If God ended polygamy in 1890, but members(leaders) didn't stop..

[slimjamm]

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

BY taught a lot of cr-p, so come find me and slit my throat ear to ear, disembowel me. Yeah, he taught that.

Adam wasn't resurrected yet to lay hands on Jesus. Moses and Elijah were supposedly translated, therefore had bodies to do so. Fine. Go to a temple ceremony, and Peter James and John go to Adam and want something that requires physical contact when they don't have bodies yet. Yet the D&C demands a litmus test of sorts... You know what I'm speaking of...
But the book of Hebrews clarifies that Jesus is the eternal high priest, He was perfect and did not need baptism for the remission of His sins, He didn't need to be ordained on the mount of transfiguration to get priesthood He already had, He did it to fulfill every jot and tittle of the law

Haha, Michael was a resurrected being upon entering the garden. What do you suppose He fell from? Immortal glory. He had a body of flesh and bone before becoming mortal. So yeah, Adam had already been resurrected before coming to the Garden. Therefore Adam was resurrected at the time of transfiguration on the Mount. I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too. Even though it's completely impossible to officiate an priesthood ordinance we haven't yet received ourselves. Or to use the priesthood on ourselves. Seeing as resurrection is a priesthood ordinance, what types of beings do you suppose the angels were that rolled the stone away? What were they really there to perform? As you've stated, he didn't need to be baptized did he? (notice he didn't baptize himself) But he was. He had to go through the same ordiances as us. To experience what we will, to be tested like the rest of us. The pattern is eternal.

[freedomforall]

Alma 4:19
19 And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.

Therefore,

The Adam God doctrine is not recognized as scripture, nor are members of the church to believe it, let alone adopt it. This doctrine is false. It was concluded that BY went beyond his mantle of authority and taught his own opinions strongly enough that many saints fell for it, but many others saw it for what it was, false doctrine and became distressed by it. It was never accepted as canon by other church GA's.

All anyone can do is deny the facts and continue to bear down with this false doctrine, possibly to their own detriment.

[slimjamm]

Alma 4:19
19 And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.

Therefore,

The Adam God doctrine is not recognized as scripture, nor are members of the church to believe it, let alone adopt it. This doctrine is false. It was concluded that BY went beyond his mantle of authority and taught his own opinions strongly enough that many saints fell for it, but many others saw it for what it was, false doctrine and became distressed by it. It was never accepted as canon by other church GA's.

All anyone can do is deny the facts and continue to bear down with this false doctrine, possibly to their own detriment.

Yes we've heard your conclusion on it, and your complete dependence on the Church regarding what you can and can't believe.

[Rachael]

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

BY taught a lot of cr-p, so come find me and slit my throat ear to ear, disembowel me. Yeah, he taught that.

Adam wasn't resurrected yet to lay hands on Jesus. Moses and Elijah were supposedly translated, therefore had bodies to do so. Fine. Go to a temple ceremony, and Peter James and John go to Adam and want something that requires physical contact when they don't have bodies yet. Yet the D&C demands a litmus test of sorts... You know what I'm speaking of...
But the book of Hebrews clarifies that Jesus is the eternal high priest, He was perfect and did not need baptism for the remission of His sins, He didn't need to be ordained on the mount of transfiguration to get priesthood He already had, He did it to fulfill every jot and tittle of the law

Haha, (yeah, funny)Michael was a resurrected being upon entering the garden. What do you suppose He fell from? Immortal glory. He had a body of flesh and bone before becoming mortal. So yeah, Adam had already been resurrected before coming to the Garden. Therefore Adam was resurrected at the time of transfiguration on the Mount. I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too. Even though it's completely impossible to officiate an priesthood ordinance we haven't yet received ourselves. Or to use the priesthood on ourselves. Seeing as resurrection is a priesthood ordinance, what types of beings do you suppose the angels were that rolled the stone away? What were they really there to perform? As you've stated, he didn't need to be baptized did he? (notice he didn't baptize himself) But he was. He had to go through the same ordiances as us. To experience what we will, to be tested like the rest of us. The pattern is eternal.

