Wren (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 11531
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 3 Months, 3 Weeks ago
|
Karma: -4
|
|
KitKat wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
No one has ever been disciplined, excommunicated, or any other church measures for not believing or adhering to in the "Adam-God Theory".
If that's what you believe...then that's what you believe. It is unlikely that if they didn't believe, or adhere to any specific doctrine that Brigham Young taught from the pulpit...that they would openly dissent.
Because according to the history of the Danites...members who openly dissented against the orders, teachings, and/or edicts of Brigham Young, might possibly stand to be 'used up'...and the Danites acted under orders.
OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here it. So what you're also saying is that people were being excommunicated for disagreeing with "theories". What other "theories" was this happening with?
I'm waiting.
And so long as you behave like Kent...you can keep waiting. Or you can discuss this like a rational adult.
It remains to be seen.
At any rate...why do you think Orson Pratt was excommunicated?
He's been respectful Jaye, just as you did with Bearyb when he was, accuse him of being evil etc. What a joke you are. Just answer the question. Is acting like me asking for proof of things you and your twin brother Wren say? If so, I'm proud to be like me.
You prove this claim and show where I have ever referred to Bearyb OR Thomas as being evil.
Up until fairly recently, Thomas has remained respectful.
Fairly recently, he's been switching to less respectful tactics and mannerisms.
When an individual says..."OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here [sic]it!"...this does not indicate respect OR courteous discourse.
In this...he is beginning to act like you do. If he wishes to engage in discussion...I'm happy to do so.
But if he is going to insert little innuendos and begin to behave in a smarmy fashion...then the discussion will take a different course.
Your delustional, he merely asked a simple quesiton of proof, as would any serious researcher want proof of people who make claims. You did the same thing to Bearyb, as GFTS so quickly noticed about you, you don't like when people challenge you, she's a smart gal. I noticed it from day one.
Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here?
You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.
How many times do you have to say the exact same thing? As you would say... get over it.
Thank you for your opinion. As long as it takes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Wren (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 11531
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influence 3 Months, 3 Weeks ago
|
Karma: -4
|
Dubbs wrote:BLogan wrote:
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.
Blogan, why do you NEVER answer my questions? I know I've given you enough time to run back and ask your preacher, which is typical of a bible thumper that doesn't know anything except the simplistic, saved by grace doctrine, which is all their preachers can gather from the bible, cherry picking just this concept.
Do you believe the Bible is perfect?
What does one have to do to become saved as you seem to think you are?
If someone is saved, can they fall from their salvation? What if they murder, become a pedophile afterwards?
Does works have anything to do with being saved?Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here? You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
KitKat (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 14672
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 3 Months, 3 Weeks ago
|
Karma: 21
|
|
Wren wrote:
KitKat wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
No one has ever been disciplined, excommunicated, or any other church measures for not believing or adhering to in the "Adam-God Theory".
If that's what you believe...then that's what you believe. It is unlikely that if they didn't believe, or adhere to any specific doctrine that Brigham Young taught from the pulpit...that they would openly dissent.
Because according to the history of the Danites...members who openly dissented against the orders, teachings, and/or edicts of Brigham Young, might possibly stand to be 'used up'...and the Danites acted under orders.
OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here it. So what you're also saying is that people were being excommunicated for disagreeing with "theories". What other "theories" was this happening with?
I'm waiting.
And so long as you behave like Kent...you can keep waiting. Or you can discuss this like a rational adult.
It remains to be seen.
At any rate...why do you think Orson Pratt was excommunicated?
He's been respectful Jaye, just as you did with Bearyb when he was, accuse him of being evil etc. What a joke you are. Just answer the question. Is acting like me asking for proof of things you and your twin brother Wren say? If so, I'm proud to be like me.
You prove this claim and show where I have ever referred to Bearyb OR Thomas as being evil.
Up until fairly recently, Thomas has remained respectful.
Fairly recently, he's been switching to less respectful tactics and mannerisms.
When an individual says..."OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here [sic]it!"...this does not indicate respect OR courteous discourse.
In this...he is beginning to act like you do. If he wishes to engage in discussion...I'm happy to do so.
But if he is going to insert little innuendos and begin to behave in a smarmy fashion...then the discussion will take a different course.
Your delustional, he merely asked a simple quesiton of proof, as would any serious researcher want proof of people who make claims. You did the same thing to Bearyb, as GFTS so quickly noticed about you, you don't like when people challenge you, she's a smart gal. I noticed it from day one.
Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here?
You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.
How many times do you have to say the exact same thing? As you would say... get over it.
Thank you for your opinion. As long as it takes.
You're welcome. Carry on. But it is kind of childish, you know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A naughty and piquant wench...and a wicked witch
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Dubbs (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 5214
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 3 Months, 3 Weeks ago
|
Karma: -344
|
KitKat wrote:Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
No one has ever been disciplined, excommunicated, or any other church measures for not believing or adhering to in the "Adam-God Theory".
If that's what you believe...then that's what you believe. It is unlikely that if they didn't believe, or adhere to any specific doctrine that Brigham Young taught from the pulpit...that they would openly dissent.
Because according to the history of the Danites...members who openly dissented against the orders, teachings, and/or edicts of Brigham Young, might possibly stand to be 'used up'...and the Danites acted under orders.
OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here it. So what you're also saying is that people were being excommunicated for disagreeing with "theories". What other "theories" was this happening with?
I'm waiting.
And so long as you behave like Kent...you can keep waiting. Or you can discuss this like a rational adult.
It remains to be seen.
At any rate...why do you think Orson Pratt was excommunicated?
He's been respectful Jaye, just as you did with Bearyb when he was, accuse him of being evil etc. What a joke you are. Just answer the question. Is acting like me asking for proof of things you and your twin brother Wren say? If so, I'm proud to be like me.
You prove this claim and show where I have ever referred to Bearyb OR Thomas as being evil.
Up until fairly recently, Thomas has remained respectful.
Fairly recently, he's been switching to less respectful tactics and mannerisms.
When an individual says..."OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here [sic]it!"...this does not indicate respect OR courteous discourse.
In this...he is beginning to act like you do. If he wishes to engage in discussion...I'm happy to do so.
But if he is going to insert little innuendos and begin to behave in a smarmy fashion...then the discussion will take a different course.
Your delustional, he merely asked a simple quesiton of proof, as would any serious researcher want proof of people who make claims. You did the same thing to Bearyb, as GFTS so quickly noticed about you, you don't like when people challenge you, she's a smart gal. I noticed it from day one.
Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here?
You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.
How many times do you have to say the exact same thing? As you would say... get over it. See wren, your act is wearing old, maybe it's time to go get a life and create a new persona, this one is old, tired, and played out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't it much better since the ignore came down? Life is so much better not having to respond to the three smarmy sisters of negativity, ahhh, it's like a load has been lifted, they never made an intelligent post anyway, so what are we missing? NOTHING!
My ignore list... Betz, Kitkat, and the blonde. They have nothing of substance to say anyway, but just like to add smarmy comments to the conversations, so why bother with the the constant smariness?
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
KitKat (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 14672
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 3 Months, 3 Weeks ago
|
Karma: 21
|
Dubbs wrote:KitKat wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
No one has ever been disciplined, excommunicated, or any other church measures for not believing or adhering to in the "Adam-God Theory".
If that's what you believe...then that's what you believe. It is unlikely that if they didn't believe, or adhere to any specific doctrine that Brigham Young taught from the pulpit...that they would openly dissent.
Because according to the history of the Danites...members who openly dissented against the orders, teachings, and/or edicts of Brigham Young, might possibly stand to be 'used up'...and the Danites acted under orders.
OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here it. So what you're also saying is that people were being excommunicated for disagreeing with "theories". What other "theories" was this happening with?
I'm waiting.
And so long as you behave like Kent...you can keep waiting. Or you can discuss this like a rational adult.
It remains to be seen.
At any rate...why do you think Orson Pratt was excommunicated?
He's been respectful Jaye, just as you did with Bearyb when he was, accuse him of being evil etc. What a joke you are. Just answer the question. Is acting like me asking for proof of things you and your twin brother Wren say? If so, I'm proud to be like me.
You prove this claim and show where I have ever referred to Bearyb OR Thomas as being evil.
Up until fairly recently, Thomas has remained respectful.
Fairly recently, he's been switching to less respectful tactics and mannerisms.
When an individual says..."OK, name names of people that we excommunicated for not believing or adhering to the "Adam-God Theory". You challenged my quote, so let's here [sic]it!"...this does not indicate respect OR courteous discourse.
In this...he is beginning to act like you do. If he wishes to engage in discussion...I'm happy to do so.
But if he is going to insert little innuendos and begin to behave in a smarmy fashion...then the discussion will take a different course.
Your delustional, he merely asked a simple quesiton of proof, as would any serious researcher want proof of people who make claims. You did the same thing to Bearyb, as GFTS so quickly noticed about you, you don't like when people challenge you, she's a smart gal. I noticed it from day one.
Dubbs, do you truly believe that your bishop, your stake president, and the regional authorities would approve of what you are doing here?
You are the perfect example of how one letter turns "reason" into "treason", and that is what you are committing against the LDS church with your antics. You lie, you cheat, you fabricate, you swear, you name call, and you say you are a good LDS person.
How many times do you have to say the exact same thing? As you would say... get over it.
See wren, your act is wearing old, maybe it's time to go get a life and create a new persona, this one is old, tired, and played out.LOL dubs. Wren knows exactly why I said that, and it has nothing at all to do with you. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last Edit: 2008/05/04 17:26 By KitKat.
|
|
|
A naughty and piquant wench...and a wicked witch
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Dubbs (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 5214
|
|
Re:Documents raise questions about religious influ 3 Months, 3 Weeks ago
|
Karma: -344
|
|
childish is right, this from a college professor (supposedly} , wow, I'd hate to have paid money to listen to wren dry and boring personality, who uses the internet to teach his classes? LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't it much better since the ignore came down? Life is so much better not having to respond to the three smarmy sisters of negativity, ahhh, it's like a load has been lifted, they never made an intelligent post anyway, so what are we missing? NOTHING!
My ignore list... Betz, Kitkat, and the blonde. They have nothing of substance to say anyway, but just like to add smarmy comments to the conversations, so why bother with the the constant smariness?
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
