KitKat.

You always have that.....

I am tired of all the nastiness that has been occurring here. It's like it is their own personal forum...

Different views and dislikes make this world go round and I will be damned if I will sit back and take it from these jerks....

Blondie wrote:
KitKat.

You always have that.....

I am tired of the anastiness that has been occuring here. It's like it is their own personal forum...

Different views and dislikes make this world go round and I will be damned if I will sit back and take it from these jerks....
^5^

KitKat wrote:
Blondie wrote:
KitKat.

You always have that.....

I am tired of all the nastiness that has been occurring here. It's like it is their own personal forum...

Different views and dislikes make this world go round and I will be damned if I will sit back and take it from these jerks....
^5^

^5^

Blondie wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Blondie wrote:
KitKat.

You always have that.....

I am tired of all the nastiness that has been occurring here. It's like it is their own personal forum...

Different views and dislikes make this world go round and I will be damned if I will sit back and take it from these jerks....
^5^

^5^

Cool.

ThomasK wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Over twenty years after Brigham Young  first publicly proclaimed the Adam-God doctrine, He emphasized that God Himself had revealed the doctrine to him:

"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—. . . (Deseret News Weekly, June 18, 1873)

On October 8, 1861, Brigham Young said:
Some years ago, I advanced a doctrine with regard to Adam being our father and God. . . . It is one of the most glorious revealments of the economy of heaven, . . .
("A Few Words of Doctrine," unpublished manuscript in the Brigham Young Collection, LDS Archives, as cited by David John Buerger in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1982, page 29).

The Mormon Church's own publication, Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star, clearly stated that the Adam-God doctrine was the word of the Lord:

. . . Adam is our Father and God, . . . the prophet and Apostle Brigham Young has declared it. . . . it is the word of the Lord
(vol. 16, page 534).

Brigham Young was certainly not the only early Mormon leader who had a testimony to the doctrine. According to David John Buerger, Heber C. Kimball, a member of the First Presidency, claimed that,

"[T]he Lord told me that Adam was my father and that he was the God and father of all the inhabitants of this earth"
(Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1982, page 27).

George Q. Cannon, who later became a member of the First Presidency, claimed the doctrine was revealed to him. David John Buerger informs us that, In an 1870 meeting, "Elder Geo[rge] Q. Cannon fully endorsed the doctrine that Father Adam was our God and Father. . . .
" Indeed, "the above doctrine had been revealed to him, so that he knew it was true"
(Ibid., page 31).

Joseph Fielding Smith, who later became the sixth President of the Church, also endorsed the doctrine. Mr. Buerger points out that many Church leaders continued to believe the Adam-God doctrine after Brigham Young's death. Even Lorenzo Snow, who became the fifth President of the Church, still maintained a belief in the doctrine a number of years after Brigham Young's death: Contrary to many later perceptions, Brigham Young's death in late August 1877 did not mark the end of the Adam-God doctrine. . . . many of the Church's leading authorities unquestionably retained a belief in Brigham's teachings . . .
in the 1890s one also finds brief but supportive references to the doctrine by Apostles Brigham Young, Jr., Franklin D, Richards and Lorenzo Snow. Amidst discussions treated below, for example, Snow is reported as leading "out on Adam being our Father and God. How beautiful the thought it brot. God nearer to us." To this Richards added that "it made him thrill through his whole body it was new & it was inspiring" (Ibid., pages 33-34).

As time went on, of course, the Mormon leaders said less and less about Brigham Young's teachings on Adam. In 1897, the Apostle Franklin D. Richards wrote a letter in which he remarked:
This, like many other points of more advanced doctrine, is too precious a pearl to be cast before swine. But when the swine get hold of them, let us rescue them by the help of the Spirit as best we can. Thinking it may be convenient to you to have President Youngs sayings on that subject, I enclose a copy from his sermon in the first Volume of the Journal of Discourses (Letter from Apostle Franklin D. Richards to Ephraim H. Nye, dated Dec. 18, 1897, as cited in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1982, page 37).

The above information was taken from Utah Lighthouse Ministry's Web page.
http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech8.htm

Sorry Charlie, the Mormon Apologists have just a lot more powerful rebuttals to your anti-Mormon Apologists. This cut and paste is getting old. Just google it and read it for yourself. Your lighthouse bulbs are burned out.

OK ThomasK, I took your advice but let me first assure you that I don't take anything for granted unless I first research it on my own.

See I don't have anybody threatening me with a temple recommend or membership within the Mormon church so I'm free as Jesus commands us to test all things.

Sorry my little friend but your Mormon apologist sadly and dishonestly only promote faith promoting B.S. and the damaging evidence is far more massive and well documented from your own leaders than I realized. yours and the Mormon churches lying for the Lord is not fooling anybody but yourselves.

Has the Mormon Church and its apologist at BYU been truthful about Brigham Young' ADAM GOD doctrine?

With all this controversy on this subject, why hasn't the Mormon presidency just opened the first Presidents vault and let both non-Mormon and Mormon scholars examined the evidence for themselves?
what are they afraid of?

I think we all know that there is so much more damaging evidence and on so many more issues that they closed these vaults to public access many years ago.

ThomasK tries to convince us that the Journal of discourses was most likely deliberately misquoted or somehow dramatized to sell more copies and therefore make more money.

ThomasK, do you honestly believe that anyone at that time besides members of the Mormon Church purchased the Journal discourses?

I think we should take an honest look at numerous other sources from Mormon leaders such as journals, anminutes from meetings and other sources widely available.