Adam-God...misunderstood?

[GeneC]

You mentioned that we are the church of Jesus Christ, and not the church of Adam. In reality, there are two churches. The Church of Jesus Christ, and the Church of the Firstborn, which is the Church of God the Father. This is from Heber C. Kimball:

.

The Firstborn is Jesus Christ and the Church of the Firstborn is Christ's Church (LDS)

[mordorbund]

I can't see Adam-God or any God coming down to Earth to sin. I don't think that would be possible. Also Brigham Young stated (incorrectly) "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."

I don't think he's saying the Godhead is the same as the creation council. I read it as him saying, "The creation was led by a presiding quorum, similar to how we know the Godhead is the Presiding Quorum over everything." Do you have any additional quotes where President Young calls Michael the Holy Ghost?

[Hartman]

I'm not sure I get your point! Mine was that Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael are not Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. What was quoted has been debunked and denied/not accepted certainly Christ's name is revered (more sacred than) over Adam's or Eve's.

You stated that you could not see God coming down to sin. I thought Eliza R. Snow eloquently made the case that transgressing the laws of immortality is not a "sin" as we generally define it.

According to Brigham Young, and Joseph F. Smith, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael are Father, Son, and Grandson. The family order in Heaven is no different from what God established here on earth.

Here is part of a Brigham Young sermon from January 12, 1862, in the Tabernacle:

"How has it transpired that theological truth is thus so widely disseminated? It is because God was once known on the earth among his children of mankind, as we know one another. Adam was as conversant with his Father who placed him upon this earth as we are conversant with our earthly parents. The Father frequently came to visit his son Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children of Adam were more or less acquainted with their Grandfather, and their children were more or less acquainted with their Great-Grandfather." (JD 9:148)

Not only do we have a Father in Heaven, but a Grandfather in Heaven, a Great-Grandfather in Heaven, and so on.

This is from Joseph F. Smith journal entry describing what was taught in the School of the Prophets:

"Elohim, Yahovah and Michael were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth and Michael became Adam. (Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871 entry; Church Archives)

[GeneC]

You stated that you could not see God coming down to sin. I thought Eliza R. Snow eloquently made the case that transgressing the laws of immortality is not a "sin" as we generally define it.

According to Brigham Young, and Joseph F. Smith, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael are Father, Son, and Grandson. The family order in Heaven is no different from what God established here on earth.

Here is part of a Brigham Young sermon from January 12, 1862, in the Tabernacle:

"How has it transpired that theological truth is thus so widely disseminated? It is because God was once known on the earth among his children of mankind, as we know one another. Adam was as conversant with his Father who placed him upon this earth as we are conversant with our earthly parents. The Father frequently came to visit his son Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children of Adam were more or less acquainted with their Grandfather, and their children were more or less acquainted with their Great-Grandfather." (JD 9:148)

Not only do we have a Father in Heaven, but a Grandfather in Heaven, a Great-Grandfather in Heaven, and so on.

This is from Joseph F. Smith journal entry describing what was taught in the School of the Prophets:

"Elohim, Yahovah and Michael were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth and Michael became Adam. (Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871 entry; Church Archives)

I agree. We are ALL spirit children of our Heavenly Parents - Elohim and his wife., So we are all BROTHERS AND SISTERS not Grandparents etc as there was no procreation without bodies. So everyone come to Earth including Christ are our brothers or sisters.

[Hartman]

The Firstborn is Jesus Christ and the Church of the Firstborn is Christ's Church (LDS)

The Church of Jesus Christ, and the Church of the Firstborn are two separate entities. D&C 88:1-5.

1Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you who have assembled yourselves together to receive his will concerning you:

2Behold, this is pleasing unto your Lord, and the angels rejoice over you; the balms of your prayers have come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, and are recorded in the book of the names of the sanctified, even them of the celestial world.

3Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.

4This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom;

5Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son—

The Comforter mentioned in verse 3 is the Second Comforter, and only those that have received this Second Comforter are those members in the Church of the Firstborn. It is they that have had a blessing at Christ's hands. (see D&C 132:5)

Those members of the Church of the Firstborn have had their calling and election made sure. Their exaltation is secure, and they have become joint-heirs with Christ. (Rom. 8:17) They have the fullness of the priesthood, and are sovereign Kings and Queens in the Kingdom. All are equal in the Church of the Firstborn.

