Questions Re "adam-god"

[checkerboy]

Gaia while your intentions may be noble they are flawed none the less. Have you also heard that a living prophet is better then a dead one?

The fact that you have given quotes by GA's does in no way make the doctrine acceptable. I can take these last three quotes and construe them to mean that because we are all descendents of Adam we will all be judged by him. (Because of your nicely put statement about the office of God.) We know that one of the rolls God (the office) has is that he will judge us. Therefore couldn't BY and HK have been simply refering to the fact that Adam as the Father of all the mortals on the planet will stand as a judge over all of us? We know that the original Twelve will judge the tribes of Israel. We know that Adam as the Ancient of Days will receive the judgements of every leader of every dispensation. I think we should apply Occam's Razor here and go with the simplest, easiest explaination as being probably the best.

I understand your intent, but it is just another way of getting people to not focus on what is necessary for salvation and instead become entangled in things which have no saving grace.

[MadHatter]

[a-train]

No doubt Mad. No doubt. Clearly those who accuse the prophets will go on to hell with the great Accuser that leads them. Your right, we need not fight them, for a kingdom divided against itself will fall.

What the antis prey on is the honest and righteous desire of the LDS to clarify and teach the truth. They know that we will make attempts to demonstrate the truth in our efforts to show them our love and care and to correct them and bring them to the truth; but they are not interested in the truth, they only hope for the rush they get if they can catch someone in a mistake no matter how insignificant.

Well spoke the Saviour of them when he said: 'Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.' (Matt 7:5)

-a-train

[Adomini22]

And has anyone ever read Doctrines of Salvation? It consists of 3 books, and in one of them dissects this "Adam-God" Theory. It states and shows, in its entirety, that God and Adam are distinct individuals and not the same being. It has the whole discourses of Brigham Young in it as well. If you read the whole thing, Brigham Young isnt saying that they are one and the same. You want answers? Read what is written. The books were written by Joseph Fielding Smith.

[rosie321]

No doubt Mad. No doubt. Clearly those who accuse the prophets will go on to hell with the great Accuser that leads them. Your right, we need not fight them, for a kingdom divided against itself will fall.

What the antis prey on is the honest and righteous desire of the LDS to clarify and teach the truth. They know that we will make attempts to demonstrate the truth in our efforts to show them our love and care and to correct them and bring them to the truth; but they are not interested in the truth, they only hope for the rush they get if they can catch someone in a mistake no matter how insignificant.

Well spoke the Saviour of them when he said: 'Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.' (Matt 7:5)

-a-train

I'm sorry but If Adam -God was taught and the lack of obedience to it forced people to be removed from the church then I do not understand why it can't be a viable matter for discussion. Truth should be able to withstand all-correct? There is great diversity of opinion in the church on this matter. Should we not be of one faith? It seems more divisions are created by not addressing it. "if any man lack wisdom..."

This topic does seem to involve some very "meaty" areas so I would agree caution is needed when addressing it. Hearing an explanation given such as, as you grow you will understand this doctrine better. There are a few concepts you need to understand better first-such as patriarchal order etc.

Denial of things that were said or unwillingness to discuss percieved historical doctrines generates fear and divisions. There's too many different faith variations out there for some to blindly trust.

[MadHatter]

It's not an "unwillingness to discuss" indeed it is far from that.

It is discussing it in a proper manner and setting. the way this was presented in this forum was in an attackign manner.

The Adam-God theory is not doctrine, nor is it taugh in our church. Lots of things change with time, even our doctrine has progressed. more revelation is constantly needed to grown and progress as people.

Discussing this theory leaves a bad taste in people's mouth.

Joseph Smith made a prophecy about Brigham Young.

Your name shall be known for good and evil throughout the world

Not everything every prophet has said, or will say or teach is true. they are just susceptible to temptation and listening to the wrong spirit as any one of us.

If you are sensitive Holy spirit, you are just as sensitive to the spirit of the devil. If you are in-tune with the promptings of the Holy Spirit you will not be decieved. but you have to remain that way or you can easily be decieved.

[rosie321]

It's not an "unwillingness to discuss" indeed it is far from that.

It is discussing it in a proper manner and setting. the way this was presented in this forum was in an attackign manner.

The Adam-God theory is not doctrine, nor is it taugh in our church. Lots of things change with time, even our doctrine has progressed. more revelation is constantly needed to grown and progress as people.

Discussing this theory leaves a bad taste in people's mouth.

Joseph Smith made a prophecy about Brigham Young.

