Awake and Arise!


When I entered the covenant offered through Denver Snuffer, I did not know whether the words of the A&C were from Jesus Christ. I had read the A&C through thrice, prayed over it, and analyzed the content through the standard of judgement given in Moroni 7, yet I still did not know the words were from Jesus Christ. The Lord did not attest the covenant to me.

Up to the time of the administration of the covenant where we were asked to stand and say “yes,” I was still wavering, questioning to myself if I actually knew the words were from Jesus Christ. When the moment came, I figured if I were wrong, the Lord would stop me. Though I was unsure, I trusted in the credibility or reliability of Denver Snuffer and accepted the covenant as if it came from God in the absence of knowledge and surety from Heaven.

The Lord did not stop me. My chest swelled uncomfortably with the spirit of pride upon saying “yes,” which I recognized was a bad thing, for charity, as it is written, is not puffed up. That was the first sign I had made a mistake. And I found out that night, to my sorrow and grief and mourning, that the covenant had been a test of integrity and I had failed.

The Lord does not lie, neither does he vary from anything he says. Though he is merciful, he is not a flexible God, but an unchangeable being. “Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man[.]”

And I found out to my horror what the Lord meant by “cursed be the man that trusteth in man.” By saying “yes” to the covenant, thereby saying I knew the words Denver Snuffer put forth were from the Lord when I did not, in fact, know those words to be from the Lord, I broke a commandment and trusted in men. The Lord had therefore cut me off from his presence, leaving me to be led by the Holy Ghost.

When I discovered the consequences of what I had done, I tried to repent immediately by publicly confessing on my blog that I had assented to the covenant despite not knowing the words of the A&C were from Jesus Christ. Afterwards, I fasted and prayed and was baptized again, confessing my sin, in the hopes that the Lord might receive me again into his presence. The curse of the Lord is not got rid of so easily.

I realized that since I had entered the covenant legally, and since there is no honorable exit from it on the text as it stands, the only honorable course of action would be to execute all of the covenant, to the letter, as it is written. This included participating in the Guide and Standard efforts.

The Lord’s request and requirements concerning the Guide and Standard are clear, and there is only one answer that fulfills his criteria, and that answer is his gospel: his law and commandments. The diligent execution of Jesus’s law and commandments as they are written, trusting in him alone, is how we come into his presence, and no man can be saved except he does those exact things. Thus The Rock of Jesus Christ: A Statement of Our Principles offers the words that Jesus gave by his own mouth as his guide and standard for any who would follow him alone and walk in his ways.

In conformity with the Lord’s requests, requirements, law, and commandments, I have formally disputed the adoption of any other document than The Rock of Jesus Christ as the Guide and Standard. This solved the Guide and Standard problem, for if the Lord’s requirement and criteria are executed as written in the A&C by this people, The Rock of Jesus Christ shall inevitably be published.

Now, all that is required of this people to succeed at the task of adopting a guide and standard by mutual agreement in righteousness is that they not defraud the Lord by placing another document in the scriptures as a Guide and Standard.

My primary error in entering the covenant was to take words from a man as though they were from the Lord, relying upon the man’s trustworthiness, connection with heaven, and service to the Lord above my own. The way we repent from trusting men is to completely stop looking to men for the words of the Lord and instead rely solely upon the word of God received by the power of the Holy Ghost to ourselves while keeping all the commandments of Jesus Christ as they are written.

The way that this test has been set up by the Lord is that failure to dispute the adoption of a document is to agree to it, knowing it is for us to follow. If you fail to dispute the adoption of a guide and standard document, then you agree to it and you agree for us to follow it. If that guide and standard consists of the words of men, regardless of whether they be true or false, and you fail to dispute it, then you agree for us to trust in and follow men and be cursed by the Lord, severed from his presence and bound by the chains of hell.

If you, like me, trusted in a man and acted upon that trust by entering the covenant, then you and I have an opportunity to repent of this trust and follow Jesus Christ alone by disputing the adoption of any guide and standard consisting of the words of men, and take the words of Jesus Christ alone for our guide and standard.

The Lottery document is an example of a guide and standard consisting of the words of men. To follow the Lottery document one must trust Denver Snuffer, who is a man. The Lord curses men for trusting men.

Right now, and at the conference at Phoenix, and until and unless this people chooses to defraud the Lord by placing another guide and standard in the scriptures, if you do not publicly dispute the adoption of a guide and standard which consists of the words of men, such as the Lottery document, then you agree to us following men instead of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Any of us who wish to no more be led by men, even prophets, but instead by Christ alone, must publicly dispute the adoption of any guide and standard document which offers the words of men as a guide and standard. We must publicly dispute their adoption in favor of adopting the doctrine, law, and commandments of our Lord Jesus Christ as our guide and standard. And we must actually do what our Lord has commanded.

