, everyone turns to the Rabbi. In the LDS Church, local leaders consult the handbook or turn to a General Authority for help with difficult procedural questions. You have stated you don’t like the term used by some – Snufferites – to describe those who read your writings. You have made it clear every man should have a sufficiently strong relationship with the Lord to get answers to procedural and doctrinal questions. Yet, you are the one the Lord sent as a servant, witness or messenger to declare the orderly dismantling of the established hierarchy. Does that not make you a prophet and de-facto leader?

Eight: A follow-up to the last question about the need for leadership in this movement can be illustrated by a recent post from Keith on the Recorder’s blog. In there he noted some people are submitting names of children baptized as young as five years old. The scriptures specifically teach the age of accountability is eight years old. He also noted the fact that some baptisms are being submitted for recording as having been performed by a woman. He quoted, again from the Phoenix lecture, your statement about priesthood being confined to men because of the Fall. You elaborated much on the idea there are so many opportunities for believers to go off the rails. I see it all the time when we discuss doctrinal questions on my blog.

For example, the worship of Mother in Heaven is a subject about which some people feel very strongly. They advocate a practice – a sacred dance – in which the objective is for a manifestation of divine favor. Specifically, they look for, expect, and report they have experienced the presence of Heavenly Mother in their ritual. This is similar to what happened with the children of Israel when Moses was up on the mountain for forty days communing with the Lord. In the end, Moses wore himself out because he had to judge every little thing that came before the people. What is the right way? How will the Lord provide leadership for His people who are awaiting His return? I’m looking for a practical answer here, not idealism.

Nine: You have declared we have an opportunity to bring about the conditions for Zion. You had proclaimed the Lord is willing and ready to help individuals and groups prepare themselves to become the kind of people who can be sealed to the Fathers, join with the City of Enoch when the Lord comes and not be burned at His coming. Joseph tried to accomplish this in his day. The people, he said, were too thick skulled to accept the things he wanted to teach them. They would fly all to pieces, he said, at the first hint of something not held in their orthodox tradition.

The response to some of the things you have tried to teach has been similar, even though you have taught them from the scriptures. Change is hard for most people, especially when it involves changing long-held beliefs that are mostly tradition. One of the most difficult things for the LDS people to accept is the idea that the Lord could possibly have had in mind what you have declared has taken place. In particular, Daniel’s interpretation of King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is interpreted by most LDS folks to mean the LDS Church IS the kingdom of God, that it IS Zion and that they are the chosen people. How do you help closed-minded people who are steeped in tradition open their eyes to the idea of non-traditional possibilities?

Ten: I’d like to end this first section of questions with something near and dear to my heart and that is the pursuit of personal spiritual communication with the Lord. I have delighted in your focus and emphasis from your first book that we can and should seek and audience with the Lord. You have declared He is willing to come to us in a literal, physical sense and that we can come into His presence, embrace Him and be taught by Him personally. If there is anything that gives more power to your teachings than your declaration you have seen Him, I don’t know what it is.

In my own pursuit of an audience with the Savior I rely on a sacred dream received shortly after I read The Second Comforter for the first time. Without going into any detail, the dream satisfied my desire to know when I could expect to enter into the presence of the Lord. In interpreting my dream, which I prayed to understand, it is not soon. I have years of work ahead of me – years of faithful and diligent effort to do as the Lord asks. And He has asked things of me, some of them very difficult. I note some people looking to unusual sources for inspiration and help – Shamans, questionable scripture, etc. I know you’re asked this all the time, but if you don’t mind, what counsel would you give for my readers who are anxiously seeking an audience with the Lord, and have become weary with the length of the process?

Eleven: May I share something? This is from a fellowship community member in Arizona. It’s called “River Church.” I’d like to know your impressions after hearing it if this is what you had in mind when you talked about organizing:

“What a beautiful day. The water was so clear I could see the bottom. The sun was bright and warm. I arrived at the Waters of Mormon about 4pm. As I walked down the bluff, I could see many people going in the water. So many were gathered at the edge of the water cheering and clapping. It was a magnificent scene for sure.

