Damning Mormonism

A beloved former bishop has reached out to me in my extremity through a series of letters. The following is an example of our correspondence. The effortlessness with which I "struck off" my responses to him demonstrates to me the inspiration of these words. I thought to share them with those of you who are interested in such things.

***

Dear Will 

My heart aches as I read and re-read your last epistle. I love you and [your wife] and it saddens me that your marriage is ending. Oh that I had a magic solution, but of course I do not. 

As to the Church, you and I have beat our differences to death in past discussions, to no avail. There seems little purpose in debating them anymore. However, I was surprised at your reference to that “damn Mormonism” when by your own admission you believe Joseph Smith is a prophet and that the Book of Mormon is true. 

I was also amused at your reference to deprograming yourself from Mormonism. The Church is often accused of “brainwashing” its followers. I prefer the word “conditioning.” It’s true that the Church does everything in its power to condition us to give up the ways of the world and follow the ways of Christ. The Church need not apologize for that. The truth of the matter is that we are all conditioned by something but we can choose whether that conditioning comes from good or evil sources. What better thing to be conditioned by than the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 

As to your marriage woes, I’m sure that there is more than Church differences involved in that. [My wife] and I have been married for over 69 years so I know that there can be trials, offenses, and all kinds of differences to deal with along with all the wonderful and good things. I wish I could say do this and this and this and everything will be OK. It just doesn’t work that way. This must have been a long time coming. I can only pray that you and [your wife] can both find the happiness you seek; but most of all that your children will not be damaged beyond repair. 

With love, Brother _____

I replied:

Dear Bro. ______,

Thank you for your kind and caring remarks. I believe they are heartfelt and charitable.

As for that "damn Mormonism", I target my ire at that manifestation of Mormonism that damns, impedes and misdirects.

Were the children of Israel "damned" or "blessed" by the law of Moses and the ministrations of the lesser priesthood? Some would say "blessed". Others "cursed" (or damned", [see Galatians 3]). Yes, having something that bears witness of truth is better than nothing. But when that something prevents one from embracing all truth -- in this case, Christ -- then that religion becomes damning. Especially when the religion purports to bring one back into the arms of Jesus...but really (by and large) does not.

The gospel of "Mormonism" is fraught with fables, fallacies and false doctrines masquerading as "commandments of God" but which are really the doctrines of men. It has become "the way we do things" -- replete with its own "secret" handbook of instructions which only the hierarchy are privy to control (like the Catholic Church keeping the scriptures themselves under wraps, out of the hands of the "common folk").

Rob Smith has written an excellent book on the subject: Teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of Men: Tradition in Modern Mormonism. (The LDS Church excommunicated Rob in February for publishing this book.) I found it filled with light and reason, testifying boldly of Christ. Rob is one of those who, like myself, has been ministered to personally by Jesus Christ. I "knew" Christ before I ever became LDS, though I did not see His face nor hear His voice by the power of the Holy Ghost until after I attended BYU. (I used to attribute that ministration to having received the Melchizedek priesthood by the laying on of hands by Mormon elders, but I was mistaken -- again, misguided by the traditions and storytelling of men.) My actual experience with Christ told me otherwise, but I was "blinded by the craftiness of men".

Those men today who wear the funny hats and grow their sideburns into locks and do all the rituals and ordinances and observances of their religion, are they "of God" or "of men"? Is theirs the "right" way? Or are they "damned" for their disbelief in a "true" religion that isn't true? Are they impeded in their progress because they do not know but reject the LDS Church, the "only true church on the face of the earth"? Is there something preventing them from receiving all truth now? Could the same be said for the Latter-day Saints? Have we become more "Catholic" than the Catholics, more "Jewish" than the Jews?

I say "yes".

It's not that Joseph Smith wasn't an inspired translator of the Book of Mormon or that the Book of Mormon isn't true. It's that the people who embraced and became "the keepers" of that book aren't true. The "religion" they subsequently created and embraced has been misguided, has gone astray and has become the "something" that prevents us from entering into God's presence...right down to the very temple garments we wear (which have become an "abomination" in God's eyes, I presume, having been changed and altered over time so that they no longer resemble the very thing Joseph bequethed to his brethren, he having used them in a very different form and fashion).

