The True Lessons From the Fall of Adam and Eve

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage27.jpg (263.07 KiB) Viewed 1711 times

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

Your continued harassment, criticism, and miss representation of what I've said, of what I know and understand has no bearing on me, it only serves to properly represent who and what you are.

Who and what am I? Go ahead and say it. The mods then aught to see just what and who you are. Go ahead, tell me what and who I am. Come on, you can do it. Let's hear it right from the horses mouth.ME:I don't havr to, you've done that for us.
You reported me, or attempted to because of what you think I am, ME:No, because you misrepresented what I said. but I want you to man up and say it. You've already called me a liar, Korihor ME, NO, I ask if you were Korihor - did you follow the ways of Korihor, Zeezrom ME:or do you follow the ways of Zeezrom? and sent me to hell.ME:I've not the power to send anyone to hell, sin does that. What did you leave out for such a good Christian that you presume to present yourself as? ME:??????

And I suppose you want to spread this garbage without any resistance. You don't want opposition, criticism or correction? Do you presume to think that by spreading this doctrine everyone should accept it without questioning its authenticity, to not oppose it, to just let you rattle on with no rebuttal? This is crazy.

No, I expect resistance, in every dispensation, the word of God and those who deliver it are always met with resistance, why would I expect any thing different in this dispensation or "This day and Age".

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage26.jpg

Well, it does add credence to that Brigham might have meant it. It does not make it true though.

So are you saying that Brigham teaches false doctrine?

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage25.jpg (273.55 KiB) Viewed 1706 times

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

I have said this before and I'll say it again, DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR ANYTHING, FIND OUT FOR YOURSELVES.
Joseph taught Brigham everything, but Brigham still went to the Lord. Brigham said he got it from the same place
Joseph did.
Go read the writings of Joseph, Brigham, et al. And AFTER reading and studying then go to the Lord. For me, it took many
years of study and searching and pondering. But because of that it happened in a moment, I didn't understand and then I did.

I do not expect everyone to accept and believe, but if you do, greater things than these await you.

[freedomforall]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage27.jpg

Contradictory, to say the least.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage27.jpg

Contradictory, to say the least.

.... to what?

[freedomforall]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage27.jpg

Contradictory, to say the least.

.... to what?

You might read it and discover the errors on your own.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage27.jpg

Contradictory, to say the least.

.... to what?

You might read it and discover the errors on your own.

I have read it.
I don't post anything that I have not read.
You made the claim, back it up.
What is contradictory?
Be specific.

[freedomforall]

Contradictory, to say the least.

.... to what?

You might read it and discover the errors on your own.

I have read it.
I don't post anything that I have not read.
You made the claim, back it up.
What is contradictory?
Be specific.

Be specific as to what you think it says. Then we can compare notes.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

.... to what?

You might read it and discover the errors on your own.

I have read it.
I don't post anything that I have not read.
You made the claim, back it up.
What is contradictory?
Be specific.

Be specific as to what you think it says. Then we can compare notes.

You are the one that said it is contradictory, did you not know what what was in contradiction when you said i?
Surely you must know why you said it, just let us in on it, if you can.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

SearchPonderPray-p4.jpg (181.44 KiB) Viewed 1695 times

[freedomforall]

You might read it and discover the errors on your own.

I have read it.
I don't post anything that I have not read.
You made the claim, back it up.
What is contradictory?
Be specific.

Be specific as to what you think it says. Then we can compare notes.

You are the one that said it is contradictory, did you not know what what was in contradiction when you said i?
Surely you must know why you said it, just let us in on it, if you can.

Why did you post it then? You presented it, you defend it. If you want people to know what's on your mind, give them something to work with. Point out some issues you think are not contradictory. This is your chance to set the tone. If you can.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

I have read it.
I don't post anything that I have not read.
You made the claim, back it up.
What is contradictory?
Be specific.

Be specific as to what you think it says. Then we can compare notes.

You are the one that said it is contradictory, did you not know what what was in contradiction when you said i?
Surely you must know why you said it, just let us in on it, if you can.

Why did you post it then? You presented it, you defend it. If you want people to know what's on your mind, give them something to work with. Point out some issues you think are not contradictory. This is your chance to set the tone. If you can.

