NeedleinA

I have shared this thought with members over the years, and leave it here today in the hopes of helping someone else as well.
It comes from D&C 121: 7-8. 
Section heading reads: ...The Prophet and several companions had been months in prison (Liberty). Their petitions and appeals directed to the executive officers and the judiciary had failed to bring them relief. 
In one of the most trying times in Joseph Smith's life and after pleading/crying/begging to the Lord to relieve him of his burdens, Joseph received the following answer:
7. My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment;
8.  And then, if thou endure it, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all they foes.
I love these scriptures, however, I wrote it wrong...did you notice?
Sometimes we understand the fact that we need to "endure" trials, however, I personally believe that is not where the blessings lay. Enduring for some is just basic survival instinct. A P.O.W. can "endure". A mother giving birth can "endure". A marriage facing heavy financial troubles can simply "endure" too. I think the blessings are not simply in "enduring" but rather "enduring it WELL". The Lord told Joseph "if thou endure it well", you get the blessing "exalt thee on high". 

When trials come our way, do we find ourselves "enduring" OR "enduring it well"? Do we curse God or our Spouse during trials? If we do, that probably isn't "well", that is simply enduring and I suggest we miss out on many blessings. This idea is seen every month during fast Sunday. Do you simply (endure) starve yourself and get mad and upset you can't eat, or is fast Sunday a pleasure?
A little food for thought (no pun intended) the next time trials come your way... try enduring it WELL and see the difference.

I'll second that solid answer. 

Well, do you ever have a moment when you learn/hear something different/outside of the box and go, "Hum, that was really interesting!". I just had one of those moments. I just finished up 40 minutes of watching a lecture: Evolution and Latter-day Saint Theology: The Tree of Life and DNA, from a FAIR Conference. 
Perhaps old news to others, but new to me in several areas. If I understood the speaker correctly as he gave his opinion, I took away the following and would be interested in your thoughts.
1. Adam & Eve were not inherently immortal.
2. Death (in various forms) was occurring in the garden. Examples he gave: Did Adam & Eve have hair, nails and human skin? If so, they are the result of dead cells. Did Adam & Eve ever pick a fruit off of a tree and discard it on the ground? Being separated from the tree, did it rot or live forever on the ground?
3. He addresses our common understanding/translation regarding: 2 Nephi 2:22
4. His theory: two mortal beings Adam & Eve had been plucked out of the mainstream (ongoing population on Earth), isolated in the Garden of Eden and while there had access to the Tree of Life. The tree made them immortal while they were partaking of it. Once kicked out, a cherubim had to then be placed in front of tree to stop them from "continuing" to eat from it. 
Anyways, I thought it was interesting enough to open up for a discussion if anyone had any thoughts about it. 
FYI: The videos are 4x 10min parts into 40min whole. Parts 3 & 4 are where he gets into his theory.
 

Thanks for your thoughts as always Vort, I appreciate it. Your quote above probably is the best advice for me when dealing with the entire explained theory in general. 

I am visiting Utah in June and I will get my fix! 
Never mention Cafe Rio please. It's rude to all those who now reside in a state where Cafe Rio is not. 
 

The philosophies of men....

Have not watched the videos. Here are my initial impressions:
"Adam & Eve were not inherently immortal."
What does "inherently immortal" even mean? Heck, I'm "inherently immortal" in the sense that my natural and permanent state will be immortality. One widely accepted Mormon theory (and it most certainly is a theory, not to be confused with revealed doctrine) is that Adam and Eve were in a "natural" state of immortality that ended with their eating of the forbidden (note the word) fruit. This fruit somehow or other caused a biochemical and/or spiritual change in them, rendering them mortal. So, were they "inherently immortal"? Is it "inherent immortality" if we are told, "Okay, you will never die so long as you never do anything that might kill you"? That seems a pretty poor sort of "immortality" to me. " Death (in various forms) was occurring in the garden. Examples he gave: Did Adam & Eve have hair, nails and human skin? If so, they are the result of dead cells. Did Adam & Eve ever pick a fruit off of a tree and discard it on the ground? Being separated from the tree, did it rot or live forever on the ground?"
This is a word game, though one that I think might bear some fruit (no pun intended). Obviously, if we are talking about the life of the macroorganism, the "death" of cells within the organism is not directly relevant to the organism's survival. A related but more interesting question would be about the gut flora; does "immortality" apply to E. coli? In the end, I think we might do best to accept the teaching at what appears to be face value and wait on further light and knowledge to refine our understanding. "He addresses our common understanding/translation regarding: 2 Nephi 2:22"
I expect we have all sorts of misinterpretations about the story (history) of Adam and Eve. I suspect that many of the parts we think of as "figurative" may turn out to be surprisingly literal, and some of the parts that many of us are absolutely conviced are exactly literal will in fact turn out to be figurative -- or perhaps literal, but not in the sense we understand them to be. Such things are made known by the Spirit and in no other way, and the Spirit does not always choose to reveal things in terms of current scientific models. "His theory: two mortal beings Adam & Eve had been plucked out of the mainstream (ongoing population on Earth), isolated in the Garden of Eden and while there had access to the Tree of Life. The tree made them immortal while they were partaking of it. Once kicked out, a cherubim had to then be placed in front of tree to stop them from 'continuing' to eat from it."
I don't buy it, and I think it's skirting dangerous ground to openly propound such speculative "space doctrine". But I do not utterly disbelieve it; it might indeed be correct, or at least correctish. I fear that such things constitute looking beyond the mark. Not to belabor the joke, but that is "St. John" as in John Milton. IOW, the author is claiming that there is no scriptural justification for the innate immortality of Adam and Eve.