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan: "It's not that the Mormons don't know very much. They know a lot! It's just that so much of what they 'know' isn't true!" In fact, most of what Mormons do "know" -- and often hastily testify of "knowing" -- isn't knowledge at all, but merely strongly held beliefs.

Knowledge comes from personal experience. When a person says "I know" such and such, such as "I know John Smith" or "I know that God lives", they are understood to say (if they truly know) that they've had interaction with a living being called John Smith or, in the latter case, God the Father. When someone says "Jesus is the Christ, my Redeemer", are they speaking from "book learning" or from personal experience? (If you say "book learning", then they are only speaking from belief, or "head" knowledge, or philosophy, not personal experience.) The same is true with belief in Joseph Smith's prophetic calling, the Book of Mormon, modern Mormonism, etc.

We are "conditioned" to recite these words "I know" as if we do "know", trusting in the engendered good feelings we feel by telling them, even experiencing our own "clarity" as we put the pieces together in our minds and hearts, so sure of ourselves, so convinced we are "on the right track", that "this church must be true", etc. (Both you and I have "partaken of the Kool-Aid" and have borne that "witness", hopefully inspired by the Spirit of God.)

But that's the test: whatsoever is spoken or discerned by the Spirit of God is scripture, nothing else.

Not even the words of a "prophet".

Much of what we believe is "dictated" to us, not just by conditioning, but by the voice and inspiration of the Holy Ghost. He (it) can lead us into all truth. We may "prophesy" (as Samuel the Lamanite did) unto the people whatsoever things should come into [our] heart[s]" by the Holy Ghost (See Helaman 13:5).

But our witness, to some extent, has been false. We have testified not of what we've known and witnessed (as one witnesses a murder and knows the facts of the case from first-hand experience), but rather as one trained in the "facts" of the case, receiving them "second hand," "downstream," relying (to some extent) upon the testimonies of others..."following a prophet," as it were. (This is true for much of our knowledge of LDS doctrine and history.)

But if the prophet's testimony is false (and we continue to rely upon it), then all is vain.

"Following a prophet," after a point, is no way to receive a testimony for one's self. It's no way to receive salvation. We cannot rest our "witness" on the witness of another for very long. We either must get a testimony for ourselves (by personal experience, as Nephi did...and, in that sense, "follow a prophet") or we remain a puppet of those who testify (either truthfully or untruthfully) to knowing something for themselves.

When those who claim to know demonstrate that they themselves do not know, then they are not to be followed. When those "in charge" pretend to know (when they do not know), they become false leaders, the blind leading the blind. And when those blind leaders set themselves up as lights to be followed, and receive praise and glory and the vain things of this world in return for their "service", even getting paid for what they do, then surely they have their reward. Then you may know whom you are truly dealing with: not with true messengers, but with those who practice (wittingly or unwittingly) priestcraft.

Do you think those who served in Israel (after Moses) did so with evil intent? Or with a sincere desire to "serve God" (as best they "knew" how)? I say the latter. But that sincerity and "religion", no matter how earnestly pursued and defended, by and large did not bring them to Christ. Keeping the commandments of God brings us to Christ, nothing else. And when men replace the commandments of God with the doctrines and commandments of men, they get apostasy...and the direct, personal link to God and His power is severed.

That's what we have today in "damned Mormonism" -- a shadow of what once was or what it was meant to be. Some within the organization may yet embrace the fullness of what God has offered and is now, again, offering, but not many. It's just too hard to sift through the chaff to find the grain when the institution itself is focusing on the chaff, calling it grain, and throwing everything else away, including those who say "No, here is the grain!" The prospects for renovation are not good. You cannot put new wine in old bottles. Mormonism has become an "old bottle".

