Monday, December 13, 2010

Amazing Grace (my new book)

Announcing the first release candidate of my new book, Amazing Grace, One Mormon's View of the Atonement.

It's a short 117 pages.

This is my view of the Plan of Salvation. Your comments, constructive or otherwise are welcome.

To download it in PDF format CLICK HERE.

To see "Amazing Grace" in HTML, click HERE But for some reason the graphics are not working.


Of Course I recommend my other books as well: Mormon Mysticism and Kingdoms That Clash.

As soon as I get the finishing touches on this book, I will begin my next researching the Tree of Life. So Stay Tuned!


Yosef said...


I just downloaded your new book and kinda skimmed its content. Based on the table of contents, it looks like it will be a very enjoyable and enlightening read. I’ve kinda been busy with the fam, and haven’t had a chance to give it the attention it deserves. Thanks again for putting your personal spiritual experiences and the understanding it gives you out on the line for us to partake of. I know too that it also means that the things you have come to value most personally are available for scrutiny and criticism. Hopefully all comments about it can remain respectful, even if there are some disagreements. Thanks again. It takes a lot of guts to put yourself on the line, when your audience isn’t just made up of eager disciples. Your testimony is greatly appreciated and you represent yourself well as a disciple of Christ Jesus and as a visionary man.


David Littlefield said...

Shalom Yosef!

Thank you for the kind words, and thanks for being a regular around here.

I welcome any insights you might have on Amazing Grace, or Mormon Mysticism.


MerlintheMad said...

Hi David. I read the first part and probably won't go further. Here's why:

The concept that "God the Father" is coexistent with all of us lesser beings/intelligences - raised to spirit level, then mortality, and finally immortality as physical beings in various "degrees of glory" or "damnation" - is fallacious in its simplicity. Imho, Joseph Smith was learning more about "God" all the time.

Simply compare his theology in the Book of Mormon, to his departure in the Lectures on Faith, and finally his 1843 statements on the subject (which the King Follett sermon and D&C 130:22 delineate, within five days of each other).

It is clear that Joseph Smith was continually expanding his theology; that his earlier "Godhead" vis-a-vis the BofM, and especially his more dogmatic 1835 assertions in Lectures (God the Father is a spirit, the Son has a physical body, the Holy Spirit is their combined influence, i.e. the Godhead is TWO beings), show that he was open to new ideas; but he didn't get these ideas from revelation, but rather from the cosmology of extant beliefs around himself: which as he came into contact with them, modified his current theology. Iirc, at the time of D&C 130 and the following Follett sermon, Joseph Smith was studying cabalism and had a Jewish doctor for his teacher (I'm blanking on the dude's name).

The point is, David, that Joseph Smith's understanding about the nature of "God the Father" is a limited one; extremely so in fact. To assume that WE all existed eternally, and that somehow "God the Father" arranged for the rest of us to come forth out of our almost mindless obscurity as "intelligences", begs the question of "Why is thre existence in the first place instead of nothing?"

If "God the Father" is just the greatest of an infinity of intelligences, then "he" is merely the most powerful of us all, but logically is not the Instigator of existence in the first place.

I am not interested in worshipping such a being. I cut to the chase and seek the "God of existence in the first place".

In doing so, my cosmology (far exceeding any theology I've come into awareness of) continually expands. Yet I will not be caught by hubris: there is no ONE truth that defines "God". If there were, we would all seek toward it: instead, I see individuals seeking their own empirically recognized connection to "God"; and in as many individual ways as there are individual egos.

Why should it be otherwise? "God" being Infinite would hardly limit our sapient species to a finite number of identical "souls". That would be boring!

So we are each in effect egocentric universes, connected ONLY to "God" and nobody else. How "God" manifests to me is known only by myself. The same is true of everyone else: and thus we have the infinite concept of the "multiverse".