"They who dwell in his presence are the church of the Firstborn; and they see as they are seen, and know as they are known, having received of his fulness and of his grace; And he makes them equal in power, and in might, and in dominion." (D&C 76:94-95)

The Church of the Firstborn is not organized in the same manner as the Church of Jesus Christ. Very few ever become members of the Church of the Firstborn. If you have not received your second anointings, if you have not met your Savior, if you have not felt His touch, if you have not received a blessing at His hands, if the Savior has not introduced you to the Father, then you can rest assured that you are not part of the Church of the Firstborn.

[Hartman]

I agree. We are ALL spirit children of our Heavenly Parents - Elohim and his wife., So we are all BROTHERS AND SISTERS not Grandparents etc as there was no procreation without bodies. So everyone come to Earth including Christ are our brothers or sisters.

Everyone born on Earth are brothers and sisters. Those not born on earth are our Fathers, Mothers, Grandfathers, Grandmothers, Great-Grandfathera, Great-Grandmothers, and so on.

Adam and Eve came here with immortal bodies. They weren't born here. They had to fall from immortality in order to provide mortal tabernacles for their spirit children. Mother Eve was the first to sacrifice Her life, her immortal life, for the benefit of Her children. To me that makes perfect sense, and is much preferable to the mainstream Christian view of the creation and our first parents.

[Just_A_Guy]

Thanks for the clarification on source, Hartman.

That is what I mean; and when God our Father organized that Church, He organized it just as His Father organized the Church on the earth where He dwelt; and that same order is organized here in the City of Great Salt Lake; and it is that order that Joseph Smith the Prophet of God organized in the beginning in Kirtland, Ohio. Brother Brigham Young, myself, and others were present when that was done; and when those officers received their endowments, they were together in one place. They were organized, and received their endowments and blessings, and those keys were placed upon them, and that kingdom will stand for ever. . . ." (J.D. 5:130-131)

Yeah, I agree inasmuch as you state that the Church of the Firstborn isn't necessarily the same thing as the institutional LDS Church (though they certainly overlap). But as for the Firstborn being Adam and not Christ: we just keep running into those pesky scriptures again. For example:

D&C 93:21-22:

21 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn;

22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.

Edited February 13, 2011 by Just_A_Guy

[mikbone]

One of my favorite quotes about the Adam God Theory is from Bruce R McConkie's Seven deadly heresies, "Anyone who has read the Book of Moses, and anyone who has received the temple endowment and who yet believes the Adam-God theory, does not deserve to be saved."

I think it is a beautiful quote.

On the other hand I do like the Adam-God theory. But I think that it has to be read carefully. Just as when Isaiah writes and it is unclear if he is writing about the past, present, or future, etc... When Young writes about Adam, He is using Adam as a generic term. And that term can be substituted for Adam, Jehovah, or Eloheim.

Thus you are best able to understand his words if you have the spirit of prophecy...

[Hartman]

Thanks for the clarification on source, Hartman.

Yeah, I agree inasmuch as you state that the Church of the Firstborn isn't necessarily the same thing as the institutional LDS Church (though they certainly overlap). But as for the Firstborn being Adam and not Christ: we just keep running into those pesky scriptures again. For example:

D&C 93:21-22:

21 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn;

22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.

Does Christ ever speak as the Father, or take upon Himself the titles of the Father? Wouldn't that explain the contradictory scriptures on this issue?

[Hartman]

One of my favorite quotes about the Adam God Theory is from Bruce R McConkie's Seven deadly heresies, "Anyone who has read the Book of Moses, and anyone who has received the temple endowment and who yet believes the Adam-God theory, does not deserve to be saved."

I think it is a beautiful quote.

On the other hand I do like the Adam-God theory. But I think that it has to be read carefully. Just as when Isaiah writes and it is unclear if he is writing about the past, present, or future, etc... When Young writes about Adam, He is using Adam as a generic term. And that term can be substituted for Adam, Jehovah, or Eloheim.

Thus you are best able to understand his words if you have the spirit of prophecy...

Since you brought up the Pearl of Great Price...

The Bible Dictionary defines the name Michael as one "Who is like God". It then goes on to show that Michael is in fact Adam.