We must awaken from our deep sleep, even the sleep of hell, and shake off the chains of the leadership of men. We must rise up and stand forth and be known as followers of Jesus Christ and not followers of men, and show our repentance by boldly disputing the attempts to bind this whole people down with the chains of hell.

“Behold, I am the law, and the light. Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live; for unto him that endureth to the end will I give eternal life.”

Jared Livesey

9 thoughts on “Awake and Arise!

  1. Guide: Something that provides a person with guiding information

    Standard: An idea or thing used as a measure, norm, model

    Jared Livesey has proposed a G&S which formally recognizes the importance of the Doctrine of Christ and the Sermon on the Mount as a model to be used by those who seek to live the Covenant and come unto Christ in preparation for the establishment of Zion.

    The Covenant was offered by the Lord ONLY to those who have received the Holy Ghost. We should ask ourselves if that criterion applies to us personally.

    For those who consider this proposed G&S, I recommend reading Denver Snuffer’s blog post in Oct 2010, found in Remembering the Covenant, Vol. 3, pp 1011-1012, which informs that the Doctrine of Christ is the introduction to the Higher Law as found in the Sermon on the Mount (Bountiful); and that it is necessary to receive the Holy Ghost before one will COMPREHEND or be able to LIVE the Higher Law.

    The Savior told his Nephite audience at Bountiful (all of whom had received the Baptism of Fire and the Holy Ghost and been in His presence) “except ye shall keep my commandments, which I have commanded you at this time (Sermon at Bountiful) ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of heaven.” (3 Nephi 12:20). These are foundational requirements.

    I support and agree with Bro. Livesey’s proposal.

    James Russell Uhl

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Jared,

    The following two statements clearly claim you have been in the Lord’s presence, which implies you have seen Him face to face:

    “The Lord had therefore cut me off from his presence, leaving me to be led by the Holy Ghost.”

    “Afterwards, I fasted and prayed and was baptized again, confessing my sin, in the hopes that the Lord might receive me again into his presence.”

    My question is simple: Are we to take these statements literally?—i.e. you previously met the Lord face to face, and that the covenant incident caused Him to deny you access to His presence?

    Is this what we are to understand by these statements?

    Like

    • The silence in response to your inquiry is deafening.
      It does not speak well of such a prolific blogger who has posted comments on hundreds of occasions on the Guide and Standard blog to the point that he has dominated the conversation taking place, yet he fails to respond to this legitimate inquiry.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. You wrote this on Rock Waterman’s blog on February 13, 2017 (in the comments section of a post entittled “Are we Misquoting God?)

    “What does it mean to ‘come unto’ Christ? None are his church who have not come unto him. I take this literally. Maybe Joseph, then, was of his church; Oliver, perhaps, and perhaps Sidney, but who else? Not me; not yet.”

    It appears you hadn’t seen God, and were certain of very little at (not even sure that Joseph was a prophet, if that means being in God’s presence.)

    So if you’re speaking literally here, aren’t you saying that God appeared to you, and accepted you into His presence, some time between February 13, 2017 and the conference in Boise.

    And that even though you were praying about the conference, and asking God whether the covenant being offered was truly of Him, and and even though you received no answer, you still (in your words) lied when you were asked if you knew that the covenant being offered was of God (and when you said “yes”)?

    And that God then withdrew His presence from you.

    But even though you entered into the covenant fraudulently, by (in your own words) lying on one of the preliminary questions, this was nevertheless an act of legally entering into the covenant in God’s eyes?

    And He has held you bound to it, and required you to participate in the GS process anyway?

    After reading and considering what you’ve written here and elsewhere, it seems to me that’s that’s the only thing you could be saying, and it’s all very confusing.

    Would you please clarify yourself for me, Adrian, and anyone else reading along?

    Would you please grant this request here?

    Like

  4. While your questions may be valid, they miss the point of this post, that there is a proposal here for the Guide & Standard that has been made.
    Please stay on track. Please address the proposal with charity and kindness.
    Thank you, and thank you to Jared for his proposal with which I find sincere agreement.
    James Russell Uhl

    Like

    • Alright, and thank you.

      I ask you to forgive me if I offended you in any way, as I also ask Jared and anyone else I may have offended.

      Now let’s look at Jared’s proposal.

      As I understand it, he’s against including any information about anyone the Lord may be using today, or anything He may be doing (or want done) today regarding a Temple fund, collecting and distributing tithes and offerings, etc, even though I believe the instructions given in the AC require those writing a GS to be mindful of those who know little or nothing of what God’s doing today, and to be charitable toward them.

      And I believe he basses this objection on what Jesus said to the Nephites regarding the limits of His doctrine, as recorded in 3 Nephi.

