Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now we move on to the so-called “Adam-God” theory, which, according to the video was taught by early Mormon prophets. It is true that Brigham Young did make some remarks about the relationship between Adam and God that have never fully been understood by the Latter-day Saints. These statements conflict with (1) LDS teachings before and after Brigham Young, and (2) with other statements made by Brigham Young himself. How do we deal with this seeming contradiction? We go with the hundreds of statements made by dozens and dozens of other LDS leaders and let the issue drop. How do our critics deal with it? They turn it into “official Mormon doctrine.”
Brigham Young not only taught the Adam-God doctrine at what was then a kind of General Conference as recorded in the Journal of Discourses, he also arranged for it to be taught during the lecture at the veil at the St. George Temple. Since the temple is the apex of Mormon worship, something taught during the endowment is about as official doctrine, and necessary for our salvation, as one can get. So, either Brigham Young as prophet and president of the church led the church astray, which Wilford Woodruff said could not happen, or the prophets who have since disagreed with Brigham on this doctrine are all mistaken and leading the church astray. It is a beautiful double bind, and more evidence that Mormonism should not be trusted.
Here follows Brigham Young's early "lecture at the veil," excerpted from Elder Nuttall's Journal (Note: misspellings are in the original):
In the creation the Gods entered into an agreement about forming this earth. & putting Michael or Adam upon it. these things of which I have been speaking are what are termed the mysteries of godliness but they will enable you to understand the expression of Jesus made while in Jerusalem. This is life eternal that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. We were once acquainited [acquainted] with the Gods & lived with them but we had the privilige of taking upon us flesh that the spirit might have a house to dwell in. we did so and forgot all and came into the world not recollecting anything of which we had previously learned. We have heard a great deal about Adam and Eve. how they were formed &c some think he was made like an adobie and the Lord breathed into him the breath of life. for we read "from dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return" Well he was made of the dust of the earth but not of this earth. he was made just the same way you and I are made but on another earth. Adam was an immortal being when he came. on this earth he had lived on an earth similar to ours he had received the Priesthood and the Keys thereof. and had been faithful in all things and gained his resurrection and his exaltation and was crowned with glory immortality and eternal lives and was numbered with the Gods for such he became through his faithfulness. and had begotten all the spirit that was to come to this earth. and Eve our common Mother who is the mother of all living bore those spirits in the celestial world. and when this earth was organized by Elohim. Jehovah & Michael who is Adam our common Father. Adam & Eve had the privilege to continue the work of Progression. consequently came to this earth and commenced the great work of forming tabernacles for those spirits to dwell in. and when Adam and those that assisted him had completed this Kingdom our earth he came to it. and slept and forgot all and became like an Infant child. it is said by Moses the historian that the Lord caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam and took from his side a rib and formed the woman that Adam called Eve-this should be interpreted that the Man Adam like all other Men had the seed within him to propagate his species. but not the Woman. she conceives the seed but she does not produce it. consequently she was taken from the side or bowels of her father. this explains the mystery of Moses's dark sayings in regard to Adam and Eve. Adam & Eve when they were placed on this earth were immortal beings with flesh. bones and sinews. but upon partaking of the fruits of the earth while in the garden and cultivating the ground their bodies became changed from immortal to mortal beings with the blood coursing through their veins as the action of life. Adam was not under transgression until after he partook of the forbidden fruit that was nesesary that they might be together that man might be. the woman was found in trans-gression not the Man- Now in the law of Sacrifice we have the promise of a Savior and man had the privilege and showed forth his obedience by offering of the first fruits of the earth and the firstlings of the flocks- this as a showing that Jesus would come and shed his blood [Four lines without any writing on them.]
Father Adam's oldest son (Jesus the Saviour) who is the heir of the family is Father Adams first begotten in the spirit World. who according to the flesh is the only begotten as it is written. (In his divinity he having gone back into the spirit World. and come in the spirit [glory] to Mary and she conceived for when Adam and Eve got through with their Work in this earth. they did not lay their bodies down in the dust, but returned to the spirit World from whence they came.
