[Editorial Note: I get many emails from readers of my blog sharing their thoughts and asking my opinion about historical and doctrinal matters and about prophecy. This series provides selected email exchanges that may be of interest to the general readership.
I sometimes alter my past responses slightly when posted in this series in an effort to provide clarity. As always, the reader should never assume that I know what I am talking about. The information is being provided to stimulate thought and deeper study into the scriptures and history of the church.
I do not share email conversations if you request that I don’t.
I seldom correct typos in emails from readers since I am unqualified to correct my own typos.
I apologize for the length of this edition and for the many notable email conversations that I just could not include in this session. I value all correspondence but I just cannot include all of it.
I seem to losing interest and energy for the blog and plan on posting much less frequently unless something major happens in the world that infuses me with additional passion. This particular series will probably be dropped.
Observations, questions, and death threats can be sent to onewhoiswatching [at] gmail dot com]
Email Exchange #1
“I have to disagree to the credit you give to the LDS Church and saving ordinances. I do not see any saving ordinances, temple rites, secret signs or tokens as of any value.”
“I have to disagree to the credit you give to the LDS Church and saving ordinances [on pages 159-160 of your book, Solving the Prophet Puzzle
]. I do not see any saving ordinances, temple rites, secret signs or tokens as of any value.
JS stated that you might as well baptize a bag of sand, as a man, for the first baptism, without the second baptism, it is of no value. If the water Baptism is of no value in and of itself, how can the rest be of any value?
I believe the signs and tokens and saving ordinances are some of the sharpest arrows in Satan’s quiver. People for the most part, believing that they are saved without receiving the true BoFHG, do not feel the need to pursue further righteness.
Those who do not receive remission of sin through the BoFHG will pay for their own sin through the 1000 year millennium with the LDS receiving the most strips, and will be resurrected with the SOP, and appear at the Judgement bar, and sentenced to the Telestial Kingdom.
Christ said my Kingdom is not of this earth. When He baptises you into His Kingdom, you are brought up as a calf in a stall, Isa ch 1. 2 Nephi Ch 32 is in effect. You are clean and the HG is your constant companion. God promised the children of Israel that He would take all sickness, lameness, infirmities from them and drive out the inhabitants of the promised land out in front of them as needed, with hoards of Hornets, if they would just believe, a belief they never achieved.
Instead they ended up dieing, fighting, sinning and being cursed with the Law. The crowning act of the Law of Moses was the crucifixion of Christ. The crowning act of the LDS church, will be the spiritual death of its members. They will stay the natural man, walking through eternity experiencing eternity as a physical experience, instead of a spiritual experience. They will be some of.
Even Peter and the whole Twelve had problems accepting Christs gospel even after Peter saw the gentiles receive the BoFHG. God had to command him to eat of both clean and unclean Animals to get him to finally come around to the Gospel Paul received.
Charity; Charity is just a word and to truly understand the word we must break down the word to the mechanics of the word. The mechanics of the word Charity is always seeking the other person’s best good. Charity covereth a multitude of sins.
Believe is also just a word, an very, very important word, undefined in scripture. However the word believe and faith are very similar words to me. Faith is somewhat defined in scripture and can show us the extent of the action of belief that is necessary to truly believe. If you are in possession of faith (believe) the size and amount of a mustard seed you could move mountains.
“I have to disagree to the credit you give to the LDS Church and saving ordinances. I do not see any saving ordinances, temple rites, secret signs or tokens as of any value.”
We don’t disagree on this, you simply misunderstood what I was saying. ( I am glad you have pointed this out so that I can clarify what I am saying better in the book)
On pages 159 and 160, when I was referring to and defining the “church of Christ” I was referring to the true restored church of Christ as it existed prior to the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood in June of 1831. I was not referring to the condemned church that followed the rejection of the fulness, or the modern apostate church which was rejected in Nauvoo.
I believe the restored church from 1830 until June of 1831 actually had power in their ordinances for those who exercised faith and that is why the greater priesthood was able to be manifested in the lives of people like Joseph Smith, Lyman Wight and Sidney Rigdon, etc., who exercized faith unto repentance through those ordinances to the extent that the Father called them to be High Priests.
After the fulness was collectively rejected by the saints, the Lord pronounced the leaders and the members of the church to be “condemned“.
CONDEMN, v.t. [L., to condemn, to disapprove, to doom, to devote.]
1. To pronounce to be utterly wrong; to utter a sentence of disapprobation against; to censure; to blame. But the word often expresses more than censure or blame, and seems to include the idea of utter rejection; as, to condemn heretical opinions; to condemn ones conduct.We condemn mistakes with asperity, where we pass over sins with gentleness.
2. To determine or judge to be wrong, or guilty; to disallow; to disapprove.Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, we have confidence towards God. I John 3.
3. To witness against; to show or prove to be wrong, or guilty, by a contrary practice.The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it. Matthew 12.
4. To pronounce to be guilty; to sentence to punishment; to utter sentence against judicially; to doom; opposed to acquit or absolve; with to before the penalty.The son of man shall be betrayed to the chief priests, and to the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death. Matthew 20.He that believeth on him is not condemned. John 3.
5. To doom or sentence to pay a fine; to fine.And the king of Egypt–condemned the land in a hundred talents of silver. 2 Chronicles 36.