Your name shall be known for good and evil throughout the world

Not everything every prophet has said, or will say or teach is true. they are just susceptible to temptation and listening to the wrong spirit as any one of us.

If you are sensitive Holy spirit, you are just as sensitive to the spirit of the devil. If you are in-tune with the promptings of the Holy Spirit you will not be decieved. but you have to remain that way or you can easily be decieved.

Thanks for your response. I can accept it up to a certain level.

I'm not seeking to stir up trouble with my response here but isn't there a difference between ignorance and deception?

Why isn't it important to understand something as important as the concept of God? Most people follow religion and seek to do right by God. The knowledge of God is of primary concern to those in and out of church. For this is life eternal that ye might know God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ whom he hath sent. When someone challenges the LDS belief in God there should be adequate knowledge weaponry to combat the evil"anti" doctrine in an individuals mind. Otherwise it seems to be an open invitation to the spirit of the devil

If the "anti's" state that the LDS believe in another God or defines him for a member or investigator who lacks the knowledge of that topic, and the person looks back to early church writings and sees reasons why the anti's are saying such things it can cause distress.

If they ask questions from people in the church and are labeled with some derrogatory label for asking questions- how is that fostering the Holy Spirit? Aren't members taught they can know the truth of all things? Shouldn't members be prepared to face the opposition whether or not they ever use their knowledge or not? It seems that by not addressing this topic it is opening the door to the spirit of the devil

It seems members are prepared in other important doctrinal matters such as the trinity why not this area

[MadHatter]

I would suggest you pick up a copy of "The Plan of Salvation: Understanding Our Divine Origin and Destiny" by Matthew B. Brown.

Incredible book, in order to fully understand our paths here on earth, we are to understand, at least somewhat, the origin and nature of God.

In this book it cites many many refrences, including scripture from our 4 standard works, as well as the JoD, and other talks from prophets, (alot from Bruce R. McKonkie, David O McKay, Spencer W Kimball, and Joseph Smith).

It goes on to show that by searching the scriptures that God is called "Man of Holiness" and that Jesus Christ is the "Son of Man."

God is an Exalted Man, his works are everlasting, this does not defy the idea of "Having no beginning and no end" the elementary particles of God's being are everlasting, and his truth and Gospel are everlasting.

Before we came to this earth we were all raised, and taught the gospel, each of us children God. Jesus Christ, the first born, excelled first in the gospel more so than any of us. but once we had all reached our progressive limit, in order to progress further and become like our heavenly father we had to experience mortality, death, affliction. we had to gain physical bodies, Just like God once did. We had to excersize our faith and choose for ourselves if we woudl follow god;s commandments or not. How can you be intelligent enough to make all things subject unto yourself without experienceing everything, including sin and death?

Adam, was foreordained to bring the rest of us into the world, to be the patriarch of the earthly family.

This all ties in together as the plan if Salvation,

Foreordainment, the Creation, the Fall of Adam, The Atonement of Jesus Christ, and Resurrection, then finally judgement and exaltation.

all of this can be deduced from current scripture and revelation.

[a-train]

The only people 'unwilling to discuss' certain things are the antis who are snipping portions out of Brigham Young's discourses and attempting to hide certain details he had in his speech that ruin their ridiculous assertions. The LDS are NOT unwilling to talk about the Adam-God-Theory, but they are unwilling to accept these deceptive multilations of the teachings of the prophets and they should be.

I have yet to hear any admittion that the quotes were so mutilated.........

Are you guys pretending those quotes are in their full context and without any changes?

-a-train

[MadHatter]

you know... what is... really fun? Elipses... When you use elipses... you can make practically any statement... say what ever... you want it to say.

[a-train]

I'm sorry but If Adam -God was taught and the lack of obedience to it forced people to be removed from the church then I do not understand why it can't be a viable matter for discussion. Truth should be able to withstand all-correct? There is great diversity of opinion in the church on this matter. Should we not be of one faith? It seems more divisions are created by not addressing it. "if any man lack wisdom..."

This topic does seem to involve some very "meaty" areas so I would agree caution is needed when addressing it. Hearing an explanation given such as, as you grow you will understand this doctrine better. There are a few concepts you need to understand better first-such as patriarchal order etc.

Denial of things that were said or unwillingness to discuss percieved historical doctrines generates fear and divisions. There's too many different faith variations out there for some to blindly trust.

That's the problem right there. The 'Adam-God-Theory' isn't what was taught. Brigham was teaching something different than: 'Michael and Eloheim is the same Being.' Go back and read THE FULL TALKS, UNEDITED. You will see where the antis and the 'Adam-God-Theorists' have edited the text to get what they want.