Do not assume I speak against all the "good" that Mormons do. I do not. I appreciate and champion their "goodness". I join with them. It is much of the doctrine that Mormons teach that is wrong. It is the idolatry and lies that Mormons embrace that impedes their progress. It's the "leaven of the Pharisees." It's the elevation of a false priesthood over a true one that "damns" Mormons and Mormonism. There is no Elijah among them. They follow a "minister" who offers "religion" rather than a true prophet who offers a relationship with Christ. (No wonder the Mormon leadership excised from the LDS temple ceremony that warning not to partake of the minister's wares. Modern Mormonism has become just what he offers. And what would the leaders of the LDS Church do without their employ? How would they "justify" their continued ministration and maintenance of power, privilege and prestige if all were "prophets" as they? If all of us were "Nephis", what need would we have for continuing guidance from Lehi? (Even Lehi, eventually, took a back seat in Nephi's boat!)

I'm am not speaking against the need for a "church" or for "leadership." The "church" is the body of Christ who come unto Him and repent of their sins [see Doctrine and Covenants 10:67] and the "leadership" is all those who can testify of Him. They know the Way. In the old days, the "leadership" were the apostles, joined by Paul and those who came to know for themselves. Then it "evolved" into an "organization," with "leadership" conferred by man's authority...and mostly the blind leading the blind thereafter...until we got Catholicism. The LDS Church has followed the same trajectory, believing that "power and authority of God" can be "conferred" by men. (Though Elijah taught us otherwise! See 2 Kings 2:9-15.) 

A true prophet "would God that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them!" (Numbers 11:29).

Now I don't claim to know the hearts and minds of those who now lead the LDS Church. (I assume their intentions are all good!) But if one from out of nowhere stands up among them and declares "I have seen and spoken with the Lord face to face!", he is put down by those who pretend to hold God's priesthood, who claim to be prophets, seers and revelators themselves but who do not prophesy, translate, see or reveal anything; who (mostly) "teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance. And they deny the power of God, the Holy One of Israel; and they say unto the people: Hearken unto us, and hear ye our precept; for behold there is no God today, for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done his work, and he hath given his power unto men" -- He hath given His power unto us. (See 2 Nephi 28:4-5).

I wish it were not so. But it is. I have seen it. I have experienced it. I have met, seen and heard Jesus Christ for myself -- and have been persecuted by the Mormons for testifying of the same. They are anti-Christ. Their religion has become a "stone of stumbling" to them.

It takes a while to become "deprogrammed" from the delusion that is modern Mormonism: that LDS ordinances and leaders can "save" you in the absence of YOU having a personal relationship with Christ, receiving salvation from His hand, having your calling and election made "sure" by hearing His voice declare it unto you. Who can testify among the Mormons the following? "I know Jesus Christ personally. I have met Him. I know Him and He knows me. We have spoken face to face. He has promised me eternal life. He is my Lord, my Savior, my Redeemer, my Father and my God."

Yet that is, essentially, Moroni's witness. It is Mormon's. It is Nephi's and Lehi's. It is every prophet's testimony who speaks in the name of the Lord.

Then why not today? Has God changed? Is His gospel different? Or are they who think, even "know" they are now "saved" by Mormonism deceived?

I know (by observing the "deadness" of the way and the "blindness" of those who claim they know the way) that they do not know the Way -- even though they may have many "goods" to offer as their "wares" of religion.

In the end, they are wolves in sheep's clothing, the blind leading the blind.

When, years ago, I offered my "testimony" in Sacrament Meeting, speaking boldly of my experience with Christ, the current stake president took me aside in his office and "lectured" me on the impropriety of what I said.

"Didn't I bear my testimony?" I asked him.

"Well, yes, you finally got around to it," he said. "But our testimonies ought to consist of 'God lives, Jesus is the Christ, Joseph Smith is a prophet, the Book of Mormon is true, and the Church is true (or guided by a living prophet).' Stick to the basics!"

"Can't we just tape record those five or six things and play them over and over again in an endless loop for 40 minutes during Fast and Testimony Meeting so we don't have to waste any time listening to silence?" I asked, sarcastically.

"That's a pretty good idea!" he joked. (At least I hoped he was joking!)

Apparently he wasn't. I was excommunicated, in part, because of my witness of Christ.

Every soul who would be saved must come unto Christ personally and follow Him (not a prophet), as the Book of Mormon teaches, or he is damned.

