Monday, February 20, 2017

Plain and Precious

And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records, which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first, which are of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them.
—1 Nephi 13:40

Nephi’s epic vision of world history—at least the part he could share—culminates in a story about a book that figures prominently in the events of our day. Nephi knew the events would happen because he saw them. He wrote his vision because he cared about us. So as we watch Nephi’s visionary events take place, we would be wise to study and heed his perspective.

The story of the book begins in 1 Nephi 13:20 with the Gentiles bringing the book to America. We are informed that when the book was written by the Jews, it contained all the following items (see 1 Nephi 13 for verse references):

  • the plain and most precious truths of the gospel (v. 26, 28, 29, 32) 
  • the covenants of the Lord which he hath made unto the House of Israel (v. 23) 
  • the prophecies of the holy prophets (v. 23)
  • the fulness of the gospel of the Lord (v. 24)
  • the witness of the twelve apostles (v. 24) 
  • the truth of God (v. 25)

This book was transmitted in its purity from the twelve apostles of the Lamb to the Gentiles, where the Great and Abominable (GA) church was formed to oppose the truth. The first order of GA business was, therefore, to corrupt the record by taking away “many parts which are plain and most precious, and also many covenants of the Lord.” (v. 26)
And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men. (1 Nephi 13:27)
And that’s how the GA formula works: If you control information, you control thought. If you control thought, you control behavior. If you control behavior, you enslave humanity, and by this means, you gain the desires of your heart.

The Devil himself, we are informed, founded the Great and Abominable church to accomplish these purposes. He employed ready minions, willing to do his bidding in exchange for temporary satisfaction of their lust and greed.

For, said the angel to Nephi, “the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church.” (v. 8) These are the goods with which the devil pays his servants for their service, because he can offer them nothing better. His servants eagerly accept such currency.

Establishing and maintaining power over men is all too easy when you follow the GA formula. Remember, it all starts by controlling the information. If people don’t know what to worship or how to worship, they will never receive what God offers. (D&C 93:19)

I find it most curious that AFTER the plain and precious parts were stripped from the book, the record then calls it “the Book of the Lamb of God.” (v. 28) That name doesn’t appear until the GA church has perpetrated their mischief upon the record. Why is that?

Here’s my theory:

Only the Lamb

If you start with a book that contains the apostles’ full testimony of Christ and His gospel, then strip out information about His being, His path, His covenants, His mission, and the plain and precious parts of His gospel, all you have left is Him, “the Lamb.” You thus create a book that handily satisfies mankind’s need to worship something, by giving them a God to worship—a sacrificial Lamb. But by withholding truths about how to worship, how to follow His path, where that path leads, what His covenants are, and the fulness of His teachings, you ensure almost nobody will actually receive the salvation He offers.

And so we have the Bible—and 40,000 Christian denominations who all accept it and worship the Lamb, and who all believe they’ve found the way to salvation, yet who all disagree on gospel fundamentals and the way to salvation. The Book of the Lamb lends comfort and assurance to every false path by concealing the true one, while still being “true.” It is Satan’s masterpiece.
Because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them. (1 Nephi 13:29)
In fact, even though one may claim to be “of Christ” or other prophets, the result will still be a Telestial inheritance because of missing knowledge:
These are they who say they are some of one and some of another—some of Christ and some of John, and some of Moses, and some of Elias, and some of Esaias, and some of Isaiah, and some of Enoch; But received not the gospel, neither the testimony of Jesus, neither the prophets, neither the everlasting covenant...These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God. (D&C 76:101-102, 106)
And how is it possible to be a follower of Christ or one of the prophets, yet still be cast down to hell? Well, frankly, it’s because of that list of lacking things: The gospel, the testimony of Jesus, the prophets and the everlasting covenant. In other words, the VERY things originally contained in the book, before the GA church stripped them out.

Wouldn’t you love to have the missing knowledge? What would you give for access to that plain and precious information?

Well, it turns out you’re in luck, because God, who knows the end from the beginning, anticipated this situation and planned steps to correct it well before it happened. Nephi informs us God ultimately won’t allow blindness to remain:
Neither will the Lord God suffer that the Gentiles shall forever remain in that awful state of blindness, which thou beholdest they are in, because of the plain and most precious parts of the gospel of the Lamb which have been kept back by that abominable church, whose formation thou hast seen…I will be merciful unto the Gentiles in that day, insomuch that I will bring forth unto them, in mine own power, much of my gospel, which shall be plain and precious, saith the Lamb. (1 Nephi 13:32, 34)
The Lord promised to return plain and precious truths that were lost. How will He do it? Well, it’s a two-step process—and it’s one we really ought to understand, because it’s happening now.

Step One: The Nephite Time Capsule
For, behold, saith the Lamb: I will manifest myself unto thy seed, that they shall write many things which I shall minister unto them, which shall be plain and precious; and after thy seed shall be destroyed, and dwindle in unbelief, and also the seed of thy brethren, behold, these things shall be hid up, to come forth unto the Gentiles, by the gift and power of the Lamb. And in them shall be written my gospel, saith the Lamb, and my rock and my salvation. (1 Nephi 13:35-36)

The Lord promised that the Nephites would preserve a record of plain and precious gospel teachings, “hid up” like a time capsule, to come forth in the latter days. And so, The Book of Mormon, though intentionally limited (3 Nephi 26:8-11) restored “many” plain and precious truths and “much of [the] gospel” to us. (v. 34)

Step Two: Other Books

Mormon informed us that step two of the Lord’s plan depends on how we respond to the time capsule information from step one:
And when they shall have received this, which is expedient that they should have first, to try their faith, and if it shall so be that they shall believe these things then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them. (3 Nephi 26:9)
Assuming some Gentiles actually believe what’s written in The Book of Mormon, the Lord will implement step two, which involves other books coming forth to establish and restore the apostles’ original testimonies that were previously stripped from the Book of the Lamb:
And after it had come forth unto them I beheld other books, which came forth by the power of the Lamb, from the Gentiles unto them, unto the convincing of the Gentiles and the remnant of the seed of my brethren, and also the Jews who were scattered upon all the face of the earth, that the records of the prophets and of the twelve apostles of the Lamb are true. 
And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records, which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first, which are of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them…
And they must come according to the words which shall be established by the mouth of the Lamb; and the words of the Lamb shall be made known in the records of thy seed, as well as in the records of the twelve apostles of the Lamb; wherefore they both shall be established in one; for there is one God and one Shepherd over all the earth. (1 Nephi 13:39-41)
Since We Know...

With the Lord’s plan spelled out in plainness before us, it’s incumbent upon us, if we desire truth, to first do all we can to believe and obey The Book of Mormon. It was given by a merciful God to help us find the path to salvation, and to open the gateway to “greater things.” Though most of the world, and even the LDS church, oppose and dismiss what The Book of Mormon teaches, there are some few who do take it seriously and value its message.

This leads to what we should expect next: new books to come forth, establishing the testimonies of the apostles and restoring the plain and precious parts of the gospel and the Lord’s covenants.

One such record has recently come forth. The Testimony of St. John has been revealed and published to begin the fulfillment of the prophecy we’ve discussed above. I believe this record is also a partial fulfillment of the promise contained in section 93 of the Doctrine and Covenants:
And John saw and bore record of the fulness of my glory, and the fulness of John’s record is hereafter to be revealed…And it shall come to pass, that if you are faithful you shall receive the fulness of the record of John. (D&C 93:6, 18)
To claim the new record fulfills ancient and modern prophecy is bold—and I should add that I’m the one making this assertion. Denver Snuffer, who revealed the record, has thus far made no statement that I know of, regarding this record fulfilling prophecy. But it’s clear to me that it does, and that the restoration of truth to the Book of the Lamb has begun.

The Good Part

I’ll talk more about the Testimony of St. John in a moment. But first, I have to tell you the good part of this story.
And that great pit, which hath been digged for them by that great and abominable church, which was founded by the devil and his children, that he might lead away the souls of men down to hell—yea, that great pit which hath been digged for the destruction of men shall be filled by those who digged it, unto their utter destruction, saith the Lamb of God (1 Nephi 14:3)
Nephi asserts that the restoration of the plain and precious truths will result in the pit being filled by those who digged it. I take that as a metaphor for their plan backfiring and bringing about the exact opposite result they had anticipated.

And backfire, it has.

Now that the fulness of John’s testimony has been restored, what happens when it is compared side by side with the old GA version of John from the Bible? Well, obviously, the restored Testimony has more in it than the Bible version. It has things the Bible version lacks.

What sorts of things?