Brigham's statement needs no defense,
Are you trying to deflect away from your statement?

You made this statement about Brigham's statement, defend it.

Contradictory, to say the least.

Tell us why you made this statement, you should know.
What does Brigham's statement contradict?
In what way does it contradict what ever it is that it contradicts.
You made the statement, defend it!

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

You don't have the time to know and understand what it is that you criticize?

I've read it all. (All that you posted, I think). And you made your position quite clear.

I've diligently proven it wrong.

Not hardly,
You attempt to prove me wrong by claiming that
It is possible to have an immortal body that was not resurrected.
That is flat out false.

Here are all the states that one can be in.
A spirit - that part that is the essence of an individual, what can not be created nor destroyed.
spirit body - the spirit, having his glory en-robbed in a spirit body frees him from hell. The body is produced by immortal parents.
mortal body - allows us a mortal probation in which to improve our character.
translated body - a mortal body that has had death delayed to fulfill a special mission.
special mortal body - the body produced by an immortal father and a mortal mother. It contains the seeds of death but does not have to die.
immortal body - a perfected resurrected body of flesh and bones for males, it was this special mortal body and is resurrected by the Father. For females, it is resurrected by their already resurrected husband.

There are no others, no unresurrected immortal body.

You can not prove your point with fiction.

[freedomforall]

Be specific as to what you think it says. Then we can compare notes.

You are the one that said it is contradictory, did you not know what what was in contradiction when you said i?
Surely you must know why you said it, just let us in on it, if you can.

Why did you post it then? You presented it, you defend it. If you want people to know what's on your mind, give them something to work with. Point out some issues you think are not contradictory. This is your chance to set the tone. If you can.

Brigham's statement needs no defense,
Are you trying to deflect away from your statement?

You made this statement about Brigham's statement, defend it.

Contradictory, to say the least.

Tell us why you made this statement, you should know.
What does Brigham's statement contradict?
In what way does it contradict what ever it is that it contradicts.
You made the statement, defend it!

You posted it because it is contradictory. I simply confirmed it by reading it, verifying that it is. So now it is your turn to agree with that assessment. This will put us on a level playing field, don't you see?

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

You are the one that said it is contradictory, did you not know what what was in contradiction when you said i?
Surely you must know why you said it, just let us in on it, if you can.

Why did you post it then? You presented it, you defend it. If you want people to know what's on your mind, give them something to work with. Point out some issues you think are not contradictory. This is your chance to set the tone. If you can.

Brigham's statement needs no defense,
Are you trying to deflect away from your statement?

You made this statement about Brigham's statement, defend it.

Contradictory, to say the least.

Tell us why you made this statement, you should know.
What does Brigham's statement contradict?
In what way does it contradict what ever it is that it contradicts.
You made the statement, defend it!

You posted it because it is contradictory. I simply confirmed it by reading it, verifying that it is. So now it is your turn to agree with that assessment. This will put us on a level playing field, don't you see?

Contradictory to what?

[freedomforall]

Why did you post it then? You presented it, you defend it. If you want people to know what's on your mind, give them something to work with. Point out some issues you think are not contradictory. This is your chance to set the tone. If you can.

Brigham's statement needs no defense,
Are you trying to deflect away from your statement?

You made this statement about Brigham's statement, defend it.

Contradictory, to say the least.

Tell us why you made this statement, you should know.
What does Brigham's statement contradict?
In what way does it contradict what ever it is that it contradicts.
You made the statement, defend it!

You posted it because it is contradictory. I simply confirmed it by reading it, verifying that it is. So now it is your turn to agree with that assessment. This will put us on a level playing field, don't you see?

Contradictory to what?

To whatever is contradictory. All we have to do is read it and ponder it for a while and see what is not contradictory. Then once the points of accuracy are found and eliminated, then what is left will give us something to work with. Pretty simple, I'd say. Almost anyone can figure it out.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

Brigham's statement needs no defense,
Are you trying to deflect away from your statement?

You made this statement about Brigham's statement, defend it.


Tell us why you made this statement, you should know.
What does Brigham's statement contradict?
In what way does it contradict what ever it is that it contradicts.
You made the statement, defend it!

