Adam-God at Yahoo! Groups

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Richard — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:16:12 GMT

... "DeWayne Hafen" wrote: ... ... Hi DeWayne, I decided I am not completely sure what you disagree with. This is what I said:

Re: Jesus/Jehovah

Steve Graham — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:28:30 GMT

I recently received the following e-mail and thought it pertained nicely to this old conversation. Steve ... I agree that scripture alone cannot settle this

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

DeWayne Hafen — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:01:39 GMT

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

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Malcolm Leitch — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:11:04 GMT

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

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Richard — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 02:20:42 GMT

... ... Oh come on DeWayne! I, of course, consider all those who reject the 2BC as somewhat blind. Just as I consider all those who reject the D&C as blind.

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

DeWayne Hafen — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:55:15 GMT

I would get into this discussion but Matthew 15:14 KJV constrains me.

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Malcolm Leitch — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:14:05 GMT

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:

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Richard — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:24:07 GMT

... men and women, including general authorities of the church, were mistaken, including Brigham who said that he received this doctrine from heaven and Joseph

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Hugh EATON — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:10:53 GMT

Michael, You wrote...(I am surprised that the LDS church hasn't pulled a Jehovah's Witness on us and called Michael the Archangel, Jesus Christ, and making the

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

mike hutchinson — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:15:05 GMT

I am surprised that the LDS church hasn't pulled a Jehovah's Witness on us and called Michael the Archangel, Jesus Christ, and making the person who came down

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Steve Graham — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:02:04 GMT

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

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Malcolm Leitch — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:14:21 GMT

Maybe because it was wrong? Malcolm. _____ From: Adam-God@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Adam-God@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Graham Sent: Friday, May 29,

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Richard — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:11:44 GMT

... ... Hi Mike, Are you an independent fundamentalist? I am curious where you are coming from. Saying the Adam-God doctrine is "fact" seems like an appeal to

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

Hugh EATON — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:57:43 GMT

hugh To: adam-god@yahoogroups.com From: hypermike14@... Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 01:31:46 -0500 Subject: RE: [Adam-God] Re: Reason for Deletion of

Re: Reason for Deletion of Adam-God Doctrine

mike hutchinson — Sun, 31 May 2009 06:32:13 GMT

The Second Book of Commandments is a load of bunk. It is another obvious fraud to detract from priesthood and true doctrine by giving half truths and flat out