“As I arrived, so many of you greeted me with warmth and kindness. It was like the first time walking through the veil into the celestial room with loved ones there to greet the newly endowed. Such a feeling of peace and acceptance. Thank you. I counted about 33 members of our community there.

“The most wonderful part of the afternoon was right after the bread and wine were blessed and passed. There was such a wonderful feeling in the group. It was so quiet, just children playing in the distance and toddlers cooing. The rest of the group sat earnestly as the waters rushed by.

“Right then I was in the moment. I pushed myself to take mental note. A wonderful experience to hold in my memory. For all my life I will remember that wonderful moment. This morning a word came to me to describe the feeling of that moment: ‘solemn’. I hope many more of you will join us in the future. I love river church.”

Twelve: Daryl’s group is just one of dozens of communities organized in a tithing and fellowship group. However, as far as I can tell, most of these fellowships are only along the Mormon Corridor, specifically in the areas where you presented the lectures. I know some have created webpages to help interested people connect to one another in a specific geographic region. In my case in Southern California, our fellowship is very, very loose with participants ranging from Alaska to San Diego.

I see the movement growing. I imagine you get a lot of emails from people asking about organizing and fellowshipping. You gave good counsel in the Mesa lecture when you suggested our time would be well spent if we did nothing more than read the scriptures – printed version – to one another and pray together. Will you share a little more about why fellowships are so important in bringing unity to the church?

Thirteen: I love the heading on your old blog, “The content of this blog presumes you are already familiar with Denver Snuffer’s books. Careful explanations given in the books lay the foundation for what is contained here. If you read this blog without having first read his books, then you assume responsibility for your own misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the writer’s intent. Please do not presume to judge Mr. Snuffer’s intentions if you have not first read his books.”

From the Wikipedia page created about you: “Snuffer claims his intentions are faith-promoting: ‘I have loved every minute of being a Mormon since I joined the church in September 1973 in New Hampshire,’ he says. ‘I am actually advocating activity and fidelity to the Mormon church.’ Snuffer claims that he intended Passing the Heavenly Gift and his other works to promote loyalty to the LDS Church.” Have your intentions changed? Do you still advocate LDS Members stay faithful and active in their wards and stakes? How can they do that and yet accept the invitation to be baptized which was renewed at the conclusion of the lectures?

Fourteen: From page four of the Mesa lecture: “The Holy Ghost does not thrill you, it informs you. It gives you understanding. … thrilling music can rouse you. A great TV show can get you thrilled and feeling goose bumps. That is not the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost enlightens your mind, it enlivens your senses, it brings light into your life, and you understand something anew. There are some people who have the Spirit with them in such a degree, that to be in their presence is to understand things better. Understanding, comprehension, light and truth—these are the Holy Ghost, not emotion, thrills and goose bumps.” (See DS blog 1-21-15 for more)

I can’t tell you how many times I have been in LDS Church meetings and heard the individual offering the invocation say, “Please bless that we will feel the spirit in our meetings today.” I can’t begin to recount the number of testimonies I have heard where the person sharing their thoughts becomes emotional, and states they are feeling the spirit so strongly. I suppose this is based on our interpretation of D&C 8:2 (mind and heart) and D&C 9:8 (bosom shall burn). Are you saying the Holy Ghost NEVER causes one to feel emotional? I have felt strong emotion in prayer that I attribute to the presence of the Holy Ghost. Isn’t that the comforter?

 

18 Responses

  1. Waiting for a transcript. Hope someone posts it.

    Like

  2. Thank you Tim. Remarkable..Hope to see you this weekend.

    Like

  3. Thank you, Tim, for making good use of your visit to Utah. My thanks to our Lord’s Servant, Brother Snuffer, for his willingness to meet with one of the truest seekers of truth (You) and help us all in so doing. I’ll see you at Grand Mesa, my good Brother.

    Roy Moore

    Like

    • Roy, are you the same Roy Moore who used to work at WCS by chance?

      Like

  4. Just finished listening. Good questions and useful answers. Thanks for doing this, Tim.

    Like

  5. Wow… Just finished listening. Thank you Tim, for asking for this interview. Denver answered so many question that I have had. Looking forward to listening again. Have a good time in Colorado and I’m excited to hear more about your experiences in the coming days.