6. To judge or pronounce to be unfit for use or service; as, the ship was condemned as not sea-worthy. To judge or pronounce to be forfeited; as, the ship and her cargo were condemned.
Shortly after being condemned in 1834, the church was not the same as it had been previously. That is why they had to take the name of the Christ out of the name of the church.
After condemning the church, the Lord ultimately REJECTED the church in Nauvoo which means that the saving ordinances of a rejected church cannot provide the spiritual rebirth that leads to salvation.
Having said all of that, I think that I have provided ample evidence in the remainder of the book (which you have not apparently read yet) to demonstrate that even though the saints were condemned and rejected as a church and prevented from living celestial law for a “little season”, they were still a remnant of God’s people who he loves and he continued working with them at some level, as a tribal kingdom.
I remain open to the possibility that the modern church offers a “preparatory” baptism for those that are pure in heart, that will lead the sincere individual away from the false teachings of the apostate church and towards a deeper relationship with Christ and towards the TRUTH…
Obviously that preparatory baptism cannot save anyone just as the law of Moses could not save anyone, however, just as the law of Moses pointed to Christ, the preparatory baptism could potentially do the same thing. I believe that if the person is pure in heart and seeking the truth, they are justified before God and will be led to greater enlightenment and ultimately into the strait gate when the fulness returns.
Nobody has been more critical of the modern church than me, however, as I have continued to study and search in an effort to better understand what the purpose of Joseph Smith’s ministry was and why we must have a “grafting in” and a timeout from the fulness for four generations, I have concluded that the modern church is part of God’s overall plan and that there is some purpose in it regardless of how much it annoys those of us who are seeking the full truth and to understand and prepare our hearts and minds to receive the fulness when it returns not only in word but in deed.
I feel grateful I was born into Mormonism instead of Protestantism or atheism. Even though I have now discarded the precepts of men promoted by the apostate church, I remain fully committed to the word of God in the Book of Mormon and the revelations Joseph brought forth. I feel those scriptures have brought me closer to God and his truth.
If the above statement is true, then the commission given to the condemned quorum of the Twelve in section 118 is still in force and the apostate church still has the commission to take the BofM to all the world so that the chips can fall where they may as people have the opportunity to accept or reject Gods word.
Some people discard the word of God altogether when confronted with the Book of Mormon.
Some accept it but then join the church and discard the word of God by allowing the precepts of men to override God’s word.
Others accept God’s word over the precepts of men once they join the the church. How they navigate their relationship with the church and the false prophets after they become enlightened is between them and God and it does not concern me.
I believe that the Mormons who have begun to understand and believe in Christ and who are trying really hard to be saved through the temporal gospel of works, represent a terrestrial group of spirits that have been deceived by the “craftiness of men, however, mingled among them, are the elect of God who quietly search the scriptures and ponder God and his gospel in their hearts”.
I no longer despise people who I feel have rejected or cannot comprehend the higher truth, I am grateful for God’s merciful plan in their lives and I wish them the best and I rejoice knowing that after their “pain” they will be in a kingdom of glory. If I obtain a terrestrial glory with them for taking a different path I will be satisfied even though my hope is for a greater reward.
Email Exchange #2
“There are a couple of things that hit me about the old farm dream that you might not have caught that I would like to share if you will”
Watcher; I am so enjoying your book and thank you for presenting gospel truths in such a complete manner.
There are a couple of things that hit me about the old farm dream that you might not have caught that I would like to share if you will.
First is the depiction that the first group, and the rabble commenced to fighting with knives. Joseph could have entered the fray armed with a Sword, but choose not to. Heb 4:12 with JS translation 12
” For the word of God is living, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of body and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”
The rabble and the led group fighting with just knives would be contending with the words of God mingled with the philosophies of man, or mangled by the philosophies of man, as I put it.
That brings me to wonder, if the rabble might be represented by those excited by the teachings of a new teacher on the block. Yet there is the scripture that says their sins will be shouted from the house tops, (internet receivers). Interesting times for sure
Very interesting observation thank you for sharing..
I have some friends in Mo that just met a woman who is a direct descendant of Joseph Smith. She has converted from the RLDS church to the LDS church.
She goes around speaking at firesides…
Anyway, she has confided in them that she has had a prophetic dream of Joseph coming back and preaching to two different bodies of people… in the middle of his preaching he says, “is anybody listening to me?” and “walks away”, as if to imply that the first two groups of people that the gospel is taken to by the servants will reject the truth…
Anyway, your comments reminded me of that…
Email Exchange #3
I love reading your insights about events of the restoration. Would you mind clarifying a few things from me from the last post?
28 And when the times of the Gentiles is come in [again] , a light shall break forth among them that sit in darkness, [the blinded shepherds and sheep of the kingdom of the Jews] and it shall be the fulness of my gospel;
29 But they receive it not; for they perceive not the light, and they turn their hearts from me because of the precepts of men.
30 And in that generation shall the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. (D&C 45:18-30)
My understanding of what you are saying is that the latter-day church is the gathered Jews/House of Israel, but when the light breaks forth again, it will be the end of the times of the Gentiles.