      The idea seems to be that Christ’s doctrine then was the sermon on the mount, anything more or less than that was of the devil, and that must be true today.

      But if that was true in the 19th century Joseph must strayed far from the rock of Christ, and been building on sand, and damning himself when he tried to lead the early latter day saints to some central gathering place, because there’s nothing about flocking together to any one location anywhere in the sermon on the mount.

      And the sermon on the mount and the sermon at bountiful aren’t identical.

      In the sermon on the mount (when the Jewish Temple was standing, and it was still lawful to offer animal sacrifices), Jesus said this:

      “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment…Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.”

      But in the sermon at Bountiful (as recorded in the book of Mormon) Jesus says:

      “Therefore, if ye shall come unto me, or shall desire to come unto me, and rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee—Go thy way unto thy brother, and first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come unto me with full purpose of heart, and I will receive you.”

      Jesus apparently adapted His words to the Nephites, at a time when animal sacrifices were no longer required, and a physical alter was no longer necessary.

      So why would He want us to treat the sermon on the mount as though the precise words He used 2,000 years ago were written in stone, and could never be updated, added to, or adapted to a later age–especially if God is now engaged in performing an end time work that may involve working through a man (or men), gathering to a central location, building a Temple, etc.?

      And especially if He’s asked those writing the GS to keep those who may no little or nothing of what He’s doing today in mind when they write their GS?

      I believe these observations address Jared’s proposal, and I believe the questions Adrian and I asked him are relevant too.

      I would like to again request him to answer those questions.

      And I’d like to take this opportunity to correct some of my typos here:

      You wrote this on Rock Waterman’s blog on February 13, 2017 (in the comments section of a post entittled “Are we Misquoting God?)

      “What does it mean to ‘come unto’ Christ? None are his church who have not come unto him. I take this literally. Maybe Joseph, then, was of his church; Oliver, perhaps, and perhaps Sidney, but who else? Not me; not yet.”

      It appears you hadn’t seen God, and were certain of very little at the time (not even sure that Joseph was a prophet, if being a prophet means being in God’s presence.)

      So if you’re speaking literally in this post here, aren’t you saying:

      1.) That God appeared to you, and accepted you into His presence, some time between February 13, 2017 and the conference in Boise?

      2.) That even though you were praying about the conference, and asking God whether the covenant being offered was truly of Him, and even though you received no answer, you still (in your words) lied when you were asked if you knew that the covenant being offered was of God (and when you said “yes”)?

      3.) That God then withdrew His presence from you?

      And that this was nevertheless viewed by God as a legal act of entering into a covenant He offered, and that instead of holding it null and void, He’s held you bound to it’s terms an conditions (and required you to participate in the GS process)?

      Is that what you’re saying?

      After reading and considering what you’ve written here and elsewhere, it seems to me that that’s the only thing you could be saying, and it’s all very confusing to me (and I would assume to others.)

      Would you please clarify yourself for me, Adrian, and anyone else reading along?

      Please grant this request here?

      Thank you.

      Like

  5. Please forgive me, but I share this in all sincerity and love for everyone.

    My Question: Is it possible the Doctrine of Christ and the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount and in Bountiful are the ONE thing we can ALL agree on?

    If so, then why not adopt this as a Guide and Standard?

    In the Answer to Covenant, the Lord commands us:

    “to be wise in word and kind in deed as you write what I require of you” and “if your hearts were right it was a light thing I have asked.”

    The Lord then asks:

    “Do you indeed desire to be my people? Then accept and do as I have required.”

    Questions: What does the Lord require?

    What does it mean when He asks us to accept and do as He has required?

    Is He talking about agonizing over what words we should put into a Guide and Standard?

    Or, is it possible He could be referring to following His Doctrine and His teachings in the Sermon on the Mount and in Bountiful? That this is what it means to do as He has required?

    In the Answer to Covenant, the Lord also said, “to unite I must admonish and instruct you, for my will is to have you love one another.”

    Is there any other way apart from His Doctrine and what He has taught?

    I believe “the Lord called His people Zion, because THEY [that is these people and their LORD] were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them.”

    Our Lord Jesus Christ alone saves and it is our relationship with Him that can make us all ONE.

    I believe in the end, it is the words of Christ and His teachings alone that “the other sheep” will resonate with and coalesce around, more than anything else.

    Thank you for your patience in hearing me, but my heart weeps.

    With humility and love,

    Josh
    Vientiane, Laos

    P.S. It is indeed difficult to judge someone’s heart without ever having met them. I have had opportunity to meet and fellowship with Jared and Fawn Livesey and I can tell you they have the sincerest hearts and truly practice what they believe. Words can seem provocative, but it is out of a heart filled with charity that those words are given.

    Like

Comments are closed.