The Iron Rod Podcast
Iron Rod 033 - False prophets

Scripture informs us that there will be many who are deceived by false prophets in the last days. In this episode we explore what the Word of God teaches about false prophets and how we can identify them in order to avoid being deceived.  We analyze and apply what these Scriptures have to say to prophets both within the Institutional Church and to several groups that have splintered off recently.

3 Nephi 14:15-20
HC 4:574
Jeremiah 23:25-26, 37
Matthew 24:11, 23-24
2 Peter 2:1-4
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
Revelation 19:20
D&C 45:57
Joseph Smith Matthew 1:37
2 Timothy 4:3-4
Joseph Smith Discourse 12 May 1844
2 Nephi 26:29
3 Nephi 27:10-11
Isaiah 66:7-8
D&C 88:62-66
D&C 63:32
Deruteronomy 31:17-18
Isaiah 54:8
Lectures on Faith 6
Mormon 9:19-20
Romans 16:17-18
Galatians 1:6-9

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

17 comments on “Iron Rod 033 – False prophets

  1. James Jul 22, 2019

    Thank you for another insightful podcast. All three of you possess a strong understanding of Doctrine and Covenants and church history that I lack. I’ve appreciated your rigorous and sincere exegetical insights.

    With that being said, I do have a few quibbles.

    1. You characterization of Denver Snuffer’s message in the Second Comforter.

    Generally, Watcher characterized the book, the Second Comforter, as making the case that everyone can receive the Second Comforter. This is true. However, the argument becomes weak when he characterizes it as a how to book. Specifically, he claims that the Second Comforter book doesn’t talk about the necessity of going through the refiner’s fire. But this is false and misleading statement. In the book, Snuffer uses the example of Nephi to show what is required to receive the Second Comforter. He is quite clear that receiving the Second Comforter is predicated upon faith and obedience, which faith means to endure through trials. Unfortunately, it seems that Watcher elides over this fact to make his argument.

    2. Re-Framing of Rob Smith’s argument.

    At the end, MD critiques Rob Smith. MD makes three claims: a) That we can enter into the presence of Christ without receiving the HG; b) his claim that people can receive the Second Comforter within 6 months is false because people have not come out to say that they have and c) his statement of Second Comforter is unsupported by scripture.

    a. If you read his blog posts, you will see that he is clear that the HG is necessary for coming into Christ’s presence. You can easily find this by entering the word “Holy Ghost” into his search bar and read his posts about it. Of course, he does differ from you guys in that HG can be given independent of a Melchizedek PH. But it seems that part of the critique was on the necessity for Baptism of Fire, which Rob Smith agrees with.

    b. The problem with his claim is twofold: i) MD commits, ironically, the same fallacy that Searcher purports to identify in RS’s argument later on — absence of evidence is evidence of absence. MD’s argument is that because people are not receiving the Second Comforter from reading his books, his claim is false. But besides the absence of evidence fallacy, MD also commits another fallacy by equating the possibility of something happening with something actually happening. Just because people don’t receive the SC from reading his books, doesn’t mean that he is false. Yet, this seems to be the central premise to his critique of RS on this point.

    c. MD, probably unconsciously, reframes Rob Smith’s argument about from Jesus speaking to us to us being able to see Jesus all the time. Rob Smith never makes that claim. He is not making a claim about how frequent or how often people can literally see Jesus, but instead arguing that seeing Jesus is just a possible today as it was in the past. MD even says “God, Rob Smith says that I can see you anytime I want.” The problem with this is that Rob Smith didn’t make that claim. MD then goes on quoting verses about God hiding his face from the people. But again, Rob Smith’s point is that seeing Jesus is just as possible as it was back then as it is today. Moreover, MD makes the mistake of conflating God’s withdrawal from a nation with God’s withdrawal from a person. It’s true that God hid is face from Israel as a nation during their exile, but this doesn’t mean that he hid is face from individuals (e.g, Daniel)

    Keep up the great work! I’ve learned much and look forward to future podcasts. However, I encourage you in your future podcast to be wary of slippage in your argument. As in these two instances, you seemed to have based your argument by simplifying and re-characterizing your opponents’ argument to your advantage. I suggest that if you want to critique someone else, that you truly understand their argument before setting out to critique it. This may be hard because all three of you tend share the same viewpoint, but I think it’ll be to your advantage to do so.