Now go to the book of Abraham and read chapter 3, verse 24. Who could this "one" be that is "like unto God"? The footnotes indicate that this "one" is Jesus, but if you read the rest of the passage that just doesn't make sense, as Christ comes into the scene in verse 27.

To play upon McConkie's quote:

Anyone who has read the Book of Abraham, and anyone who has received the full temple endowment, including the Lecture at the Veil, and who does not yet believe the Adam-God doctrine, does not deserve to be saved.

[GeneC]

ALL living as Spirits in our pre-mortal existence are children of our Heavenly Father. This includes 1/3 that followed Lucifer and the 2/3's who chose to follow Heavenly Father's plan and go through a mortal probation so that we could receive bodies and continue our progression to become like our Heavenly Father.

Fundamental to Our Faith - Ensign Jan. 2011

Fundamental to Our Faith

By Elder Dallin H. Oaks

2. The Purpose of Mortal Life

My second fundamental premise concerns the purpose of mortal life. This follows from our understanding of the purposes of God the Eternal Father and concerns our destiny as His children. Our theology begins with the assurance that we lived as spirits before we came to this earth. It affirms that this mortal life has a purpose. And it teaches that our highest aspiration is to become like our heavenly parents, which will empower us to perpetuate our family relationships throughout eternity. We were placed on earth to acquire a physical body and—through the Atonement of Jesus Christ and by obedience to the laws and ordinances of His gospel—to qualify for the glorified celestial condition and relationships that are called exaltation or eternal life.

[Just_A_Guy]

Does Christ ever speak as the Father, or take upon Himself the titles of the Father? Wouldn't that explain the contradictory scriptures on this issue?

Well, first off, let's remember that the scripture is only "contradictory" when one brings Adam-God into the mix; otherwise it makes perfect sense.

Assuming Adam-God to be the case, I don't think you can use divine investiture to bootstrap verse 21 into coherency. The speaker says He both was with the Father (i.e. not the Father) and is the Firstborn. For divine investiture to even be an option, you'd have to either a) have the role-switching literally in mid sentence, or b) have deity be providing text that, under its plain meaning, is deliberately misleading.

Moreover, even Brigham Young at least sometimes used "Firstborn" as a synonym of Jesus Christ. Example:

Again, when we look around we see many, very many, men and women who profess to know the things of God, to belong to His family, to the Church of the First-Born—the Church of Jesus Christ, who are ofttimes wrought upon by the Holy Spirit of the Gospel which has caused them to rejoice therein, who give thanks to their God, rejoice with joy unspeakable, and you would think they were very near the kingdom of heaven—near the threshold of the gate which opens into the presence of the Father and the Son, and yet, if anything crosses them, will give way to an evil temper; and if anything is presented to them which they do not understand, they condemn it at once; they are ready to pass judgment upon that which they do not understand.

--JD 3:193

[john doe]

Let's remember that the Adam-God Theory is just that, a theory, and is not doctrine of the LDS Church.

[Hartman]

Well, first off, let's remember that the scripture is only "contradictory" when one brings Adam-God into the mix; otherwise it makes perfect sense.

Assuming Adam-God to be the case, I don't think you can use divine investiture to bootstrap verse 21 into coherency. The speaker says He both was with the Father (i.e. not the Father) and is the Firstborn. For divine investiture to even be an option, you'd have to either a) have the role-switching literally in mid sentence, or b) have deity be providing text that, under its plain meaning, is deliberately misleading.

Moreover, even Brigham Young at least sometimes used "Firstborn" as a synonym of Jesus Christ. Example:

--JD 3:193

Is "Firstborn" a name or a title, and can that title apply to both the Father and the Son? When Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and John Taylor used the title "Jehovah" they were generally referring to God the Father. That's no longer the case today.

George Q. Cannon commented on how this confusion comes about.

"Jesus speaks for the Godhead, the personages who compose the Godhead, and that must be kept in mind all the time, not speaking for himself, but for the Father. It is overlooking this that leads to confusion. Men thinking that Jesus speaks for himself. (St. George High Council Minutes, June 11, 1892, Church Archives)

It may very well be that Jesus and the Father are both the "Firstborn". I guess it depends on your perspective. One thing is for certain, the Father was born before the Son.