Do you think the Bible is THAT mistranslated? Christ wasn't the first fruit of the resurrection? Paul was just bloviating in Corinthians like O'Reilly on Fox News? I'll believe in the Shroud of Turrin before I believe your pontifications. Adam gave up immortality. He was gonna die, he did die. Jesus came to give us life. Victory over the grave

[freedomforall]

It wasn't just that they didn't want to tear apart existing polygamous families, but there were a considerable number of new polygamous marriages performed for a number of years after the 1890 Manifesto. These marriages were done for the highest leaders in the Church, not by renegades. I'll post some links tomorrow, unless someone beats me to it. D. Michael Quinn wrote a paper on this, after being allowed access to Church Archives.

Unfortunately this thread has digressed and degenerated to an Adam/GOD discussion. Glad I'm not the only one with ADD.
You're right. It's disturbing this happened. I don't understand why we got to go through church history rotations if the GAs want us to cherry pick and acquiesce to correlated history...then preach about honesty

Speaking of honesty......a woman in my ward just returned from a mission working in the office of the Seventy who is in charge of all the Phillipine Missions. She did not give any examples of what she was referring to, but in her testimony today, she said that she now knows that it's right and proper that the Church doesn't tell the members everything, as some things may destroy their testimonies. It was a very weird testimony, and I am left wondering how long she will be able to convince herself that not all truth is helpful, so it's okay for Authorities to omit and actually lie about unhelpful truths.

So the church is backed and operated by deceit? This alone could destroy testimonies.
Some people will go to great lengths to cause contention and discord, won't they?
So I guess this scripture is a bunch of hogwash, huh?

Alma 12:10
10 And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.

So you see, the church cannot hold back truth or mysteries from anyone truly seeking them with a soft heart and in humility. It is not the responsibility of the church to teach all the mysteries because many people could not deal with it. Only those whose hearts are willing, having real intent and a great desire to know, can not only learn the mysteries but also deal with and live by them.
The majority of church members have a hard enough time keeping the commandments and living Christ-like lives at present. To continue to pile up even more upon them would drive many away.

JST, Luke 12:57
57 But he that knew not his Lord’s will, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required; and to whom the Lord has committed much, of him will men ask the more.

[Rachael]

It's weird that we are products of immotal, resurrected first parents but we inherited death. We didn't even get to eat the forbidden fruit

[Rachael]

It wasn't just that they didn't want to tear apart existing polygamous families, but there were a considerable number of new polygamous marriages performed for a number of years after the 1890 Manifesto. These marriages were done for the highest leaders in the Church, not by renegades. I'll post some links tomorrow, unless someone beats me to it. D. Michael Quinn wrote a paper on this, after being allowed access to Church Archives.

Unfortunately this thread has digressed and degenerated to an Adam/GOD discussion. Glad I'm not the only one with ADD.
You're right. It's disturbing this happened. I don't understand why we got to go through church history rotations if the GAs want us to cherry pick and acquiesce to correlated history...then preach about honesty

Speaking of honesty......a woman in my ward just returned from a mission working in the office of the Seventy who is in charge of all the Phillipine Missions. She did not give any examples of what she was referring to, but in her testimony today, she said that she now knows that it's right and proper that the Church doesn't tell the members everything, as some things may destroy their testimonies. It was a very weird testimony, and I am left wondering how long she will be able to convince herself that not all truth is helpful, so it's okay for Authorities to omit and actually lie about unhelpful truths.

So the church is backed and operated by deceit? This alone could destroy testimonies.
Some people will go to great lengths to cause contention and discord, won't they?
So I guess this scripture is a bunch of hogwash, huh?

Alma 12:10
10 And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.

So you see, the church cannot hold back truth or mysteries from anyone truly seeking them with a soft heart and in humility. It is not the responsibility of the church to teach all the mysteries because many people could not deal with it. Only those whose hearts are willing, having real intent and a great desire to know, can not only learn the mysteries but also deal with and live by them.
The majority of church members have a hard enough time keeping the commandments and living Christ-like lives at present. To continue to pile up even more upon them would drive many away.

JST, Luke 12:57
57 But he that knew not his Lord’s will, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required; and to whom the Lord has committed much, of him will men ask the more.

I'm not out to destroy anyone's testimony. But just like in the Bible, we have good and bad eras. BoM too. Have we become so prideful that those past example are no longer applicable?

[slimjamm]

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

BY taught a lot of cr-p, so come find me and slit my throat ear to ear, disembowel me. Yeah, he taught that.