You have said those who rejected the fulness in the days of Joseph Smith were Gentiles (or maybe Ephraimites?) but this time who will be rejecting the fulness – Gentiles, or Jews? or The house of Israel mingled among the Gentiles who have embraced Babylon and then it will return to other remnants like the native Americans? I’m just having a hard time keeping track of all the groups that don’t even know who they are and who to watch for messengers to come among.
You also mentioned that the elect would need to be gathered out of the Jerusalem where the prophets will appear and cry repentance. How do you see this happening? The closest I can see so far might be the excommunication of so many people who are not in line with “follow the living prophet”, but many of these are from the group that are following Denver Snuffer, whom you believe to be something other than a true messenger. Do you see something else going on that I am missing?
Thanks for writing. I hope you get a chance to address these questions.
My understanding of what you are saying is that the latter-day church is the gathered Jews/House of Israel, but when the light breaks forth again, it will be the end of the times of the Gentiles.
No that is not what I am saying.
I am saying just the opposite.
When the light shines forth, it will end the dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham and will be the times of the gentiles coming in again.
Sorry I have not communicated better.
This topic is very confusing for several reasons, one of them has to do with semantics and the fact that the gentiles nations have and do rule and control the world and in that sense, one could say that we live during the times of the gentiles from a political point of view.
HOWEVER, with regard to the context of “GOSPEL DISPENSATION“, it is a different topic. We need to differentiate between the times of the political rule of the gentile nations and the time when the gospel is being sent to the nation of the believing gentiles.
I would liken it to the time when the Jews had their own religious kingdom set up at the time of Christ. At that time, even though they had their religious kingdom set up and Christ was extending the gospel to them, the kingdom of the Jews were under the rule of Rome politically.
When speaking of the times of the gentiles and the fulness of the gentiles it is important to differentiate world domination from a political perspective as opposed to a gospel dispensation.
The modern corporate church represents the reestablishment of the Kingdom of Israel governed by Judah, and yet, they are politically governed by the gentile nations that are in control.
I believe the passage in Section 45 and other related passages are saying that from the going forth of the Gospel by Peter James and John to the gentiles during New Testament Times, continuing on until the fulness of the gospel was restored and rejected within that same dispensation (during Joseph’s ministry), it represented the time when the gospel was directed primarily to the believing Gentile. It is important to understand that the restoration of the church of Christ in 1830 and the restoration of the fulness in 1831 were are taking place during the dispensation to the Gentiles that began with Peter James and John.
Once the believing gentile church collectively rejected the fulness and broke the everlasting covenant during Joseph’s ministry, “something new” had to be done to delay the curse from going forth in the earth as noted in Malachi.
At that point, the gospel message was then directed primarily to the House of Israel and foreign missions were established so that the grafting in of the natural branches could take place. At that time the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham was secretly ushered in and we have been in that dispensation up until now.
Once the Gentile servants of the 2nd watch return with the fulness, the times of the gentiles will once again come in.
Of course we are speaking in generalities.
It is really not black and white, because some from Judah were already in America and came into the church during the Kirtland era and conversely, there were undoubtedly some believing gentiles that came across the great waters during Nauvoo and Utah.
But generally speaking, the gospel had been to the gentiles at the beginning of Joseph’s ministry and then, as Parley Pratt noted, the servants of the Lord turned their efforts and were sent to the House of Israel after the Gentile nation had come to its fulness in rejecting the fulness.
According to Section 109 the beginning of the redemption of Jerusalem and the gathering of Judah began from that very hour in 1836.
According to Section 110, the ushering in of the Dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham was taking place at that time. So there seems to have been a transitionary time between 1834 and 1836 when the gospel was being rejected by and taken from the gentiles, and taken to the House of Israel.
From that time until today, we have been in the Dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham for about four generations.
We are waiting for the return of the believing Gentile servants who will usher in the Dispensation of the fulness of times. When they arrive and present the fulness of the Gospel, “not only in word, but in deed“, to those who sit in darkness, the times of the gentiles will “come in” again.
The graphic below would be a better illustration if the change in color showed up better between the left side of the 1836 line and the right side of the line.
One of the reasons this topic is so confusing is because virtually everyone has been conditioned to believe that the true and living church that joseph restored has remained on the earth since the time of Joseph Smith and therefore everyone thinks we are currently living during the times of the gentile dispensation and that the times of the gentiles is about to come to an end. I believe this misunderstanding is necessary in order for prophecy to take place.
“You have said those who rejected the fulness in the days of Joseph Smith were Gentiles (or maybe Ephraimites?) but this time who will be rejecting the fulness – Gentiles, or Jews?”
Once the fulness is ushered in, “those who sit in darkness”, who I believe has reference to those religious leaders that rule over the religious dispensation of the gospel of abraham, as well as the membership of the modern church collectively, that don’t repent, will reject the fulness when it is again offered.
Only a very few people will be included in the first harvest.
I believe the first harvest is composed of Ephraimites who are of mixed lineage because the scriptures seem to indicate this. However, Ephraimites have been mingled among virtually all tribes so it is not wise to categorize from outward appearances. Rather, the elect can only be identified by the fact that they are willing to repent, reform, humble themselves, offer up a broken heart and a contrite spirit, and enter into the full law of the gospel including consecration when God’s anointed servants return to begin the Marvelous Work and ushering the fulness of times.