Is there a particular part FP that strikes you as flat out wrong? I'm not defending his "theory". It struck me as something different and worth taking a moment to dissect, similar to many posts on here. Sharing it here, well...this is me dissecting it.

I'll second that solid answer. 

I'll second that solid answer. 

Sooner is better. You get the Gift of the Holy Ghost all that much faster (an important consideration), and Satan has less time to putz around with your mind.
And please don't forget what I mentioned earlier: get some of your own family's names and start their temple work as fast as possible — the next day if you can manage it. The Temple is a powerful tool for you to use as a shield against the temptations that will surely come.
Lehi

That is a great little book and not just for youth! I used to take it on dates with me and explain that these were the rules we were going to follow. One chap threw the book to the other side of the room and told me earnestly that we did not have to obey those rules because we were 'older'. That little book really sorted the sheep from the goats!

Oh boy, can I add a nerd comment too? Okay, just bought Star Wars the Force Awakens and watched it with the kids tonight.
My new favorite motivational nerd quote when dealing with Anti-Mormon lit/comments:
"Go straight at 'em, don't let these thugs scare you." - Poe Dameron (Resistance Pilot)

I have shared this thought with members over the years, and leave it here today in the hopes of helping someone else as well.
It comes from D&C 121: 7-8. 
Section heading reads: ...The Prophet and several companions had been months in prison (Liberty). Their petitions and appeals directed to the executive officers and the judiciary had failed to bring them relief. 
In one of the most trying times in Joseph Smith's life and after pleading/crying/begging to the Lord to relieve him of his burdens, Joseph received the following answer:
7. My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment;
8.  And then, if thou endure it, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all they foes.
I love these scriptures, however, I wrote it wrong...did you notice?
Sometimes we understand the fact that we need to "endure" trials, however, I personally believe that is not where the blessings lay. Enduring for some is just basic survival instinct. A P.O.W. can "endure". A mother giving birth can "endure". A marriage facing heavy financial troubles can simply "endure" too. I think the blessings are not simply in "enduring" but rather "enduring it WELL". The Lord told Joseph "if thou endure it well", you get the blessing "exalt thee on high". 

When trials come our way, do we find ourselves "enduring" OR "enduring it well"? Do we curse God or our Spouse during trials? If we do, that probably isn't "well", that is simply enduring and I suggest we miss out on many blessings. This idea is seen every month during fast Sunday. Do you simply (endure) starve yourself and get mad and upset you can't eat, or is fast Sunday a pleasure?
A little food for thought (no pun intended) the next time trials come your way... try enduring it WELL and see the difference.

As others have hinted, the key to this is his answer to the question, "Why do you ask?"
As the father of seven, I can count on all our hands the times I've answered the wrong question. It's a waste of my time, and of the child's. And it does not resolve the problem.
We can guess and speculate as to why he's asking. It could be "nefarious" or it could just be that he's asking for clarification.
I'd suggest not opening doors that need not be opened.
Lehi

There are definitely commandments in the strength of youth book and stuff which if you didn't follow would mean you can't have a temple recommend.
I know this as I was given one a couple of months ago by my Gospel Principles teacher at my house.
I guess it's easier then discussing the law of chastity before baptism with a 32 year old married mother of two hahaha.

Why on earth would they not be considered commandments? Thou shalts and thou shalt nots from the Lord through the voice of His servants. Sounds about right to me. And since when does a temple recommend define what is and isn't a commandments? The temple is a higher, stricter level of covenants and obedience. There's a whole heap load of things that the Lord has said we shouldn't/should do that aren't in the temple recommend interview.

FAIR (Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research ) and FARMS ( Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) are not the same thing.
FARMS is now the Maxwell Institute.
Lehi

Catholic Dawn, Mormon Harvest has 50 Lds doctrines and the biblical support for them, also has details of Catholic non biblical beliefs too. It's the book that convinced me to get baptised 

Just FYI, Steve, and not to be condescending at all (really): Any "problematic" question you are likely to asked has almost certainly been asked already, probably many decades ago, and has been answered. FairLDS (or whatever FARMS is calling itself these days) probably has a link to the answer. Jeff Lindsay, whom JAG mentioned, is a great resource. We actually have a pretty good group here.
My only caveat would be: If you ask a question, you should listen to the answer. This is no reflection on you personally, but very often we have found that people questioning Mormonism, and especially professional anti-Mormons and those who listen to them, greatly enjoy asking what they suppose are "tough" questions, but strangely enough have little interest in hanging around for the answer. This is especially true when the answer is complicated or subtle, requiring a sufficient amount of background preparation to understand it. If you're willing to invest the time and energy to understand LDS doctrines and the LDS viewpoint, you can actually have all or most of your questions answered sufficiently to understand them. You may or may not agree with the answers, depending on whether you accept the principles on which the answers are based, but you will at least have a general understanding of the LDS viewpoint.