Well, the missing things, of course. The plain and precious parts of the gospel. The covenants of the Lord. The stuff the GA church intentionally removed! It’s there in the Testimony of St. John.

So, in other words, by removing what the Lord would later restore, the GA church bequeathed to you and me a checklist of the very items they wanted suppressed. The Devil couldn’t have done more to highlight exactly what he doesn’t want you to know, and therefore what you MUST know to ascend to dwell with Christ. A simple comparison gives you the list. Talk about a plan backfiring!

The list is before us, and available to anyone who wants to compare the restored Testimony of St. John with the GA version of John from the Bible.

Know what’s even better? That comparison work has already been done for you as well. I currently know of several, different, side-by-side comparisons of the two books, making it simple to compare and highlight the missing information for yourself. At this point it’s so easy a child can do it.

You can download the various comparisons, audio versions and other resources at this link:

Once again, the Lord has shown that His wisdom is greater than the cunning of the Devil, and that it’s impossible to successfully fight against God.

The Best Part

And now for the best part of all concerning the restoration of John’s testimony. Recall my assertion that this record fulfills the following prophecy:
And it shall come to pass, that if you are faithful you shall receive the fulness of the record of John. (D&C 93:18)
Well, the payoff is in the very next verse:
I give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and know what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness. (D&C 93:19)
The point of restoring what was lost is to provide correct information—plain and precious information—about what to worship, how to worship, and ultimately, how to come unto the Father and receive the fulness of what He offers, which is always received by covenant.

That word “worship” is laden with all sorts of baggage, based on false traditions and unbelief. The Lord has clearly informed us in the above revelation that the purpose of restoring John’s record is to restore the correct understanding of worship, which can be summarized as following the same path as the one you worship.

In Closing

I’ve read the restored Testimony of St. John, and found incredible light and truth there. In fact, this is a whole new level of clarity and purity. I do not make the following statement without careful consideration, but having spent most of my life studying, searching and teaching the Book of Mormon, I can state that the light in John’s record is even brighter and more clear than that of the Book of Mormon—and that’s about the most over-the-top thing I can imagine saying about it.

If you haven’t yet read John’s restored record, I highly recommend doing so. Better yet, spend the time to compare it with the Bible version so you can see the differences. That’s where you’ll find the parts of the gospel you and I have been missing; these are some of the “greater things” Mormon wished he could reveal; these are the “first principles of the gospel about which so much hath been said.” (TPJS 348) These are the very things Satan and his minions attempted to keep from you. It’s worth the small effort to find them out.

In the name of Father Ahman I testify to you, He who hearkens to my testimony, and trusts him who sent me, there is no end to his potential progression. His progress will not cease, for I demonstrate the pathway of eternal lives. 
—The Testimony of St. John, p. 8


  1. Adrian, I'm quite humbled right now because I was reading through 'Removing the Condemnation' last night 1 Nephi 13:39-41 and it hit me like a ton of bricks that the Testimony of John was part of the fulfillment of that prophecy. The Spirit bearing testimony to me of that truth. Then I see your post today. Not coincidental at all. Thank you!

  2. Adrian,

    Fabulous work as usual. Another step, I believe, in knowing what Satan has taken out of the Bible is the use of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. Joseph Smith warned the early saints that if they did not publish the JST the church would yet fail. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.9)

    I believe that cursing took effect upon the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844.
    My blog deals almost exclusively with major corrections made by Joseph to the Book of the Lamb...

    I add my witness to the validity of the Testimony of John. It is interesting what the Lord had added back in via Denver, and what HE had taken out.

    Thank You,
    John Scott Peterson

  3. Adrian,

    I absolutely love this definition that you have presented:

    "[a] correct understanding of worship...can be summarized as following the same path as the one you worship"

    That definition not only highlights the fact that worship of Christ is often misunderstood or misapplied, but also that men often end up worshiping each other -- worshiping the General Authorities in whatever organizations they happen to belong.

    I also like the intentional / or unintentional connection that is in your post with regard to abbreviating GA (Great and Abominable), since "GA" is also an informal abbreviation for "General Authority" that is sometimes used by missionaries and others within the church.

    As I was reading your post, the potential crossover between General Authorities and the "Great & Abominable" reminded me of this kick ass quote from Denver:

    "I've had enough general authorities for a lifetime. I've
    seen enough “Strongmen” come and go for a lifetime. I am not anyone's “Strongman.” I will never be anyone's “Strongman,” period. It is repulsive to me. It is morally corrupt. In this world, as soon
    as you create an institution, as soon as you have anything other than people voluntarily working together towards an end, as soon as you have anything other than an idea, you have corruption.As soon as you turn the Gospel into something tangible, corporate or institutional, all that is needed to destroy the power of the Gospel is to get control of the institution. It does not require corrupt men, only false traditions. Only ideas can remain pure and holy here."

    The fact that Jesus wasn't a "strongman" or General Authority type figure during his mortal ministry says it all. Those who fail to follow his example of leadership are not worshiping him -- they are failing to follow his example and are worshiping something else, unintentionally though it might be.

    Thank you for this insightful post.


    1. Joe, I'll admit the "GA" connection caused me a few good laughs as I wrote this post. Is "GA" a coincidence? You decide...

  4. I have a few differing interpretations:

    • The book "proceeded forth" out of the mouth of "the Jew." It wasn't "written by the Jews." Many claim, understandably, that the Jew is "John." But why then would it be called "The Book of the Lamb" if it proceeded out of John's mouth? I assert that the "Jew" is Jesus Himself, and that the Book of the Lamb is (in its simplest form, anyway) the sermon He gave on the Mount and in Bountiful. Of course, there is more to it than what we have, and probably more iterations of the Book of the Lamb than just what John brought forth, recording the words of Jesus, a Jew.

    • The Twelve Apostles of the Lamb are different than the apostles that Jesus chose in Jerusalem. Remember that these 12 followed the "One" whose countenance was brighter than the sun down to earth. Most likely, in my opinion, is that these 12 were dispersed throughout time and had a piece of the Book of the Lamb (like Abraham received a record of the heavens, Moses received a record of the Creation, and the Brother of Jared (not being part of Israel) had a record of all, which was presumably received "a great many thousand" of years (20,000? 30,000? 50,000?) before Abraham was around. His record will act as the original copy which will eventually authenticate the other versions that will come forth in time.

    "And they must come according to the words which shall be established by the mouth of the Lamb; and the words of the Lamb shall be made known in the records of thy seed, as well as in the records of the twelve apostles of the Lamb; wherefore they both shall be established in one; for there is one God and one Shepherd over all the earth."

    • You said, "These are the goods with which the devil pays his servants for their service, because he can offer them nothing better. His servants eagerly accept such currency." Are we not playing a similar game of reward/payment when we seek to "gain" an "eternal reward" for our so-called righteous acts? If we seek to "save" our life, then we will lose it. But if we are willing to lose our lives for the sake of the Lord (helping Him recover His lost sheep), then the oath and the covenant of the priesthood promises that we will gain it, and all that the Father has too. In other words, if we are going to require that God operates in an "economy," then we will have to pay every whit due. However, there is another way.

    1. 12 Visions: I agree with with your interpretation of the 12. I think they are the likes of Moses, Mahonri, Noah, etc. Maybe comprised of those who were ordained to the Higher Priesthood? I don't know. Just spitballin'...

      Daymon Smith did an interesting, and admittedly very speculative, lecture on this. It's about 90 minutes and worth the time, I think.

      It's here if anyone is interested:

      Question: I was under the impression that 3 Nephi 26:9 referred to additional records coming specifically to the Remnant of Jacob, should they accept the Book of Mormon, which will be brought to them by the Gentiles (which I don't think has happened yet, but I could be 100% incorrect). If I recall and understand correctly, the plates of Nephi were separated from the bulk of the records (Mormon 6:6). Just thinking out loud, but could the rest of the records the Lord refers to be the remainder of the Nephite record that's likely still buried somewhere in Western NY?

    2. matt - You could very well be correct about 3 Nephi 26, but I think that "they" can easily refer to both the Gentiles and the remnant of Lehi. Either way, it is clear to me that the records will come through some of the Gentiles and will be "established" by the 3 witnesses ("Three Nephites"), one of which could very well be Nephi, son of Nephi, aka, the Angel Nephi, or as the LDS's would say, "The Angel Moroni."

      I would be surprised if something as valuable as the remaining Nephite record was still buried, unless there was so much to it that it couldn't be portable.

    3. Hm, could be. Mormon mentions the Gentiles bringing the word to "this people," but I can believe it refers to both the remnant and Gentiles.