    • Hi James. Thanks for both the compliments and the criticisms. I welcome correction. I won’t speak for Watcher, so I’ll only respond the issues you raised about what I said.

      Regarding the Holy Ghost (a). I said Rob teaches that “you don’t need to do the scriptural process. You don’t need to actually receive the gift of the Holy Ghost by one holding the Melchizedek Priesthood, you don’t need to consecrate and sacrifice all things…”. Rob does teach that you need the Holy Ghost, but he seems to think there is some other way of receiving the Holy Ghost than what is taught in the D&C.

      Regarding (b), that’s a fair criticism. Although Rob teaches that anyone can receive the same experiences he claims to have, the fact that others aren’t having these experiences doesn’t prove that Rob is wrong. (Although when the claim is “anyone can do this”, you would think there would be some testimonials).

      Regarding (c), on page 72 of Seek Ye This Jesus, Rob writes “To know God, you must have met him many times. You can’t say you know someone who you have only met once. Knowing someone means you know what they look like, what their voice sounds like, you’ve spent a great deal of time with them, and you know what pleases them and puts them off. To know God, you must not only have seen him multiple times, but you must spend quite a bit of time with him. On page 77, “Eventually, you will enjoy constant access to God.” Page 78, “These experiences are not optional fringe benefits of living the gospel of Jesus Christ. They are not rare occurrences reserved for the few or elite. They are always present in the lives of those who are inheritors of eternal life. The absence of this degree of interaction with God indicates that an individual has deviated from the life required of those who will inherit eternal life.” Page 82, “A habitation with God, on the other hand, is like a permanent connection to the battery that you can switch on at any time.”

      • James Jul 26, 2019

        Thanks for replying!

        I’d like to focus on one belief: that we need to have hands laid upon our heads in order to receive the Gift of the HG.

        You say this is based in Doctrine and Covenants, which I don’t dispute. However, a few questions: 1) Does DC say that laying on of hands is the only way and there is not other? That is, how explicit is it? Feel free to send my over the verses you are using. 2) How do we reconcile you viewpoint with examples from the scriptures that show that the HG can be given prior to the laying on of hands? A few examples come to mind: 1) Cornelius in Acts 10, who seems to have received the HG before baptism of water and absent the laying on of hands; 2) Helaman 5, where the jailers seem to experience of BoF without having hands laid upon them.

        This are honest questions, because these examples seem to call into your assertion.


        • D&C 20 gives the Articles and Covenants for the Church of Christ. Verse 41 says the elders are “to confirm those who are baptized into the church, by the laying on of hands for the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, according to the scriptures.” Nowhere in the Articles and Covenants of the Church of Christ is another method described. So even if God did it differently in times past, we have the procedures given to us for our time which we are commanded to obey.

          Other places in D&C support this.
          D&C 25:8 For he shall lay his hands upon thee, and thou shalt receive the Holy Ghost,
          D&C 33:15 “And whoso having faith you shall confirm in my church, by the laying on of the hands, and I will bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost upon them.”
          D&C 36:2 “And I will lay my hand upon you by the hand of my servant Sidney Rigdon, and you shall receive my Spirit, the Holy Ghost, even the Comforter”
          D&C 39:23 “And again, it shall come to pass that on as many as ye shall baptize with water, ye shall lay your hands, and they shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”
          D&C 55:3 “And on whomsoever you shall lay your hands, if they are contrite before me, you shall have power to give the Holy Spirit.”

