Jesus as the Father

[TheAngelPalmoni]

Went there

Same problem.

I see the thumbnails but there is no way I can download the file or enlarge to a larger size and save picture.

I guess this is great study guides I will have to miss out on:bawl:

It is something most likely so simple (if it were a snake. . . ) but I just don't see it:(

Bro. Rudick

LOL you got to right click on the drawing and hit... SAVE TARGET AS.... That or Right CLICK on the download Icon and do the same....

[a-train]

I might have worded it poorly.. but I was suggesting that (perhaps) Elohim is not God the Father. He very well could be a 'God the Father' but I was speaking on if he is our 'God the Father'.

I was suggesting (or attempting to) that Michael is a God. Specifically God the Father -- as he is the spiritual father of us all, the earthly father of us all, and the biological father of Jesus Christ. I'm not saying I believe it.. i'm simply discussing a theory which has some validity.

"Father Adam's oldest son, Jesus the Savior, who is the heir of the family, is Father Adam's first begotten in the spirit world and the only begotten according to the flesh (as it is written), Adam in his divinity having gone back into the spirit world and come in the spirit to Mary, and she conceived."

John Nuttall, Brighams personal secretary.

(Before we say he wasn't a prophet.. he also recorded other topics for Brigham.. like temple instructions. He was obviously trusted.)

At the very least.. it's an elegant theory. In this theory I view Elohim as the one giving the calling and being their adviser. Michael as being the one given the calling (to bring to pass the salvation of his children and to further the progression of Christ).

I hope that makes more sense.

Give the precise citation for your quote. Believe me, I've read it all. And Brigham makes plain that Michael (Adam) is distinct from the father of our Spirits.

Based on many of his talks, it is apparent that Brigham called the Father (Elohim) "Father Adam" at times. Is Brigham speaking to Nuttall about Michael or Elohim?

The most commonly cited talk on the issue was Brigham's address to the April 1852 General Conference. The talk contains the phrase: "three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael", speaking about those present in the creation.

Now tell me this, if indeed, Jesus of Nazereth is the only begotten Son of Adam according to the flesh, who then is Cain, Abel, and Seth?

-a-train

[TheAngelPalmoni]

Who are you?

[bmy-]

Give the precise citation for your quote. Believe me, I've read it all. And Brigham makes plain that Michael (Adam) is distinct from the father of our Spirits.

Based on many of his talks, it is apparent that Brigham called the Father (Elohim) "Father Adam" at times. Is Brigham speaking to Nuttall about Michael or Elohim?

The most commonly cited talk on the issue was Brigham's address to the April 1852 General Conference. The talk contains the phrase: "three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael", speaking about those present in the creation.

Now tell me this, if indeed, Jesus of Nazereth is the only begotten Son of Adam according to the flesh, who then is Cain, Abel, and Seth?

-a-train

(Diary of L. John Nuttall, Feb. 7, 1877) Yes, i've been pondering the meaning of the 'only begotten' (as it is written) part. I wonder mainly what the (as it is written) means.

A few more sources.. not including the one you mentioned. We can say he's speaking of Elohim as Adam.. or perhaps he's speaking of Michael. I tend to believe that he was speaking about Michael.

“How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which is revealed to them, and which God revealed to me — namely that Adam is our father and God…Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or ever will come upon the earth” (Sermon delivered on June 8, 1873. Printed in the Deseret Weekly News, June 18, 1873.).

"I have learned by experience that there is but one God that pertains to this people, and He is the God that pertains to this earth--the first man. That first man sent his own Son to redeem the world, to redeem his brethren; his life was taken, his blood shed, that our sins might be remitted. That Son called twelve men and ordained them to be Apostles, and when he departed the keys of the kingdom were deposited with three of those twelve, viz.: Peter, James, and John" (Journal of Discourses 4:1).

"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."

(Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses; Volume 1. Verse 51)

The fact that our apostles and prophets could not agree on an issue like this is a topic for another thread. A much more serious one, imo. It's not like this is the only topic they cannot agree on either.. I think it's safe to say that Brighams teachings are in line with Joseph Smiths and other prophets of God. There's controversy.. sure -- but does it stem from the early Church or the modern Church?

Edited May 29, 2009 by bmy-

[Hemidakota]

Based on many of his talks, it is apparent that Brigham called the Father (Elohim) "Father Adam" at times. Is Brigham speaking to Nuttall about Michael or Elohim?