It appears to me from scripture that a remnant of believing repentant gentiles will unite with a remnant of the repentant and believing seed of Lehi to build the New Jerusalem… but again, it is important to note that everyone that accepts the fulness in the first harvest is of the repentant remnant of Ephraim.
You also mentioned that the elect would need to be gathered out of the Jerusalem where the prophets will appear and cry repentance. How do you see this happening?
By the time the two prophets are crying repentance to the latter day saint “Jews” in “Jerusalem”, the elect have already been harvested.
I do not have a strong opinion on whether the ministry of the two witnesses will take place in the City of Salt or Kirtland…. I can see it playing out either way. There could be a migration of the modern church stalwarts to Kirtland within the next few years or they may stay in Utah. Either say, wherever the main body of the kingdom of Judah is, is technically called Jerusalem.
“The closest I can see so far might be the excommunication of so many people who are not in line with “follow the living prophet”, but many of these are from the group that are following Denver Snuffer, whom you believe to be something other than a true messenger. Do you see something else going on that I am missing?”
The fact that people become critical and are excommunicated from the church does not necessarily mean they are the elect. People leave the church for a myriad of reasons and motivations.
There have been countless groups that have split off from the modern corporate church during the last four generations but they may have no more light and knowledge than the modern church, even if they have their eyes opened to the apostate condition of the church. It is easy to become critical with the modern church when comparing it to the standard of New Testament Christianity and the restored church of the restoration. Many of these splinter groups are trying to “steady the arch” without the authority to do so.
Christ’s warning of false prophets is an ancillary prophetic narrative that takes place at this general time frame.
Once a person gets a firm witness of the truthfulness and magnitude of the event described in Section 110 and the prophetic narrative described in this latest series, it becomes undeniable that Snuffer has to be a false prophet because of his stance on Section 110 that he has been unwilling to repent of.
He continues to claim ongoing revelation from God having supposedly been taught something profound as recently as a few weeks ago and yet he continues to shed darkness and doubt about the veracity of section 110.
If he was really a major player in the end times scenario anointed by God, to shed the truth on what is currently happening, he certainly would be clearly testifying of 110 and what it means instead of providing an intellectual historical analysis that shed darkness and doubt about the veracity of the event.
A true prophet would take a firm stance and speak with authority on the issue saying “thus saith the Lord” section 110 is true or untrue, etc..
Snuffer refuses to take a hard stance on the topic but rather casts doubt on the event by listing all of the historical issues surrounding it that don’t intellectually seem logical to him.
I suspect that if he has been reading my research on the topic and this series, that he realizes now that he has made a colossal mistake of ginormous proportions in taking the stance that he has taken. The bottom-line is that he has rejected revelation and is causing others to reject God’s word which is quite a serious matter, but he realizes that if he acknowledges his mistake, it puts his revelatory claims in question. He is now caught between a rock and a really really hard place.
Email Exchange #4
“Jospeh talks about sitting down with both Elijah and JtB in the last days at the last great sacrament meeting. ”
I was studying this this morning and found a few verses that doesn’t seem to fit the theme of Elijah being JtB.
I have problems with this section anyway. Because the original revelation stops in the middle of verse 5. I’ve never been able to uncover where the rest of the revelation comes from. I’ve looked in the KRB for it.
I’m not sure if you addressed this before or not.
Jospeh talks about sitting down with both Elijah and JtB in the last days at the last great sacrament meeting.
6 And also with Elias, to whom I have committed the keys of bringing to pass the restoration of all things spoken by the mouth of all the holy prophets since the world began, concerning the last days;
7 And also John the son of Zacharias, which Zacharias he (Elias) visited and gave promise that he should have a son, and his name should be John, and he should be filled with the spirit of Elias;
8 Which John I have sent unto you, my servants, Joseph Smith, Jun., and Oliver Cowdery, to ordain you unto the first priesthood which you have received, that you might be called and ordained even as Aaron;
9 And also Elijah, unto whom I have committed the keys of the power of turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers, that the whole earth may not be smitten with a curse;
yes that section seems problematic but it is important to remember that it merges to separate revelations together and that other grammatical changes have been made.
I have addressed this in my book as follows-
Section 27 Testifies of Section 110It Provides Clarity to Malachi,
110 and The Doctrine of Elijah
When I first discovered the secret Elijah doctrine in the Inspired Version, years ago, I looked for way to debunk it. The thought that God would transmigrate an Old Testament prophet into the person of a New Testament figure seemed remarkable and difficult to believe. When I noticed a passage in Section 27 that made it appear as if Elijah and John the Baptist were separate people, I decided to not write in my blog about how the Inspired Version teaches regarding the two individuals being the same, although I did make a few comments in the comment section of various posts.
The evidence was overwhelmingly in favor of the two of them being the same, but I chose to not write any blogs or papers on the topic until I could understand the reason behind the apparent discrepancy. Nevertheless, the two passages in the Inspired Version along with the mountain of supporting evidence rang true to me, so I began to investigate a little deeper into the origin and original text of Section 27.
A Composite of Two Revelations
According to Robert Woodford, “Section 27 is either a composite of two revelations, or one revelation written in two parts. The uncertainty concerning its origin can be traced to two contemporary accounts . . . it appears these two revelations were combined for publication in the 1835 edition of the D&C.”