Finally, hubris is less likely when I retain the concept that my finite mind cannot ever comprehend Infinity. I can understand a finite definition of the concept of Infinity. But to actually COMPREHEND infinity is impossible. To do so, I would have to become cognizant of "God in total", i.e. BE "God" itself. I am clearly not created to be like that, so my purpose is to exist within space-time, alone (saving my connection to "God"), and forever, and constantly learning more about "God": who, it appears to me, is a Joyful being; or at least chooses to pursue/emphasize Joy above all other attributes and emotions.

Peace and Joy be upon you this Christmas Season, and forever....

David Littlefield said...

Hello Merlin!

And thank you for the feed back. And I am sorry that my views rub cross-grain to your understanding of the cosmos.

But let me briefly address a couple of your points, for which I suspect we will just disagree.

You disagree with degrees of glory or damnation. That is your right of course, but clearly degrees of glory is the model taught in the scriptures, historic Christianity, Judaism, and in the imagery of the temple.

I have no problem with Joseph Smith’s views expanding over time. Because that is what prophets do, get revelation that they did not previously know. That being said, I don’t see this chasm you speak of between earlier works of the prophet to his later teachings. I am familiar with the teachings you cited and think the inconsistencies are forced onto the texts, but do not flow from them.

Your cosmology of “no ONE truth” just defies any logic I can comprehend. If God exists, his existence is a truth, and the fact that people seek in different direction has no defining influence upon God, nor is it proof of any lack of real, objective, or independent truth.

Lastly, we will just have to disagree. I believe God is our Father, that we are his sons and daughters. That within our small fallen selves is the potential, with the grace of God, to become like him, and to join him.

And a Merry Christmas to you, and all!


Anonymous said...

Well I do not really care if I agree or disagree with your book-but I think that putting IT out there is important. I think we can debate on it and talk about it like everything else on your web site- I think we are always learning and trying to put It together-the energy of expression can focus our minds and spirit.We have the chance to reflect and contrast with our own views and perspectives-and give and take on each others insights- somtimes an overview is nice and sometimes understanding is nice- I think we are all aiming for the Truth in our weaknd humanity state looking thru the glass darkly- Keep up the good work- If I disagree with something, you can count on me to let you know, go get em boy!!!!!!

Bob said...


I’m a little confused by your remarks. You criticize Joseph Smith for expanding “his” theology, but you boast that your continually expanding cosmology far exceeds any other theology. What makes you right and someone else wrong, if you both are doing the same thing in your own eyes? You said that you retain the concept that your finite mind cannot ever comprehend Infinity, yet you speak in absolutes as though you were expert in the Infinite. If you cannot comprehend the mind of the Infinite, how do you really know that you were not created to become cognizant of God in total, i.e. to become like God itself? “Is any thing too hard for the LORD” (Genesis 18:14)? If you cannot ever comprehend the Infinite, then how are you certain that the ultimate purpose of its creation of you was to keep you within space-time, alone, and forever? And why would you be constantly learning more about God and feeling its Joy towards your pursuit, if it was an impossible aim? Why would God encourage you to go down a dead-end street that both it and you knew full well was a dead-end street? You say that you cut to the chase and seek the God of existence in the first place, and then say that there is no ONE truth that defines God? Have you not answered your own question, and defined God as the Self-Existent One, i.e. YHVH, I AM THAT I AM? If there were such a definition, you said, we would all seek toward it, as though this is the idea was absurd, but you close your remarks by claiming that part of the purpose of your existence is to forever and constantly learn more about God. You claim to not be interested in worshipping such a being as the One that Joseph Smith does, however you then describe your pursuit of the very same Being. The only difference is that Joseph believed that there was a finish line and you believe it is God’s will to keep you locked in an infinity of never quite making it. Is the Joy that you claim your different God has for you, because it is laughing with you or at you? Why would it bring you into existence, program you to constantly learn more about it through firsthand experience, and then deny you the opportunity of ever reaching the goal you were created to seek after? If you were created to constantly learn more about God, but obviously not created to ever receive a fullness of what you were created to seek, how can you ever be sure about anything? That would mean that every future moment would prove that you were wrong about your present understanding. Could you please explain this again?

Anonymous said...