    Like

  6. How can I download from an Android phone?

    Like

  7. The Q&A interview shed new light on the idea of where we are going. Churches – as in plural. I like this idea. People of Christ Arizona is one of those churches. Yet Snuffer further encourages the different churches to experiment. I hope we can all offer a cloak of charity as the different churches experiment. I am a member of the People of Christ Arizona church. I hope people of the other like churches (preserving the restoration) extend charity to us as we extend charity to them while we all experiment.

    Like

  8. Tim,

    Thank you so much for doing this. Very helpful and clarifying in a number of ways. I suspect those who have already set firm in their minds that Denver is a fanciful fraud will not be persuaded. However, I felt that your interview can serve as a great bridge for those seeking truth. To hear Denver declare, in plain humility and meekness, what he did with you is quite powerful and gives one something very clear to take to the Lord. Given that this is only 100 minutes, it’s a great place to start for someone before wading through the 20 + hours of talks, the years of blog posts and 8 + (soon to be 9 +) books. It was a powerful reconfirmation for me of what I have received through prayer, pondering and study. Bless you for your acts of service.

    Like

  9. Thanks so much for doing this interview and recording it for us Tim! I enjoyed this very much.

    Like

  10. Exceptional questions, Tim. The use of extensive quotes prefacing the questions greatly aids in understanding Denver’s answers. As anyone knows who has taught successfully, the questions are the hard part. I’d agree with BeStill&Know that this interview could serve as an intro to Denver and his calling as a witness and what that implies for the rest of us. The method of sharing the questions beforehand so Denver could prepare his responses was useful. Thank you, thank you for recording the interview.

    His description of how jarring and unsettling the Lord’s rejection of the Church being led by the priesthood was to him and his claim as a teacher not a prophet–rings true to me. In the scriptures, being called as a prophet almost always was an uncomfortable experience. The prophet Amos, famous for his line, “The Lord will do nothing but he reveal his word to the prophets”, also stated simply that he was not a prophet nor the son of a prophet.

    Like

  11. Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah!
    Jesus anointed that Prophet and Seer.
    Blessed to open the last (i.e. latest) dispensation,
    Kings shall extol him, and nations revere.

    Wait, does this refer to JS or DS?

    As for me (and hopefully my house, if I can persuade them), I/we won’t be singing that song, with either reference, but something more like this:

    Praise to the Lord, the Almighty, the King of creation!
    O my soul, praise him, for he is thy health and salvation!
    Join the great throng,
    Psaltery, organ and song,
    Sounding in glad adoration!

    Praise to the Lord! Over all things he gloriously reigneth.
    Borne as on eagle wings, safely his Saints he sustaineth.
    Hast thou not seen
    How all thou needest hath been
    Granted in what he ordaineth?

    Praise to the Lord, who doth prosper thy way and defend thee.
    Surely his goodness and mercy shall ever attend thee.
    Ponder anew
    What the Almighty can do,
    Who with his love doth befriend thee.

    Praise to the Lord! Oh, let all that is in me adore him!
    All that hath breath, join with Abraham’s seed to adore him!
    Let the “amen”
    Sum all our praises again,
    Now as we worship before him.

    Will you join in that song?

    Peace and Love.

    Like

  12. Other murders that are not as well known as MMM is the event known as the Aiken Party murders. This directly implicates B.Young. Given the knowledge that has come to light about the Aiken Party Murders, I believe B. Young was far more involved in the MMM that previously thought.
    See: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/25443606?uid=3739912&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21106864616793

    Like

  13. I listened to the 40 Years a Mormon lectures. I was particularly interested in his items around membership and counting….

    13 million inactive members? Where does that number come from?

    What church is he referring to that only counts their members in twice a year, including the months of Easter and Christmas? The quarterly report is done 4 times a year. The average sac attendance is used in the months of March, June, Sept, Dec. it is a number – nobody has a list of people that is checked off. The number is counted each Sunday in the month, then the average is taken across the 4 or 5 sundays and that number is submitted as attendance.

    How do i trust a person that claims to have been in leadership positions in the church but gets such simple and small things totally wrong. In the context he gets them wrong, they are used sensationally… why?