          Some of these verses talk about specific individuals, so one could argue that it only applies to those individuals. Section 55 says anyone you lay your hands on, so one could argue that people they don’t lay their hands on could get it some other way. But Section 33 says “whoso having faith” shall receive it by the laying on of hands. I think that covers 100% of people, unless someone wants to argue that people without faith can receive the Holy Ghost.

          If you know of a scripture in the D&C that suggests there is another way, I’d like to see it. The consistent commandment is that in this church, we receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands by those who have the authority. If someone teaches more or less than that, then they are teaching a different gospel than the one we have in the scriptures.

          As for the incident in Helaman 5, one of our listeners clarified that in his comments to a previous post. Those who were in the prison and received the Holy Ghost had already been members of the church.
          35 Now there was one among them who was a Nephite by birth, who had once belonged to the church of God but had dissented from them.

          So we know that a dissenter is someone who once belonged to the church. Now look at the description of the prisoners:
          27 And behold, when they had said these words, the earth shook exceedingly, and the walls of the prison did shake as if they were about to tumble to the earth; but behold, they did not fall. And behold, they that were in the prison were Lamanites and Nephites who were dissenters.

          Looking at how dissenters is used elsewhere reinforces this idea.
          Alma 46:7 And there were many in the church who believed in the flattering words of Amalickiah, therefore they dissented even from the church

          So all those who were in the prison had already been baptized and had hands laid on their heads. The prison experience was when the gift was finally bestowed.

          So that leaves Cornelius. Peter was the one authorized by Christ to lay hands on people to give the Holy Ghost. He was under the impression that only Jews were to be brought into the Church of Christ, so he would not consider laying hands on Cornelius. The way the Lord chose to tell him to start accepting Gentiles was the two part message of the vision at Joppa of eating unclean food, and seeing the Holy Ghost fall upon Cornelius. Peter gets the message (if God isn’t withholding the Holy Ghost from Gentiles, why am I?) and no longer withholds the Gospel from Gentiles. There is no other scriptural record after that of someone receiving the Holy Ghost without the laying on of hands.

    • Watcher Jul 22, 2019


      Denver has humbly stated several times that if he can qualify to enter into the presence of the Lord, anyone can. This of course gives people the false hope that they don’t need the fulness on the earth in order to ascend into the presence of the Lord. Yes Denver addresses the importance of going through the refiners fire and he touches on other important principles. That is how false teachers deceive people, they mingle truth with falsehood. They may teach nine truths to pass off one huge falsehood.

      The main point that I was trying to make is that the true doctrine of the other comforter, as revealed by Joseph Smith and supported by scripture, teaches that one must first, receive the fulness of the saving ordinances (which is not currently possible until the light shines forth and the final restoration begins)

      Secondly, live the law of the gospel, including consecration, not only to say, but to do, (which nobody is correctly and fully doing right now)

      And lastly, one must sacrifice all things and prove themselves before God so as to have their calling and election made sure by the voice of God out of heaven.

      All of that must be done BEFORE one can receive the other comforter.

      Denver’s teachings, his testimony, and his personal claims regarding this doctrine are contrary to the true doctrine. Period.

      At the end of the day, if he is teaching a false doctrine and falsely claiming to have received the second comforter, and telling people that they can bypass the order clearly declared by JS, and receive this blessing at this time, then he is leading people astray IMO.

  2. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic as it has been on my mind recently. In fact I’ve been comparing JST Matthew 24 with sections 45 and 88 and Revelation and Nephi, in order to try and better understand the timeline of the last days so that I can better know what to be looking for. The appearance of false prophets vs the true servants is one of the huge themes especially in JST Mathew 24. I also was just in an art gallery the other day in Odessa, Ukraine and saw a paining by Nikolai Ge called “What is Truth?” It can be seen here:
    I have been reading about the history of the painting and basically everyone but Leo Tolstoy hated it because the depiction of Christ didn’t fit the established artistic model of the day. It shows Christ standing in the shadows and as a disheveled mad looking peasant, not some majestic divine beautiful portrait that people were accustomed to. I think this picture more accurately portrays what Jesus, and other prophets probably looked like and will look like when they return in order to test the people. They won’t be wearing fancy suits or living in mansions, or selling books, instead they will probably look like homeless bums, but they will show forth the works of the fullness of the gospel.
    Isaiah says that:
    1 Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?