MerlintheMad you are not under a should or any other obligation to read that book- but I would like to see what you have to Say about Grace- One of my Favorite subjects- Amazing Grace & Mormonism is like Water and Oil. maybe a Mormon Mysticism- I have not read it yet but I will-I hope you do too. Your talent can allow the truth to be risen- These topics are good and should be reasoned with- Truth grows stronger when displayed - we do not need to agree with each other - but it is kind of like online Bible Study or FHE
It is like fighting for the truth, hopefully not against it.

Anonymous said...

As I cautioned I would be Back-
Yes I like your book-Buttttt
I would Like to Point out Mormon Blasphemy
1 The Father is GOD and Jesus is GOD the Son is God
not just an older Brother showing us the WAY.
Blasphemy to Say that a Plan was Presented and that there was a OTHER choice other Than the SON, such a suggestion is Blasphemy on its Own!!
"The Father did not ask for volunteers to propose a plan whereby man might be saved. What he did was ask whom he should send to be the Redeemer in the plan he devised. Christ and Lucifer both volunteered, and the Lord chose his Firstborn and rejected the amendatory offer of the son of the morning."
"There is no salvation in believing any false doctrine, particularly a false or unwise view about the Godhead or any of its members."
"The creeds of Christendom illustrate perfectly what Lucifer wants so-called Christian people to believe about Deity in order to be damned."
Bruce R. McConkie Brigham Young University on 2 March 1982.
God Knew who He would Send - There was no sorting out process-
Mormons Make Blasphemy of Jesus Christ from the Very Beginning- He was not Just one of the
BRETHREN - or Just a Little Older-
his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. JESUS=Jehovah the saviour.
his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was GOD.(GOD Joseph do not Touch that WORD)
2The same was in the beginning with God.
3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Thy throne, O GOD, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
2 Nephi 19:6
name shall be called, Wonderful, Counselor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Mosiah 16:15
Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen.
Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last;
16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Jesus was Not a Choice of some lottery -
GOD from the very Beginning- He came for Us - And JESUS did not Need Adam to OBEY LUCIFER so Jesus could Earn His Exaltation-
Jesus Christ GOD from the Beginning- not an evolving Gnostic creature or older Brother of Lucifer,
Mormons Teach that Lucifer Helped Jesus Evolve by bringing about the Fall Thru Adam to allow Jesus to be come MORE God- Jesus Christ is Whole and HOLY Before The Beginning-
From Everlasting to Everlasting- Not a Gnostic Evolving Creature.
For I am the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour-I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour. 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Eternal and Everlasting GOD

Anonymous said...

This is a touchy subject for some, so I will navigate as care- fully as I can here. It is not my intention for any readers to get stuck here, be offended, or otherwise unable to proceed.We know that the Lord does not give conflicting commandments. Keeping one commandment does not require us to break another commandment. It is within our ability
to keep the commandments, otherwise the laws of God would not be just, and neither would His punishments.
and yes you are correct If God gave two commandments that were in conflict-GOD would then be the Author and Finisher of SIN-NOT FAITH
The Mormons version of 'god is NOT trustworthy-
"Great Blessings Resulted from the Transgression
How does the Fall provide opportunities for us to become like our Heavenly Father?"
Quoted from the Priesthood Manual
"However, latter-day scriptures help us understand that their Fall was a necessary step in the plan of life and a great blessing to all of us. Because of the Fall, we are blessed with physical bodies, the right to choose between good and evil, and the opportunity to gain eternal life. None of these privileges would have been ours had Adam and Eve remained in the garden.
Have class members read Genesis 1:28 (or Moses 2:28) and Genesis 2:16–17 (or Moses 3:16–17) to discover two commandments given to Adam and Eve by Heavenly Father: to multiply and replenish (fill) the earth and to refrain from eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Explain that Adam and Eve could not keep both these commandments. If they chose to eat the fruit, they would be cast out of the Garden of Eden. But if they did not eat the fruit and remained in the garden, they would not be able to have children (to “multiply and replenish the earth”). Because the Garden of Eden was a place of innocence, while Adam and Eve lived there they could not change or progress in any way, including having children (see 2 Nephi 2:22–23).