      I assumed that the Angel Nephi was Lehi's son. What are your thoughts behind Nephi, son of Nephi, he of sealing power? That's interesting. I've also wondered if the "man among the gentiles" is one of the Three Nephites. (When I realized Christopher Columbus couldn't possibly be referenced in the BoM, that was when I first broke with LDS convention and "church leadership" and started asking better questions).

      My guess is that there are buried records all over the world from the various branches led away by the hand of the Lord. I can't imagine it's difficult for Him to protect them if He wishes. But that's just a guess...

    4. Quick follow up: Do you believe it's Nephi, son of Nephi because he is the one who could actually physically witness of Christ's ministry, being alive at His arrival at Bountiful? (Along with the sealing power and conferral of the higher priesthood directly by God?)

    5. You're right, Nephi was an eye witness to what happened, and therefore has some important insight to what went on and how we Gentiles can establish the marvelous work in our day. Moroni mentions that the 3 can appear to whomever they like, so I assume that Joseph Smith was one of them.

      These 3 disciples were "beloved," which I believe is a way of saying that they were endowed with "charity," or in other words, the power to perform miracles for the benefit of mankind. I think that when the Gentiles ask for and receive this sort of charity, the three will step into the picture and share their experience. This is the underlying idea behind the 40 day fast which is currently going on (see for more info).

      I think the man among the Gentiles is not a translated being, otherwise it would not be something that the Gentiles have to "prove" through faith. All things are done through faith, and I would guess that we Gentiles are no exception. The "witness" (Nephi?) will only come AFTER our faith is exercised.

    6. There is one idea that may be helpful. See if Lehi's dream and Nephi's vision make sense if the man among the Gentiles is Joseph Smith. That could be at least one way of looking at it.

    7. It might have been him, if his attempt had not been a false start. But Joseph did not come out of captivity or bring the people out, and Joseph was made king when the Lord said He would raise up no kings among the Gentiles. Joseph also cursed his enemies, which is not the doctrine of Christ. In my mind, Joseph is not a fit.

  5. Adrian:
    Can you give a little background on the following "Background Summary?"

    Background History
    There is a new edition of the scriptures being prepared which will use the JST of the Bible. That will result
    in both the Book of Moses and JS-Matthew being removed from the Pearl of Great Price. When I was
    asked to take a look at the project I had the impression that a new translation of John's Gospel was needed
    and ought to replace the missing texts. I asked a qualified Greek Scholar to undertake that project and he
    declined. But the impression remained that it needed to be done.
    I made it the subject of prayer and was told to do the work. I spent a few days working with an EnglishGreek
    New Testament, the JS Translation of John, and a Greek Lexicon before becoming hopelessly
    discouraged by the many options and choices. I prayed about it before retiring for the night and essentially
    quit. I explained that it would take years for me to accomplish this, and that I was not going to be able to
    solve the riddles of the text. I went to bed assuming I was done with it.
    In the middle of that night I was awakened and given the solution to every dilemma I had been facing in
    the work on the text. So the next day I continued on from where I had abandoned the work and, to my
    surprise, everything was opened to my mind so clearly and continuously that the entire project was
    completed in less than three weeks. The light of heaven opened the material in a way I had never thought
    of nor had previously attained to in considering the Gospel of John. At times it progressed so rapidly that I
    was unable to finish one part before the next came rolling out. Many new and different things were added,
    and at least one thing was dropped entirely because it was not part of John's original composition. Because
    of the rapid way it rolled out, once I finished the text I went back to clean up a lot of what had been left as
    incomplete sentences, run-on sentences, missing words (particularly conjunctions) and cryptic or
    inadequate explanations. The intent of the writer, John, was revealed, including why some things were
    included in the text and the manner he wrote.
    When it began it was an attempt at a "translation" but by the time it was completed it was clearly a
    "revelation" and not merely a translation of a text. Therefore the result does not have my name on it,
    because I cannot claim any credit for the content. I failed in what I was attempting. What resulted came
    from heaven.
    -Denver Snuffer

    Was this Denver's response to your questions to him?

    1. No, this was not in response to anything I asked.

      I didn't create any of the comparisons on the site, and I'm not sure where that explanation came from, or what question may have elicited it.

    2. I read that same quote a couple weeks back from a comment Bob Sonnatag wrote on the LDS Remnant FB.

    3. I can confirm that this was Denver's response via email to my request for context and background. I shared it with his permission. They are his words; he speaks for himself, and I am not a spokesman.

  6. Thanks for pointing out the obvious fulfillment of prophecy in regards to John's record. I experienced full on goosebumps as I read through the scripture references you provided.

  7. I looked up page 9 of The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (as referenced by J. S. Peterson above) at

    "...Until we have perfect love we are liable to fall and when we have a testimony that our names are sealed in the Lamb’s book of life we have perfect love and then it is impossible for false Christs to deceive us; ...further, that God had often sealed up the heavens because of covetousness27 in the Church. The Lord would cut short his work in righteousness28 and except the Church receive the fulness of the Scriptures29 that they would yet fail." —FWR, p. 16. (Oct. 25, 1831.)

    27. Isa. 57:17; Jer. 6:13; Luke 12:15; Eph. 5:3; D&C 98:20; D&C 104:4.
    28. Rom. 9:28; D&C 52:11.
    29. D&C 42:15; D&C 104:48.

    What is interesting, in context of your post, Adrian, is that Joseph said the Church's success or failure rests upon receiving the fulness of the Scriptures. Not just the JST, but Scripture like the Testimony of St. John.

    Not sure that any perceived "success" any Mormons/LDS have had since the 1830's is "success" in God's view. I'm guessing not.

    But this much we can boldly say, that since the fulness is NOW being clarified and revealed in new scripture, that we are entering a time where the Lord's "church" will not fail but see success.

  8. It will take some time to plumb the depths of The Testimony of John. Within the text are perhaps the best scriptural explanation of
    🔹The meaning of Keep the Commandments
    🔹The nature of the pre-mortal world
    🔹The nature of eternal progression
    🔹The divisions of the celestial world
    🔹The nature of the Holy Ghost
    🔹The nature of ascent
    🔹Other cycles of existence
    🔹Some details on astral journeys
    🔹And new names of the Son and the Father
    McKay Platt

  9. This is great stuff I especially appreciated the background comment from Snuffer, it's nice knowing the details.
    One thing that really surprised me about it though was that it completely passed over the Atonement. Seems like it was intentionally left out, I wonder by whom...

  10. Gruden
    You don't need to use the word atonement to talk about the atonement.
    " I will sacrifice my life for the sheep.
    I have other sheep that are not part of this fold. I will visit them and they will also hear my voice, and I will make all my sheep into one fold, following one shepherd. I will sacrifice my life for them, and then take it up again to provide life for the flock.

    That's not talking about the atonement I don't know what it's talking about, Gruden

    1. I did read it, and I assure you I understand word substitutions and allusions. I'm referring to the specific event in Gethsemane; it is not his death that can reconcile us with God, but his suffering in Gethsemane. In the standard NT John is the only one of the Gospels not to cover this event. Clearly he never intended to write about it, which I find interesting.

  11. I concur with Mr. Ebenezer. The whole message of John is a testimony of the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ: The life, the miracles, the teachings,and finally the suffering in Gethsemene, and the death upon the cross.

    In Christ's own words He testifies this is why He came, "The time has come for me to complete the work required of me, to intercede for the world. And the accuser will lose all his power. Because of the sacrifice of his life that the Son of Man is to make, he will rise up and rescue all mankind. He said this to explain how important his death was to save others." (Page 21).

    And further on page 17, "Just as the Father laid down his life for me, he trusts me with the lives of the sheep. I will sacrifice my life for the sheep."

    These are the "preparations" He has made and the "finishing" of it will be as we believe and follow the path He has proved of His Father, and as we approach the end of the path. "You will have to let others stretch out your hands and likewise nail you, even if you plead to have the bitter cup removed. This he said to foretell the sacrificial death that is required for endless glory."

    We must follow after Him!


  12. How come this new version of the record of John doesn't contain the changes that Joseph Smith made in the JST?

    1. This is a fair question, I think.

    2. A couple of thoughts here.

      First, the ultimate goal of any translation, or restoration, is to share correct information, reflecting the original intent. This means the ideas get conveyed accurately, even if different words are used.

      I’ll use a hypothetical trip to the store as an example, along with representative translations from various sources.

      KJV: I took my journey to the store.
      JST: I took my journey to the grocery store.
      TSJ: I purchased eggs, milk, and sugar because I needed them to bake a cake.