I have shared this thought with members over the years, and leave it here today in the hopes of helping someone else as well.
It comes from D&C 121: 7-8. 
Section heading reads: ...The Prophet and several companions had been months in prison (Liberty). Their petitions and appeals directed to the executive officers and the judiciary had failed to bring them relief. 
In one of the most trying times in Joseph Smith's life and after pleading/crying/begging to the Lord to relieve him of his burdens, Joseph received the following answer:
7. My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment;
8.  And then, if thou endure it, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all they foes.
I love these scriptures, however, I wrote it wrong...did you notice?
Sometimes we understand the fact that we need to "endure" trials, however, I personally believe that is not where the blessings lay. Enduring for some is just basic survival instinct. A P.O.W. can "endure". A mother giving birth can "endure". A marriage facing heavy financial troubles can simply "endure" too. I think the blessings are not simply in "enduring" but rather "enduring it WELL". The Lord told Joseph "if thou endure it well", you get the blessing "exalt thee on high". 

When trials come our way, do we find ourselves "enduring" OR "enduring it well"? Do we curse God or our Spouse during trials? If we do, that probably isn't "well", that is simply enduring and I suggest we miss out on many blessings. This idea is seen every month during fast Sunday. Do you simply (endure) starve yourself and get mad and upset you can't eat, or is fast Sunday a pleasure?
A little food for thought (no pun intended) the next time trials come your way... try enduring it WELL and see the difference.

I agree with Vort.
Our family just had a discussion about this thread during dinner. We are a mixed race family from the USA. We talked about how we would feel if roles were reversed. What if the church was restored, and had primarily grown through it's history in another country, say Japan, Congo or Tonga instead. We would perhaps naturally see more Japanese or Congolese or Tongans in higher up leadership roles as a result of: proximity, language barriers, or even generational maturity in the gospel. We discussed the fact that there are wonderful, incredibly strong diverse members across the world, but perhaps right now they can "best" serve by building up the church in their own nations and languages first. Ultimately it is not our choice to pick and choose leaders, we are not in control despite any political landscape or personal desires. It can often be hard being in the minority of anything, political, religiously, or ethnically, but that fact alone doesn't make others wrong or open to criticism just because they aren't what we had hoped for.

I have shared this thought with members over the years, and leave it here today in the hopes of helping someone else as well.
It comes from D&C 121: 7-8. 
Section heading reads: ...The Prophet and several companions had been months in prison (Liberty). Their petitions and appeals directed to the executive officers and the judiciary had failed to bring them relief. 
In one of the most trying times in Joseph Smith's life and after pleading/crying/begging to the Lord to relieve him of his burdens, Joseph received the following answer:
7. My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment;
8.  And then, if thou endure it, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all they foes.
I love these scriptures, however, I wrote it wrong...did you notice?
Sometimes we understand the fact that we need to "endure" trials, however, I personally believe that is not where the blessings lay. Enduring for some is just basic survival instinct. A P.O.W. can "endure". A mother giving birth can "endure". A marriage facing heavy financial troubles can simply "endure" too. I think the blessings are not simply in "enduring" but rather "enduring it WELL". The Lord told Joseph "if thou endure it well", you get the blessing "exalt thee on high". 

When trials come our way, do we find ourselves "enduring" OR "enduring it well"? Do we curse God or our Spouse during trials? If we do, that probably isn't "well", that is simply enduring and I suggest we miss out on many blessings. This idea is seen every month during fast Sunday. Do you simply (endure) starve yourself and get mad and upset you can't eat, or is fast Sunday a pleasure?
A little food for thought (no pun intended) the next time trials come your way... try enduring it WELL and see the difference.

Here is where you can get them and others too:
https://bookstore.fairlds.org/

Also, I'll leave with one of my favorite Sisters of all time: Sister Okazaki. (Thanks LP)
Chieko Nishimura Okazaki (October 21, 1926 – August 1, 2011) was first counselor to Elaine L. Jack in the Relief Society general presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) from 1990 to 1997. She was the first non-Caucasian woman to serve as a general presidency member of an LDS Church auxiliary organization.[2]
Okazaki was born and raised in Hawaii as a Buddhist, the daughter of Hawaii-born parents of Japanese descent. At the age of fifteen she converted to the LDS Church. She later married Edward Y. Okazaki and they had two sons. Professionally she was an educator and taught in Hawaii, Utah, and Colorado, and was also an elementary school principal.