    2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

    3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

    4 ¶ Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

    I think they important question we all need to consider is do we have false perceptions of what the servants will look like and how they will act? Or are we studying the scriptures to see the works that they will do?

  3. Ranae Jul 24, 2019

    I don’t know if I missed this – how would you define a “prophet”? How can you recognize a true prophet? Does a prophet have to have a following? Do they have to be exemplary in everything they say and do? Do they have to perform miracles? My question stems from an interest in trying to see what God is doing on the world stage, not just among believers of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon.

    Do you think there are actual prophets trying to prepare the world at this time for the work that is coming? If so, can you identify them? Or is there no need for them because the scriptures prophesy of our day and time?

    One other point that came to mind as you were talking is that I don’t believe the “fruits” we are supposed to look for are miracles. I have noticed in reading blogs over the years, that the messengers have various spirits that accompany their words. “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance” (Gal. 5:22-23). This is echoed in D&C 121:41-42 “No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile…”. There is no need for a “prophet” to be defensive about his message, because it isn’t his message in the first place. I don’t mean that the message is always easy to hear, or that people won’t become defensive about what he says, but that he won’t need to take differences of opinion personally or attack those who disagree, because a true message from the Lord will stand on its own merits.

    • Those are good questions. I refer back to the scriptures.

      Jeremiah 23:25-32 talks about false prophets that share their dreams that contradict the scriptures. Also see Jeremiah 29:8-9. Deuteronomy 13:1-5 also talks about false prophets sharing dreams. If a person publishes their dreams and visions as from the LORD, yet they contradict the scriptures, I would consider them a false prophet whose message will lead people astray.

      Jeremiah 14:14-15 talks about false prophets who prophesy without being sent by the LORD. Jeremiah 23:35 says these prophets must publish the word the LORD spake unto them. Not summaries, or overviews, but transcripts. Someone who claims to speak in the name of the LORD yet won’t repeat his words verbatim seems to fit in the false prophet category.

      Matthew 24:23-24 warns about false prophets who will declare they know how/where to find Christ. If someone is teaching a way to come unto Christ that differs from the scriptural method, that seems like a false prophet.

      The flip side of Jeremiah 23:35 is that a true prophet will repeat the words of the LORD. I’ve been working on Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel in the Reformatted Scriptures. They are constantly quoting the LORD verbatim. Most of Doctrine and Covenants is the same. We have false prophets today publishing “thus sayeth the Lord” revelations, but comparing those messages against the existing scriptures reveals the false message. One day, we will have true prophets bringing forth the word of the LORD once again. Until that time, we have the existing revelations we need to devour.

      Is the LORD using people today to get ready for the restoration? I’m sure he is. They just wouldn’t fit the job description of a prophet, who reveals the word of the LORD. That doesn’t minimize their work. In the body of Christ, not everyone needs to be the mouth. Some need to be hands and feet. All are important and all work together to accomplish the end goal.

  4. James Jul 26, 2019

    Ah, that helps.

    Yeah, at least for me, that didn’t come through during the podcast. Your explanation helps clarify a few things, although I disagree with your premise about having to wait until all the saving ordinances are established before one can receive his Second Comforter.

    Furthermore, you may be correct in consecration, but Snuffer has definitely discussed in the past the need to be in full submission to God via way of sacrifice. Although not addressed in his book, though it seems that this convo is now focusing on all of Snuffer’s work, his 40 Years of Mormonism lectures delve into the principle of sacrifice as a way to SC.

    So for me it seems that the real issue between Snuffer’s viewpoint and yours the need for all the saving ordinances before one can receive their Calling and Election. Not that Snuffer is saying anyone can receive. After all, we can’t measure the truth of one’s message based on how it is received by others. People might respond incorrectly to Snuffer’s message by thinking that they can have the SC at anytime, but it doesn’t mean that Snuffer advances that idea.