Restoring the Original Integrity to the Text of Section 27
As I began to dig a little deeper into Section 27, and was able to look at earlier texts, the problem became obvious. The text had become distorted. Once the modern use of verses is removed and the earlier punctuation restored, the meaning is greatly transformed. Notice the versing and grammar alterations as well as text deletion that has taken place in the modern version of Section 27:
In the 1833 Book of Commandments, the first part of what we now as Section 27 was published. It represents what the angel told Joseph as he was on his way to procure wine for the sacrament. In the 1835 D&C, both parts are published together and, in the 1851 publication of the Pearl of Great Price, only the second part is published. In both of those texts, Verses 8 and 9 are actually part of the same sentence. A colon instead of a semicolon is used. It is not broken up into modern verses. The capital “A” on “And” is a lower case “a”.When restored to an earlier way the text was presented, the meaning completely changes. This is how the two verses emerged as one verse, in the 1851 edition of the Pearl of Great Price.
As you can see, the two verses were, originally, one sentence. Elijah was not being presented as one of the characters who will be at the occasion of sharing the wine; rather, the point being made in the narrative, is that both the higher and lesser priesthood needed to be ordained by the laying on of hands, in the same manner that Aaron was ordained to the Aaronic priesthood and that Elijah was ordained to the Melchizedek priesthood.
This is a much needed clarification, because when the Old Testament reveals that the Melchizdek priesthood is received by the calling of God’s voice out of heaven, it does not include the fact that a physical ordination must accompany the heavenly call. Aaron and Elijah were being given as examples of how the reception of both the higher and lower priesthood involved the laying on of hands.
One would think that Melchizedek would have been chosen as the example for proper Melchizedek priesthood protocol since that priesthood was named after him. In hindsight, now that I understand that John the Baptist was Elijah the Prophet, who also held the Melchizedek priesthood, it feels to me as if a cryptic witness is being offered of the fact that John was Elijah. Therefore, he was uniquely qualified to restore the Aaronic priesthood, and also to teach Joseph and Oliver about the forthcoming Melchizedek priesthood.
A Few other Observations about Section 27
The Final Elijah. The phrase, “restorer of all things spoken by the mouth of all the holy prophets,” is very significant. It distinguishes the mission of Elijah the “preparer” from the mission of Elijah the “restorer.” It is not known why it was taken out in later publications.
“The Keys of Turning the Hearts of the Fathers.” It appears, from Verses 8 and 9, that Joseph and Oliver obtained the keys of turning the hearts of the fathers to the children. The return of Elijah was all about transferring priesthood KEYS so that the Abrahamic promise could be fulfilled.
In Section 13, Elijah transferred the priesthood KEYs of the “ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins.”
In Section 110, Elijah declared to Joseph and Oliver that “the KEYS of this dispensation are committed into your hands.”
Which dispensational keys? The priesthood keys to the ancient dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham that had just been committed into the hands of Joseph and Oliver back in Verse 12 of Section 110! The priesthood, given by Elijah to Joseph and Oliver in 1829, belonged to the dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham that was secretly committed to Joseph and Oliver behind the veil in 1836.
Email Exchange #4
Why did Alma, who was a high priest after the order of Melchezidek baptize people into repentance?
Nevertheless Alma labored much in the spirit, wrestling with God in mighty prayer, that he would pour out his Spirit upon the people who were in the city; that he would also grant that he might baptize them unto repentance.
Is this because they were under the old covenant and Christ hadn’t come yet? But then how did Alma get to become a high priest?😉
Your question presupposes that “into” and “unto” are synonymous.
I don’t think they are.
To me, the passage is simply inferring that repentance is a requirement and prerequisite of baptism and that the miraculous softening and humbling of the heart necessary for repentance could take place to prepare the people for baptism.
Alma was petitioning the Lord that he would bestow his spirit upon the people that they might become humbled and repentant, preparing them for baptism.
I didn’t agree with what you had written and went to the New Testament to see what John the Baptist had said about it.
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: (emphasis mine)
But then I looked at the JST and look what I found …
JST Matt 3:38
I indeed baptize you with water, upon your repentance; and when he of whom I bear record cometh, who is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear, (or whose place I am not able to fill,) as I said, I indeed baptize you before he cometh, that when he cometh he may baptize you with the Holy Ghost and fire. (emphasis mine)
I stand corrected
Email Exchange #5
You should read this when you get a chance…
(attached was a speculative timeline showing why Denver is an inspired prophet and speaking about the temple that Denver and is disciples are going to build.)
Response from one of the other recipients of the email
At a loss for words with that snufferite document “Patriarchs and Temples”….
I don’t know how anyone can take anything that comes from DS seriously.
DS now has enough diehards to get his little kingdom going for real. It’s going to start getting serious.
My Response to the above Response
Amen to that.
Yes this movement could get pretty serious. He is creating a kingdom. It will be interesting to see if there is enough time for him to get his temple project off the ground.
The odd thing to me is how the implication of the document is that the LDS temple does not become defiled until homosexual marriages are first performed in them. That assumption presupposes that the current LDS Masonic Temple ordinance has been valid up to this very day. That is consistent with the fact that Denver loves the Masonic endowment and would indicate that Denver’s endowment in his new temple will be more of the same signs tokens and handshakes that we have had for the last four generations.