Adam wasn't resurrected yet to lay hands on Jesus. Moses and Elijah were supposedly translated, therefore had bodies to do so. Fine. Go to a temple ceremony, and Peter James and John go to Adam and want something that requires physical contact when they don't have bodies yet. Yet the D&C demands a litmus test of sorts... You know what I'm speaking of...
But the book of Hebrews clarifies that Jesus is the eternal high priest, He was perfect and did not need baptism for the remission of His sins, He didn't need to be ordained on the mount of transfiguration to get priesthood He already had, He did it to fulfill every jot and tittle of the law

Haha, (yeah, funny)Michael was a resurrected being upon entering the garden. What do you suppose He fell from? Immortal glory. He had a body of flesh and bone before becoming mortal. So yeah, Adam had already been resurrected before coming to the Garden. Therefore Adam was resurrected at the time of transfiguration on the Mount. I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too. Even though it's completely impossible to officiate an priesthood ordinance we haven't yet received ourselves. Or to use the priesthood on ourselves. Seeing as resurrection is a priesthood ordinance, what types of beings do you suppose the angels were that rolled the stone away? What were they really there to perform? As you've stated, he didn't need to be baptized did he? (notice he didn't baptize himself) But he was. He had to go through the same ordiances as us. To experience what we will, to be tested like the rest of us. The pattern is eternal.

Do you think the Bible is THAT mistranslated? Christ wasn't the first fruit of the resurrection? Paul was just bloviating in Corinthians like O'Reilly on Fox News? I'll believe in the Shroud of Turrin before I believe your pontifications. Adam gave up immortality. He was gonna die, he did die. Jesus came to give us life. Victory over the grave

Not the Bible, but your understanding of it, yes. Christ is the first fruits of the resurrection of our Father's children. Who would you claim performed the priesthood ordinance of resurrection on the Savior? Himself? Why didn't he baptize himself etc? Because he understood that's not how the priesthood works. That has never been the pattern.

[Rachael]

Because Christ was a mortal and immortal. He also said he could resurrect Himself. Christ was one of a kind

He never fit phairisaic patterns

It is Biblical

[freedomforall]

Alma 4:19
19 And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.

Therefore,

The Adam God doctrine is not recognized as scripture, nor are members of the church to believe it, let alone adopt it. This doctrine is false. It was concluded that BY went beyond his mantle of authority and taught his own opinions strongly enough that many saints fell for it, but many others saw it for what it was, false doctrine and became distressed by it. It was never accepted as canon by other church GA's.

All anyone can do is deny the facts and continue to bear down with this false doctrine, possibly to their own detriment.

Yes we've heard your conclusion on it, and your complete dependence on the Church regarding what you can and can't believe.

Listen, doesn't your arrogance, self aggrandizment and lack of understanding stand out like a Sequoia in a corn field? Aren't you doing the exact same thing? You didn't come up with this stuff on your own unless you are BY reincarnated. You take precepts of a man who went beyond his authority and run with it as gospel truth. I know by the Spirit of God this doctrine is false because it was never made official church doctrine as I have posted and proven time and time again. Your denial of this is on you and you alone. Every time you try to answer a question you run to past GA's to back you up, yet those opinions are not corroborated by scripture in the least as confirmed by so many prior church leaders. Do you think millions of saints are deceived? Come on.
As do others, I read, study, ponder and pray about scripture and the doctrine is not backed by scripture one iota. Therefore, one is left with precepts of men to back them.
Do you want to continue abasing me and any others that disagree with you? Denying truth at your own doing? Do you want to keep judging me knowing full well you know not what I know? Must you continue to espouse and promote this doctrine even to the point of abasing others, of whom, do not agree? Do you think that people disagree because they are unlearned or have not pondered the scripture or a combination thereof? WHY SHOULD WE BELIEVE IT, ANYWAY? It makes absolutely no sense at all.

I bear down against this doctrine as has been done by many other church members. And in accordance with the Spirit of truth.

False doctrine has its ramifications, enough to gain three woes.

2 Nephi 28:15
15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!

I think it is time to stop the abase others card.