Read or have a class member read the following statement by Elder Russell M. Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles:
“To bring the plan of happiness to fruition [fulfillment], God issued to Adam and Eve the first commandment ever given to mankind. It was a commandment to beget children. A law was explained to them. Should they eat from ‘the tree of the knowledge of good and evil’ (Genesis 2:17), their bodies would change; mortality and eventual death would come upon them. But partaking of that fruit was prerequisite to their parenthood” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1993, 46; or Ensign, Nov. 1993, 34).

Anonymous said...

Okay I just finished your Book-
I think your book is Excellent in things Mormon-
"There is no eternal life outside of the temple. The temple is not an appendix to our religion, it is our religion. What we do in our chapels, homes, and elsewhere are just an extension of the temple. There is little purpose for this life with out the temple.
Witch Temple or Which Temple?
Spencer W Kimball was great friends with 33rd Degree Master Mason
Norman Vincent Peale "is the best known champion of Freemasonry in America today". Peale wrote, in the Introduction, "There is, as I see it, nothing like Masonry. It is unique in its fellowship which spreads over much of the earth, in addition to our own country. Moreover, this in-depth fellowship spans the years, even the centuries, running back into antiquity. To me it means a personal relationship with great historical personalities and, taken by and large, also with about the finest body of men whom it is possible to assemble anywhere".
" In 1980, during his keynote address at Mormon president Spencer Kimball's 85th birthday party, Peale called Mormon leaders men of God who are doing God's work and praised Kimball as a true prophet of Jesus Christ.Peale is no ordinary Freemason. He was when alive connected to many other powerful 33rd Degree Freemasons in the field of religion, or should I say religious deception. There are powerful ties between him and other high ranking Freemasons such as Billy Graham, Robert Schuller and former Mormon president Spencer Kimball. This is all part of the Illuminati control of global religion.
Spencer w Kimball removed the Churches stance against Freemasonry- And the Utah Grand Lodge Dropped its Stance Against Mormons-Mormon Temples and FreeMason Temples now we can go to Both Temples AGAIN Now we can Go to The Real Temple-3 Degrees or 33 what is Higher?
I hear what you are saying

Anonymous said...

I have said all i will say In this
"Amazing Grace (my new book)" I will Not Over Post this Page
I do not like how you tried to Justify Masonic Mormon Penalties- Please only respond to These two verses of Truth
James 5:12 But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.
Matt 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne:
35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
I walked out of The Temple and You say That is Hell.
Jesus Says: whatsoever is more than these cometh of EVIL.

Anonymous said...

David, I thought that I wanted to say that although I do not Agree with everything in your Book, It does provoke me to Repentance and Trying to Live a Holy Life, I really think that a Prick to the Heart is Important, Life always challenges us in mundane ways, Making God real makes sense.
When I say "I here you", I say I catch the Theme of the Gospel in your Book. It is like a Banner unfurled and Invite to Improve your Life and to Repent and Live your Life Right, There are Many things that I Have Issues with, but If I can remember to repent in the real sense and apply Grace and Mercy in my life, try to live Holy out of love toward God Then I think I am trying to Expose my Life and heart to God ,
Your Book Made me Think about the Whole Thing.
It is kind of Like "The Miracle of Forgiveness"
There is always a Push to Repent and Love God
Because your Book Pushes and Pricks towards Repentance, I Give it Thumbs Up- That also means I am Mindful That I always need to Repent-
And If we are not trying to Repent Respect God and Life, what are we really doing? Good Job!!!!

Justin said...

I read your other two and enjoyed them. Thanks for making this one available.

David Littlefield said...


Thank you! I am glad you enjoy them. Amazing Grace is a fast read, but makes some points I thought would be of interest.


You must not have read "Amazing Grace" very well. To criticize the book for:

1.) Not teaching that Jesus was "God." I argue He was God the creator, and redeemer. An Elohim.

2.) I never said that there was more than one plan of salvation in the pre-mortal life to pick or vote on. I said the opposite. There was choice to accept or reject it, and we all accepted it.

Anonymous said...