You posted it because it is contradictory. I simply confirmed it by reading it, verifying that it is. So now it is your turn to agree with that assessment. This will put us on a level playing field, don't you see?

Contradictory to what?

To whatever is contradictory. All we have to do is read it and ponder it for a while and see what is not contradictory. Then once the points of accuracy are found and eliminated, then what is left will give us something to work with. Pretty simple, I'd say. Almost anyone can figure it out.

So why don't you just tell us, you made the statement. You must know why you made the statement, what do you think it contradicts?
You raised the issue, put it to bed by just telling us what you think it contradicts and why.

[freedomforall]

You posted it because it is contradictory. I simply confirmed it by reading it, verifying that it is. So now it is your turn to agree with that assessment. This will put us on a level playing field, don't you see?

Contradictory to what?

To whatever is contradictory. All we have to do is read it and ponder it for a while and see what is not contradictory. Then once the points of accuracy are found and eliminated, then what is left will give us something to work with. Pretty simple, I'd say. Almost anyone can figure it out.

So why don't you just tell us, you made the statement. You must know why you made the statement, what do you think it contradicts?
You raised the issue, put it to bed by just telling us what you think it contradicts and why.

Over time, you'll figure it out. It's not that hard to detect. When you do we'll have something to discuss. If you don't know what it is then we couldn't agree on it. This is the goal is it not? To come to an agreement? We cannot achieve it by you not knowing what I found to be contradictory. Therefore you figure it out first, since I already have. Come on, it's not that hard. I shouldn't have to point it out to you. Therefore, I won't. This is how it works.

Until then, check ya later.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

Contradictory to what?

To whatever is contradictory. All we have to do is read it and ponder it for a while and see what is not contradictory. Then once the points of accuracy are found and eliminated, then what is left will give us something to work with. Pretty simple, I'd say. Almost anyone can figure it out.

So why don't you just tell us, you made the statement. You must know why you made the statement, what do you think it contradicts?
You raised the issue, put it to bed by just telling us what you think it contradicts and why.

Over time, you'll figure it out. It's not that hard to detect. When you do we'll have something to discuss. If you don't know what it is then we couldn't agree on it. This is the goal is it not? To come to an agreement? We cannot achieve it by you not knowing what I found to be contradictory. Therefore you figure it out first, since I already have. Come on, it's not that hard. I shouldn't have to point it out to you. Therefore, I won't. This is how it works.

Until then, check ya later.

But you made the claim, you should explain your claim.
What is it contradictory to?

You can't can you? You just throw out stuff but can't back it up can you?
Such a simple thing to just say why you said it was contradictory.
So simple that you can't do it.

That which is asserted without proof
can be dismissed without proof.
Your claim of contradiction is dismissed.

[freedomforall]

To whatever is contradictory. All we have to do is read it and ponder it for a while and see what is not contradictory. Then once the points of accuracy are found and eliminated, then what is left will give us something to work with. Pretty simple, I'd say. Almost anyone can figure it out.

So why don't you just tell us, you made the statement. You must know why you made the statement, what do you think it contradicts?
You raised the issue, put it to bed by just telling us what you think it contradicts and why.

Over time, you'll figure it out. It's not that hard to detect. When you do we'll have something to discuss. If you don't know what it is then we couldn't agree on it. This is the goal is it not? To come to an agreement? We cannot achieve it by you not knowing what I found to be contradictory. Therefore you figure it out first, since I already have. Come on, it's not that hard. I shouldn't have to point it out to you. Therefore, I won't. This is how it works.

Until then, check ya later.

But you made the claim, you should explain your claim.
What is it contradictory to?

You can't can you? You just throw out stuff but can't back it up can you?
Such a simple thing to just say why you said it was contradictory.
So simple that you can't do it.

That which is asserted without proof
can be dismissed without proof.
Your claim of contradiction is dismissed.

The proof was before you, but since you dismissed it, I come out on top. I mean, how can contradiction be brought out if it gets dismissed? And since it wasn't disproved, I naturally, by default, have proven my point.
Therefore, the Adam-God doctrine remains false due to the lack of proof. Proof has been dismissed, finally.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

So why don't you just tell us, you made the statement. You must know why you made the statement, what do you think it contradicts?
You raised the issue, put it to bed by just telling us what you think it contradicts and why.