[slimjamm]

Because Christ was a mortal and immortal. He also said he could resurrect Himself. Christ was one of a kind

He never fit phairisaic patterns

It is Biblical

Yes he sure is one of a kind, and how blessed we are to have him. Rachael, so it's clear, we may not agree on many aspects, and that's OK it makes life interesting. But I do applaud you for not just toeing the line. Someone who can look at things from other perspectives. That's refreshing, so don't let that part of you go. We may butt heads from time to time, but in the end we'll both get it right

[Rachael]

OK. Uncle, uncle. Adam is GOD, was a Resurrected being made from the dust of the earth by a grandpa GOD Isaiah didn't know about, was ordained priesthood by those that don't have bodies by laying on incorporeal hands, was immortal, became mortal, transgressed so we could multiply, came back a few thousand years later after death, didn't have the power to ressurect...Himself
... But thanks for kind words

[freedomforall]

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

BY taught a lot of cr-p, so come find me and slit my throat ear to ear, disembowel me. Yeah, he taught that.

Adam wasn't resurrected yet to lay hands on Jesus. Moses and Elijah were supposedly translated, therefore had bodies to do so. Fine. Go to a temple ceremony, and Peter James and John go to Adam and want something that requires physical contact when they don't have bodies yet. Yet the D&C demands a litmus test of sorts... You know what I'm speaking of...
But the book of Hebrews clarifies that Jesus is the eternal high priest, He was perfect and did not need baptism for the remission of His sins, He didn't need to be ordained on the mount of transfiguration to get priesthood He already had, He did it to fulfill every jot and tittle of the law

Haha, Michael was a resurrected being upon entering the garden. Michael was Adam in the flesh. What do you suppose He fell from? He fell from the presence of the Father and became mortal. He was thus rendered spiritually dead as written in scripture. Immortal glory. He had a body of flesh and bone before becoming mortal. He had a body of spirit just as Christ had when the brother of Jared saw the Lord before coming to earth in the flesh. So yeah, Adam had already been resurrected before coming to the Garden. If this were true then Adam would have been walking around in a different body. Not so. Therefore Adam was resurrected at the time of transfiguration on the Mount. I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too. He did. John 2:19
19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple (his body), and in three days I will raise it up.

Even though it's completely impossible to officiate an priesthood ordinance we haven't yet received ourselves. Or to use the priesthood on ourselves. Seeing as resurrection is a priesthood ordinance, what types of beings do you suppose the angels were that rolled the stone away? What were they really there to perform? As you've stated, he didn't need to be baptized did he? He was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. We are baptized because of his example and to have our souls cleansed. It is necessary. Don't believe it? Read Moses 6:60 (notice he didn't baptize himself) But he was. He had to go through the same ordiances as us. To experience what we will, to be tested like the rest of us. The pattern is eternal.

[freedomforall]

Jesus Christ was the first individual to be resurrected.

2 Nephi 2:8
8 Wherefore, how great the importance to make these things known unto the inhabitants of the earth, that they may know that there is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God, save it be through the merits, and mercy, and grace of the Holy Messiah, who layeth down his life according to the flesh, and taketh it again by the power of the Spirit, that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, being the first that should rise.

Note too that he said he will raise himself up from the dead.

[slimjamm]

Michael the archangel (Adam) holds the keys of the resurrection and after a man is raised from the dead, has an immortal body and receives an ordination to hold the keys of the resurrection from under the hands of Michael or those having authority, he then has the power to raise the dead, and not before. Jesus was the first fruits of the resurrection. "He had power to lay down his life, and power to take it again." When he had lain in the grave three days an angel, some person who was appointed to this work, appeared, rolled back the stone and called Jesus forth. We have power here through the priesthood to lay hands upon the sick and they recover, to cast out devils, open the eyes of the blind and unstop the ears of the deaf according to the faith of the children of men. It is just as easy to raise the dead for one who is ordained unto this power as it is for us to administer in the ordinances of the House of the Lord here. (Brigham Young, 23 Feb, 1848, Winter Quarters)

Brigham Young, Salt Lake Tabernacle, August 28, 1852.

One of the greatest queries on the minds of the Saints is to understand the nature, the principle of the foundation of our existence. To say nothing about what has been, if you will follow out that which is before you, you can learn all about it. I have a notion to tell you, though I have not time to say much about it now. I will, however, just tell to you the simple story relating to the exaltation of man in the celestial kingdom of God. We will take Joseph for instance: he is faithful to his calling--has filled his mission to this earth, and sealed his testimony with his blood; he has done the work his Father gave him to do, and will soon come to the resurrection. His spirit is waiting for the resurrection of the body, which will soon be. But has he the power to resurrect that body? He has not. Who has this power? Those that have already passed through the resurrection--who have been resurrected in their time and season by some person else, and have been appointed to that authority just as you Elders have with regard to your authority to baptize.