The most commonly cited talk on the issue was Brigham's address to the April 1852 General Conference. The talk contains the phrase: "three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael", speaking about those present in the creation.

Now tell me this, if indeed, Jesus of Nazereth is the only begotten Son of Adam according to the flesh, who then is Cain, Abel, and Seth?

-a-train

I have read President Young's talk that is not correct statement. Yes! I can say, that Adam and Eve were brought to the earth when it was close to the celestial resident but Adam or Michael is not the Father of Jesus Christ.

This will require some prayer and consideration of what is being present here.

[Hemidakota]

The fact that our apostles and prophets could not agree on an issue like this is a topic for another thread. A much more serious one, imo. It's not like this is the only topic they cannot agree on either.. I think it's safe to say that Brighams teachings are in line with Joseph Smiths and other prophets of God. There's controversy.. sure -- but does it stem from the early Church or the modern Church?

Affirmative!

[JohnnyRudick]

LOL you got to right click on the drawing and hit... SAVE TARGET AS.... That or Right CLICK on the download Icon and do the same....

I go to the page that has all the scrolls.

I right click on one and I go to my Download Gelper and click "Save as" and I only have the choice to save as D:\Palmoni Scrolls\PALMONI 01.html. an html document.

Sooooo, I go agead and try to download it as that and I get a 25kb file called PALMONI 01

Which I click on (holding my breath) and I get a blank screen with 4 little blue boxes in the middle saying

back download

thumbnails on thumbnails on

thumbnails off thumbnails off

play

None of the boxes do anything:p

Thanks:D

Bro. Rudick

[JohnnyRudick]

. . . The fact that our apostles and prophets could not agree on an issue like this is a topic for another thread. A much more serious one, imo. It's not like this is the only topic they cannot agree on either.. I think it's safe to say that Brighams teachings are in line with Joseph Smiths and other prophets of God. There's controversy.. sure -- but does it stem from the early Church or the modern Church?

I sure am glad you pointed that out:D

Bro, Rudick

[bmy-]

I sure am glad you pointed that out:D

Bro, Rudick

It's really my only issue with the Church. Man does it make for some heated discussions.. (and I love those!) I can't help but side with the older teachings of the Church.. I sometimes feel as if we dumb the doctrine down to 'fit in'.

I'm not sure if it's a real quote or not.. or if someone simply made it up. I was once told by an 'ex-mormon' (ran off by his parents because he was gay).. that Brigham once said something along the lines of "We passed the trial of persecution with flying colors.. it's the trial of acceptance that has me worried."

[mikbone]

I'm not sure if it's a real quote or not.. or if someone simply made it up. I was once told by an 'ex-mormon' (ran off by his parents because he was gay).. that Brigham once said something along the lines of "We passed the trial of persecution with flying colors.. it's the trial of acceptance that has me worried."

Perhaps?

“The worst fear that I have about [members of this Church] is that they will get rich in this country, forget God and his people, wax fat, and kick themselves out of the Church and go to hell. This people will stand mobbing, robbing, poverty, and all manner of persecution, and be true. But my greater fear for them is that they cannot stand wealth; and yet they have to be tried with riches” (quoted in Preston Nibley, Brigham Young: The Man and His Work [1936], 128).

[a-train]

A few more sources.. not including the one you mentioned. We can say he's speaking of Elohim as Adam.. or perhaps he's speaking of Michael. I tend to believe that he was speaking about Michael.

But he doesn't say Michael. He says "the first man".

-a-train

[Hemidakota]

Michael was "first man" upon this earth. Even the term ADAM means first. As Eve was also called Adam, being first woman. I also did see a pattern with President Young's journals, he was a big admire of Adam or Michael, as I am with Savior and Prophet Joseph Smith.

I can suspect, he had some close ties with Michael in his mortal life.

[mikbone]

I think that is was obvious to Brigham Young that Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael were 3 separate personages. The temple ceremony (in which he assisted greatly in its production) is explicit in its declaration that they were 3 separate beings.

Moses 6:50-52 also displays 3 separate personages and Elohim the Father speaking directly to Michael-Adam

50 But God hath made known unto our fathers that all men must repent.

51 And he called upon our father Adam by his own voice, saying: I am God; I made the world, and men before they were in the flesh.

52 And he also said unto him: If thou wilt turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice, and believe, and repent of all thy transgressions, and be baptized, even in water, in the name of mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth, which is Jesus Christ, the only name which shall be given under heaven, whereby salvation shall come unto the children of men, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, asking all things in his name, and whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be given you.