Over time, you'll figure it out. It's not that hard to detect. When you do we'll have something to discuss. If you don't know what it is then we couldn't agree on it. This is the goal is it not? To come to an agreement? We cannot achieve it by you not knowing what I found to be contradictory. Therefore you figure it out first, since I already have. Come on, it's not that hard. I shouldn't have to point it out to you. Therefore, I won't. This is how it works.

Until then, check ya later.

But you made the claim, you should explain your claim.
What is it contradictory to?

You can't can you? You just throw out stuff but can't back it up can you?
Such a simple thing to just say why you said it was contradictory.
So simple that you can't do it.

That which is asserted without proof
can be dismissed without proof.
Your claim of contradiction is dismissed.

The proof was before you, but since you dismissed it, I come out on top. I mean, how can contradiction be brought out if it gets dismissed? And since it wasn't disproved, I naturally, by default, have proven my point.

To you this is about being on top. I thought integrity had more value.
You claimed there is a contradiction but have been unable to say what contradicted.
So your claim is without merit. You have proven nothing, other than you make claims
you are unable to substantiate.

Your claim is false.

[freedomforall]

Over time, you'll figure it out. It's not that hard to detect. When you do we'll have something to discuss. If you don't know what it is then we couldn't agree on it. This is the goal is it not? To come to an agreement? We cannot achieve it by you not knowing what I found to be contradictory. Therefore you figure it out first, since I already have. Come on, it's not that hard. I shouldn't have to point it out to you. Therefore, I won't. This is how it works.

Until then, check ya later.

But you made the claim, you should explain your claim.
What is it contradictory to?

You can't can you? You just throw out stuff but can't back it up can you?
Such a simple thing to just say why you said it was contradictory.
So simple that you can't do it.

That which is asserted without proof
can be dismissed without proof.
Your claim of contradiction is dismissed.

The proof was before you, but since you dismissed it, I come out on top. I mean, how can contradiction be brought out if it gets dismissed? And since it wasn't disproved, I naturally, by default, have proven my point.

To you this is about being on top. I thought integrity had more value.
You claimed there is a contradiction but have been unable to say what contradicted.
So your claim is without merit. You have proven nothing, other than you make claims
you are unable to substantiate.

Your claim is false.

So now it is your turn to substantiate my claim being false since the proof was dismissed. We can't have it both ways. When proof and truth is dismissed the whole issue becomes moot. Therefore, the claim that the Adam-God doctrine is valid, is now proven to be false, by default.

[Hidingbehindmyhandle]

But you made the claim, you should explain your claim.
What is it contradictory to?

You can't can you? You just throw out stuff but can't back it up can you?
Such a simple thing to just say why you said it was contradictory.
So simple that you can't do it.

That which is asserted without proof
can be dismissed without proof.
Your claim of contradiction is dismissed.

The proof was before you, but since you dismissed it, I come out on top. I mean, how can contradiction be brought out if it gets dismissed? And since it wasn't disproved, I naturally, by default, have proven my point.

To you this is about being on top. I thought integrity had more value.
You claimed there is a contradiction but have been unable to say what contradicted.
So your claim is without merit. You have proven nothing, other than you make claims
you are unable to substantiate.

Your claim is false.

So now it is your turn to substantiate my claim being false since the proof was dismissed. We can't have it both ways. When proof and truth is dismissed the whole issue becomes moot. Therefore, the claim that the Adam-God doctrine is valid, is now proven to be false, by default.

You have presented no proof.
I did not dismiss your proof since you provided none to dismiss.
You twisted my words, I did not say your proof was dismissed.
I said your claim was dismissed.

DoctrineOfPriesthoodPage27.jpg

Contradictory, to say the least.

Your claim is here for all to see.
But with no proof.
"Contradictory" is a binary operator, I provided Brigham's comment.
You made the claim of "Contradictory" so it is up yo you
to show to what it is "Contradictory".
You made the claim, you should know why you made the claim.
I have repeatedly ask you to explain, what does it contradict,
And you have not been able to to do that.

That which is asserted without proof
can be dismissed without proof.
Your claim still goes unsubstantiated.
Your claim is still as hollow as a hollow toadstool story.