[Hartman]

Let's remember that the Adam-God Theory is just that, a theory, and is not doctrine of the LDS Church.

I agree that Adam-God is not a doctrine of the Church today, but was it once a doctrine of the Church?

[GeneC]

Never!

[GeneC]

Well, first off, let's remember that the scripture is only "contradictory" when one brings Adam-God into the mix; otherwise it makes perfect sense.

Assuming Adam-God to be the case, I don't think you can use divine investiture to bootstrap verse 21 into coherency. The speaker says He both was with the Father (i.e. not the Father) and is the Firstborn. For divine investiture to even be an option, you'd have to either a) have the role-switching literally in mid sentence, or b) have deity be providing text that, under its plain meaning, is deliberately misleading.

Moreover, even Brigham Young at least sometimes used "Firstborn" as a synonym of Jesus Christ. Example:

--JD 3:193

Is "Firstborn" a name or a title, and can that title apply to both the Father and the Son? When Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and John Taylor used the title "Jehovah" they were generally referring to God the Father. That's no longer the case today.

George Q. Cannon commented on how this confusion comes about.

"Jesus speaks for the Godhead, the personages who compose the Godhead, and that must be kept in mind all the time, not speaking for himself, but for the Father. It is overlooking this that leads to confusion. Men thinking that Jesus speaks for himself. (St. George High Council Minutes, June 11, 1892, Church Archives)

It may very well be that Jesus and the Father are both the "Firstborn". I guess it depends on your perspective. One thing is for certain, the Father was born before the Son.

The Father and the Son - Ensign Apr. 2002

The Father and the Son

* April 2002 Ensign

"None of these considerations, however, can change in the least degree the solemn fact of the literal relationship of Father and Son between Elohim and Jesus Christ. Among the spirit children of Elohim the firstborn was and is Jehovah or Jesus Christ..."

I say we do not know enough (or any) of Heavenly Father's heritage to say if He was the Firstborn of his Heavenly Parents. But as far as our pre-mortal existence Heavenly Father is the Father of all our Spirits and Jehovah (Christ) is the Firstborn and the Only Begotten Son. Basically Firstborn is a Title but also used as a name to identify the Son of Heavenly Father. Jehovah or Christ has many many more Names & Titles.

[Hartman]

Never!

I'm assuming that your position is that Adam-God was never a doctrine of the Church. However, Brigham Young said it was doctrine. Are you suggesting that he was a false prophet?

"A Few Words of Doctrine"

Given by President Brigham Young in the Tabernacle in

Great Salt Lake City Oct. 8th 1861. A. M.

"I will give you a few words of doctrine, upon

which there has been much inquiry, and with regard to

which considerable ignorance exists... Some years ago, I advanced a doctrine with regard to

Adam being our father and God, that will be a curse to

many of the Elders of Israel because of their

folly. With regard to it they yet grovel in darkness

and will. It is one of the most glorious revealments

of the economy of heaven, yet the world holds it in derision.

Had I revealed the doctrine of baptism

for the dead instead of Joseph Smith there

are men around me who would have ridiculed

the idea until dooms day. But they are ignorant

and stupid like the dumb ass."

It sounds like it was a doctrine to me.

[GeneC]

I'm assuming that your position is that Adam-God was never a doctrine of the Church. However, Brigham Young said it was doctrine. Are you suggesting that he was a false prophet?

"A Few Words of Doctrine"

Given by President Brigham Young in the Tabernacle in

Great Salt Lake City Oct. 8th 1861. A. M.

"I will give you a few words of doctrine, upon

which there has been much inquiry, and with regard to

which considerable ignorance exists... Some years ago, I advanced a doctrine with regard to

Adam being our father and God, that will be a curse to

many of the Elders of Israel because of their

folly. With regard to it they yet grovel in darkness

and will. It is one of the most glorious revealments

of the economy of heaven, yet the world holds it in derision.

Had I revealed the doctrine of baptism

for the dead instead of Joseph Smith there

are men around me who would have ridiculed

the idea until dooms day. But they are ignorant

and stupid like the dumb ass."

It sounds like it was a doctrine to me.

I'm not sure why I have to repeat this AGAIN!

but......