22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
“I think I’m beginning to see that his fall was necessary..”
First I’d like to thank you for your blog and the amount of time you have spent researching and compiling all the data that you have.
I like you, years ago realized that the church had stopped following the fullness of the gospel and I gave up church activity.
However, I also believed Joseph had become a fallen prophet due to sin, but thanks to you I think I’m beginning to see that his fall was necessary, and for that knowledge I thank you.
I’d also like to take you up on your offer for a copy of your timeline to use in my own studies. Thanks very much and God bless you! Not everyone uses the spiritual gifts they have been given, but your gift of teaching is and will be of great service to sincere followers of Christ.
Thank you for the kind words and praise God for the grace He is showing us as He begins to take the blindness off of our eyes. I am sending the timeline
Email Exchange #7
“I do not see any hint of how long a generation is..”
I have been searching through your blog posts for a discussion of how many years comprises a generation. Specifically, in reference to the 3d watch beginning in about 4 generations after the rejection of the Gentile church.
I found this statement from one of your blog posts:
We learn from latter-day revelation that in the second watch, the Lord destroys the Gentiles church.
This will be discussed in future posts. (Various scriptures referring the four generations that follow the LDS Restoration Movement are as follows
another reference that speaks in more general terms about Gods dealings with the wicked beginning at the 3rd and 4th generations is 98:46 
The throwing down of the gentile Church and the destruction of the gentile nations of the earth takes place at about the time that the gospel light shines forth in the third and final watch… when the marvelous work comes forth.
I have examined all of these references and agree that a generational gap of 3 to 4 generations is applied by the Lord in reference to forebearance against enemies of the Lord’s work. But, I do not see any hint of how long a generation is.
I do know that the Moses led wandering in the wilderness was for the time for the death of the generation which rejected the celestial law. And that was for forty years.
Are we to understand that when the Lord refers to a generation he means 40 years?
If so, then 4 generations would be 160 years and according to my calculations that time would have ended somewhere in the early 2000’s!
It is interesting that you are bringing this up now as I got a similar email from another subscriber recently on the same topic.
He claims a Biblical generation is 70 years.
I admit that it is debatable as to how long a Biblical generation is.
In addition to the logic you already have pointed out, the savior prophesied that the not one stone would be left standing in that generation and it was almost exactly 40 years later that the siege and destruction of Jerusalem took place, which is another reason for the 40 year definition speculation.
Getting to your point regarding the early 2000’s, the 64 dollar question is, when did the generation begin that the scriptures are referring to? From what point in time do we begin calculating the 160 years forward?
There are so many possibilities beginning with Joseph’s birth in 1805, the first vision, to the return of Elijah the Tishbite in 1829, to the legal organization of the church in LDS Section 20 in 1820 (which very clearly gives us the statement about how many years it had been sin the birth of our Lord)
Then there is the condemnation of the church in December of 1834, beginning of the redeeming of Jerusalem “from the very hour” in 1836 in LDS section 109, and the rejection of the saints as a church in 1841 or the death of Joseph Smith in 1844 or the actually crown of King Brigham as the king of Israel (president of the church by common consent in 1848 and many other possibilities beyond 1844 as a potential starting point…. we just don’t know for sure when the first generation begins and ends..
I have made many speculations about this but I am afraid I am more of a “yankee guesser” like my great great grandfather Brigham than a prophet like brother Joseph LOL
I will say this.. I do believe the end of the four generations has possibly already taken place for reasons I do not have time to elaborate on at this time.
I think there are some amazing things that have taken place already that very few people realize the significance of… but I have decided to keep relatively quiet about them for now..
My guess is that 2001-2 and 2007-8 and 2014-5 represent a sequence of seven year periods that represent an amazing prophetic pattern and in which some amazing things have already taken place.
It would not surprise me if the servants have already been on the earth for several years preparing for the calamity that is about to take place.
We know that more translation must take place so they can come forth with additional scripture with which to test the world with and according to Joseph’s Patriarchal blessing, he takes seven years to gather wheat for times of famine for the coming times of hardship topological to how Joseph of Egypt did in planning for his brethren, etc.
If the proclamation to the kings of the earth and the president elect as mention in LDS section 124 is to be fulfilled with this coming election, then the servants must come forth VERY SOON
…BTW listening to the FBI Director Comey (sp?) yesterday, revealed that the FBI is under the control of far more powerful influences than are visible to most. His attempt to declare what a “reasonable prosecutor” would do did not fool anyone trained in the law. He was out of his area of expertise and simply taking one for the team. He is being called on this over and over.
Now what will be interesting to watch is how the Lord uses all this commotion and chaos, in this super jublilee year, to work his plan. The works and designs of man fail, as is happening presently, the works, designs and purposes of God cannot be frustrated.
May we have our spiritual senses attuned to what is happening now. I think it may be as when Nephi prayed all night because on the next day, the believers were to be executed if the sign were not given. Just in the “nick of time,” it came. Type and shadow for Watchers. We will be tested because it looks like the powerful criminal cabals have won (are winning), but the Gospel of Abraham requires us to have faith.