      All speak of the same event.

      The KJV is the least informative.
      The JST adds important clarifying information.
      The TSJ provides the motive and specifics behind the trip, as well as what was obtained. But it never uses the word “grocery.” Did it therefore leave out what Joseph Smith gave us? Or is the word “grocery” implied by the list of items obtained?

      The “lacking” JST items that I’ve seen so far are very much like this example.

      Also, it’s important to keep in mind that Joseph Smith never set out to restore the original records of the Bible. He only added specific, usually small, clarifications to help clarify what was already there. I haven’t found any instance yet where the new record utterly neglects or contradicts the ideas Joseph was trying to convey with the clarifications he offered.

      Admittedly, I have not made an exhaustive search for JST items that may be lacking…but as far as I’ve searched, I’ve not found any of the ideas lacking.

    3. Thanks for the reply back.

      Here's one example where I have issue with.

      KJV John 1:21

      And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

      JST John 1:21

      And he confessed, and denied not that he was Elias; but confessed, saying; I am not the Christ.


      Who are you? And he did not deny that he possessed the Spirit of God’s messenger, but declared, I am not the Messiah.

      The TSM seems to disregard the JST and revert back to the KJV.

      This verse is really important in the JST because it's one of the few changes that Joseph made to show that John the Baptist was indeed Elijah.

      Here's the other one from the account of the Mount of Transfiguration.

      JST Mark 9:3

      And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses, or in other words, John the Baptist and Moses; and they were talking with Jesus.

      I'd love some clarification on the matter.

    4. Thanks for bringing this up, Ryan. This is an excellent example.

      Joseph Smith taught:

      ..for the spirit of Elias was a going before to prepare the way for the greater, which was the case with John the Baptist. He came crying through the wilderness, "Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." And they were informed, if they could receive it, it was the spirit of Elias; and John was very particular to tell the people, he was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light…

      The spirit of Elias is to prepare the way for a greater revelation of God, which is the Priesthood of Elias, or the Priesthood that Aaron was ordained unto. And when God sends a man into the world to prepare for a greater work, holding the keys of the power of Elias, it was called the doctrine of Elias, even from the early ages of the world.

      History of the Church, 6:249-254 (See also TPJS p.335)

      The KJV was obviously altered to have John deny that he came in the spirit and power of Elias. Joseph Smith restored that truth in the JST. The TSJ calls this “the spirit of God’s messenger,” which is an entirely accurate representation of the idea, though it doesn’t use the word, “Elias.” The JST and the TSJ are in agreement.

      Elijah was a man, not to be confused with Elias. John the baptist was not Elijah.

  13. John is one of my favorite books of scripture. I studied the Greek New Testament in college and later on studied John 1 extensively and came to the conclusion that most of John 1 was taken from the record of John the Baptist, that John the Beloved was originally a disciple of John the Baptist, that John the Beloved included a portion of the record of John the Baptist as the preface to his testimony, that the record of John referred to in D&C 93 refers to the record of John the Baptist, not John the Beloved and that the fullness of the record of John would be scripture written by John the Baptist and an expansion of John 1. For this reason I don't see TSJ as the fullness of the record of John.

    Also TSJ mentions Mary cutting Jesus' hair which had not been cut because of the vow. I assume this refers to the Nazarite vow. This vow has three main restrictions, not to cut your hair, not to drink wine and not to have contact with unclean things including corpses. Jesus was a Nazarene (from Nazareth) but it is doubtful he was a Nazarite. I find this section of TSJ problematic.

    1. Hi Craig,

      I don't believe section 93 gives any specific reason to assume the promised record to come forth is the record of John the Baptist. (I realize the heading and Bruce McConkie both hold this interpretation, but I don't see anything in the record itself definitively pointing to John the Baptist.

      Similarly, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea that Christ was under a Nazarite vow. Samson was under such a vow, yet he touched the unclean and the dead. But God still honored his vow for the sake of his hair. Can we be certain the same circumstances didn't apply to Christ?

  14. Craig,

    You have a good point. But what if the entirety of the book of Enoch, which we don't have, is composed of the words of Adam? Would we still want to call it the book of Enoch? What if Enoch was trying to explain the fulness of his record using Adam's words? Who then should claim the title of the book? Should we call 2 Nephi the record of Isaiah since Nephi used Isaiah's record to convey his own testimony? Should the entirety of the Book of Mormon be renamed to the books of Jacob, Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, etc. even though Mormon is likely using those records to tell us his testimony of our day?

    Can John the Beloved have the same testimony as his first mentor, John the Baptist, and therefore use his first mentor's words to explain his own testimony? Would we have the record of both Johns if this were the case?

    Either way, the fullness is probably not something that can be read, but needs to be experienced. If it is something that everyone has to experience, then each one person's record is essentially the same as each other person's no matter what words are used, or who used them.

  15. I have no problem with one prophet quoting another and am not trying to call the validity of the Gospel of John into question. I compare the Gospel of John to 1st Nephi. Nephi gave an overview of his father's ministry before recording his own. But I would expect the fullness of the record of Lehi to be about Lehi and not an expansion of the book of Nephi and I would expect the fullness of the record of John the Baptist (if that is what D&C 93 is talking about) to be mainly about the ministry of John the Baptist. Jesus said there was no greater prophet than John and we know relatively little of his ministry so the fullness of his record would be instructive. It is something more to look forward to. That said, I am not a trained scholar and it is entirely possible that I am mistaken. It feels right but I am willing to consider other evidence.

  16. Something I noticed which I think is significant: On page 1 of the Testimony of St. John it says "The Messenger of the Heavenly Council was in the cosmos..." The familiar Isaiah 9:6 is rendered in the Septuagint as follows: "For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of the great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him." (using Brenton's 1851 translation)
    Thanks, Evan

  17. I really appreciated the enlightenment I received as I read through this blog Adrian. It surprised me to see that I had missed passages which spoke of future scriptures. Amazing how such things can be lost even though they are right there in front of us. A loss of the plain and precious things through blindness.

    Thanks to all for their comments as well. So much insight.

  18. I just read the gospel rewrite of John. Great piece of fiction. Entirely a fraud and completely borrowed from the New Testament with a few things changed or added that Joseph Smith revealed. Hard to stay awake reading the thing. It's a fraud and that is clear.

    1. So wait, it's a fraud because it's too similar to the New Testament? And it's "great fiction," but you can't stay awake? I found it hard to sleep when the new version was revealed.

      But I get it. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

      You've called it a fraud twice, without offering any reasoning behind the label. Surely, you have something more than name calling and illogical assertions to contribute to the dialogue?

  19. Hi, I didn't think my last letter would be published because I called this new testament version of John to Denver as fraudulent. I'm sure this one won't be published either and so I'll be brief. The reason I know this is a fraud is because there are some obvious errors. One thing it's titled the testimony of John the Beloved. But the scriptures that are written there are about John the Baptist. They are two different people entirely. Also there is no affirmation that this was written by John the Beloved nor John the Baptist. All writings by these ancient prophets have an affirmation that they are true. Nothing here about that. The work is entirely plagiarized from the NT with a few very minor changes that make the account inaccurate. I would love to discuss this with anybody here because I think I can prove my point.

    Another point I should make is anything that comes from the Lord will have His metaphorical language. You see that all through the writings and revelations to Joseph Smith. You don't see any metaphorical language in any of this and therefore this is just another example of the fraudulent nature of the thing.

    I'm sure you believe this work and accept as correct from God. I assure you it is not and you would be wise to reject it.

    That's my brief statement and like I said I'm sure you won't put it up which is too bad. Would love to have an engaging, frank conversation about this. But if not that's okay. Have a good day.

    1. Hi iterry,

      Thank you for providing some reasons behind your assertions. I truly appreciate it, and I appreciate you having the integrity to back up your assertions. Well done!

      Yes, the first part of the record quotes John the Baptist. John the Beloved was a disciple of John the Baptist, was there when Christ was baptized, and wrote his testimony of the event. This no more proves fraud than anyone else writing in their journal about someone or something they witnessed. Of course they are two different people entirely, and the record never says otherwise. Quite the opposite, in fact.

      Here’s a relevant quote: “And I, John, bear record, and lo the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended upon Him in the form of a dove and remained upon Him. There came a voice out of heaven saying: You are my Beloved Son, this day I have begotten you; for I was there with John the Baptist when he baptized Jesus.” (p. 32)

      John gives a lengthy affirmation of the truth of his testimony on pages 31-32. I won’t quote its entirety here. Furthermore, Christ repeatedly asserts, throughout the record, that He is telling the truth. Is that not enough?