You have not the power to baptize yourselves, neither have you power to resurrect yourselves; and you could not legally baptize a second person for the remission of sins until some person first baptized you and ordained you to this authority. So with those that hold the keys of the resurrection to resurrect the Saints. Joseph will come up in his turn, receive his body again, and continue his mission in the eternal worlds until he carries it out to perfection, with all the rest of the faithful, to be made perfect with those who have lived before, and those who shall live after; and when the work is finished, and it is offered to the Father, then they will be crowned and receive keys and powers by which they will be capable of organizing worlds. What will they organize first? Were I to tell you, I should certainly spoil all the baby resurrection that Elder Hyde and others ever preached, as sure as the world.

After men have got their exaltations and their crowns--have become Gods, even the sons of God--are made Kings of kings and Lords of lords, they have the power then of propagating their species in spirit; and that is the first of their operations with regard to organizing a world. Power is then given to them to organize the elements, and then commence the organization of tabernacles. How can they do it? Have they to go to that earth? Yes, an Adam will have to go there, and he cannot do without Eve; he must have Eve to commence the work of generation, and they will go into the garden, and continue to eat and drink of the fruits of the corporeal world, until this grosser matter is diffused sufficiently through their celestial bodies to enable them according to the established laws, to produce mortal tabernacles for their spiritual children.

Michael holds the keys of resurrection. Why? Because he had already received this ordinance prior, by another whom had these keys and authority, (which couldn't have been Jesus Christ). Christ was the first of our Father's children to receive this ordinance of resurrection, hence the first fruit. He received this ordinance from those posessing this authority, after having received it for themselves; being sent by the Father or He who holds the keys.

… The Father called all spirits before Him at the creation of man, and organized them. He (Adam) is the head, and was told to multiply. The keys were first given to him, and by him to others. TPJS

Michael held the keys first.

[sandman45]

Alma 4:19
19 And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.

Therefore,

The Adam God doctrine is not recognized as scripture, nor are members of the church to believe it, let alone adopt it. This doctrine is false. It was concluded that BY went beyond his mantle of authority and taught his own opinions strongly enough that many saints fell for it, but many others saw it for what it was, false doctrine and became distressed by it. It was never accepted as canon by other church GA's.

All anyone can do is deny the facts and continue to bear down with this false doctrine, possibly to their own detriment.

I believe the Modern prophets who said Brigham taught false doctrine went beyond their mantle of authority and taught their own opinions and didnt receive revelation upon the subject like Brigham said he did..

Brigham announced this in GENERAL CONFERENCE!

......When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, about whom holy men have written and spoken–He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later. (JD 1:50, April 9, 1852)

1873, which was 21 years after the first public announcement

How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me–namely that Adam is our Father and God. (Des. News, June 18, 1873)

Looks like he announced it as revelation and still said it was revealed to him by God

[sandman45]

It's weird that we are products of immotal, resurrected first parents but we inherited death. We didn't even get to eat the forbidden fruit

We are products of Mortal Parents.. remember.. Adam and Eve FELL from immortality to mortality..

[sandman45]

Alma 4:19
19 And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.

Therefore,

The Adam God doctrine is not recognized as scripture, nor are members of the church to believe it, let alone adopt it. This doctrine is false. It was concluded that BY went beyond his mantle of authority and taught his own opinions strongly enough that many saints fell for it, but many others saw it for what it was, false doctrine and became distressed by it. It was never accepted as canon by other church GA's.

All anyone can do is deny the facts and continue to bear down with this false doctrine, possibly to their own detriment.

Yes we've heard your conclusion on it, and your complete dependence on the Church regarding what you can and can't believe.

