|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | + | {{GregSmithUser:Browsebar}} |
| | + | == Links to check == |
| | + | {{Set off quote 1 |
| | + | |color=eaf9f5 |
| | + | |image=Russell_nelson_official_portrait_2018.jpeg |
| | + | |I believe that if the Lord were speaking to you directly tonight, the first thing He would make sure you understand is your true identity. My dear friends, you are literally spirit children of God. ... |
| | | | |
| | + | Labels ''can'' be fun and indicate your support for any number of positive things. Many labels will change for you with the passage of time. And not all labels are of equal value. But if any label replaces your most important identifiers, the results can be spiritually suffocating. ... |
| | | | |
| − | "Somebody could walk into this room<br>
| + | ''Who are you?'' First and foremost, you are a child of God. |
| − | And say your life is on fire.<br>
| |
| − | It's all over the evening news,<br>
| |
| − | All about the fire in your life on the evening news."<br>
| |
| − | :- Paul Simon, "Crazy Love, Vol. II," ''Graceland'' album (1986).
| |
| | | | |
| − | ----
| + | Second, as a member of the Church, you are a child of the covenant. And third, you are a disciple of Jesus Christ. |
| − | {{Snuffer/FalseStatement}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/DoubleStandard}}
| + | Tonight, I plead with you not to ''replace'' these three paramount and unchanging identifiers with any others, because doing so could stymie your progress or pigeonhole you in a stereotype that could potentially thwart your eternal progression. |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/HistoricalError}}
| + | For example, if you are identified mainly as an American, those who are not Americans may think, “I know everything there is to know about you” and attribute erroneous beliefs to you. |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/SelfContradiction|Remarks about it here}}
| + | If you identify yourself by your political affiliation, you will instantly be categorized as having certain beliefs—though I don’t know anyone who believes everything that their preferred political party presently embraces. |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/ContradictsBoM}}
| + | We could go on and on, rehearsing the constraints of various labels that we put on ourselves or that other people place upon us. ... |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/ContradictsDC}}
| + | How tragic it is when someone believes the label another person has given them. ... |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/SourceDistortion}}
| + | [Satan] rejoices in labels because they divide us and restrict the way we think about ourselves and each other. How sad it is when we honor labels more than we honor each other. |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/ContradictsJoseph}}
| + | Labels can lead to judging and animosity. Any ''abuse'' or ''prejudice'' toward another because of nationality, race, sexual orientation, gender, educational degrees, culture, or other significant identifiers is offensive to our Maker! Such mistreatment causes us to live beneath our stature as His covenant sons and daughters! |
| | | | |
| − | {{Snuffer/Undercuts|Remarks here}}
| + | There are various labels that may be very important to you, of course. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that other designations and identifiers are not significant. I am simply saying that no identifier should ''displace'', ''replace'', or ''take priority over'' these three enduring designations: “child of God,” “child of the covenant,” and “disciple of Jesus Christ.” |
| − | ----
| |
| − | Hypocrisy re: citations
| |
| | | | |
| − | Because his remarks are targeted at believing members of the Church of Jesus Christ, Snuffer cites three authors for whom he normally has little respect:
| + | Any identifier that is not compatible with these three basic designations will ultimately let you down. Other labels will disappoint you in time because they do not have the power to lead you toward eternal life in the celestial kingdom of God. |
| − | * Brigham Young
| |
| − | * Heber C. Kimball
| |
| − | * George A. Smith
| |
| | | | |
| − | Snuffer uses citations from each to argue that these Church leaders foretold a potential loss of priesthood authority by the Church:
| + | Worldly identifiers will never give you a vision of who you can ultimately become. They will never affirm your divine DNA or your unlimited, divine potential.<ref>Russell M. Nelson, "Choices for Eternity," Worldwide Devotional for Young Single Adults, 15 May 2022 {[link|url=https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/broadcasts/worldwide-devotional-for-young-adults/2022/05/12nelson?lang=eng}}</ref>}} |
| − | | |
| − | :To the same effect, during the Mormon Reformation Heber C. Kimball said: “We receive the priesthood and power and authority. If we make a bad use of the priesthood, so you not see that the day will come when God will reckon with us, and he will take it from us and give it to those who will make better use of it? (JD6: 125.) George A. Smith said, “God has set his hand at the present time to establish his kingdom. But unless the Saints will so live and so exert themselves that they can preserve the purity of the holy Priesthood among them, the work will be left to other people.” (JD 6: 161.) Even Brigham Young commented on the possibility that only an LDS remnant would remain to carry forward the work: “God will preserve a portion of the meek and the humble of this people to bear off the Kingdom to the inhabitants of the earth, and will defend His Priesthood; for it is the last time, the last gathering time; and He will not suffer the Priesthood to be again driven from the earth.” (JD 2: 184.)<ref>{{CriticalWork:Snuffer:Mesa|pages=6 note 18}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | But, why would Snuffer regard these authors as authoritative? He has made his disdain for them clear elsewhere.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Snuffer's attitude toward Brigham Young and other apostles===
| |
| − | For example, he wrote of Brigham Young:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Murder was allowed [in Utah] but only when President Young thought it was needed for the salvation of the victim.<ref name="PTHG">{{CriticalWork:Snuffer:Passing the Heavenly Gift}}.</ref>{{Rp|223}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | Snuffer also insists {{nl}} that Brigham Young did not receive all of the keys which Joseph could have passed on.<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|36, 81-86}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | George A. Smith and Heber C. Kimball were both apostles, and Snuffer [[Criticism_of_Mormonism/Books/Passing_the_Heavenly_Gift/Claims_about_priesthood_ordination#Could_Brigham_Young_Qualify_to_Claim_Sealing_Power.3F|denies]] that they were in a position to have the sealing power from Joseph which they claimed to hold.<ref></ref> He [[Criticism_of_Mormonism/Books/Passing_the_Heavenly_Gift/Brigham_Young_and_apostles_not_witnesses_of_Christ|claims]] too that they were not suited to be true apostles that could witness of Christ's resurrection.<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|243}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | In Snuffer's view, something vital was lost with Joseph's death, and Brigham and the rest of the apostles were mistaken to think that they had it. He regards Brigham Young as one who winked at murder, and further blames the second President of the Church for:
| |
| − | * instituting "coercive" programs<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|132}}
| |
| − | * "using 'blood atonement'...rhetoric [which] resulted in tragedy"<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|132}}
| |
| − | * "intimidat[ing] 'sinners'"<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|133}}
| |
| − | * sanctioning the extrajudicial murder of convicts<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|137}}
| |
| − | * "justify[ing] the elimination of an apostate" (the Parrish-Potter murders)<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|138-9}}
| |
| − | * causing the murder of the AIken party<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|140}}
| |
| − | * "institut[ing] the covenant in the temple ceremonies requiring all covenant-makers to swear to avenge the blood of Joseph and Hyrum Smith"<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|143}}
| |
| − | * using his authority to have "Dimick Huntington...[and] Hosea Stout...slaughter Indians"<ref name="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|145}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | Snuffer uses these claims (which are not explored in any detail, but only lightly touched on—presumably to shock the reader) to conclude that:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Although the gentile church was established by a Prophet upon whom the Lord conferred the fullness of the priesthood, the transfer of that fullness is more presumed in the accounts than proven....But subsequent events can help illustrate whether the prophesied gentile lyings, deceits, wickedness, abominations, murders and hypocrisy foretold by Christ have happened.<ref name ="PTHG"></ref>{{Rp|145-146}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | For Snuffer, then, Brigham's rule was a corrupt one marred by murder, violence, coercion, and hypocrisy: evidence that the Church did not retain what Joseph had started with. And, Heber C. Kimball and George A. Smith were either in the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve during this period.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It is strange, then, that Snuffer would cite them as authorities. How can such men be said to have the spirit of prophecy, or the spirit of the Lord to guide them or the Church?
| |
| − | | |
| − | It seems obvious that Snuffer cites them ''only'' because he thinks he can enlist their support for his theories. If Snuffer's stake president, on the other hand, had cited Brigham Young's witness that he had all the keys from Joseph, Snuffer would doubtless reject this witness: we have seen what he truly thinks of Brigham.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Brigham Young's full talk==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Snuffer has, then, cited Brigham's address in JD 2:184. He wants us to consider this address authoritative. Very well—let us examine the address, and see if it supports Snuffer's claim that the Church risks losing priesthood authority.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Snuffer quotes Brigham:
| |
| − | | |
| − | Even Brigham Young commented on the possibility that only an LDS remnant would remain to carry forward the work: “God will preserve a portion of the meek and the humble of this people to bear off the Kingdom to the inhabitants of the earth, and will defend His Priesthood; for it is the last time, the last gathering time; and He will not suffer the Priesthood to be again driven from the earth.” (JD 2:184.)<ref>{{CriticalWork:Snuffer:Mesa|pages=6 note 18}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Let us examine Brigham's statement in context, and see if Snuffer has honestly represented it. The snippet quoted by Snuffer is in bold type, color has been added to vital sections about which he has not informed his audience:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I can tell you something more, brethren and sisters, and friends, and the United States, and all the world; the Lord Almighty will not suffer His [p.184] Priesthood to be again driven from the earth, <font style="color:red; background:white">even should He permit the wicked to kill and destroy this people. The Government of the United States and all the kings of the world may go to war with us,</font> but '''God will preserve a portion of the meek and humble of this people to bear off the Kingdom to the inhabitants of the earth, and will defend His Priesthood; for it is the last time, the last gathering time; and He will not suffer the Priesthood to be again driven from the earth.''' <font style="color:blue; background:white">They may massacre men, women, and children; but the Lord will not suffer them to destroy the Priesthood</font>; and I say to the Saints, that, <font style="color:green; background:white">if they will truly practise their religion, they will live, and not be cut off.</font><ref>{{JDmini|vol=2|pages=183}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Snuffer has very cleverly omitted the key sentences before and after which explain Brigham's meaning. Brigham says that <font style="color:red; background:white">''even if the whole world wages war upon the Saints,'' and ''even if violence and death comes against to the Church</font> the Lord will still preserve some of the Saints to maintain the priesthood that they currently have. He repeats again that <font style="color:blue; background:white">''even if they are allowed to massacre some of the Saints''</font> God will still preserve the priesthood. And, <font style="color:green; background:white">if the Saints live their religion</font> they will not be subject to violence.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thus, Brigham is not in any way supporting Snuffer's claim that the Church will lose the full priesthood authority ''en masse'', and only a few chosen (like himself) will preserve it. Instead, Brigham is saying that even if the Saints become wicked and are thereby killed, the Lord will not kill all of them, and those who remain faithful will '''''continue to hold the Priesthood that he insists they have''''. Even murder and death cannot wipe out the Priesthood authority, because the Church has it and God will not permit it.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thus, rather than supporting Snuffer's position, Brigham completely rebuts it.
| |
| − | | |
| − | To be sure, Snuffer likely does not accept Brigham's authority or his declaration—because if he did
| |
| − | | |
| − | Why did Snuffer change Brigham's meaning? Why did he cite a man whom he regards with obvious distaste? The only reason can be that Snuffer wishes to persuade believing Latter-day Saints, and he thinks citing Brigham will increase his credibility. Many readers will find such tactics dishonest. They certainly reveal much about Snuffer's approach to historical documents and religious ideas.
| |