Now, as for my marriage, yes, it's a travesty, a disaster, a train wreck. (And a wonderful thing. Consequently, my head and heart and life are spinning!) When one dies by a thousand cuts, or suffers a thousand deaths by a single blow, the diagnosis of what "does one in" is invariably the same: both complex and simple. Our own human weaknesses, our sins and missteps, and the philosophies of men mingled with scripture (rather than practicing the gospel and teachings of Jesus Christ) have persuaded my wife to seek to end our union. I would not have it so. But I cannot compel her to remain with me. I know that God joined us together. I believe it is sin now that tears us apart. God gave us the spirit of love that made us "one". I now believe God has withdrawn that same spirit of love from my wife, hardening her heart against me. She no longer sees me as the man she loved or should have married, but as an enemy and a "threat" to her security and happiness. My own sins and proclivities have severed me from the light and truth that would have allowed me to lead my family in righteousness. If I had been altogether righteous (and not "broken" myself), she would have "followed" me (I believe) to the ends of the earth! But I was not righteous. I was broken. I was mislead. And I lost her confidence. That failure rests heavily upon my shoulders, my heart and my mind. [My wife] and my children were my "Isaac," that which I loved (and still love) most in this world. Their "loss" is my greatest failure, my deepest remorse.

The Lord has shown me my weakness...but that knowledge has come at a very steep price: the dissolution of my family and the loss of all that I love. It is tragic.

I am not the man I was before. I am now one or two steps closer to God. But, apparently, I am destined to cross this river of mortality hereafter without the abiding companionship and comfort of [my wife] and (for the most part) my children. How sad!!!

I leave it in the Lord's hands. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.

--Will

My good former bishop responded:

Dear Will

Thank you for your response to my note. I am always so impressed with your use of words even though in my mind they are misdirected. You have a wonderful gift; in fact you have many wonderful gifts.

As I mentioned in my last note there is little to be gained by debating our many differences when we are both so tightly fixed to our positions. I doubt that there is anything I could say that would change your mind nor could you change mine; but we can both love and respect one another.

Without addressing every point, there were a couple of things that crossed my mind that were significant to me.

You said: "Following a prophet," after a point, is no way to receive a testimony for one's self. It's no way to receive salvation. We cannot rest our "witness" on the witness of another for very long. We either must get a testimony for ourselves (by personal experience, as Nephi did...and, in that sense, "follow a prophet") or we remain a puppet of those who testify (either truthfully or untruthfully) to knowing something for themselves.

I happened to be reading next week’s Sunday School lesson and this jumped out at me: Mosiah 15:11: Behold I say unto you, that whosoever has heard the words of the prophets, yea, all the holy prophets who have prophesied concerning the coming of the Lord—I say unto you, that all those who have hearkened unto their words, and believed that the Lord would redeem his people, and have looked forward to that day for a remission of their sins, I say unto you, that these are his seed, or they are the heirs of the kingdom of God.

The question is also raised in my mind as to whom, by your standards, do we look for guidance? You? Denver Snuffer? Rob Smith? What are your credentials? What have you done to be prophets? What qualifies any of you to “judge” the Church or anyone in it? Where is your authority?

Just thinkin’!

Brother _____

My response:

I do enjoy the nuances of perspective that are batted back and forth between us, (switching metaphors) sharpening our swords, if you will. Or, again, "keepin' it real" -- as you have said: "What have you done to be prophets?"

Fair enough.

"What qualifies any of you to 'judge' the Church or anyone in it? Where is your authority?" 

This comes dangerously close to that same query thrown at the Savior by those disputatious, disbelieving and doubtful chief priests, scribes and elders: "By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?" (Mark 11:28; see also Luke 20:2.) But, as you point out, Jesus and His disciples were doing (healing the sick, raising the dead, even forgiving sins).

So I might ask: "Where is your authority?"

With regard to those challenging Christ and His authority, their authority (to practice priestcraft) came to them by men. They knew not whence or by whom Jesus' authority came. It did not come from them, that much they knew! And they also marveled that Jesus' authority came with power. (Nevertheless, many still disbelieved.) Both the wicked and the righteous understood that possession of real power to do good, even miracles, is demonstrative of having real authority. (See John 3:2 and Luke 5:21-25.)

So your point is well taken.