Listen, doesn't your arrogance, self aggrandizment and lack of understanding stand out like a Sequoia in a corn field? Aren't you doing the exact same thing? You didn't come up with this stuff on your own unless you are BY reincarnated. You take precepts of a man who went beyond his authority and run with it as gospel truth. I know by the Spirit of God this doctrine is false because it was never made official church doctrine as I have posted and proven time and time again. Your denial of this is on you and you alone. Every time you try to answer a question you run to past GA's to back you up, yet those opinions are not corroborated by scripture in the least as confirmed by so many prior church leaders. Do you think millions of saints are deceived? Come on.
As do others, I read, study, ponder and pray about scripture and the doctrine is not backed by scripture one iota. Therefore, one is left with precepts of men to back them.
Do you want to continue abasing me and any others that disagree with you? Denying truth at your own doing? Do you want to keep judging me knowing full well you know not what I know? Must you continue to espouse and promote this doctrine even to the point of abasing others, of whom, do not agree? Do you think that people disagree because they are unlearned or have not pondered the scripture or a combination thereof? WHY SHOULD WE BELIEVE IT, ANYWAY? It makes absolutely no sense at all.

I bear down against this doctrine as has been done by many other church members. And in accordance with the Spirit of truth.

False doctrine has its ramifications, enough to gain three woes.

2 Nephi 28:15
15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!

I think it is time to stop the abase others card.

When Joseph said Adam was the 'Ancient of Days' there was no scripture to back that up... There is now.. because Joseph REVEALED that to us which is now in the D&C!!!

Joseph was the great SEER, he was the PROPHET, and REVELATOR..

the next PROPHET was Brigham Young.. and then he REVEALS something that was mostly kept hidden by our church because there were people in the church who didn't like what he REVEALED.. and now modern prophets call it false doctrine? and that he was beyond his mantle of authority? come on.. something fishy is happening.

what about this?

articles of faith 9: We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

so if a revelation was not in a certain book before its been revealed then its false? isnt revelation something thats new and mysterious and that is not already written down?

[sandman45]

anyway.. whats the OP again? lol

[freedomforall]

And who was so arrogant that they implied complete stupidity by making the following remark?

I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too

And I proved that Christ did, in fact, resurrect himself with John 2:19

And why would I believe anything said from this poster that made the following statements directly to me? Should I put each insult in its own sentence as a list? When posters have to resort to this type of garbage as a form of communication to maintain their self imposed superior position there is no room left for other posters to respond but what they would get the same treatment, JUST BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE AND POST EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP.

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

And then to claim that church leaders are holding back many things that could drive people away in order to justify this false doctrine is really over the top.

[slimjamm]

And who was so arrogant that they implied complete stupidity by making the following remark?

I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too

And I proved that Christ did, in fact, resurrect himself with John 2:19

And why would I believe anything said from this poster that made the following statements directly to me? Should I put each insult in its own sentence as a list? When posters have to resort to this type of garbage as a form of communication to maintain their self imposed superior position there is no room left for other posters to respond but what they would get the same treatment, JUST BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE AND POST EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP.

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

And then to claim that church leaders are holding back many things that could drive people away in order to justify this false doctrine is really over the top.

You sure are a sensitive little fella. Apparently you've resorted to this same "type of garbage as a form of communication", as you put it. Now run tell Brian.

[freedomforall]

Alma 4:19
19 And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them.

Therefore,

The Adam God doctrine is not recognized as scripture, nor are members of the church to believe it, let alone adopt it. This doctrine is false. It was concluded that BY went beyond his mantle of authority and taught his own opinions strongly enough that many saints fell for it, but many others saw it for what it was, false doctrine and became distressed by it. It was never accepted as canon by other church GA's.

All anyone can do is deny the facts and continue to bear down with this false doctrine, possibly to their own detriment.

I believe the Modern prophets who said Brigham taught false doctrine went beyond their mantle of authority and taught their own opinions and didnt receive revelation upon the subject like Brigham said he did..

Brigham announced this in GENERAL CONFERENCE!

......When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, about whom holy men have written and spoken–He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later. (JD 1:50, April 9, 1852)

1873, which was 21 years after the first public announcement

How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me–namely that Adam is our Father and God. (Des. News, June 18, 1873)

Looks like he announced it as revelation and still said it was revealed to him by God

Believe what you want. I don't know you. I care less what you believe. It doesn't make or break my salvation in the least, although I'm not pleased with all the insults. But I do have to consider the source in each case.
Having said this if you believe you are adhering to forum rules by, through insults and innuendo, implying that those who show disagreement as if they are dumber than a bag of rocks and by promoting false doctrine then have at it.
Perhaps some of us can reciprocate in kind without fear of getting warnings or being banned for standing up for our own beliefs...beliefs from years and years of study and NOT going by what the church says we can or cannot believe as you so arrogantly assumed.