I felt myself much blessed in being permitted to associate with such men and hear such instructions as they savored of life to me-
(Source: Journal of L. John Nuttall; BYU Special Collections; Pres. Brigham Young; delivered in St. George; Wed., Feb. 7, 1877. This was the first draft of the Lecture at the Veil. Brother L. John Nuttall was the private secretary to President Brigham Young until his (Brigham's) death in 1877. He then became the private secretary to President John Taylor (1879-1887) and again to President Wilford Woodruff (1887-1892)
"When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken--HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do...When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal. When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession. I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and over-righteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone.
It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael, these three forming a quorum, as in all heavenly bodies, and in organizing element, perfectly represented in the Deity, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation.
Now remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost" (Journal of Discourses 1:50-51).
Other quotes (http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-adam-god.html - broken link)
BY taught that one must believe the Adam-God doctrine or be damned. It was taught in conference and in the lecture at the veil by the then president and prophet of the church. If that ain't doctrine, then Mormons are pretty much free to question anything any prophet says no matter what the setting, which would be a step in the right direction.
However, if they do resign themselves to believing it, then I can show how the later prophets declared it to be false doctrine and did not believe it and warned members against teaching it. So, if you believe Brigham then the later prophets must be damned and have apostacized from the truth. If the later prophets are right, then Brigham was teaching false doctrine, even in the temple, which means prophets can lead the people astray, which means the modern prophets might also lead us astray. Which means we are free to question them as well, which would also be a step in the right direction.
Policies, practices, even commandments can change, but doctrines are truths as they really are, were and will be, and as such can not change. Once a Mormon is free to think for themselves and give themselves permission to view prophetic teachings with a skeptical eye, then they will be able to learn the truth about the church.
The Adam-God doctrine is unique in this ability to undermine absolute trust in the prophet's teachings.
I just found another quote showing that Eliza R. Snow, one of Brigham's wives, a former wife of Joseph Smith, sister to President of the Church Lorenzo Snow, and a former Relief Society president, understood and accepted this doctrine as well. Kind of brings new meaning to the hymn she wrote, "O, My Father":
"Adam is our Father and God. He is the God of the earth." So says Brigham Young. Adam is the great archangel of this creation. He is Michael. He is the Ancient of Days. He is the father of our elder brother, Jesus Christ---the father of him who shall also come as Messiah to reign. He is the father of the spirits as well as the tabernacles of the sons and daughters of man. Adam! Michael is one of the grand mystical names in the works of creation, redemptions, and resurrections. Jehovah is the second and the higher name. Eloheim--signifying the Gods--is the first name of the celestial trinity. Michael was a celestial, resurrected being, of another world.
-Women of Mormondom; Eliza R. Snow, and Elder Edward Tullidge. March 1877.
Regardless of where it was taught, to whom it was taught, or by whom, the teaching was never canonized and has not been taught by any Church leader before or since. I would say that 9,999 out of every 10,000 Latter-day Saints today has never even heard of the doctrine. The intent of the video is to convince people who are so gullible as to believe everything they hear that this is LDS doctrine, when clearly IT IS NOT. And you, Hueff, are sounding more like Ed Decker every time you post. I'm surprised that someone who was once in a bishopric would have such an elementary understanding of the process by which doctrine is made official. (Or maybe it's something you've just convenient forgotten.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt
]The Adam-God doctrine is unique in this ability to undermine absolute trust in the prophet's teachings.
Unique? I think not. Anyone who wants to find excuses to undermine anything about Mormonism can certainly find other questionable statements. I'm sure you can think of a few of them yourself.
Quote:
Once a Mormon is free to think for themselves and give themselves permission to view prophetic teachings with a skeptical eye, then they will be able to learn the truth about the church.
I'm as free to think for myself as you were when you left the Church but unlike you, I have just not decided to throw out the baby with the bath water. You threw out both. You also bashed the bathtub to pieces in the process. You're an atheist now, so it should hardly make any difference to you one way or the other. There is no reason why you should believe Mormonism if you don't believe in God. I, on the other hand, have read the same anti-Mormon literature as you did and despite everything it says, have found more reasons to remain LDS than to leave the Church. You seem to think that that if all Mormons know what you know, if they'd all looked into the "truth" like you have, they'd all come to the same conclusion you did. That's just not the case.