John 1:1 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was GOD.
JST, John 1:1 In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was (of) (God). ?????
"An Elohim." was Lucifer "An Elohim." too?
Were we? If Jesus was "just" an older Brother and not GOD in of and thru he really would not be GOD
"And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And
one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first. And the second was angry, and kept not his first estate; and, at that day, many followed after him." (Abr. 3:24-28.) The question then arose, how, and upon what principle, should the salvation, exaltation and eternal glory of God's sons be brought about? It is
evident that at that Council certain plans had been proposed and discussed,and that after a full discussion of those principles, and the declaration of
the Father's will pertaining to His design, Lucifer came before the Father with a plan of his own, saying, `Behold [here am] I; send me, I will be thy
son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore, give me thine honor.' But Jesus, on hearing
this statement made by Lucifer, said, `Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.'
....But Lucifer wanted to introduce a plan contrary to the will of his Father, and then wanted His honor, and said: `I will save every soul of man, wherefore give me thine honor.' He wanted to go contrary to the will of his Father, and presumptuously
sought to deprive man of his free agency, thus making him a serf, and placinghim in a position in which it was impossible for him to obtain that exaltation which God designed should be man's, through obedience to the law which He had
suggested; and again, Lucifer wanted the honor and power of his Father, to enable him to carry out principles which were contrary to the Father's wish."
-- John Taylor, Mediation and Atonement, pp. 93-94.
"The Father did not ask for volunteers to propose a plan whereby man might be saved. What he did was ask whom he should send to be the Redeemer in the plan he devised. Christ and Lucifer both volunteered, and the Lord chose his Firstborn and rejected the amendatory offer of the son of the morning."
Bruce R. McConkie

Yosef said...


Still working on your book. Enjoy it, but haven’t had much time to gather commentary. Early in the text, you said:

“The major point of discussion was who was the Father going to send of the Gods” (David Littlefield, Amazing Grace, footnote 13, p. 16).

It is interesting to note that the English translators of the Hebrew bible use the word Elohim to refer not only to the one true God, but also to:
divine (1),
divine being (1),
exceedingly (1),
God (2326), god (45),
God's (14),
goddess (2),
godly (1),
gods (204),
great (2),
judges (3),
mighty (2),
rulers (1),
shrine* (1).
(NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries
Copyright © 1981, 1998 by The Lockman Foundation)

Apart from the most frequent reference to ‘God’ (2326), the next highest use is for ‘gods’ (204), and ‘god’ (45). Another area of interest would be to the 2 uses as ‘godess’.

One use that sticks out most to me is:

“AND God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD thy [Elohim], which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other [Elohim] before me” (Exodus 20:1-3).

This definitely lines up with the New Testament teachings of Paul and the Prophet Joseph Smith’s discourse on the plurality of Gods.

“For though there be that are called [theos], whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be [theos] many, and [kurios] many,) But to us there is but one [theos], the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one [kurios] Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6).

New Testament Greek words ‘theos’ and ‘kurios’.

Theos—divinely (1), God (1267), god (6), God's (27), God-fearing (1), godly (2), godly* (1), gods (8), Lord (1).

Kurios—lord (10), Lord (626), Lord of lords (2), Lord's (12), lords (1), master (38), master's (3), masters (8), masters' (1), owner (6), owners (1), sir (11), sirs (1).


Anonymous said...

I just started your book and have a question about your comments on 'dust'. This is something I have been studying recently and your comments made me think of Helaman 12:7-8.

7 O how great is the nothingness of the children of men; yea, even they are less than the dust of the earth.

8 For behold, the dust of the earth moveth hither and thither, to the dividing asunder, at the command of our great and everlasting God.

There are other scriptures regarding 'dust', but it seems to me that in order for dust to 'move' at the behest of God, it would need to have intelligence and not be just inanimate matter. It may not appear animate, but it is composed of atoms the same as every other being or substance that we interact with. We don't really know how deep to go to find an intelligence, but at a core level, all matter that we interact with obeys God.

I would argue that at a core level, all matter tied to this world, at least, is made up of intelligence. If this is so of the dust then our bodies, which are also made up of this dust, are a microcosmos of which our intelligence, at a higher level, is given governance over.