Yes we've heard your conclusion on it, and your complete dependence on the Church regarding what you can and can't believe.

The word "we've" must include slimjamm and yourself. And since you claim our current leaders are holding back, which is deceitful to begin with, I look forward to you two speaking in next GC and straightening everyone out on the matter of Adam-God. I had no idea you two have the whole gospel at your disposal in order to keep the rest of us heathens up to date. I look forward to your sermons. I really do. I mean, if I were as self assured as you two, I'd want the whole church membership to know they've been deceived and set them straight.

[creator]

You sure are a sensitive little fella. Apparently you've resorted to this same "type of garbage as a form of communication", as you put it. Now run tell Brian.

Sorry but you don't get to treat people that way on this forum.

[freedomforall]

And who was so arrogant that they implied complete stupidity by making the following remark?

I suppose you think Christ resurrected himself too

And I proved that Christ did, in fact, resurrect himself with John 2:19

And why would I believe anything said from this poster that made the following statements directly to me? Should I put each insult in its own sentence as a list? When posters have to resort to this type of garbage as a form of communication to maintain their self imposed superior position there is no room left for other posters to respond but what they would get the same treatment, JUST BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE AND POST EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP.

Your attempts to disregard what Brigham plainly taught is the true nonsense. D&C 88:112-115 CLEARLY notes Michael as the great God, fighting for His children. But you clearly don't see that and will try to explain it away. My point being, it doesn't matter if I provide Scripture or words of prophets, you'll simply run to FAIR's website (speaking of nonsense) to try and refute. Do you believe Jesus was married and had children? If so, show me all the scriptures that specifically state this. Show me where it states this is official Church doctrine. If you don't believe this, explain to me how Jesus can be said to have fulfilled all righteousness, while neglecting God's first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. Then show me the scriptures that specifically state that he wasn't married or had children, and why. Also, that this is offical Church doctrine.

This is the reason you have partial truth but not a fullness. If you feel it's not your individual understanding of the Scriptures, or official Church doctrine, you reject it. This is you turning your heart from God because you rely on the precepts of men. God desires us to search Him out and let Him teach us, not read a few books and wait for a few men to tell us what to believe, not moving until they tell us. The Church has it's inspired place, but it surely isn't the source of all truth. I would hope you understand the Gospel and the Church are not the same thing. I see you're still at the point you are completely dependant on the Church, and you needing them to tell you exactly what is what. I hope in time you get to the point in which the Father desires you to be in. One where you act for yourself, by following His precepts and counsel.

And then to claim that church leaders are holding back many things that could drive people away in order to justify this false doctrine is really over the top.

You sure are a sensitive little fella. Apparently you've resorted to this same "type of garbage as a form of communication", as you put it. Now run tell Brian.

Sensitive? Is this what you think? I cannot express what I think. But I could find plenty of scripture to explain it.
And why would you post stuff that would cause concern as if Brian shouldn't know about in the first place. You're the one who agreed to the forum rules, did you not. Did you lie? And you really think I should take your assumptive, demeaning and heartfelt insults with a smile and not say something?
The garbage is the false doctrine about Adam-God being Michael. It's been proven wrong...get over it. If you think that the scriptures I use to refute your theory are garbage, this is on you.
Your blatant insults are as plain as a Sequoya in a corn field, what can I say?


I really want to see what kind of vocabulary you use when communicating with others that don't agree with you. I'm one of the few that has even bothered to refute this crazy doctrine. I'm sure there are others, but God says to stand up and defend...in all places, at all times and in ALL things. So this is what I'm doing...SO TAKE IT UP WITH GOD, IT'S HIS COMMAND NOT MINE. Or do you have something to say against the word of God on this matter? Huh?

Mosiah 18:9
9 Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death, that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal life—

[sandman45]

You sure are a sensitive little fella. Apparently you've resorted to this same "type of garbage as a form of communication", as you put it. Now run tell Brian.

Sorry but you don't get to treat people that way on this forum.

What about the way he is treating those who believe what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught about Michael/Adam?

Articles of Faith

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.