The whole discussion among the prophets of the 19th Century was NOT what these 'Adam-God-Theorists' claim. That is the problem from the beginning. Again, the people in 'denial of things that were said' are those who edit portions of talks out. I am not denying what was said, I am trying to get you to see what WAS said that the 'Adam-God-Theorists' are taking out.

-a-train

[Doctor Steuss]

you know... what is... fun? When you...make p...

I can't believe you just said the above.

[MadHatter]

Astonishment?

Aphauled?

or Sarcasm?

[Doctor Steuss]

Astonishment?

Aphauled?

or Sarcasm?

Tannerism.

[a-train]

Doctor Steuss, you have wit, that is for sure. LOL! Tannerism for sure.

-a-train

[BenRaines]

Very funny Dr. S.

Ben Raines

[Gaia]

It is discussing it in a proper manner and setting. the way this was presented in this forum was in an attackign manner.

GAIA:

Ohpuhleez. Go back and read this entire exchange and it becomes very clear who has done the "attacking" and who has NOT.

* * *

Hi Rosie --

You make a very good point about this doctrine being relevant to "knowing who we worship" -- and in fact, that's exactly what Brigham YOung said about it:

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.

(Manuscript Addresses of Brigham Young, Oct 8, `1861)

Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! 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. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians and non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later . . . 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 of 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 . . . 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. (Journal of Discourses, 1:50-51, 1854)

How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I 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 who ever will come upon the earth . . . We say that Father Adam came here and helped to make the earth. Who is he? He is Michael, a great prince, and it was said to him by Eloheim, "go ye and make an earth." . . . Father adam came here, and then they brought his wife . . . Then he said, "I want my children who are in the spirit world to come and live here. I once dwelt upon an earth something like this, in a mortal state. I was faithful, I received my crown and exaltation. I have the privilege of extending my work, and to its increase there will be no end. I want my children that were born to me in the spirit world to come here and take tabernacles of flesh.

(Deseret News, June 18, 1873)

INterestingly, Joseph Smith said something very similar, and quite relevant to and consistent with this theory/doctrine:

If men do not comprehend the character of God they do not comprehend themselves.....

Here, then, is eternal life--to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you,--namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one,--from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power.

Discussing this theory leaves a bad taste in people's mouth.

GAIA:

LOL -- Funny you should say that -- Joseph Smith said just the opposite. IN the King Follet Discourse - -which many say goes hand-in-hand with the Adam-God theory/doctrine, Smith said:

Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from age to age and there is no creation about it. The first principles of man are self-existent with God. All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement and improvement. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. God Himself found Himself in the midst of spirits and glory. Because He was greater He saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest, who were less in intelligence, could have a privilege to advance like Himself and be exalted with Him, so that they might have one glory upon another in all that knowledge, power, and glory. So He took in hand to save the world of spirits.

This is good doctrine. It tastes good. You say honey is sweet and so do I. I can also taste the spirit and principles of eternal life, and so can you. I know it is good and that when I tell you of these words of eternal life that are given to me by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the revelations of Jesus Christ, you are bound to receive them as sweet. You taste them and I know you believe them. I rejoice more and more.

(The King Follett Discourse: a Newly Amalgamated Text by Stan Larson Fn, BYU Studies, vol. 18 (1977-1978), Number 2 - Winter 1978 204.)

Joseph Smith made a prophecy about Brigham Young:

"Your name shall be known for good and evil throughout the world"

GAIA:

Oh, let's look at the REST of that story, and make sure that we accurately portray its meaning/ implication:

Upon seeing Brigham Young for the first time and while yet some distance away the Prophet Joseph stopped his chopping on a beech log, straightened up, studied Brigham for a moment, then remarked: "There comes the greatest man who ever lived to teach the identity of God to the world, and he will yet lead this people."

[brigham Young first met Joseph Smith in September, 1832 in Kirtland, Ohio. He said: "Here my joy was full at the privilege of shaking the hand of the Prophet of God, and I received the sure testimony, by the spirit of pro-phecy, that he was all any man could believe him to be, a true prophet." (Mill Star July 11, 1863, p. 439.) During this visit a meeting was held in which Brigham spoke in tongues. After this manifestation Joseph prophesied: "The time will come when brother Brigham Young will preside over the Church." (See History of the Church 1:297; Mighty Men of Zion, p. 16; Mill Star 21:439; Journal of Discourses 3:51; 4:54; 5:332; 8:206; 9:89, 332; They Knew The Prophet, Hyrum L. Andrus, p. 34.)]