      Calling the work “plagiarized” from the NT is another way of simply noting the similarity, which we would most certainly expect to see. Why would it not bear strong similarities to the NT record of John, while restoring a fuller understanding?

      As for the Lord’s metaphorical language, I’m not sure what you mean. Can you provide some examples? John is giving HIS testimony—not a revelation from the Lord. It is an eyewitness account, and the voice is John's, not the Lord's. John does quote the Lord, but not as revelation. All the quotes John includes of Christ are during Christ’s mortality or just after His resurrection. Where should the metaphorical language appear, and what should it be? And how should an eyewitness account of events compare to a revelation to Joseph Smith?

      In the end, the sorts of textual “proofs” you attempt as evidence of fraud really aren't convincing. First and foremost, the way to judge the matter is by asking God. It’s His witness that matters. If He says it’s true, it is. If He says it’s false, it is. And if you can’t hear His voice and hold a conversation with Him, I’d suggest addressing that deficiency is far more important than attempting to "prove" this record a fraud by other means.

  20. Iterry,
    Have you asked God to reveal to you whether the testimony of John is truth or not?
    I concur with Adrian on this. It really is a matter for each of us to individually decide the truth of anything given to us (i.e. The Book of Mormon, Lectures on Faith, etc...)
    And how do we decide the truth of all things? Only God can tell us that by the power of the Holy Ghost?

    The first time I read the testimony of John I couldn't put it down. There are some things that are written on the heart that cannot be denied. I asked and I got an answer. The testimony of John is revelation and scripture that has depth and truth I have hardly begun to dig out, much like the Book of Mormon and Lectures on Faith, etc...
    I don't see how anyone can really compare that revelation to the current NT. In fact I found myself connecting to it on a very personal level, as if it was written specifically for me, as strange as that sounds. And then I read it to my kids and, boy, I have never seen them so engrossed in scripture as I did with John's testimony. I would read a couple pages to them each day and we would talk about it a little, but when I got to the last 5 pages they wouldn't let me stop reading. And I couldn't stop crying because it was just so powerful to me. My younger kids have accepted it readily as scripture, as revelation. I think it's beautiful.

    1. Yes Paula and it's a fraud for several reasons. I just mention some below to Sandra and so I won't go into them again because it's repetitive.

      I see the thing that was written far different than you have. It took me several hours to wade through the thing. I found it quite boring in fact because there was nothing there other than a few changes here and there like there are now 6 bottles of water that were turned into wine. Well, so what! What is so beautiful about it? As I've said I've found no metaphorical language which is beautiful.

      One thing that is beautiful that I should mention is when you find this metaphorical language you have different levels of meaning in the scriptures. There is the literal meaning, metaphorical, Tropological, and the Anagological meanings. There is great depth to true scripture when it is revealed from God to man. So when I read something like this new testament I look for those things and if they are not there then it's not from God. There are certain rules that are followed in that language and when they are used improperly then you can tell as well. So I guess I don't see why this is such a great thing. I don't see any importance to it at all other than a simple rehash of what we already had. When the real text of John comes out it will be far different.

      Look at the book of Revelation for example. That was written by John the Beloved. Look how different that is as compared to this one. No comparison at all. So don't be fooled into thinking that it is from God if there is no evidence for it and there isn't.

  21. So wonderful! Denver is unbelievable!

    1. I can't tell if you're seriously genuine with your comments because of your screen name. 😂

  22. Question for iterry. You mentioned one proof of fraud was that there was no metaphorical language in it and at the same time you claim it was a replication of the NT rendition. Did John have metaphors in it? If so or if not... would the full account of John have those or not? And if not, then why would the full account have them or omit them if they were a replica? It is a little confusing yes?

  23. No Sandra it is not confusing. This work is purported to be from God is it not. There has to be some evidence of this in the text itself. By there not being any metaphorical language tells me that it is not from God. The Lord would have given John or inspired John to put that language in his work if it was authentic. This thing is a complete plagiarized version of the NT and has no value that I can see. Denver simply changed a few things to make it sound authentic like using the name of God as Ahman. There are many names of God in fact the Jews count 72 names. He didn't use Son Ahman for Christ so he wasn't consistent either.

    So what I'm trying to tell you is there are enough evidence in the text itself to tell me it is not correct. Also the spirit tells me it is not true because of these and other problems.

    Last night I wrote up what I mean by metaphor and I see that it has not been put up yet. I hope it is because I explain it a little bit more.

    Let me give you another example. Joseph you accept as a great prophet of God. So do I. His revelations are fantastic and you can tell by reading them that they are from God. The spirit testifies they are. In your local library along the Wasatch Front that is you will find something called the unpublished revelations of John Taylor. When John Taylor wanted something from the 12 he simply sat down and penned a revelation. They are all phony and false. You read them and there is nothing in them. No metaphorical language no affirmation from God that they are authentic nothing at all other than the very first few words that say Verily thus saith the Lord. They read far different than anything in the D&C and by this the Lord has given us a way to detect that is not from Him.

    I point this out because it is important. You and I can be fooled but the Lord has given us ways to detect the frauds. We just have to use them.

    1. iterry, you wrote three lengthy comments for this conversation, but posted them as comments on an unrelated blog post from a couple months ago. That's why they don't appear here. I initially approved them, but when I realized they were mis-posted, I took them back down because they made no sense where they were posted.

      Sorry, I have no way to move them. The blogger platform doesn't give me that ability. But if you care to re-submit them, I'll post them here.

    2. Hi Adrian,
      That was dumb of me to post this in the wrong place. I can see what I did wrong and thanks for letting me know.

      Thanks for answering my little note. There are a number of ways to tell if something is from the Lord. You’ve mentioned one and that is through the spirit. That should be obvious of course that if something is from the Lord then it would carry with it a spirit. Asking the Lord for his conformation of something of course is a way to truth. I have done so with this and the answer came as no that it is not of God.

      But there are other ways that you can tell if something is from God. I mentioned the affirmation. The beginning of the piece is lacking in the affirmation. Yes there are a few minor ones through the text but for me it’s lacking because this is being sent out to the world as something new from the Lord. It doesn’t have the characteristics that would make it such. I’m not even sure where it actually comes from.
      If you look at the time period after Christ there were a bunch of so-called gospels that were sent out into the world that purported to be a true gospel of Christ. You’ve heard of the gospel of Thomas, Judas Iscariot, Barnabus and many others. They were all spurious as well. Later the Church gathered up the ones that they thought were authentic. There are some in the bible today that aren’t inspired but contain doctrine that is 2nd century. The book of Hebrews is one of those. Even though it has some interesting doctrines that may have been handed down from the early days the doctrines are in that book are from the 2nd century and therefore the book really shouldn’t be quoted as an authentic work. In think chapter 11 of Hebrews was handed down from an earlier time however. But the Godhead doctrine is clearly 2nd century well into the apostasy.

      So getting back to this discussion how can you tell what is from God and what isn’t? This is a good question. One of the ways that the Jews used was the metaphorical language of the Lord. If the revelation contained no metaphorical language then the work immediately became suspect. I could detect absolutely no metaphorical language in this work and yet it is purported to be from God to Denver. If you look at John’s other writings like the book of Revelation it is jammed full of metaphorical language which makes the work authentic.

      Let me give you an example of what I mean and I should be clear that the works of the Prophet Joseph Smith are filled with metaphorical language and I can site numerous examples of that language for you. But I have a great scripture from the old testament that really shows the language of the metaphor. If you understand the metaphors that are being used then you can understand what is going on and what the prophecy is about.

      For an example of this go to Ezekiel 47:1-12, here Ezekiel is shown a vision beginning at the temple in Jerusalem. He sees water issuing out from under the threshold of the house (temple). The waters flow from the altar and as it flows along it gathers or collects more water until it flows into the dead sea. When the water enters the Dead-sea it is healed. There are trees along the bank of this Dead-sea and so forth.
      Now if you read this it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. None – you can’t make heads or tails out of it. If you understood the metaphor you would get the message. The Lord does this to conceal much of the gospel from those who would corrupt the book or are not worthy of receiving the message. Christ told his disciples this very thing that he would speak to the people in parable.

    3. So what does it mean? Here are just a few of the interpretations of the metaphors: Water = people, Dead-sea is a large group of people, Dead also means they don’t have the gospel. In this case something is healing them. The trees along the bank are people. The leaves on the trees are – you guessed it people. The fishermen in the water are catching fish - fish are people. In this case many different kinds. So from here if you understand the rest of the metaphors like Engedi and Eneglaim which are metaphors for real cities you can get the rest of the story as to what is happening. I site this simply as an example of metaphor.