The greatest interest in this theory came after his death. Most Church authorities contemporary with President Young had little or nothing to say on the subject. The two best-known exceptions were Heber C. Kimball, who mentioned it in several sermons, and Apostle Orson Pratt, who openly voiced his rejection of the concept. Following President Young's death, with the exception of several obscure statements, no Church authority has advocated the idea.

During the last decade of the 19th Century, interest in the subject elicited response from such authorities as Wilford Woodruff, George Q. Cannon and Joseph F. Smith. These men acknowledged that they were personally familiar with President Young's theory but discouraged teaching and speculating upon the subject. The status of the "Adam-God theory" was summed up in 1897 in a private letter outlined by President Wilford Woodruff and written by Apostle Joseph F. Smith:

President Young no doubt expressed his personal opinion or views upon the subject. What he said was not given as revelation or commandment from the Lord. The doctrine was never submitted to the councils of the Priesthood nor to the Church for approval or ratification, and was never formally or otherwise accepted by the Church. It is therefore in no sense binding upon the Church.

I concur with their findings. And so does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

[Hartman]

The Father and the Son - Ensign Apr. 2002

The Father and the Son

* April 2002 Ensign

"None of these considerations, however, can change in the least degree the solemn fact of the literal relationship of Father and Son between Elohim and Jesus Christ. Among the spirit children of Elohim the firstborn was and is Jehovah or Jesus Christ..."

I say we do not know enough (or any) of Heavenly Father's heritage to say if He was the Firstborn of his Heavenly Parents. But as far as our pre-mortal existence Heavenly Father is the Father of all our Spirits and Jehovah (Christ) is the Firstborn and the Only Begotten Son. Basically Firstborn is a Title but also used as a name to identify the Son of Heavenly Father. Jehovah or Christ has many many more Names & Titles.

Another name for Jehovah is God the Father.

Here are the words of Joseph Smith:

"We believe in God the Father, who is the great Jehovah and head of all things, and that Christ is the Son of God, co-eternal with the Father."(TS 3:578, November 15, 1841)

"O Thou, who seest and knowest the hearts of all men -- Thou eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Jehovah -- God -- Thou Elohim, that sittest, as saith the Psalmist, "enthroned in heaven," look down upon Thy servant Joseph at this time; and let faith on the name of Thy Son Jesus Christ, to a greater degree than Thy servant ever yet has enjoyed, be conferred upon him. (HC 5:127)

"Shall we shrink at the onset? No! Let every man's brow be as the face of a lion; let his breast be as unshaken as the mighty oak, and his knee confirmed as the sapling of the forest: and by the voice and the loud roar of the cannon; and the loud peals and thundering of artillery; and by the voice of the thunderings of heaven as upon Mount Sinai; and by the voice of the heavenly hosts; and by the voice of the eternal God; and by the voice of innocent blood; and by thy voice of innocence; and by the voice of all that is sacred and dear to man, let us plead the justice of our cause; trusting in the arm of Jehovah, the Eloheim, who sits enthroned in the heavens; that peradventure He may give us the victory..." (HC 5:94)

You can also look to Joseph's prayer in D&C section 109 and HC 2:420-426 to see that Joseph did not teach that Jehovah is Jesus Christ, but a patriarchal superior to Christ.

Here are some statements from John Taylor on Jehovah:

"Hence His profound grief, His indescribable anguish, His overpowering torture, all experienced in the submission to the eternal fiat of Jehovah and the requirements of an inexorable law. (The Mediation And Atonement, p. 150)

"Suffice it to say that He bore the sins of the world, and, when laboring under the pressure of those intense agonies, He exclaimed, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass." But it was not possible. It was the decree of God; the fiat of the great Jehovah..."(JD 24:34)

"As in the heavens they all agree The record's given there by three.... Jehovah, God the Father's one, Another His Eternal Son, The Spirit does with them agree, The witnesses in heaven are three." (Sacred Hymns and Spiritual Songs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1891, p. 295, # 262)

"Who has controlled and managed the affairs of the world from its creation until the present time? The Great I Am, the Great Eloheim, the Great God who is our Father. We bow before him." (JD 15:217)

One the other hand, John Taylor said the following:

"His name shall be called Immanuel," which being interpreted is, God with us. Hence He is not only called the Son of God, the First Begotten of the Father, the Well Beloved, the Head, and Ruler, and Dictator of all things, Jehovah, the I Am, the Alpha and Omega, but He is also called the Very Eternal Father. Does not this mean that in Him were the attributes and power of the Very Eternal Father?" (The Mediation And Atonement, p.138)

President Taylor here explains that the titles of Jehovah, I Am, Alpha and Omega, and even "the Very Eternal Father" may appropriately be applied to our Savior, Jesus Christ. Why? Because in Christ were the attributes and power of the Eternal Father. Jehovah is not the proper name of a God, but is a title which may be applied to more than one god. I would suspect that "Jehovah" is not the only title that applies to more that one being.

[Hartman]

I'm not sure why I have to repeat this AGAIN!

but......

The greatest interest in this theory came after his death. Most Church authorities contemporary with President Young had little or nothing to say on the subject. The two best-known exceptions were Heber C. Kimball, who mentioned it in several sermons, and Apostle Orson Pratt, who openly voiced his rejection of the concept. Following President Young's death, with the exception of several obscure statements, no Church authority has advocated the idea.

During the last decade of the 19th Century, interest in the subject elicited response from such authorities as Wilford Woodruff, George Q. Cannon and Joseph F. Smith. These men acknowledged that they were personally familiar with President Young's theory but discouraged teaching and speculating upon the subject. The status of the "Adam-God theory" was summed up in 1897 in a private letter outlined by President Wilford Woodruff and written by Apostle Joseph F. Smith:

President Young no doubt expressed his personal opinion or views upon the subject. What he said was not given as revelation or commandment from the Lord. The doctrine was never submitted to the councils of the Priesthood nor to the Church for approval or ratification, and was never formally or otherwise accepted by the Church. It is therefore in no sense binding upon the Church.

I concur with their findings. And so does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

This doctrine was taught in the temple through the Wilford Woodruff administration. That is evidenced in the Bunkerville case. The First Presidency of Wilford Woodruff stated that the Lecture at the Veil and been reviewed and approved by the Quorum of the Twelve. I have hundreds of journal entries of Brigham's contemporaries discussing this doctrine. Many of those journal entries talk about discussing this doctrine in the school of the prophets. I have numerous articles from the Millennial Star discussing this doctrine. I have Church hymnbooks with hymns singing praise to Adam, our God and Father. I have numerous general conference talks discussing Adam-God.

And you want me to believe that "the greatest interest in this theory came after his death"?

By the way, what part of the temple endowment was ever "formally or otherwise accepted by the Church"?

Edited February 13, 2011 by Hartman

[GeneC]

Another name for Jehovah is God the Father.

Here are the words of Joseph Smith:

"We believe in God the Father, who is the great Jehovah and head of all things, and that Christ is the Son of God, co-eternal with the Father."(TS 3:578, November 15, 1841)

"O Thou, who seest and knowest the hearts of all men -- Thou eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Jehovah -- God -- Thou Elohim, that sittest, as saith the Psalmist, "enthroned in heaven," look down upon Thy servant Joseph at this time; and let faith on the name of Thy Son Jesus Christ, to a greater degree than Thy servant ever yet has enjoyed, be conferred upon him. (HC 5:127)

"Shall we shrink at the onset? No! Let every man's brow be as the face of a lion; let his breast be as unshaken as the mighty oak, and his knee confirmed as the sapling of the forest: and by the voice and the loud roar of the cannon; and the loud peals and thundering of artillery; and by the voice of the thunderings of heaven as upon Mount Sinai; and by the voice of the heavenly hosts; and by the voice of the eternal God; and by the voice of innocent blood; and by thy voice of innocence; and by the voice of all that is sacred and dear to man, let us plead the justice of our cause; trusting in the arm of Jehovah, the Eloheim, who sits enthroned in the heavens; that peradventure He may give us the victory..." (HC 5:94)

You can also look to Joseph's prayer in D&C section 109 and HC 2:420-426 to see that Joseph did not teach that Jehovah is Jesus Christ, but a patriarchal superior to Christ.