I love preaching to the choir. VBG (very big grin)
Email Exchange #8
(below are selected conversations with a person who is part of a splinter group from the RLDS (Community of Christ) church)
“it is apparent that because certain sections (the oracles) were not included in the RLDS DC, that a blindness was imposed on those who thought that be reading the three standard works they were getting the “full story”. Au contraire!. How can we have gotten the full story without considering such sections as LDS DC sections 109, 110, 125 and others. By eliminating these from the official book, the membership was (and is) deceived by “out of sight, out of mind” blindness.”
The interesting thing is that we Mormons have been in blindness also, despite the fact that we did have those sections of scripture. We simply did not understand what they meant!!!
In our pride an arrogance, we have superimposed a “dispensation of the fulness of times” narrative over the “dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham” narrative that is actually being presented… go figure. LOL
Email Exchanges #10
“What now?… what does the Lord expect us to do?”
I am still making my way through all your blog posts. It is a daunting task for sure. One question keeps popping in my mind over and over again. What now? After we have learned about the third watch and everything that comes with it, what do we do with that knowledge? What does the Lord expect us to do? Do we act any different? Do we worship differently? If I decide to stay in the church and continue to go and hold callings and go to the temple does it hurt me?
And one last question. Do you ever meet with people? I have a bunch of questions that only really work if they are asked face to face.
That is between you and the Lord. I try not to give advise to people per D&C 1:19. I would be a poor excuse for the Holy Ghost
I appreciate the lunch offer.. I will consider it. I have had several but have not taken anyone up on it. I am not sure if it is a good idea. meeting a space cadet like me might discredit what people might have learned through the key words searches they have learned to do from this blog.
Email Exchange #11
I just finished reading Pt. 5. It is great. But most of all, it is comforting.
As I read it, I became aware of how like a brief to establish the proper construction of a Constitutional or statutory provision your exposition represents.
First, the constitutional or statutory framework must be laid down. That’s what I call the basic beat, referring to a musical analogy. The lawgiver lays out where things are and where they are going.
Second, there is the historical development where individual cases are adjudicated in order to flesh out the underlying beat. Each individual fact pattern must be dealt with according to the Judges understanding of that initial cadence already laid down. The individual cases may deal with any part of that initial legislative enactment so that, taken one by one, they may appear to be out of order.
But, when the cases are looked at as representing the best thinking of the Judges as they relate to the original legislation, it makes no difference when they are decided. They become a part of the grand mosaic which forms the melody of the statute.
This is what your work is demonstrating, at least to me. You have treated the scriptures and the related historical documents and information as a single data source for the exegesis of God’s plan.
Understanding that plan (melody) allows us to place our own individual cadenza on the flow of the melody.
But this also directs our understanding of how to search the scriptures, as you have pointed out. We must understand the basic beat, and lay out a timeline or process line. Then when we study a particular scriptural story or prophetic pronouncement, it must be identified as to where in the process it fits.
The more pieces of the puzzle we find and fit in, the clearer the overall mosaic becomes and allows us to all find our cadenza time to be anxiously engaged in adding to the music.
I love your showing us the way to solve the puzzle…
I know you said that you are going to be very busy for several weeks, but I found something this evening as I was studying PPB chapter 12.
First, a confession. I have never studied the Book of Abraham. I don’t believe that the RLDS gives it any credence.
Second, I found your review of the Gospel of Abraham to be absolutely stunning. As I was reading along, it suddenly occurred to be that this must be one of the precious truths removed from the Bible. And then there on the next page was your comment to that effect including the more specific removal of a covenant. Just simply amazing.
Email Exchange #12
“..This only makes us more scripurally illiterate as a people. We might “know” the church’s doctrine, but not why or where it’s located in the scriptures. If it’s even there at all.”
I’m not sure if you’ve seen this or not.
It’s an article that explains that the Church is doing away with scripture mastery. They are changing into doctrinal mastery. But before you think they’re throwing the baby out with the bath water you’ll be happy to know …
“That means Doctrinal Mastery becomes topical, not sequential,” said Elder Clark. “We figured out a way to get the scriptures in there so you still have 25 scriptures that are part of Doctrinal Mastery, but the focus is really on topics — doctrinal topics.”
Phew, at least they were able to squeeze 25 scriptures in there.
Why are they going this route?
“Students have instant access to virtually everything about the Church from every possible point of view,” Elder Ballard said. “Today what they see on their mobile devices is likely to be faith-challenging as much as faith-promoting.”
In an effort to help students be informed, educated and spiritually taught about the doctrine and history of the Church, the new Doctrinal Mastery has been added to the seminary curriculum.
This only makes us more scriputally illiterate as a people. We might “know” the church’s doctrine, but not why or where it’s located in the scriptures. If it’s even there at all.
I was reading in D&C 20:58
But neither teachers nor deacons have authority to baptize, administer the sacrament, or lay on hands;
Where do we get that deacons are to pass or administer the sacrament and teachers are to assist when needed?
A classic idea of what the church teaches and what isn’t supported in scriptures.
But I digress back to Elder Ballard’s reasoning for this new curriculum change. I think back to an address J. Reuben Clark, Jr. Gave in 1938 to religious educators.
