gdemetz wrote:What I gave was the true doctrine. The part Brigham Young got wrong, as his personal opinion, was the part about God and one of His wives becoming mortal after eating the fruit. President Joseph F. Smith addressed this issue in a letter that was drafted by Wilford Woodruff. Their bodies became "charged" with the fruit, and not changed by it. It is my opinion that Brigham Young misunderstood this revelation which was given to him by Joseph Smith. When their bodies became charged with it, then they produced, according to natural law, physical bodies for Adam and Eve. The cartoon version of Adam popping up from the ground which is accepted by apostate Christendom is false and shows the desperate need for the restitution of all things! It also does nothing to explain how Adam is also the son of God as the Book of Moses and the Book of Luke state!
Do you have anything that collaborates this from any Prophet from say the last 50 years? I bet that most of church leadership today would say something on the lines of “I don’t know if we teach that…”
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man. - The Dude
Don't you know there ain't no devil, there's just god when he's drunk - Tom Waits
You may be right Son of Ismael. The critics are probably just hoping that a current church leader would make a statement like that these days, but I'm sure that Mitt Romney is hoping that they won't.
I see many are fixated with the past. I think that we all want to know the details about how it all happened. But I am of the opinion that while in this fallen state we will not be able to comprehend the process. Since I know that all of the creation is in some way a shadow of God's plan I will just trust that as I look towards the future the past will also be known.