Here are some statements from John Taylor on Jehovah:

"Hence His profound grief, His indescribable anguish, His overpowering torture, all experienced in the submission to the eternal fiat of Jehovah and the requirements of an inexorable law. (The Mediation And Atonement, p. 150)

"Suffice it to say that He bore the sins of the world, and, when laboring under the pressure of those intense agonies, He exclaimed, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass." But it was not possible. It was the decree of God; the fiat of the great Jehovah..."(JD 24:34)

"As in the heavens they all agree The record's given there by three.... Jehovah, God the Father's one, Another His Eternal Son, The Spirit does with them agree, The witnesses in heaven are three." (Sacred Hymns and Spiritual Songs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1891, p. 295, # 262)

"Who has controlled and managed the affairs of the world from its creation until the present time? The Great I Am, the Great Eloheim, the Great God who is our Father. We bow before him." (JD 15:217)

One the other hand, John Taylor said the following:

"His name shall be called Immanuel," which being interpreted is, God with us. Hence He is not only called the Son of God, the First Begotten of the Father, the Well Beloved, the Head, and Ruler, and Dictator of all things, Jehovah, the I Am, the Alpha and Omega, but He is also called the Very Eternal Father. Does not this mean that in Him were the attributes and power of the Very Eternal Father?" (The Mediation And Atonement, p.138)

President Taylor here explains that the titles of Jehovah, I Am, Alpha and Omega, and even "the Very Eternal Father" may appropriately be applied to our Savior, Jesus Christ. Why? Because in Christ were the attributes and power of the Eternal Father. Jehovah is not the proper name of a God, but is a title which may be applied to more than one god. I would suspect that "Jehovah" is not the only title that applies to more that one being.

You're getting names and titles mixed up. Much as people mix up the power of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Try to read this and you might understand the nuances.

The Father and the Son - Ensign Apr. 2002

A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

From Improvement Era, Aug. 1916, 934–42; capitalization, punctuation, paragraphing, and spelling standardized.

1. “Father” as Literal Parent

2. “Father” as Creator

A second scriptural meaning of “Father” is that of Creator; e.g., in passages referring to any one of the Godhead as “the Father of the heavens and of the earth, and all things that in them are” (Ether 4:7; see also Alma 11:38–39; Mosiah 15:4).

God is not the Father of the earth as one of the worlds in space, nor of the heavenly bodies in whole or in part, not of the inanimate objects and the plants and the animals upon the earth, in the literal sense in which He is the Father of the spirits of mankind. Therefore, scriptures that refer to God in any way as the Father of the heavens and the earth are to be understood as signifying that God is the Maker, the Organizer, the Creator of the heavens and the earth.

With this meaning, as the context shows in every case, Jehovah, who is Jesus Christ the Son of Elohim, is called “the Father,” and even “the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth” (see passages before cited and also Mosiah 16:15). With analogous meaning Jesus Christ is called “The Everlasting Father” (Isa. 9:6; compare 2 Ne. 19:6). The descriptive titles “Everlasting” and “Eternal” in the foregoing texts are synonymous.

That Jesus Christ, whom we also know as Jehovah, was the executive of the Father, Elohim, in the work of creation is set forth in the book Jesus the Christ, chapter 4 [by James E. Talmage]. Jesus Christ, being the Creator, is consistently called the Father of heaven and earth in the sense explained above; and since His creations are of eternal quality He is very properly called the Eternal Father of heaven and earth.

3. Jesus Christ the “Father” of Those Who Abide in His Gospel

4. Jesus Christ the “Father” by Divine Investiture of Authority

[Hartman]

You're getting names and titles mixed up. Much as people mix up the power of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Try to read this and you might understand the nuances.

The Father and the Son - Ensign Apr. 2002

A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

From Improvement Era, Aug. 1916, 934–42; capitalization, punctuation, paragraphing, and spelling standardized.

1. “Father” as Literal Parent

2. “Father” as Creator

A second scriptural meaning of “Father” is that of Creator; e.g., in passages referring to any one of the Godhead as “the Father of the heavens and of the earth, and all things that in them are” (Ether 4:7; see also Alma 11:38–39; Mosiah 15:4).

God is not the Father of the earth as one of the worlds in space, nor of the heavenly bodies in whole or in part, not of the inanimate objects and the plants and the animals upon the earth, in the literal sense in which He is the Father of the spirits of mankind. Therefore, scriptures that refer to God in any way as the Father of the heavens and the earth are to be understood as signifying that God is the Maker, the Organizer, the Creator of the heavens and the earth.