      Same is true of the New Testament. Luke for example talks about where the carcass is found there will be the eagles. Again this is metaphor and the scriptures are filled with them. D&C 133 is about the gathering of the 10 tribes. When they are gathered they smite the rocks and ice flows down in their presence. Here is more metaphor that is incomprehensible if you don’t understand the language.

      So what we have here in Denver's work is over 30 pages of a document purported to be from God that has none of His language in the thing. It reads like the many pseudepigrapha and apocryphal works that came out after the 1st century after Christ and the apostles. This is why I can tell that there is nothing of value in the thing. Yes it’s similar in many respects to the gospels hence my charge that it is plagiarized just as these pseudepigrapha works were in many case plagiarized as well.

      This is just one of the reasons why I can’t accept this work. Look at the work with open eyes and don’t accept everything that comes your way as from God because it is easy to be fooled. The Lord has given us a number of ways to tell and this is one of them.

      This letter is getting too long but there is one more way and I won’t go into it and that is that all new scripture has to fit into prophecy and not contradict earlier prophecies. There are many scriptures that say that in the last days that revelation will be cut off to the Church. That means everybody. D&C 101:43-62 is a metaphorical revelation that tells us that revelation was cut off to the Church when they got here to the valley because the general authorities became business men. This is a difficult revelation to understand unless you understand metaphor. Isaiah 29:9-10 says that the Lord has covered our prophets and seers – again the same thing. Hosea chapters 2 and 3 say the same thing that revelation was cutoff to the Church when the Lord dropped us off here in the valleys.
      So that is just an overview of what I see. Take a look and keep your eyes open. Tell me what you think about this. Thanks

    4. iterry, interestingly, I have personally received revelations from the Lord and not once did He use metaphorical language. He did use 'principle' language. Language that was eternally applicable in every circumstance or arena. For instance, once I asked the Lord where His true church was. He responded immediately and audibly with, "Where there is true and honorable priesthood, is where you will find my true church." Could it be that true and honorable are metaphorical words? or Perhaps Priesthood is a metaphorical word? No, I didn't think so either. Later I received a second revelation upon this response. It was, "True and Honorable priesthood is not a person. It is MY POWER AND AUTHORITY. Only I can infuse it when, where and through whom I will." Now where in that revelation is a metaphor?

      The church is not the individuals. The church may not receive revelation in the last days. This is a fact we have all witnessed. But individuals do ... in fulfillment of Joel 2:27-28. Israel is a people scattered and many are found here in the USA.

      No one can put limits or conditions to control the word of God to HIS people, where ever they may be found. I find it very interesting that you have put a 'formula' to the Lord's work. Many already know that Shakespear was asked to do some of the work of creating the KING JAMES Bible.. The 46th word from the beginning of Psalm 46 is "shake" and the 46th word from the end (omitting the liturgical mark "Selah") is "spear". Shakespeare was in King James' service during the preparation of the King James Bible, and was generally considered to be 46 years old in 1611 when the translation was completed.

      We know that language of metaphor and allegory where his forte.

      Interestingly, may of the translations use different words and concepts entirely from what we have had given to us. These new words create a whole new understanding of what is being given to us. It isn't about what 'language' format is being used. It is the eternal principles which work into it which tell, if anything.

      I noticed several decades ago that French uses of different words created a problem for the 'stone' which Peter was supposed to have been called. That was just one of the words 'metaphorically' used in English that didn't translate the same into French.

      German seems to be the most accepted by scholars who use any translations. Words such as 'deliverer' instead of 'God' can make a huge difference.

      Finally, there is a major difference between teachings and prophecies which were meant to only be understood through the Spirit for the righteous. John's writings in Revelation is an example of that. Also Isaiah, and other prophetic writings for our last day. But consider Jesus telling His disciples that He would no longer speak plainly to others because of their wickedness. He told them that He would only teach in parables or metaphors. BECAUSE THEY WERE WICKED. The wicked need to have these because otherwise they would receive more than they were able to live up to. So I find it very interesting that you are rejecting the plain and precious teachings because they are not cached in metaphor. Seriously, consider what you are indicating here.

    5. Sandra, I am not rejecting something that is plain and precious. It isn't anything of the sort. In fact, anybody could have written the thing. Denver wrote it and there is absolutely nothing in it of any importance or precious. It is very plain to be sure and has no spiritual content at all other than it was plagiarized from the New Testament. He changed a few words around and added a few to make it sound authentic but it isn't. True revelation cannot be duplicated because you have to understand the Lord's language. Fakers can be detected quite readily in other words. This is one of the ways to tell what is from God and what isn't. That's my point in all this. I read it and there isn't anything there.

      As for your revelations although they are interesting they do contradict revelation to us from the prophets of God about the last days. So I would be very careful in believing everything you see and hear because if they contradict revelation then you know of a surety that it is not from God. Lucifer is a deceiver and you have to be careful because he will deceive you. I could go into those contradictions as well. And again I do not want to be rude or offensive, but these things are important.

    6. iterry, just somethings to consider. You use the phrase 'the Lord's language' to prove whether or not a revelation comes from God, but you have chosen criteria that can't be useful on a continued basis. You have chosen metaphors and prophecies which can't seemingly contradict your understanding of certain previously received passages.

      That is putting a lot of power in your grasp. OR it is actually telling on your own brand of fakery. Words are very interesting things. I have said it before, and I find I must say it again often. Words, without the Spirit of the Holy Ghost, are deceivers. No matter they be in accord with your idea of what does or doesn't constitute true language of the Lord. Knowledge, which comes by words in printed form, can deceive even if originally given by God. People think they are learned. But when someone actually receives direct revelation it is so comprehensive, words, knowledge, fail.

      1 Cor.13: 1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

      2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

      I believe we must stay upon the Lord.

    7. What I'm trying to tell you is that true scripture from God have certain elements that will betray the thing as a fraud if those elements are not present. Relying on just your feelings is not one of them. Sure having the spirit is one of them but as I told you in the beginning there is no spirit in this writing at all. There is nothing there of any worth whatsoever. So if you can separate those feelings for a moment and concentrate on what is being said you can detect what is from God and what isn't. The Lord's language is not found in these verses other than the direct quotes from the KJV. In fact it reads more like the living KJV because he got rid of the old archaic language of the KJV. There is a living BOM out there too that does the same thing.

      So I guess what I'm seeing in your posts is you are relying on your feelings more than staying upon the Lord. You are so hungry to hear something from God that you'll latch on to anything.

      Years ago there came for the sealed portion of the BOM. Did you believe that fraud too for example? Later the person that wrote it told everybody that is was in fact a fraud. But there were people who still believed it was authentic even after being told it was not. Again Feelings and not the spirit of God at all.

      I see nothing of value in this work at all. I read it and there is nothing there. It will lead you away from the true prophets of God if followed.

    8. iterry, lest we over take a really good blog and some excellent and insightful comments with our personal interloping, I will simply give you something to think about and quit this discussion.

      I did not at first accept the book of John from Denver Snuffer. I do not accept all that comes from him. There are two who know of my thoughts on the matter first hand. Adrian is one I have personally emailed my contrary thoughts. So your accusations of me following 'my feelings' could be correct in that instance. But since that time I have been constantly praying, fasting, and asking the Lord to know HIS desire. When this blog of Adrian's came, I was given answers I had sought for diligently. I don't back anything lightly.

      Also, when the supposed sealed portion of the BOM came out I read it and was totally appalled. It was an obvious fraud and I dismissed it out of hand because I had been ready to be fed as I am fed from the Book of Mormon. I received the spiritual confirmation that it was of man instead.

      I hope you come to understand the foibles of your own 'feelings and security' in your searching for the truth and continue to grow in spiritual prowess as you have in 'knowledge'. Take care.

  24. I have some background thoughts on this new manuscript which have been evolving since we received the manuscript 2 weeks ago. After a first rapid read of this manuscript followed by a second much more careful study, I am convinced that this is a gift from God.

    It actually solved for me a question I have puzzled over—the conflict in the gospel of John between the Mary who received Jesus after his resurrection being Mary from Magdala up north in Galilee, versus the Mary who anointed him for his burial being the Mary who lived just southeast of Jerusalem with her sister Martha and brother Lazarus.

    The augmented account matches what I would expect to see if I live to see the sealed Book of Mormon manuscript; that is, this new account is not really new but rather the same account viewed with a 40 watt bulb having been replaced by a floodlight.