    I think that is one of my concerns. It seems that you are largely dismissing Snuffer because of how people are applying his doctrine, instead of examining the doctrine itself.

    Thanks for replying and taking the time! I mean no offense by my comments, but am seeking to engage with you guys critically and honestly.

    • Although Denver’s idea of what the necessary ordinances are is incorrect, he definitely taught that they were necessary prerequisites to receiving the Second Comforter. (all quotations from “The Second Comforter”)

      p. 25 “To go where the Second Comforter is you have to do it the way the scriptures teach. There is a specific way to get there. It makes no sense to think the promised results are not linked to the requirements to get them.” Agreed.
      p. 26 “You must receive the ordinances of baptism, laying on of hands for the Gift of the Holy Ghost, and thereafter take the sacrament…” Agreed.
      p. 26 “You need to have been washed and anointed, and received your endowments. These rites are essential tools…If you don’t have these tools, you can’t build required faith.” As far as I know, Denver’s movement doesn’t perform washings and anointings, nor endowments. So by his own words, his followers can’t build required faith.
      p. 26 “All these ordinances are required to follow God…Through the ordinances of the Gospel, you become an heir and a member of God’s family. He comes to visit members of His family, but not with strangers and foreigners.” I guess that means anyone who joins Denver’s movement without going through the LDS Church will never be a member of God’s family.
      p. 27 “He has chosen to require baptism, laying on of hands, washings, annointings, endowment, sealing, etc., as the rites He wants us to receive…It makes little sense to think He provided these rites and then decided to make them superfluous to the Second Comforter. If that were so, why would He waste the effort and ask us to waste the time? Why ask us to do the irrelevant?” If these ordinances are required, and Denver is telling people they don’t need the LDS Church, isn’t he leading people away from God?
      p. 27 “It is futile to travel other paths and hope to obtain the same things the authors of scriptures obtained while going in another direction – especially when the authors repeatedly tell us there is only one way.” Amen.
      p. 33 “Accepting the word of God delivered to you through the Prophet Joseph Smith is also bedrock in the process. God did not send a Prophet and establish a binding testimony through him by having his blood shed as a witness of the truthfulness of the message he delivered, only to have us doubt, question, reject, or entertain reservations about that message.” Umm…D&C 110? Alma 34:34?

      From what Denver wrote, it seems that anyone who follows Denver is unable to receive the Second Comforter, as they are cut off from the “necessary ordinances” that are only available from the LDS Church, and Denver himself doubts, questions, rejects, and changes the scriptural record Joseph left us and has published revised versions of the scriptures for his followers to use.

      • Here are a few more quotations I found:

        p. 259 “Actually conversing with the Lord through the veil requires you to first receive its sacred type and shadow through ceremony and promise.”
        p. 260 “If you will not receive the ordinance, you cannot receive the real thing.”
        p. 413 “Without the ordinances of the Gospel you cannot qualify for the kind of light and truth that comes from an audience with Christ. Those qualifying ordinances are exclusively available through the priesthood and keys held solely by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

  5. After hearing the quotes from Brigham and Heber I would call their prophecies measured by the Lord’s definition to be “false prophecies” by false prophets. This is bold and plain sophistry.

  6. Thanks so much for another podcast. Interesting and contaversial points raised no doubt. I guess I will say this one thing… If it were as easy as simply appealing to the scriptures when evaluating would-be prophets, then there wouldn’t be so much confusion reigning in Christianity… I, for one, am very very cautious about rejecting someone’s message outright who claims direct, charismatic experiences with the Lord if some of their statements don’t seem to fit with my CURRENT interpretation of scripture. Let us not be too rash in rejecting a prophet, as they have been all throughout the past, simply if their message and circumstances don’t match what we expect. In the case of the Rob Smith criticizm, I feel this was done a bit too rashly. He was a bit mischaracterized too, as he most definitely does not paint the path path to knowing God in this life to be an easy one… While certain things may not ring true, that’s fine… Put it on a shelf, perhaps, rather than calling them a flase prophet outright … Let’s be cautious here… For example, I do not agree with your interpretation of Joseph and Sidney having received unconditional promises to return in the flesh during the last days (I find these scriptural justifications too weak) nor to I agree that we MUST have the MP among us to receive a baptism of fire (I myself having received an undeniable baptism of fire)… But I’m not going to reject the rest of what you have to say based on those points of disagreement….