God has placed us to be gods over our own microcosmos that we have been given stewardship over.

This is also how our bodies are recording devices that can testify against us at the last day and how the voices of those who have gone before can 'cry from the dust'.

God creates by placing intelligence in a spirit and then uniting it with element (that which is acted upon and has no intelligence) and it becomes something that he can speak to which allows it to respond and obey.

God's glory is his honor, the honor that all intelligence gives to him because of his righteousness and perfection.

What are your thoughts on this?

Anonymous said...

Just read Amazing Grace. Thank you so much for increasing my understanding. I want to take advantage of the atonement of Christ but my sins are so many that I can't even remember all of them to repent of. I too stand amazed at the Grace of God, and despite being a sinner, I have hope in my Savior.

David Littlefield said...


Thanks for responding to my book so kindly.

It touches me that you a fellow sinner can see just a little better how you can cut through it all and receive a remission of your sins.

When understood properly Grace is a wonderful thing. A funny thing, this is my least read book.

- David

Anonymous said...

David, thought you might enjoy this link

David Littlefield said...


Thank You!

That is a great link explaining this who dimensions thing to a large extent.

Here it is again as a link: 10 DIMENSIONS


The Quinn Family said...

I have just started reading Amazing Grace after thoroughly enjoying the Tree of Life book. Just wanted to comment on your statement, "it is not that our spirit is within us, it is that it is attached to us in another dimension". That is an incredible thought. I have always thought of our bodies being like a nesting doll, layers upon layers as we move from existence to existence, adding a layer and bringing it with us, but if I am understanding what you are saying (and I may be missing it), the idea that our other layers are still connected to those other dimensions, is a wonderful thought that I have never heard before. I am going to ponder on this today as I find it a very very exciting idea. Wish I didn't have so many other things to do today as I am excited to keep reading. Thank you for your excellent writing.

The Quinn Family said...

I am squeezing in all the time I can to continue reading, it is really so excellent! Question: In Amazing grace in respect to Genesis 1:8 "Be fruitful, multiply adn replenish the earth", You have a footnote 43 that states: "Note that this command is during the narration of the spiritual creation not the physical creation". I have not thought of that before and wondered if you might explain it more and what your thoughts are on the difference that makes.

David Littlefield said...

Dear Sister Quinn:

I am so very happy that you are enjoying my writing. Sorry to have disrupted your morning 8-)

Why I noted (footnote #43) that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, at this instance, was in the spiritual creation, and not the physical, was an attempt to tie a couple concepts together. In this section of the book I was going over the idea that “agency” is not choice, but agency is the receiving of commandments in the pre-existence that we received by covenant. We are now subjects/agents of those covenants, our covenants have to do with healing and restoring family. That the command to multiply was reconfirmed on the earth before Eden, and that we now make a choice to keep our agency, or to dishonor our covenants.

So it may be a distinction without a difference, but the idea was that the covenant was not only in this life, but comes from the pre earth life, as reflected in the Proclamation on the Family, this is all a very old plan, and it’s a family plan, and we all agreed to it.

At least, that’s the way I see it.



The Quinn Family said...

Page 72 talks about being born again. Your explanation of that in regards to Adam being the first surrogate and Christ being the second surrogate in regards to sin is the VERY best explanation of what it means to be born again that I have heard. Excellent thoughts!

David Littlefield said...

Dear Sister Quinn:

Thank you! I did put a lot of thought into the topic.

At the speed that you were going you should be done by now. I hope we finished up as well as you thought I did up to page 72.

For someone who appreciated it as much as you did, if you were the only one who ever read it, it was worth writing.

Thank you,


Anonymous said...

We will be having funeral services for David Littlefield on Tuesday, March 5th from 4-5 p.m. It will be at this LDS chapel: 1276 Erringer Road, Simi Valley, CA. He will later be buried in Sandy, Utah. If you know anyone that would like to know this information, please do pass it along.

The Quinn Family said...

Is there a published obituary you might wish to share?