Yet John the Baptist, being the greatest prophet, worked no miracle. His only "claim to fame", it seems, was recognizing the Son of God and bearing witness of Him when He appeared, remaining true to that testimony all his life, even when threatened with death. 

The Jews rejected that prophet, as well.

Like the Mormons today, they could not believe God could (or would) work outside of the "established" framework and religious hierarchy; therefore they rejected even Christ (like their fathers rejected the prophets before Him). If you'll do some research, you'll see that almost all of the prophets "recognized" today, including Christ's twelve apostles [and] Joseph Smith, [even Christ Himself!] came from outside the "established", "predictable" religious orders.

Hence, Jesus asked them:

4 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men?
5 And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then believed ye him not?
6 But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet.
7 And they answered, that they could not tell whence it was.
8 And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. (Luke 20:4-8)

John the Baptist was not recognized as a "prophet" by the religious leaders of his day. Yet Jesus said no greater prophet was ever born of woman (see Luke 7:28). 

So it is today. 

True prophets are seldom recognized or respected. They are customarily stoned and rejected, not "beloved," honored, celebrated or adored by those to whom they are sent. (That's a pretty good measure by which false prophets may be detected!) Both Ether and Elijah dwelt in caves (to escape death). Lehi was cast out of the synagogue and fled for his life. Isaiah was sawn in half. Jeremiah cast into a pit. So customary has been the rejection of the prophets by those who call themselves "the Lord's people" that righteous Stephen lamented (even as they killed him!): "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?" (Acts 7:52).

Whenever God gives a dispensation of truth to His children (as He did with Moses and, later, with Joseph Smith), the people take what they receive from Him (or reject it) and make a muck of it, invariably (with only two exceptions known to history) sliding into apostasy, almost from the get-go. (The Book of Mormon demonstrates this pattern repeatedly, with the people of Zarahemla casting arrows and stones at Samuel the Lamanite, rejecting his message -- even as a known "prophet," Nephi, dwelt among them. Likewise the wicked priests of King Noah's day, having "authority," burned alive the humble messenger God sent to them.) 

Jesus explained how it would play out in His day:

9 Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
10 And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
11 And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
12 And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
13 Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
14 But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
15 So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. (Luke 20:9-16.)

His disciples couldn't believe it, saying "God forbid." But it was true. And that's what happened.

We have our modern equivalent today. (See Doctrine and Covenants 101:44-58.) Even so, there are many who cannot or will not recognize the Lord's true servants among them or the loss of God's priesthood and authority even as miracles have ceased and the heavens have been closed now, by and large, for almost two centuries.

Jesus' disciples, being inured to the "traditions" of hierarchal authority and priesthood ordination, bickered amongst themselves for stature and preeminence. (See Mark 10:37-41.) Likewise they complained when they saw one casting out demons in Jesus' name and rebuked him. But Jesus corrected them, saying: "Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." (See Luke 9:49-50.) Was I "against" you? Do the Mormons today respect the ministry and honor the divine "authority" of those not of their sect?

Later, when "apostate" Samaritans denied hospitality to Jesus and His traveling disciples because they deigned to worship in Jerusalem rather than in Samaria, His disciples imagined that He would have them destroy those wicked people! (That's what they would have done!)

54 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?
55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
56 For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. (Luke 9:54-56, emphasis added.)

Jesus said "Come unto me." (Matthew 11:28.) Not "Go away. You're not welcome here." Do the Mormons follow Christ's example, or someone else's?

But let's get back to your question: "By what authority?!" (I hope you don't stomp off into the wilderness when I tell you! ;o)

When Jesus asked His disciples "Will ye also go away?" Peter responded: "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life." (John 6:67-68.) Peter did not cite Jesus' miracles as evidence of His authority, but His words. Peter was a virtuous man. "A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign." (Matthew 16:4.) (I'm not implying that you are wicked or adulterous for your query. It's a honest question: "Do you have any signs or tokens"?)

The signs and tokens of a true messenger are the delivery of pure doctrine and a real testimony of Christ, as one who knows Him, being sent. Gabriel announced:

"I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings." (Luke 1:19.)

This is a true messenger, even an angel! Nevertheless, Zacharias disbelieved. Gabriel's witness was that he stood in the presence of God. He had a message to deliver and his words were fulfilled.