    Like

  14. Here’s the relevant quote:

    I will tell you the definition of an active member of the LDS Church used while I was on the High Council, and I believe still used now. Anyone who has attended one meeting every 90 days is considered “active.” They measure it every three months and submit a report. The church only reports a measure of church-wide activity based upon two quarters: the Easter quarter, and the Christmas quarter. If anyone comes to one meeting during those quarters of the year, they are counted in the church measurement of “active” members. Actual activity rates are skewed and overstated.

    The LDS Church claims it has approximately 16,000,000 members today. They claim activity to be somewhere between 4 and 5 million. That is less than 33% activity. People who self identify, depending on which poll you look at, are between 3 and 4 million. That means there are less than 22% who self identify as LDS.

    Seems generally correct to me.

    I don’t have personal knowledge about headquarters only using 2 quarters when aggregating the data for reports, but it is at least plausible.

    Like

  15. Tim, thanks for doing this interview! It was fun to hear your voice. You may claim to be an old man, but I think your voice sounded remarkably young. 😀

    Like

  16. Wow, a million thanks for making this happen.

    Like

  17. Denver is still confused about Joseph’s connection to polygamy and the origin of D&C 132. He thinks that D&C 132 was written by Joseph Smith, and that it flowed somehow from what he found in Jacob 2. He makes a great error in believing so. It poisons his understanding of a great many other things. He needs to correct this great error.

    First, many minds have evidently been clouded by false interpretations of Jacob 2. As a lawyer, Denver should be able to read Jacob 2 clearly, but perhaps his mind is too clouded by the false reading that has been given by early post-Joseph polygamy advocates. Please relay the following to him so he can disabuse his mind of false readings.

    It’s a simple matter of grammar. Jacob 2:30 is not a loophole for polygamy—far from it. Note that the verse begins with “For.” This is a conjunction that means “because.” It is “The word by which a reason is introduced of something before advanced” (Webster’s 1828 dictionary). However, “because” won’t fit Denver’s (nor LDS apologists’) interpretation—verse 30 doesn’t answer why the Nephites must obey God’s commandment to stop polygamy (expressed in the previous verse). Denver must pretend “For” means “but” or “however” or “nevertheless” in order to completely switch horses in the middle of the stream, so to speak.

    So what does verse 30 actually say? Let’s break it down: “For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me.” Verse 25 has already said God “led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.” That’s the SEED referred to later in verse 30. A companion verse is 1 Nephi 7:12–“. . . [Lehi’s] sons should take daughters to wife, that they might RAISE UP SEED UNTO THE LORD in the land of promise.”

    “. . . I will command my people.” This clause does not mean or say, “I will command my people to commit polygamy” as Denver tries to influence people into believing. It refers back to the previous verse regarding the people keeping God’s commandments AGAINST polygamy. “Command” here simply means “govern” or “rule.” It’s similar to a general saying, “I will command the army.” Obviously, if the people disobey His COMMANDments, then God is not in command of the people, and their seed will not be righteous.

    “. . . otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.” Denver would claim “things” here refers to God’s commandments, but these “things” were identified already in verse 23–“for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the THINGS which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.”

    Putting it all together in a paraphrase, Jacob 2:30 actually means: “Because if I will raise up a righteous branch here in the Promised Land, I will govern my people; otherwise they shall listen to the things written about David and Solomon and continue committing whoredoms.”

    Second, Denver has not carefully read the history concerning how D&C 132 came about and how it was attached to Joseph Smith by others after his death. One of the key items Denver has failed to consider is the anachronism in William Clayton’s account about the recording of D&C 132–the Urim and Thummim was not in Joseph’s possession at the time of the supposed recording in which it is claimed that Joseph and Hyrum supposedly debate it’s use for the revelation. William Clayton thus lied in his account of the origin and recording of D&C 132.

    In short, Joseph Smith is not the author of D&C 132, nor does Jacob 2 have anything to do with D&C 132’s origin. Again, please relay this correction to Denver so he can disabuse his mind of false attributions and false teachings. We need to be clear about what Joseph wrote and what he did not write. Denver is close in many respects to filtering things accordingly, but still errs greatly in this regard. I believe he will see other important things with more clarity if he can correct his error here.

    Like

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: