Four talks are finished. Two transcripts are up. I am working to complete the other transcripts.

The fifth talk will be on November 2nd in Utah County. If you are planning to attend and would like to submit a question, please bring it with you in writing and I will collect them before beginning. Questions will be difficult to incorporate into the recording of the talks unless I can read them as part of the discussion and then answer.

It would be good if questions did not change the subject, but related to the topics discussed this far. If a question is already part of what is coming in future talks, then it will get covered in the ordinary course of the material, rather than taking it out of context.

The next subject covered in Utah County will be the priesthood. I’m going to try to be there a little early to gather written questions beforehand from those who come. If you can’t attend, you can still send a question to me by commenting on this post and I will receive it.

The Idaho Falls lecture has been transcribed and uploaded to Scribd. You can link from the blog.

The plan at the present is to have the next talk on November 2nd in Utah County. That is a Saturday, and I am hoping to find a venue that can be used in the morning. If possible, I’d like to begin at 9:30 a.m.

The next talk will be on priesthood. At that point, I will be half way done. I will continue sometime in the Spring in Grand Junction and that topic will be Zion.

All of this is really one long talk, delivered in 10 increments. But each one is a stand alone discussion. If you listen to them in order, you should be able to see how it fits together into one great whole.

Transcripts will be put up as they are completed. The recordings are all available now.

Last week I spent four days out of town in a trial, and then returned home to speak in Centerville. You should pay special attention to the scriptures in that talk. They are worth considerably more attention than can be given to them in a 2 hour lecture. I can only present ideas and then spend limited time directing you to where you can study them in the scriptures. The full import of the material is left to you to study out and reach your own conclusions.

Our thinking is tied to a model given to us by the Mormon traditions. The scriptures are not necessarily in harmony with those traditions. Therefore, it is necessary to look carefully at the scriptures, discard untruths, discover the revelations that are there and then believe what God has revealed. For many people that is too much to ask. I realize that, but the notion of people looking at things with new understandings should not be opposed. We all believe in Joseph’s ministry. We believe in the Book of Mormon. We believe in the revelations and translations given through Joseph Smith. That should be enough to allow us to have fellowship with one another.

Studying the revelations and finding something new or long forgotten is no basis for fighting with one another, or denying fellowship to those who choose to believe the works of God include something more than our traditions dictate. President Uchtdorf’s general conference address suggests the church welcomes different ideas. Whether that is true or not, our individual application of charity towards differing opinions and views should be broad, friendly and welcoming. On BOTH sides.

The address for Sunday is 525 North 400 West, Centerville, Utah. Everyone has to be in a seat to comply with fire code. There are approximately 500 seats (including a balcony).

Saturday I was in Idaho Falls. After the conclusion of the talk my wife and I drove home. We went to church with the family Sunday morning, then she and I drove back to Logan on Sunday evening for the talk there.

Three talks have been given. There was an introduction, and then discussions about faith and repentance comprised the first three topics. The Centerville talk, this coming Sunday, will be about covenants.

There are about 7 1/2 hours of material covered to this point. This is about 30% of what will be covered. My original estimate of 25 hours seems to be about right at this point. I’m hoping to get another talk in before the Thanksgiving/Christmas/New Year time frame and then not do another one until the Spring. If another can be fit in after Centerville and before a winter break, then this will be 50% complete. That would be a wonderful accomplishment.

Now that three are done, I have learned how challenging it is to drive and speak in two venues in a single weekend. The only other time I expect that to happen will be in Las Vegas and St. George.

There continue to be warnings coming from the leadership about attending these talks. That seems to be attracting unwanted attention. The size of the audience in Boise and Idaho Falls was about the same. Logan was larger. Centerville should accommodate 500, but I’m hoping there will be empty seats. If the church continues to oppose, discuss, announce and call attention to this it will drive up curiosity. I don’t like that.

Here’s what happens. When someone who has been warned that I’m “apostate” comes and listens, they hear something that doesn’t sound like it is apostate. It seems rather more faith promoting and sincere than rebellious and angry. That produces another round of distrust of the church that is altogether avoidable if the church would just be quiet. Opposing won’t work. Ignoring is the best tactic. I’d recommend that the leadership and those stake presidents and bishops who want to prevent people from coming to hear me never mention my name. That way I can come and go unnoticed by those who are not interested enough to search out what it is I am doing. Let them sleep. I’m not trying to steal anyone. But people can be alienated by the false and unwarranted criticism being cast my way.

If what I am doing is of God, then that will show soon enough. If it is not of God, then it will fail of its own accord. Nothing needs to be done. The best approach is to allow the matter to unfold as it will. In the end, we will all know whether this is something the Lord has required of me, or if I am just another one of the long list of pretenders.

I give this advice in all sincerity. Smaller venues and a more intimate and informed group would be better Larger crowds, who are interested in a carnival atmosphere will be disappointed. I discuss scripture and doctrine. Deseret Book told me, “doctrine doesn’t sell.”

The First Presidency are the primary organizational leadership in the hierarchy of the church. (D&C 107: 22.) They are the presidency of the church. They set the agenda and are accountable for keeping the church running.

The Twelve are equal in authority. (D&C 107: 23-24.) They differ from the First Presidency in their responsibility. They have no authority within organized stakes, but are missionaries, whose job is to spread the missionary work throughout the world. When there is no organized stake, they preside because of their role as a “traveling high council.” But their authority to administer in a stake ends once a stake is organized.

The Seventy are equal in authority. (D&C 107: 26.) Like the Twelve, they are missionaries. They fill missionary assignments when the Twelve cannot be present.

The stake High Council forms a quorum equal in authority. (D&C 107: 37.)

Joseph Smith never called a member of the Twelve into the First Presidency. They were sent on missions. In Nauvoo, Joseph presided over the sitting High Council, as you can read in the minutes of the Nauvoo High Council.

When Brigham Young wanted Sidney Rigdon excommunicated, he recognized as a member of the Twelve he had no authority to do so. Therefore, the trial was before the Nauvoo High Council.

When Joseph died, and Hyrum predeceased him, there was no one designated to replace Joseph. D&C 43: 4 required Joseph to designate his successor. He did this. It was Hyrum. (D&C 124: 91-95.) Therefore, there was no successor.

Interestingly, Section 107 was not referred to in the succession process in August 1844. Nor was there a revelation given to settle the matter. It was handled as a political event, with an election by common consent. Brigham Young campaigned for the Twelve, not for himself. Rigdon campaigned unsuccessfully to wait for one of Joseph’s sons to be old enough to assume the role. The election in Nauvoo was primarily between those two options. In the months following however, others would make claims and would peel off followers.

Once the Twelve were elected as the replacement leadership group, they have thereafter remained in control. Today there is an oligarchy of the Twelve governing the church, and they control everything, with the senior member becoming the automatic successor President, and the First Presidency invariably organized from the Twelve (though there have been exceptions).

Although the Twelve and the Presidency of the Seventy were responsible for my excommunication, they lacked the jurisdiction to implement their decision. Therefore, it was necessary to employ the stake, which had jurisdiction, to accomplish this.

I’ve appealed to the First Presidency. But what I find interesting is that the process in my case has involved the stake high council, the Presidency of the Seventy, the Twelve, and will now also involve the First Presidency. All of those quorums which are “equal in authority” are to be affected by this decision. Only the Lord could bring about such an interesting alignment of responsibility for this decision to excommunicate someone for their belief in scripture, belief in prophecy and their historical viewing of Christ’s prophecies about us and our behavior.

Please have your scriptures and The Lectures on Faith  for the upcoming Idaho Falls lecture.

Elder Christopherson of the Twelve gave a speech at BYU Idaho this week. It fits in nicely with the upcoming talk, therefore I am linking it here. I’d recommend you listen to it. His defense of the Prophet Joseph Smith is needed as more and more believing Latter-day Saints get a little troubling information, and collapse in disbelief. The cure, as Elder Christopherson explains, is to not know too little, but to immerse yourself in study and find the answers to any troubling information you unearth.

We have greater access to information today than we have ever had. But if we neglect studying it, then it serves no purpose. Whether Joseph was a prophet or not should matter to you. If you conclude he was, then he affords an opportunity to better understand the relationship between God and man. Joseph’s life is recent enough, with sufficient enough material, that we can learn things about him that are not available to us about Paul, Peter, John the Baptist, Mormon, Moroni, Nephi, Isaiah, Moses, Abraham, Noah, Enoch or Adam.

Learning of the difficulties Joseph endured, understanding the tendency to attribute ill-will to his words and actions despite what motives were in his heart, and the subsequent drift away from his preaching and teaching is important to understand. That understanding should help you in your own effort to live in harmony with God.

I believe that the many revelations in the D&C identifying Joseph as the spokesman for God means exactly that: Joseph was and IS the spokesman God sent. Joseph’s words need to be heeded as if they came from God directly to us. No one has the right to change or ignore them. No one (and I mean NO ONE) has the right to claim they are Joseph’s equal. There are no “keys” or “key holders” who can alter Joseph’s teachings except at their peril. When they ignore or contradict Joseph’s revelations, and teach others that they can ignore the message and warnings given by that prophet who was called by God to begin this dispensation, they damn themselves and any who listen to them.

When Elder Christopherson defends Joseph, I want to rejoice and shout my own “Amen!” to his message. He is my brother in belief as he makes that defense.

When we got back from a walk the other night, there was a missionary tract with $5 in it, a note, a pumpkin, and some tomatoes. The note apologized for destroying our watermelon. The $5 was to pay for the lost watermelon.

On Saturday when the missionaries returned, we learned that the pogo stick on the front porch was too tempting to the Jacksonville, Florida Elder. In his attempt to impress, he mashed the porch watermelon. I told him that I’d like that on video if he filmed it, and that since the garden produce was an unexpected gift, the watermelon wasn’t missed. I gave him his $5 back.

If the Jacksonville parents read this, your Elder is fine, and in the good care of a Missouri companion. If the mission president reads this, I gave the Elders some referral information they could use.

Comments come to the blog and we read every one of them. They are not posted, but are read. Comments degenerate and quickly get off topic. They made this into another discussion blog/board. This is not intended to be a discussion board.

If I wanted to mislead people and never brook even constructive criticism, I would want to make people believe I could never lead them astray. In that regard, instead of telling you that you should always ask and defer to God, because He is unchanging and unchangeable; and instead of explaining that everything you believe should be measured against the scriptures and consistent with what was revealed through Joseph Smith, I would expect you to accept my pronouncements and whims. I respect your intelligence too much to attempt such a foolish undertaking. If I tried to do anything other than persuade with meekness and pure knowledge, you would be able to discern I was up to no good. You know better than to trust any mere man with your faith and confidence. At least I hope you do.

The Red Sox have locked up the AL East. My daughter hit a two out RBI double last night in a boy’s league hardball game. Life is good.

I received two emails notifying me there is a man, woman, child, or committee who is now getting ready to do a “rebuttal” to Passing the Heavenly Gift. It can be found at: http://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/an-evening-in-boise-with-denver-snuffer-part-one/

Normally I would just dismiss someone who lacks the courage to stand up for what they write by identifying themselves. Only then can they be tested by the kind of criticism, disdain, insults, derision and discomfort my family and I are constantly subjected to. Denver Snuffer is my real name. However, this particular woman, or committee, or man has some thoughtful material that I have enjoyed reading. Therefore, despite her/his/their anonymity, I am hopeful there will be worthwhile and productive criticism given.

I suspect this is written by a single individual, because of the constant use of the word “I.” However, that could be a collective agreement to use the singular. It is clear the individual/committee want to be viewed as masculine, but I’ve seen this done by women as well. You will note in the first installment that when they agree with me, I am called “Denver” and when they disagree I am “Snuffer.” That suggests some internal disagreement, so there’s either more than one or the individual is conflicted.

In any event, I’m hopeful this can provide what the church never has: some feedback based on history that shows PTHG errs in retelling the events of our dispensation.