    I have spent time with early versions of John such as the Geneva Bible, my favorite being Tyndale’s original, and I love the 500 year old English. But the archaic English does nevertheless obscure original meanings. Just as an example: Tyndale’s 1534 English has a definition of the phrase “by and by” which is dead opposite to what we would expect—“by and by” is defined in Daniell’s helpful glossary of 1534 English as “at once” rather than the expected “eventually.” (Page xxxiii, Tyndale’s New Testament translated by William Tyndall and republished by David Daniel, 1989 Yale University) I can see that the clarity of meaning we all so much need at this difficult time requires our own usage, not Shakespeare’s.

    Leaving behind such detail level issues, let me make an analogy of what I believe we are witnessing that’s been growing on my mind. I recently finished rereading McCullough’s excellent book “1776” containing the history of George Washington during the first 18 months of his service as military commander of the colonists; also recently rereading McCullough’s biography of John Adams in the same period. I’ve read a spectrum of similar period history from authors both religious and irreligious. To me the overriding conclusion is that Washington’s army was delivered by the hand of God, not by Washington or any man. (1 Nephi 13: 15-19) After Divine deliverance at Boston the army marched to defend New York City and Brooklyn. Washington’s forces were washed away like a sandcastle in the tide against 400 British ships carrying many times more troops than the Americans. Finally Washington made the bad decision to have his men make a stand at Fort Washington on the northwest shore of what’s now called Manhattan Island. He is said to have wept as he watched from across the Hudson when the fort was decimated and had to surrender. There is no substitute for experience, even if you are George Washington. But he constantly learned from what had not worked. He went on to astonish the world and shut the mouths of detractors because he was a tool in God’s hands. (D&C 101:80)

    continued in 2nd comment

  25. Segment 2

    What does all this have to do with translating by the gift of God? D&C 8 contains a commission from God to Oliver Cowdery to “receive a knowledge concerning the engravings of old records, which are ancient, which contain those parts of my scripture of which has been spoken by the manifestation of my Spirit.” In section 9 we see the result in verse 7: “Behold you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.” Even though Oliver witnessed Joseph translating he still didn’t understand how hard it was, perhaps because Oliver was not the scribe during Joseph’s first struggling attempts. When Oliver failed the Lord told him that he actually could have translated if he had had an understanding of what the process entailed, but he was told that rather than continuing he needed to throw his support behind Joseph.

    It was the notorious (later a member of the mob at the destruction of Far West) William McClellin who was chief voice in criticizing the language Joseph used in the revelations. He took the challenge from God to produce an imitation of even the least of the revelations, and he failed in the eyes of all witnesses. (D&C 67:3-9; History of the Church vol 1, page 226).

    So here we are today. I quote from our new translator’s own description of his effort:
    “I prayed about it before retiring for the night and essentially quit. I explained that it would take years for me to accomplish this, and that I was not going to be able to solve the riddles of the text. I went to bed assuming I was done with it. In the middle of that night I was awakened and given the solution to every dilemma I had been facing in the work on the text. So the next day I continued on from where I had abandoned the work and, to my surprise, everything was opened to my mind so clearly and continuously that the entire project was completed in less than three weeks. The light of heaven opened the material in a way I had never thought of nor had previously attained to in considering the Gospel of John. At times it progressed so rapidly that I
    was unable to finish one part before the next came rolling out.”
    Just as with Oliver, initial attempts failed. But it was then left with the Lord. (D&C 6:14) The result is the Lord’s message of peace to us in this new manuscript of John’s witness.

    continued in 3rd and last comment

  26. 3rd segment

    According to my understanding of the Book of Mormon, true scripture contains light and truth, and the sheep recognize the voice of their master within it. The messenger is tasked with relaying the words of Jesus (which are the words of the Father) to us. Recognizing the words of Jesus as light and truth wherever we find them is our responsibility. (3 Nephi 28:34). That means we have to get off our backsides (Zephaniah 1:12 “men that are settled on their lees” :) and put in the required effort both with study and with faith if we expect to gain a witness.

    At the end of the day, the question is what is in my heart and in your heart, not a masterful exegesis or impressive footnotes. As specific illustration, because I recognize light and truth I accept the Book of Abraham as Abraham’s words, ignoring a chorus of faithless gainsayers who do not know God.

    We have a choice. We can follow the example of Washington’s detractors who wanted him sacked after he demonstrated great courage but lack of experience when New York was lost. We can follow McClellin’s example of criticizing the language used in Joseph’s revelations. We can jockey for eminence with our own philosophies devoid of scripture. (2 Nephi 7:11) We can run loudly and rashly about as blind guides, OR we can receive new light and truth and rejoice and lift up our hearts for gladness. (D&C 19:39-40).

    In summary, if we will receive it, we can choose to pray to the Father that he will grant to the developing translator grace upon grace that he will have sufficient strength to continue this work. (D&C 9:12-13)


  27. iterry, consider this passage

    2 Nephi 25:4
    4 Wherefore, hearken, O my people, which are of the house of Israel, and give ear unto my words; for because the words of Isaiah are not plain unto you, nevertheless they are plain unto all those that are filled with the spirit of prophecy. But I give unto you a prophecy, according to the spirit which is in me; wherefore I shall prophesy according to the plainness which hath been with me from the time that I came out from Jerusalem with my father; for behold, my soul delighteth in plainness unto my people, that they may learn.

  28. Yes Sandra I'm very familiar with that passage. I'm also very familiar with the next two passages as well.
    2 Nephi 25:7-8 But behold, I proceed with mine own prophecy, according to my plainness; in the wich I know that no man can err; nevertheless, in the days that the prophecies of Isaiah shall be fulfilled men shall KNOW of a surety, at the times when they shall come to pass.

    vs 8 Wherefore, they are of worth unto the children of men, and he that supposeth that they are not, unto them will I speak particularly, and confine the words unto mine own people; for I know that they shall be of great worth unto them in the last days; FOR IN THAT DAY SHALL THEY UNDERSTAND THEM; wherefore, for their good have I written them.

    So Sandra here in the last days there will be men that understand Isaiah the prophet. Nephi goes into detail about that in this chapter. He tells us that the Jews understand the language of the Lord. That language as I mentioned to you is metaphorical. That means in the last days there are men who will understand that metaphorical language. I've been taught that metaphorical language and understand it pretty good. Isaiah is not a mystery at all. The prophecies of Isaiah are being fulfilled and I've seen them fulfilled just as Nephi prophesied. I mentioned in one of my last posts the metaphorical vision of Ezekiel. I understand that vision in Ezekiel 47:1-12 very well because again I understand the language and have been taught it. That is why I know through the spirit and through the learning of the Jews that what Denver was put forth is not of God. It is a fraud and should be discarded. I don't say that to be rude or mean or anything like that.

    There have been many over the years that have come around claiming revelation from God and have prophesied of a number of things. For the most part those prophecies never come to pass and they are proven to be a fraud. The Saints are so hungry to hear anything from the Lord these days because the so-called prophets downtown don't see or hear anything as you well know.

    But the Lord has not left us in the last days without guidance. What He did was open up the writings of these ancient prophets of God. They can be understood now completely. Every single verse of all these ancient prophets are understandable now and those prophecies that they spoke are being fulfilled. One of them tells us that in the last days we will NOT have any prophets come among us. Only His words will come among us and will tell us what we need to do to prepare for the Millennium and the coming Tribulation which is just about here now.

    Let me show you one of the great prophecies that is being fulfilled right now. It is found in Isaiah 19:1-4

    1. An oracle concerning Egypt: When the Lord enters Egypt riding on swift clouds, the idols of Egypt will rock at his presence and the Egyptians’ hearts melt within them.
    2. I will stir up the Egyptians against the Egyptians; they will fight brother against brother and neighbor against neighbor, city against city and state against state.
    3. Egypt’s spirit will be drained from within; I will frustrate their plans, and they will resort to the idols and to spiritists, to mediums and witchcraft.
    4. Then will I deliver the Egyptians into the hand of a cruel master; a harsh ruler will subject them, says my Lord, the Lord of Hosts.

  29. In these verses you will see a metaphor. All the commentaries in the Church will see this literally but they do not understand metaphor. Egypt is a metaphor for the US. You might even already know that. I won't tell you the complete interpretation of this but plug in US and look at verse 2. We are on the verge of Civil War in this country right now and this is being fulfilled. Not completely yet but very soon now we will have complete civil war. Look at verse 3. I will frustrate their plans. This was literally fulfilled by Trump. The Lord frustrated Obama's plans completely by defeating Hillary. She was supposed to win and the election was rigged for her to win. But the Lord frustrated that plan.