You do not have to sneak up behind this spiritually experienced youth and whisper religion in his ears; you can come right out, face to face, and talk with him. You do not need to disguise religious truths with a cloak of worldly things; you can bring these truths to him openly, in their natural guise. Youth may prove to be not more fearful of them than you are. There is no need for gradual approaches, for “bedtime” stories, for coddling, for patronizing, or for any of the other childish devices used in efforts to reach those spiritually inexperienced and all but spiritually dead.
You can read it here:
I’m not sure this is the best long term strategy. Not a bad one for the short term to engage return missionaries to help the youth.
very interesting.. thanks for sharing
This should reduce the number of people that leave the church because they start searching the scriptures during the scriptural mastery sessions
Email Exchange #13
As I was reading section 42 I saw a couple of things in a couple different verses which raised some questions regarding the historical narrative you have laid out.
Verse 31- mentions high priests. I know there is a difference in high priests in the lesser priesthood verses High Priest in the Highest Priesthood. However, at this point in church history (Feb 1831) I wasn’t aware that the office of high priest was established yet? I thought that the Morley Farm conference was the first time that anyone was ordained to the office of High Priest?
Another one is in verse 39. You have said that prior to 1837 all missionary work was going to the Gentiles in America and that when foreign missions to England and Europe and other Islands opened up that was when the gospel was taken to the House of Israel.
However, verse 39 clearly states that the riches of those who embrace my gospel among the Gentiles in 1831 would go unto the poor of my people who are of the house of Israel. At that time, the Church was only in America, so who were the poor of the people of the house of Israel if not the poor LDS members at that time?
Also, I’ve always wondered how it is that the early converts were the Gentiles that 3 Nephi 16 warned about, yet most all of them came from the same nations – England and parts of Europe – as those who you call of the dispersed of Judah and outcasts of Israel who would come in after 1836?
1- the words “high priests” did not show up in the 1833 Book of Commandments, it was added to the 1835 D&C retroactively which substantiates what I have said See http://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/boc/boc44.shtml
2- I have said that the official mandate to take the knowledge of the fulness of the Gospel to the house of Israel and begin the gathering of the House of Israel is rooted in section 110 and the commission given in section 118 and the establishment of foreign missions that took place thereafter however, I have also pointed out that some of the elders and apostles that were called to take the gospel to the House of Israel were probably from the House of Israel, such as Brigham Young, John Taylor, Willard Richards, etc.
3- Verse 39 is a prophecy of a future event. “for it shall come to pass“. One could argue that the resources of the gentile church did in fact benefit the converts coming to America during the Nauvoo period and continuing through the Utah period. One could also argue that the prophecy is yet to be fulfilled… again, it was to be a future fulfillment, not happening at that time.
4- This question was posed by the “Just and True” guy when he began participating on the peer review. I have covered this in earlier posts and I think in the Book. I don’t have my notes with me as I am out of town, however as I recall, the first two groups of christian pilgrims that came to America appear to be from Joseph-Ephraim-Gentile stock and they all came from a very isolated geographical demographic inside England while the second wave of missionary work during the Nauvoo-Utah periods was covering a much broader geographical area from many parts of Great Britain and other countries.
Also, the demographics had also possibly changed somewhat during the long interim period of time. (also, Joseph said that the missionaries during the Nauvoo period were gathering the “dispersed of Judah” (Jews) and the “outcasts of Israel” (other tribes of Israel) hence the second great wave of missionary work is not necessarily limited to the Jews. Just as there was apparently a small remnant of Judah in America and the restored church during the Kirtland years there were very possibly remnants of other tribes who had mingled among the gentile nations coming into the church during the Nauvoo-Utah periods..
Email Exchange #14
This most current series has to be the most insightful and powerful witness of the 3 watches and different latter day dispensations that you’ve done.
Praise God almighty for his mercy and grace in opening this up to you and ultimately us.
Oh my gosh… I was so hyper-focused on the issues that I discussed in the posts that it did not even occur to me what a great witness Moroni’s declaration was of the three watches.
Thank you for pointing that out to me.. that observation needs to be incorporated into part three.
Praise God almighty for his mercy and grace in opening up our eyes indeed!
Email Exchange #15
“I just came to a part where you wrote about “impart” and “portion of meat”.
I’ve been reading in your book again. There’s some really great insights and meat in it. I’ve started at the beginning and am now finishing chapter 8.
I just came to a part where you wrote about “impart” and “portion of meat”.
I never noticed that impart as used in JST Lk 12:51 also corresponded to Mosiah chapters 4 and 18. I only thought it corresponded to D&C 42.
But in Mosiah 2-3 the people of king Benjamin are taught the gospel covenant, repent of their sins and receive the baptism of fire. He then tells them that if they don’t impart of their substance their remission of sins is only temporary.
Same with Alma in Mosiah 18 who’s teaching them the words of Abinadi. After they covenant through baptism he instructs them impart of their substance.
As a side note, wouldn’t it be interesting if the the same angel who visited Benjamin was Abinadi. Just speculation.
We see the same pattern emerge with JS and consecration.
So the pattern as you’ve identified in the scriptures is the gospel of baptism by fire must be offered, then an invitation to consecrate or impart of our substance comes next.
I never caught that before.
Thank you for pointing out the obvious.
Listing of Past Notable Emails