The next lecture in the fortieth year series will be on Saturday, September 28th in Idaho Falls (Skyline Activity Center, 1575 North Skyline Drive, Idaho Falls.) Since it is a Saturday it will be casual dress. The site will accommodate 200 people. There is overflow potential outside, and the intention to put two speakers for that area (if needed). This would allow some folks to bring their own lawn chairs or blankets and (weather permitting) listen outside. Or just get a CD afterwards and listen to that. Copies can be preordered at http://www.publishinghope.info. The following day in Logan (The CopperMill Restaurant, Emporium, upstairs, 55 North Main Street, Logan, Utah. Enter off Center Street or 1st West.) The talk will begin at 7:00 p.m. I will be in Sunday dress.

Each talk is entirely different material, laying a foundation to understand the topic of Zion. All the talks will be leading into a single theme: the restoration of Zion.

The fourth talk will be on October 6th in Centerville, Utah. It will also be Sunday dress, beginning at 7:00 p.m.

Do not think you need to attend. The talks are recorded. They will be available on CD’s. The CD’s will be transcribed. Once they are transcribed they will be made available here on this blog. Eventually the recordings will be made available as a free MP3 download. When the entire subject is concluded next year, the transcripts will be gathered into a book and the book will be available. So whether you ever attend or not, the information will all be available in two formats: recorded and written. Both will be available for purchase (CD’s/book) and for free (MP3/blog entries).

The discussions will mean a good deal more if you just listen to the material. The ideas and doctrine matter. The scriptures and their language matter. The message, not the messenger.

I like criticism more than praise. Criticism, particularly well thought through criticism, is appreciated. Never shout down critics. Let them have a full say. If they make a good point then think about it. Always remember that redemption comes from the only Holy Being who condescended to come here precisely because of His perfection. He alone could break the bonds of death.

Remember that in all the diversity and wonder of nature there is very little that is identical. Each one of us is unique for a reason. Your unique existence is a reflection of God’s great liberty given to us all. There is no uniformity of thought. We ought to exchange ideas, never try to control the thinking of others. Let everyone believe as they may. If you have a better idea, articulate it and persuade others. But never think your view alone ought to rule everyone else’s thinking. God doesn’t do that. He persuades. He invites. He entices. Gently. Lovingly. Patiently. So stop acting like you shouldn’t be bound by the same constraints. Also remember that when discussing an important topic, it is not possible to set out every detail in one statement, one comment or one discussion. The entire scope and sweep of the matter takes time and patience for clarity. If you’ve read it, the discussion in The Second Comforter about the first year Torts class in law school is a good illustration of how confused the subject was before clarity was found. It is good to let a matter emerge incrementally until you can see enough of the topic to have it form a clear image.

A couple trying to lose weight decided they would be more motivated if they began to weigh themselves together. As they did, the husband complained that all the increases were the fault of his wife. He took credit for all their losses. Over time she became very thin, and he quite corpulent. But they did lose a little in the process.

For those who read the newly linked talks, the transcripts will differ slightly from the talks. In the talks I spoke spontaneously using lists of scripture as my only text. The remarks were free flowing and unrehearsed. Then they were transcribed verbatim.

I took the verbatim transcription and edited it to reflect better sentence structure and subject-verb agreement. I took some compound sentence fragments and reshaped them into actual sentences. NOT perfect, but somewhat better. Then I added parenthetical references to show where an unexpressed scriptural cite could be found because that was what was in my head when the remark was made. It gives context to the reader.

I also corrected some misstatements, such as “Articles of Faith” when I meant “Lectures on Faith.” Since I knew what I meant, the transcription corrects that. Also there was a “Levite” which was meant to be “Judah.”

I also noted that one thought I began wasn’t finished. So in the transcript I finished the thought.

When these get gathered together and published as a book, it will be edited further. At that time, it will be edited with readability in mind and a good deal more grammar and sentence structure will be imposed on the text. Also, there are numerous footnotes that will be added when I make them into a book.

None of the talks are written or will be written in advance. They will just be given – then transcribed. The only talk I’ve written in advance was the paper presented at Sunstone last year. They required it. Otherwise, I speak spontaneously.

On the right column of this page there is a new section where you can link to the talks/papers I’ve given. The transcript of the Boise talk is available there now, as well.

I was asked how I justify “evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed” –a question I’ve already answered here, here, and here, among other places.

It would be better to read what I write than to presume something about me. If you’re interested enough to criticize, then why aren’t you interested enough to read what I’ve written so your criticism can be grounded in more than your imagination?