    The next verse says they will turn toward Idols and spiritualists. This is being fulfilled. You've likely heard of the witches in this country getting together to cast a spell on Trump. This is happening and they are turning toward their idols like the stock market. The next verse is very scary because soon this will be fulfilled because we are going to be given into the hands of a cruel master. I won't go into it but this is the great tyrant of the last days that is prophesied in Revelation, Daniel, and Isaiah. He will be the cruel master and soon the government of the US will be destroyed.

    My point is metaphors are understandable and the Lord has opened them up. If a document purported to be from God does not have that language it is not from God. That is one of the tests of a true revelation from God. Denver's John the Beloved does not have it and it is very easy to detect that it is a complete and very clumsy fraud. In fact I can't understand why anybody would even believe this thing.

    1. I do see iterry, what you are trying to say, but I also see myself twenty years ago, in your understanding today. I will allow you to grow at your own pace as I have been allowed to do by God. I think, however, you will find in time, that your understanding is a stage of progress, not the ultimate level of obtainment.

      I don't say this to be mean or demeaning. Not at all. I say it to let you know I was once where you are now. I saw the identical meanings you see now.

      The time of the Lord's work is in our own hands. It is not set in seemingly matching events as you believe the prophecies to be fulfilled as we speak.

      You will find, as Abraham did, Moses did, as everyone who ever had a prophecy uttered to them, did, that they are the reason for when and where these prophesies are fulfilled...

      Consider Moses being told to lead the people out of Egypt to the promised land... which was 35 days travel away... yet it took 40 years to get there. Why? The people. Consider Abraham being told he would father a child and because he was not ready to wait upon the Lord, it took 25 years longer than it would have other wise taken.

      Consider all the prophecies given to Joseph Smith about Zion. These things are not as predictable in men's ways as they think. God brought about the fall of the Iron curtain... in a way no one predicted and in a time not expected. So it will be with the prophecies you have mentioned and believe you know how they will be fulfilled. You are not the first nor will you be the last. Consider how Cleon Skousen's book of expounding the prophesies had this same theme of knowing how it all would come around. He was wrong. I was wrong years ago as well the same way you are wrong today.

      There will be tough times ahead, but nothing as drastic as the fulfillment of those prophesies would indicate. We won't be hurting any more than we were in the 80s, 90s, or 2007-9. We need to be prepared for some hardships... like lack of food and water for a very short time. But nothing as drastic as our country's government failing.

      So... clumsy fraud... is your evaluation today. I believe in a very short time you will change your mind on that. In the mean time we can all pray for each other. Love one another. Serve one another.

    2. After reading your last posting Sandra I now have a much better understanding of why you would be taken in by the obvious fraud. It’s as if you have no ability to interpret scripture at all. You mentioned for example that there will be no great calamity coming upon the earth. This would fly in the face of all the ancient prophets including Joseph Smith who have prophesied these things. So I think what is happening is by accepting these frauds Lucifer is diverting your attention from the correct path and what you must do in order to survive the last days.
      One of the reason that I wanted to read this book is because of what has been revealed through the ancient prophets of God about the mission of John the Beloved in the last days. So when I started reading the thing the first thing discussed is John the Baptist. I wondered if Denver when he was making up his book confused the two. John the Baptist of course is not John the Beloved. John the Baptist was a forerunner of Christ and told of his coming. He held the Aaronic priesthood and appeared to Joseph Smith to restore that priesthood back to earth. That was the end of his mission.

      But the mission of John the Beloved is far more than John the Baptist. His future mission is far more and it’s written in many of the Old Testament books. He is the Elias that appeared to Joseph Smith and brought back the Gospel of Abraham. The Church has no understanding of what that Gospel is today. It is revealed in Isaiah as to what that mission is. He will gather the lost tribes of Israel in the last days. He was translated and is here on earth. He has not died yet but will live through the Millennium. There is much more to his story that I could tell you about him that has been revealed but I’ll refrain from doing so. This is the reason I wanted to read this gospel. There is absolutely nothing in the thing that tells of his mission in the last days. It is devoid of any details at all about him. So another problem I see is that I really think Denver likely confused the two or he wanted to stick very close to his plagiarism of the NT in order to not be exposed completely as a fraud. That is he wanted to make it sound a little bit authentic. So the reasons are many that expose this work as a complete fraud. If I were you I would reject it and get back to the true prophets of God.

      Another thing you ought to know is that according to Isaiah 29:9-10 in the last days there will be no prophets sent. What the Lord did is open of the words of the ancient Prophets which are our prophets today. Isaiah is the watchman on the tower not Monson or Denver. There is no one in the tower. The tower is revelation and this is prophesied in D&C 101:43-62 the parable of the Nobleman. In that parable the Lord tells us that the Church leaders did not build the tower because it was a time of peace. The time of peace came when we came here to the valleys along the Wasatch Front. They said it was a time of peace and they didn’t need the tower which is revelation. They instead gave their money to the exchangers meaning they became businessmen and left off the work of the ministry. This is why when you crack open the D&C you see no revelation beyond 1847. The same thing is said in Isaiah and Hosea in particular. Revelation was cut off to the Church. So until the Lord sends John the Beloved there will not be any revelation given to the Church. He will gather the tribes and lead the Exodus in the last days. So those are reasons that this work of Denver should be rejected. These scriptures make him a false prophet. You were warned about these false prophets in the last days in Matthew 24:5.
      “For many shall come in my name saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. “ What the Lord is saying is these people will indeed preach Christ to you but by so doing they will deceive you. So you have to be careful. Understanding the scriptures is very important to being not deceived and I can see now why you would be because of your lack of understanding the manner of prophecy.

    3. iterry, you misunderstood what I stated about no great calamity 'ever' coming upon the earth. Actually many great calamities have and are coming and have come upon the earth in my life time. They just don't come as you believe they will come. The evil governing powers will be taken down as the righteousness of the people increase. or not if they people do not increase in righteousness.

      I won't try and continue to discuss this as it seems we are not communicating very well. Take care.

    4. iterry, I'm amazed at how easily you brushed aside the need to find out the Lord's opinion of the thing, and instead replaced it with your own ideas about what scripture must or must not contain. Is your own wisdom really so great that you don't need God's opinion on the matter?

      This is John's record about the Lord. You keep insisting that if it is the Lord's word, it MUST contain certain language, as if the Lord is not free to speak as he pleases. But is John also constrained by the construct you've devised? Must he speak in the Lord's voice?

      You are attempting to compare revelation from the Lord with record born by an eyewitness. But these are entirely different things. Both are true, both are scripture, but they are entirely different in their nature, purpose, and construction.

      I hold that ANY standard you put above God's word becomes the path to deception. Period. Any time you say, "this CANNOT be true because..." and what follows is your opinion, you are relying on your own wisdom and not God's.

      It would be a tragedy to get it wrong.

  30. iterry- It is interesting that Denver would feel inspired to receive revelation on behalf of a person who is currently living. It seems as though he didn't think through this enough. I agree with that point and the other point of him being a fraud. I've found numerous errors in his other teachings. He doesn't pass the litmus test. Much of the other points you wrote however don't pass the test either. Isaiah 29 is taken out of context.

    But, you can't win an argument so I won't try.

    1. RofJ, interesting you believe that the revelation of a 'living' soul couldn't be given to someone here on earth because that revelation came from someone living. Jesus Christ is living. If it is John's work, then why not John be the one to give the revelation to Denver?

      I had my daughter's guardian angel yell at me once. Of course she wasn't living as John. But if the dead/passed on spirits can communicate with us, why not one who is living? Do they have to manifest? No. Moroni gave us this understanding about the three nephites who were still around, because they visited and ministered unto him. But were they always manifested? I think not.

      Perhaps you know of some scripture which tells us that 'living souls' can't reveal scriptures or other information.

      I believe that once a 'mission' is given... it is carried to its completion by those it was given to even in unbelievable ways. Noah was given an unbelievable mission. It had never rained before and he was told to prepare for something that had never been experienced or known before. He was given something that was to be ridiculed and misunderstood for over 100 years. Just something to think about.


Hey everyone,

It's been brought to my attention that comments from mobile phones and some browsers might not come through in some situations. I recommend you save the text of your comment before submitting, in case you need to submit again.

If you commented and it hasn't appeared, try sending from a different browser, or device, or use the "Contact Me" tool to reach out to me personally. Sorry for the problems! The blogger platform, though free, seems to have problems.