With this meaning, as the context shows in every case, Jehovah, who is Jesus Christ the Son of Elohim, is called “the Father,” and even “the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth” (see passages before cited and also Mosiah 16:15). With analogous meaning Jesus Christ is called “The Everlasting Father” (Isa. 9:6; compare 2 Ne. 19:6). The descriptive titles “Everlasting” and “Eternal” in the foregoing texts are synonymous.

That Jesus Christ, whom we also know as Jehovah, was the executive of the Father, Elohim, in the work of creation is set forth in the book Jesus the Christ, chapter 4 [by James E. Talmage]. Jesus Christ, being the Creator, is consistently called the Father of heaven and earth in the sense explained above; and since His creations are of eternal quality He is very properly called the Eternal Father of heaven and earth.

3. Jesus Christ the “Father” of Those Who Abide in His Gospel

4. Jesus Christ the “Father” by Divine Investiture of Authority

"We believe in God the Father, who is the great Jehovah and head of all things, and that Christ is the Son of God, co-eternal with the Father."(TS 3:578, November 15, 1841)

"Suffice it to say that He bore the sins of the world, and, when laboring under the pressure of those intense agonies, He exclaimed, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass." But it was not possible. It was the decree of God; the fiat of the great Jehovah..."(JD 24:34)

Both of these statement clearly differentiate between Jehovah and Jesus.

It doesn't get any clearer than that.

[john doe]

I agree that Adam-God is not a doctrine of the Church today, but was it once a doctrine of the Church?

In a word, no.

Yes, some leaders at the time taught it and held it up as truth, and I don't doubt that some portions of the idea may be true, but the concept was never really given a definitive structure or form. It was and is difficult for most lay people in and out of the Church to understand or even quantify. Ultimately, it has never been brought before the body of the church and presented to it for consideration or a vote to be considered doctrine and binding on the Church. It is not contained in our scriptures, although some portions may seem to be supported by certain passages of scripture. There is much we don't know about the theory, and much that was not understood fully. It was never really fleshed out to make a coherent understanding of the idea.

[GeneC]

Be that as it may the Official Church recognition comes to light in "The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles

The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles

"The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles," The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles, (2000)

As we commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ two millennia ago, we offer our testimony of the reality of His matchless life and the infinite virtue of His great atoning sacrifice. None other has had so profound an influence upon all who have lived and will yet live upon the earth.

He was the Great Jehovah of the Old Testament, the Messiah of the New. Under the direction of His Father, He was the creator of the earth. “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3). Though sinless, He was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. He “went about doing good” (Acts 10:38), yet was despised for it. His gospel was a message of peace and goodwill. He entreated all to follow His example. He walked the roads of Palestine, healing the sick, causing the blind to see, and raising the dead. He taught the truths of eternity, the reality of our premortal existence, the purpose of our life on earth, and the potential for the sons and daughters of God in the life to come..........................

Of the Living Christ, the Prophet Joseph wrote: “His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying:

“I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father” (D&C 110:3–4).................

“For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father—

“That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God” (D&C 76:22–24).

We declare in words of solemnity that His priesthood and His Church have been restored upon the earth—“built upon the foundation of … apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone” (Ephesians 2:20).

We testify that He will someday return to earth. “And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together” (Isaiah 40:5). He will rule as King of Kings and reign as Lord of Lords, and every knee shall bend and every tongue shall speak in worship before Him. Each of us will stand to be judged of Him according to our works and the desires of our hearts.

We bear testimony, as His duly ordained Apostles—that Jesus is the Living Christ, the immortal Son of God. He is the great King Immanuel, who stands today on the right hand of His Father. He is the light, the life, and the hope of the world. His way is the path that leads to happiness in this life and eternal life in the world to come. God be thanked for the matchless gift of His divine Son.

Signed:::::

So basically it wouldn't even matter if Elohim went by Jehovah it's Jesus Christ, the Firstborn, the Only Begotten Son whose Church we belong to and have to pass judgment with to enter The Kingdom of God.

This borders on contention so I will refrain from further fruitless discussion.

Edited February 13, 2011 by ThankGodForRepentence