Edited May 30, 2009 by mikbone

[Justice]

I believe those verses in Moses doesn't prove the Father was speaking. Jehovah is allowed to speak and quote what the Father has said. When Jehovah said, "in the name of my Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth, which is Jesus Christ," He was using a quote from the Father inserted into what He was saying.

I know this because these are words spoken after the fall. This is where Jehovah began to preach His gospel to man. But, it was the Father's plan, so it stands to reason Jehovah would quote Him.

[Hemidakota]

Moses 6:50-52 is the FATHER speaking.

[mikbone]

Justice is probably correct in saying that Moses 6:50-52 is Jehovah invoking Divine Investiture and speaking as if he is the Father. Even so, this scripture displays 3 seperate and distinct roles.

There are many other references to Elohim, Jehovah and Michael as Separate entities. Based upon this and the many subsequent writings of apostles after Brigham Young, it is safe to say that Adam/Michael is not Elohim.

There are many options that one can submit to try to bring reason to the sermon that Brigham Young delivered in the Journal of Discourses 1:50.

I believe that Brigham Young presented the Adam-God Discourse after a vision that he had. It is possible that even BY was confused and that he possibly misintrepreted the vision. After all Elohim, Jehovah, Adam, and Seth have the exact same appearance. If He was describing "Father Adam" as Michael then his intrepretation was incorrect. I think that he understood the vision though and that his defination of "Father Adam" was the Father of Adam. And that he used the expression "Father Adam" to conceal the true identity of Adam's Father, the man that "commenced the work of creating earthly tabernacles... by partaking of the course material that was organized and composed this earth, until His system was charged with it, consequently the tabernacles of His children were organized from the coarse materials of this earth". Journal of Discourses 4:218

Most believe that Elohim was the father of Adam. I think that there is ample evidence to suggest that in reality Jehovah was the father of the physical tabernacle of Adam/Michael.

[bmy-]

But he doesn't say Michael. He says "the first man".

-a-train

It's the same thing. Michael is the Ancient of Days.

Most believe that Elohim was the father of Adam. I think that there is ample evidence to suggest that in reality Jehovah was the father of the physical tabernacle of Adam/Michael.

Christ will receive the keys to the priesthood from Michael. In my eyes.. this says that Michael is further along the path of progression than Christ is. Christ wasn't the only person to take sin upon himself.. Michael did the same when he became 'Adam'.

The one with the most keys can open the most doors. The one with the most freedom has the most responsibility. The one with the most responsibility is the one with the most authority. That's how I look at it.

Edited May 31, 2009 by bmy-

[JohnnyRudick]

It's the same thing. Michael is the Ancient of Days.

Christ will receive the keys to the priesthood from Michael. In my eyes.. this says that Michael is further along the path of progression than Christ is. Christ wasn't the only person to take sin upon himself.. Michael did the same when he became 'Adam'.

The one with the most keys can open the most doors. The one with the most freedom has the most responsibility. The one with the most responsibility is the one with the most authority. That's how I look at it.

Not to get into a long dissertation here but Jesus will receive the Keys to the priesthood from Adam, this is the same formality that led Jesus to be baptized and receive His calling from John who was called Baptist - the last man who held the keys to the Aaronic Priesthood in righteousness.

Had nothing to do with being further along on progression.

Just the way it works.

Nite;)

Bro. Rudick

[the Ogre]

Christ will receive the keys to the priesthood from Michael. In my eyes.. this says that Michael is further along the path of progression than Christ is. Christ wasn't the only person to take sin upon himself.. Michael did the same when he became 'Adam'.

Next you'll be telling us is that you advocate for the Davidic Servant.

What you just said is as dangerous to the church as the list Jim produced in the anti-mormon thread if not more so. Nothing you said is supported by church doctrine. Everything you said is the spew of apologists and speculation. If you want to be believed, you better provide citations for each truth-claim that dates no more than ten years ago. For your citations to be credible, they need to come from the First Presidency or a member of the Twelve.

[mikbone]

Christ will receive the keys to the priesthood from Michael. In my eyes.. this says that Michael is further along the path of progression than Christ is. Christ wasn't the only person to take sin upon himself.. Michael did the same when he became 'Adam'.

The one with the most keys can open the most doors. The one with the most freedom has the most responsibility. The one with the most responsibility is the one with the most authority. That's how I look at it.

Based on your statement alone... Since Joseph Smith has held the Keys of the Kingdom and will then give these keys back to Michael. Joseph Smith is Greater than Michael??? Your logic fails.