Others today have borne similar witness. I believe them. They have taught true doctrine and have borne a pure testimony of Jesus Christ, as one who knows Him face to face.

Which of your "prophets" have done so? Have any of them claimed to know Him personally (and not just know of Him)? Do they speak of standing in His presence and repeating His words, as a prophet should and would do?

Did Joseph Smith shirk from bearing his witness? Or claim that his experience with Deity was "too sacred" to discuss?

No. Those who have met Christ (like Paul) are inclined to shout it from the roof tops! (I know I did! I couldn't contain my joy! But, somehow, the LDS Church managed to stifle it out of me -- by coercion and shaming and rejection.)

You have your "primitive church" after all, it seems, both before and after Christ's ministry.

"The question is also raised in my mind as to whom, by your standards, do we look for guidance? You? Denver Snuffer? Rob Smith?"

The mistake of the ages is to insert anyone other than Christ into that equation. Even Joseph Smith erred by allowing himself to be elevated (like Moses) to the role of "prophet." Like Moses, the power to discern truth and error and the responsibility to do so ought to be handed down as far as possible, to the lowliest among us, if necessary, so that all may grow and mature in testimony and power in righteousness. When we "follow a prophet" we run the risk of "short-circuiting" our own development and salvation. 

Hence, Laman and Lemuel, when queried about whether or not they had "inquired of the Lord," responded: "We have not; for the Lord maketh no such thing known unto us." (1 Nephi 15:8-9.) After all, they were not following Christ (as Nephi was). They were following a prophet (their father).

"Following a prophet" almost inevitably renders us Lamans and Lemuels. We look to the prophet (or to our fathers, the "blessed, noble pioneers," etc.) instead of to the Lord.

The only way for a branch to bear real fruit is to remain well connected to the Vine, not to the Vine's husbandman. When the husbandman plucks off the branches unto himself, he kills the branches and stifles the fruit.

I have found others who have spoken the words of eternal life. Jesus said: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." (John 10:27; emphasis added.) Jesus' sheep don't follow a prophet. In fact, those who do "follow a prophet" are damned to a telestial existence (if that is all they do), worlds without end. (See Doctrine and Covenants 76:98-112.) Why is that? Because only association with Christ -- knowing Him and being known by Him, receiving His mercy and His grace personally -- has the power to transform lives. Not "following a prophet." Not engaging alone in religious rituals or receiving ordinances (though those have their place). The power of God is in His ability to transform the inner man by the workings of His Spirit and His love. Those who love God -- because they receive His love -- do not sin. His love motivates them to repent and to be "born again." When we cut ourselves off from Him and His love (by accepting any substitute, even a prophet), we damn ourselves.

Who is a prophet then? Anyone who has a real testimony of Jesus Christ has the spirit of prophecy. (See Revelations 19:10.) "[F]or flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." (See Matthew 16:16-17, emphasis added.)

But I regard a prophet as one who has stood in the Divine Council, who has heard the word of the Lord, and has been commanded to speak on His behalf, declaring His words, no more, no less. This is a prophet. Not a miracle worker. Not one likely sitting in the chief seats, dining sumptuously, but rather a "nobody," whose message alone is his "credentials."

I have found Denver Snuffer to fill that role. I believe no one within the hierarchy of the Mormon Church does today. (As much as I appreciate their ministries and their teachings, they cannot lift me if they, too, are standing in the pit.) Who among them has been to heaven (as Denver claims he has)? Who claims to know Jesus Christ and God the Father personally, as Denver has claimed?

I have known and met now several who so testify. I, too, have been ministered to by the Savior. I have seen His light and felt His love. I have heard His voice, unto the melting of my soul. He has borne witness to me by the power of the Holy Ghost that He is real and living and powerful. I have not yet stood in His physical (spiritual?) presence (that I know of), but I have seen and heard Him for myself. And it is enough to give me a rock solid testimony of His divinity.

I have a similar testimony of the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, and the divine calling of Joseph Smith. Yet I was considered "unworthy" to belong to your church and was cast out for "apostasy."

I dare say there were few, if any, like me in your midst.

--Will Carter