People need to realize that we, as Latter-day Saints, have what is sometimes referred to as an “open canon”. This means that we believe that the heavens are not sealed and that God continues to speak to His Church today through living prophets, just as He spoke to the prophets whose words are recorded in the scriptures. Our leaders have written hundreds of volumes that discuss just about any topic of a spiritual nature you can think of. Some have become almost classics to the LDS people. Our leaders also speak to us at conferences, in special firesides or other meetings and through articles in the Ensign. When we hear or read what theses men have to say, we accept their words as being true. After all, we have sustained them as having been called of God. But they’re human beings, too. They don’t know everything there is to know and they, like the rest of us, are entitled to their own opinions. Sometimes, they voice their own opinions.
As President Lee said regarding the Standard Works, "We call these the standard… works because they are standard. If you want to measure truth, measure it by the four… standard works. If it is not in the standard works, you may well assume that it is speculation. It is man’s own personal opinion.”
He also said, “When I meet with our missionaries and they ask questions about things pertaining to the temple, I say to them, as I close the discussion, ‘I don’t dare answer any of your questions unless I can find an answer in the standard works or in the authentic declarations of Presidents of the Church.’” That’s pretty amazing, really. He could easily have responded by saying just about anything he wanted to say, and everyone who heard him would have accepted what he said without hesitation. And yet he, as a prophet of God, didn’t dare voice his opinion without being able to back it up by the scriptures.
The standard words are, then, a means by which we not only may, but by which we should, measure all that we are taught. A standard, after all, is a yardstick, a model or a pattern. That’s what the word means. Gerald Lund once remarked that when he was growing up, the Standard Works were used as a “measure by which you judge all things.” He said that, in his family, the gospel was put to the same intense scrutiny and debate as any other topic. But it was a scrutiny which came from a foundation of faith rather than skepticism.
It may also well be that certain seemingly contradictory statements are, if all the facts were known, not really contradictory at all. But, assuming they are or even that we perceive them to be, if we really want to resolve this issue in our own minds, we can go to the scriptures and can rest assured that what we find there is true.
Hueff, I have three questions for you which, if you answer them honestly, should actually pretty much put this issue to rest:
1. During the years you spent as a Latter-day Saint, how many times did you personally hear the "Adam-God theory" taught in General Conference, Stake Conference, in Sacrament Meetings, in your High Priests Quorum meetings, Elders Quorum meetings, Sunday School, Seminary, etc.? (I'm not talking about it being mentioned or alluded to as part of a class discussion, but actually taught.)
2. How long were you a member of the Church before you ever heard of this teaching? How did you hear of it?
3. At any time while you were a member of the Church, did you personally believe this teaching to be true? If you did, for how long did you believe it and why? What things went into your conclusion that it was true?
Hueff, I have three questions for you which, if you answer them honestly, should actually pretty much put this issue to rest:
1. During the years you spent as a Latter-day Saint, how many times did you personally hear the "Adam-God theory" taught in General Conference, Stake Conference, in Sacrament Meetings, in your High Priests Quorum meetings, Elders Quorum meetings, Sunday School, Seminary, etc.? (I'm not talking about it being mentioned or alluded to as part of a class discussion, but actually taught.)
2. How long were you a member of the Church before you ever heard of this teaching? How did you hear of it?
3. At any time while you were a member of the Church, did you personally believe this teaching to be true? If you did, for how long did you believe it and why? What things went into your conclusion that it was true?
1) Never.
2) I was born in the covenant. The first time I heard of Adam-God was on my mission. So, 20 years. I heard about it from someone while I was knocking on doors.
3) After I really read all about it, and learned that Brigham Young really did teach and believe it, I tried to reconcile it with the other teachings of the church and could not. So, I never really believed it.
I would never and did not in this thread say that "Mormons believe the Adam-God doctrine" because I know they don't. However, it is clear that many Mormons did believe it in Brigham Young's day (I could provide more quotes if you wish from other members). Brigham Young claimed that Joseph Smith taught him that doctrine himself.
What makes this doctrine so unique is that unlike random off the cuff statements that some apostle or seventy made, this doctrine was written into the lecture at the veil. Now, I know that almost none of the temple teachings are in the standard works, but does that mean we should throw out the temple doctrines as "not what Mormons believe" just because they can't be supported by the standard works? No, I would think not.
