I just couldn't help myself. the thought and the scripture just jumped out
there.

And yes, we can all pull scriptures all night to prove whatever.

And yes, I disagree with both of you on this one.

DeWayne



--- In Adam-God@yahoogroups.com, "Malcolm Leitch" <malcolm-L@...> wrote:
>
> Very good J.
>
>
>
> Of course no council anyone can give will persuade you.. Proverbs 12:15 and
> I'm not going to try and convince you.. Proverbs 12:23. But if I were to do
> so.. Proverbs 8:33
>
>
>
> Wow, we could throw scriptures at each other all night J
>
>
>
> From: Adam-God@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Adam-God@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of DeWayne Hafen
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 7:54 PM
> To: Adam-God@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Adam-God] Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I would get into this discussion but Matthew 15:14 KJV constrains me.
>
> --- In Adam-God@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Adam-God%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Malcolm Leitch" <malcolm-L@> wrote:
> >
> > Richard, I don't usually agree with you, as you know... but in this case I
> > agree with what you say here - well said.
> >
> >
> >
> > In addition, check out: http://en.fairmormon.org/Fallibility_of_prophets
> >
> >
> >
> > Malcolm.
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Adam-God@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Adam-God%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:Adam-God@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Adam-God%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
> Behalf
> > Of Richard
> > Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2009 8:24 AM
> > To: Adam-God@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Adam-God%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Adam-God] Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Adam-God@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Adam-God%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Steve Graham" <solitary.wanderer52@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I suppose that could be one explanation. If so, a whole bunch of good
> men
> > and women, including general authorities of the church, were mistaken,
> > including Brigham who said that he received this doctrine from heaven and
> > Joseph himself.
> > ...
> >
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > I am convinced that Adam-God was jettisoned because it simply cannot be
> > reconciled with the teaching that the President of the Church is
> guaranteed
> > to never fall and lead the church astray. That is the real reason.
> >
> > If President Young was teaching false doctrine in his Adam-God sermons,
> then
> > it is inescapable: the President of the church TODAY could also be
> teaching
> > false doctrines.
> >
> > So if President Young was wrong, then President Monson could be wrong-- in
> > fact he could be wrong about President Young being wrong.
> >
> > But if President Young never really taught anything different, then there
> is
> > no such problem. But that cannot be honestly proven, so it is best to
> leave
> > the matter alone as if it was proven.
> >
> > Those of us who recognize that the Church President guarantee doctrine
> > actually contradicts the scriptures do not have this problem with
> Adam-God.
> > We can accept that President Young could have been wrong. We also accept
> > that church Presidents that have rejected Adam-God could also be wrong. We
> > have no need to apologetically redefine President Young's Adam-God
> > teachings.
> >
> > But those who push for the Church President guarantee doctrine (CPGD) find
> > the Adam-God conundrum a great problem, as I explained above.
> >
> > Thus, it appears they have decided that the best way to deal with it is to
> > ignore it as much as absolutely possible. Thus, there are no books or
> > Conference discourses over-viewing what President Young taught, and
> > explaining why the church has determined to leave it alone. That would
> open
> > a can of worms. So nothing is said about it.
> >
> > The lone President Kimball mention of it stands out like a sore thumb to
> > those of us who are inspired by the Adam-God teachings, and would like the
> > matter discussed and REALLY resolved by the church.
> >
> > But we are told this is all we need to know:
> >
> > Jesus was the Christ, Joseph was a prophet, but that is NOTHING compared
> to
> > this: the men in the flesh, with blood in their veins at the head of the
> > church will NEVER lead the church astray! And don't forget it!!
> >
> > Richard
> >
>