    • Watcher Jul 29, 2019

      “If it were as easy as simply appealing to the scriptures when evaluating would-be prophets, then there wouldn’t be so much confusion reigning in Christianity…”

      That is not a reflection on the deficiency of God’s written word, it reflects a deficiency in the human condition during a time of darkness in being able to read and learn from God’s word in the spirit.

      There are countless people who find the literal interpretation of scripture uncompelling.

      We live in a religious and secular culture that indoctrinates people to take the scriptures lightly, especially if they make us feel uncomfortable or don’t appear to have a strong historical precedence for have happened before. Taking the scriptures lightly is one of the traditions of our fathers that we have inherited.

      It is remarkable to me that there are over 15 scriptures, prophecies, patriarchal blessings, allegories, dreams, and visions that testify that Joseph and the other first laborers of the last kingdom will have a second commission and be returning to finish the assignment that they have been given, yet the word of the Lord in all of its varying forms is uncompelling.

      What would make it compelling?

      A personal visit from God to validate his written word in scripture?

      One of the primary underlying themes of this podcast that celebrates the importance of God’s holy word and holding tight onto the iron rod, is that the saints of the restoration rejected the fulness and that we live during a time of hidden darkness until the light shines forth again and the fulness is returned to the earth by God’s true anointed servants that hold that mandate.

      This epiphany is comprehended by very few people.

      It is just too hard to believe, it challenges the neatly giftwrapped narrative that we have inherited. It takes a great deal of humility to accept that perhaps our generation and our pioneer forefathers are not as spiritually entitled and gifted as we have been led to believe.

      We just don’t want to believe that God has turned his head from us for a season.

      We are just too important for God to do that to us.

      Past generations that lived during the dark ages may have lived during a time of global apostacy but certainly not us. We don’t live in the dark ages, we are enlightened and some of us are ascending into the presence of God.

      The day I realized that the truth claims of the church were not true, was a very dark and scary day for me. My worldview began to crumble, and I felt somewhat disoriented.

      I immediately began looking for the special person or group of people that secretly held the keys or that had the secret recipe for opening up the heavens.

      I first looked into Mormon fundamentalism for the answers and then eventually began evaluating all of the claims that the various alternate voices were making.

      The next major epiphany came once I realized that God had a very specific time frame when the fulness was withdrawn and he had a very specific appointed time when it will return, just like when he removed Moses and the higher priesthood from the midst of apostate Israel but eventually sent Elijah to prepare the way before Christ. God deals in appointed timeframes.

      When the fulness returns with the true servants it will not produce some trite “how to” formula for ascending into heaven nor will it reduce the message to one of enduring difficult trials and the refiners fire that one must pass through.

      It will begin with the commandment to REPENT and come until Christ and come out of the darkness and delusion that we have been laboring in. “Come out of her my people”

      But that message may just fall on deaf ears because none of us are living in darkness right? So the commandment to repent will be a tough pill to swallow. It just won’t pertain to us. We have the witness of Denver and Rob and others that assure us that we don’t need to bother with the cold hard facts contained in scripture and church history, we simply need to believe, follow a protocol and pay the price and ascend.

      According to prophecy, the marvelous work will involve the coming forth of additional scripture. At the time that it comes forth everyone will be out of the way.

      It appears as if it will contain illuminating and edifying clarifications about our situation and about how and why we arrived at in this situation and why we need to repent.

      God’s marvelous work and strange work will unfold, and the light will emerge even though many will reject it because of pride, arrogance and ignorance.