Granted Adam-God is not in the standard works, but where in the standard works or statements issued by the First Presidency does it say that only things that are taught in the standard works can be considered doctrine? They don't so define true doctrine. So, Harold B. Lee's statement that "if he can't support a doctrine from the standard works then it is not doctrine" could be merely an opinion. I think it is nothing more than a convienient post hoc fix to dismiss those inconvienient doctrines taught by the early prophets of the Church.
At minimum the Adam-God doctrine, if not correct, shows Brigham Young had no idea who he was praying to if he thought he was praying to Adam in the name of Jesus. The leader of God's church on earth, doesn't even know who god is.
I'm sorry this is a big deal, and not something that should be swept under the rug as nothing but the random speculation of a man. Young warned his listeners to not dismiss this doctrine and that it would prove to be their salvation or damnation.
It is my position that the evidence against the Book of Abraham proves Joseph Smith was a knowing fraud. The Adam-God doctrine further demonstrates that LDS prophets blatantly contradict each other about doctrines as elemental as who Heavenly Father is.
DNA evidence shows Native Americans are not descended from the Hebrews. The signs and tokens of the temple were stolen from the Masonic rituals which date back to the 13th century in Europe, not from Solomon's temple. Everything adds up; it is exactly as we would expect if the Church were not true.
Okay, Nea1… On to the part you’ve been waiting for. The video states that thousands of years after He supposedly came to Earth the first time as Adam, Elohim again journeyed to Earth from the starbase Kolob to have sex with the Virgin Mary. (I really love that “starbase Kolob” bit; it’s such a nice comedic touch.) Well, as any twelve-year-old could tell you (today, I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to hear it from a six-year-old), a virgin is someone who has never had sexual intercourse. Mormons believe that Mary was a virgin at the time Jesus was conceived and at the time He was born. (We don’t believe that she remained a virgin throughout her life. After all, she was married to Joseph.) That means that she lost her virginity to Joseph after the birth of her Son, not as a result of His conception. We believe that God was Jesus’ literal Father. We also believe that Mary was His literal mother. All of the Christians I know would agree with us with respect to this second sentence. If Mary could be Jesus’ literal mother without having had sex, why couldn’t God have been His literal Father without having had sex?
Mormon Apostle, Orson Pratt believed that Jesus was married, not once, not twice, but three times. Good for Orson Pratt. Who gives a damn? Again, this is positively not LDS doctrine, but in this particular case, even if it were, would it make the slightest bit of difference with respect to Jesus’ divinity? No. (Orson Pratt, incidentally, got himself into a lot of hot water by coming up with some of his off-the-wall interpretations.) As far as Joseph Smith being a literal descendant of Jesus Christ, I can’t even find the source for that little gem.
The video then goes on to say that Mormons believe that after His resurrection, Jesus Christ visited the Americas to preach to the “Indians, who the Mormons believe are really Israelites.” Well, that’s partly true and partly false. The Book of Mormon is the history of a group of 30 or so Israelites who were led by God to the American continent shortly before the fall of Jerusalem in about 600 B.C. Over the years, they grew in number, and eventually split into two groups, named after two brothers, Nephi and Laman. We believe that some of today’s Native Americans are descendents of the Lamanites. We certainly don’t believe that all Indians are Israelites. But the video is right about one thing: We believe that Jesus Christ established His Church in the Americas as He had in Palestine. That is the story that is told in the Book of Mormon, and we are clearly not trying to hide it from anybody. The video describes the Lamanites as having dark skin and the Nephites as having white skin. Interestingly, it ignores the fact that all of the original Israelite settlers were people of Middle-Eastern origin. It’s not as if the Nephites were Scandinavian! Look at anyone of Middle-Eastern descent today. Most of them are every bit as dark skinned as the American Indians. Clearly, the reference to skin color is highly exaggerated, although it does provide some good ammunition for anti-Mormons trying to accuse Mormons of being racist.
1) Never.
2) I was born in the covenant. The first time I heard of Adam-God was on my mission. So, 20 years. I heard about it from someone while I was knocking on doors.
3) After I really read all about it, and learned that Brigham Young really did teach and believe it, I tried to reconcile it with the other teachings of the church and could not. So, I never really believed it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