Adam transgressed that man may be. Christ never sinned, Christ atoned.

In reality the Atonement is the key to exaltation, true power/honor.

Elohim is by far the greatest patriarch that we are aware of. This is because he not only atoned, but he also created spiritually. Elohim also created both Adam/Michael and Jehovah. Thus the honor that Jehovah and Adam achieve will also continue to glorify Elohim.

Moses 4:1-2

And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, 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, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.

The Son cannot be greater than the Father. Nor does he wish too.

[pam]

That's how I look at it.

Bmy since you qualifed your statement with this little comment, I will take it to mean this is your opinion and thoughts perhaps not doctrine itself.

But I would like to know if there is some scripture or doctrinal reference that would have you come up with that Adam is further along in progression. To understand where your thoughts and opinions are coming from. I've never heard this myself but that certainly doesn't mean anything.

Edited May 31, 2009 by pam

[TheAngelPalmoni]

It's the same thing. Michael is the Ancient of Days.

Christ will receive the keys to the priesthood from Michael. In my eyes.. this says that Michael is further along the path of progression than Christ is. Christ wasn't the only person to take sin upon himself.. Michael did the same when he became 'Adam'.

The one with the most keys can open the most doors. The one with the most freedom has the most responsibility. The one with the most responsibility is the one with the most authority. That's how I look at it.

edited by moderator.

Edited May 31, 2009 by BenRaines
inflamatory. Attack on poster

[TheAngelPalmoni]

Adam is the Archangel Michael who is subject to Christ and the Father in authority. The Father through Christ created the Heavens and the Earth. Adam was the first one to be given all the keys because we was the first mortal prophet. the Line of power in the Godhead is, The Father, Christ, Holy Ghost. The sitting of the first presidency in heaven is, The Father (president) Christ (First Councilor) Michael (Second Councilor).

~Angel Palmoni~

web.me.com/angelpalmoni

[BenRaines]

Now that sounds reasonable to me AngelPalomoni.

Ben Raines

[bmy-]

Bmy since you qualifed your statement with this little comment, I will take it to mean this is your opinion and thoughts perhaps not doctrine itself.

But I would like to know if there is some scripture or doctrinal reference that would have you come up with that Adam is further along in progression. To understand where your thoughts and opinions are coming from. I've never heard this myself but that certainly doesn't mean anything.

It's not even my opinion. It's simply speculation and thinking out loud. I've made that very clear through out this thread. Does it not seem backwards that the person receiving the keys is further along the path of progression? It seems to me that the person who gave the keys.. already held them.

I suppose it's more like when the prophet receives his keys.. he gets them all.. from people who hold one or two. I could view it like that.. but i'm specifically talking about the 'Michael-God' theory and looking for evidences for it.

Next you'll be telling us is that you advocate for the Davidic Servant.

What you just said is as dangerous to the church as the list Jim produced in the anti-mormon thread if not more so. Nothing you said is supported by church doctrine. Everything you said is the spew of apologists and speculation. If you want to be believed, you better provide citations for each truth-claim that dates no more than ten years ago. For your citations to be credible, they need to come from the First Presidency or a member of the Twelve.

Dangerous to the Church? Only if they're afraid of speculation, discussion, and intellectual curiosity. We believe all the prophets of this church.. to be .. well.. Prophets. All Prophets carry the same authority, as far as I know. Sometimes I believe the Church is scared of intellectual curiosity.

We can't use Joseph Smith quotes? He lived far more than 10 years ago. The diary of Nutall has temple ceremonies recorded.. it's credible. It's not doctrine.. but it's valid.

Based on your statement alone... Since Joseph Smith has held the Keys of the Kingdom and will then give these keys back to Michael. Joseph Smith is Greater than Michael??? Your logic fails.

Even if it was incorrect.. that's alright. It's how I learn. Michael was previously exalted.. was Jesus?

Adam transgressed that man may be. Christ never sinned, Christ atoned.

In reality the Atonement is the key to exaltation, true power/honor.

Elohim is by far the greatest patriarch that we are aware of. This is because he not only atoned, but he also created spiritually. Elohim also created both Adam/Michael and Jehovah. Thus the honor that Jehovah and Adam achieve will also continue to glorify Elohim.

I agree. But as I stated earlier.. I was speculating about what if Elohim was the 'executive' who put this plan into motion, and then stepped away. Much like a Father buying his child their first car when they turn 16.

Edited May 31, 2009 by bmy-