Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dan
... it is confusing as it is very complex, but I think the contradictions are more based on (oh dear, BDB is NOT going to like me saying this at all ...) our looking at the issue with different paradigms than them. But BY also expounded quite a bit on the theme that we can all personally be Adams and Eves, and so there are other layers of discussion going on that can create paradoxes as well.
|
That SWK did not need an "official" declaration to do away with AG is indicative of its "unofficial" status in the first place. You can't undo a constitutional amendment with a supreme court ruling, but you can undo a supreme court ruling with a supreme court ruling.
As for the paradigm idea: I understand how they would think what they did, which is the foundation for my argument: Brigham Young put two and two together and got five. Ultimately, the basic idea that the intelligent entity known as God was the same intelligent entity known as Adam is either true or false. Other layers of meaning and interpretation can be valuable and profitable in learning about God's origin and Man's destiny, but the actual identification of God=Adam is what is being called into question. This, and correct me if I'm wrong, is what Brigham Young taught as true and what Spencer W. Kimball taught as false. Who's right?