      The final restoration will not promote the deceptive and seductive narrative that we have always had the ability to bypass the necessary priesthood keys and fulness of saving ordinances. It will begin with the basics just like it did during Joseph’s ministry.

      Faith, repentance, and the true and authorized baptism of water, fire and the holy ghost are what get us into the strait gate. Yes many of us have had wonderful spiritual experiences that feel like we think the baptism of fire should feel like. But do those feelings really represent the fulness of the baptism of fire? Are the fulness of the fruits present today?

      None of us are in the strait gate right now.

      In our current situation, you cannot bypass the strait gate and enter into the presence of the Lord.

      Until one has this epiphany, they will continue to chase the ever-elusive priesthood button. Button, button, who as the button?

      They will continue running around looking for the prophet that can open the heavens for them and introduce them to Christ and help them ascend into heaven.

      As long as one is in denial about the true history of Mormonism and how the fulness was lost and how interim dispensation of the gospel of Abraham was secretly ushered in until the fulness returns, the claims of these current voices will be intriguing and seductive. This is why sincere yet gullible people gravitate to people like Denver and Mauricio and Rob.

      • I love you guys and am grateful for your insight. I’m also certainly not in denial that the fullness has been lost to us as a people and as a church. And we certainly, most definitely, wrest the scriptures to our condemnation. But I believe Nephi when he says “the power of the Holy Ghost, which is the gift of God unto all those who diligently seek him” and that this gift is available to ALL, regardless of when they were born (1 Nephi 10:17-19). Would you really have me believe that this gift is only available if a man with the proper priesthood is available to lay his hands on your head? I thought the Savior employed NO SERVANT at the gate to the strait and narrow path.
        Sorry, but I must believe this gift is available to all who diligently seek, even if He, the Lord, is hiding his face from all the world, and churches, as a whole. Consider how many true prophets and Messengers have been rejected through time by the scriptorians of their day? Did the Pharisees not search the scriptures diligently yet reject the Savior of whom they testify? Why is this? I would submit that it is because they didn’t seek the Lord diligently and receive the Holy Ghost. If they had, they would have recognized the messenger. And that is simply why I warn us to not be too hasty to slap the “false prophet” label on everyone who claims to have entered in the strait gate – especially if we haven’t…

        • Watcher Jul 30, 2019


          The purpose of this podcast is to encourage people to search the scriptures. At this point in time very few people interpret all of them the same way but that does not mean that we should abandon them in favor of those claiming to be prophets who are reinterpreting doctrines such as the second comforter.

          You are welcome to believe anything you want to believe. I celebrate agency and certainly don’t want people to believe anything just because I believe it.

          I have never said that the promptings of the HG at some level are not available to people at this time.

          Beyond that, I am not sure what gift you are referring to when you speak of the “gift”, unless you are referring to the gift of the holy ghost. Again, if you think you or Rob or others have received that gift that is your prerogative.

          People like Denver and Rob appear to rest their doctrinal veracity on their foundational claims that they have received the second comforter. I have already explained in my posts that Joseph Smith’s definition of the second comforter is quite different than Denver or Bob’s. If that is the gift you are referring to then I guess we can just agree to disagree on that.

          If you want to believe that God is letting people into his presence and teaching them through the back door “while hiding his face from the whole world” that is fine. As long as you can reconcile that in your mind without experiencing confusion and double-mindedness.

          There are many people out there that share your logic and I appreciate you reminding me of this.

          I will be addressing your claims in a blog post in more detail and why I feel that they are inconsistent with scripture and sound doctrine. I think these issues are very instructive and I appreciate your willingness to stand up for what you believe in. These are very important issues that are worthy of debate, discussion and prayerful consideration.

          • No doubt Brother Watcher, we must all immerse ourselves in God’s word, trust it, and trust the Lord to enlightenour understandings, and stop trusting in the arm of flesh. Thanks for responding to me. I love the work you are all doing through this platform.