Not everything every prophet has said, or will say or teach is true. they are just susceptible to temptation and listening to the wrong spirit as any one of us.

GAIA:

So when a prophet says, "This was a REVELATION to me, and it is a REVELATION to you", and "this is SCRIPTURE", he culd actually be teaching FALSE DOCTRINE or even be "listening to the WRONG Spirit"? And by "wrong spirit", you mean exactly who -- the Devil?

So just to be clear: You are actually suggesting that Brigham Young, sustained as "Prophet Seer and Revelator" was actually listening to the DEVIL (or a "wrong" spirit) when he claimed he had received revelation?

If you can't be sure who your prophets are actually getting their revelation from, why bother to HAVE prophets?

~Gaia

[Gaia]

I meant to add this:

These (Brigham Young, Heber C Kimball, John Taylor and others who taught this "Adam-God" doctrine ) were plain-spoken men, they said what they meant, and meant what they said. In the literally hundreds -- perhaps thousands of quotes relative to this teaching, over the quarter-century or more that it was taught -- they were very clear about what they meant.

When you actually go back and read the original statements, it is very difficult to misunderstand or misinterpret, no matter how much some might want to.

I strongly recommend actually reading the quotes for yourself, and (through prayer and study) making up your own mind in the matter.

That's pretty much all i have to say about it.

Blessings --

~Gaia

[a-train]

There! Gaia, you did it again! You posted that quote with the 'three distinct characters' portion deleted out of it. You have yet to respond to my several declarations that this quote has been chopped.

Don't you see how the full text does NOT further your position?

-a-train

[tiancum]

SOURCE OF ADAM-GOD THEORY. President Brigham Young is quoted-in all probability the sermon was erroneously transcribed!-as having said: "Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, saint and sinner! 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.

Bruce R McKonkie.

He further explains Brigham's other assertions in context.

It makes sense to me.

could you let that be a possibility for you also gaia? I could be mistaken, but it seems like a stumbling block for you...as well as other recent topics. Could that be correct?

may I ask you a couple questions Gaia?

-where are you getting your materials? Do ya have actual books, official records, or are they coming from an unofficial site somewhere.

-do you visit anti-mormon sites?

Now many are clever to say they got it directly from the source, but if they are still historically "secondary sources" No matter how, verbatim they are copied, or cut and pasted.

[MadHatter]

Gaia,

You can say whatever you want with as many disclaimers as you want but the fact remains that your threads are to promote controversy on the forums, you are not here to learn, you are here to argue and debate. go to another forum site for debating, this is a Gospel Discussion forum. not "theory discussion" or "defunct article" discussion. Go troll somewhere else.

This thread should be closed.

[Dr T]

Many may not like what they read in her posts but from where I'm sitting, she brings up some good questions/quotes.

[a-train]

Many may not like what they read in her posts but from where I'm sitting, she brings up some good questions/quotes.

If she could only quote rather than edit....

-a-train

[Gaia]

SOURCE OF ADAM-GOD THEORY. President Brigham Young is quoted-in all probability the sermon was erroneously transcribed!-as having said: "Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, saint and sinner! 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.

Bruce R McKonkie.

He further explains Brigham's other assertions in context.

It makes sense to me.

could you let that be a possibility for you also gaia? I could be mistaken, but it seems like a stumbling block for you...as well as other recent topics. Could that be correct?

GAIA:

I wanted to be sure to address this because you asked it so respectfully.

First -- there aer many who do accept this explanation. I'm afraid that i personally don't think it holds much water because it certainly wasn't the only quote on Adam-God -- there were hundreds, perhaps thousands -- of others, from not just Brigham but nearly all the GA's, over a very long period of time; furthermore, there is the testimony of those who were actually at those meetings and heard the sermons, and their records of what was said -- hundreds of them, really -- that all report the very same thing.

To say that "Brigham was misunderstood", or "the sermon was mis-transcribed" or any of that level of "explanation" is to completey ignore the vast historical record we have, from literally hundreds of different sources.

Now, regarding Elder McConkie:

There are many things i appreciate about Elder McConkie, but to be very honest, there are a few things about doctrine that i honestly differ with him about -- as did some BYU Religion professors who were my mentors, and other experts in LDS history and doctrine -- for example, BH Roberts.

For example, he supported his Father-in-Law's postion on the progression of God, saying that God "progressed" ONLY in glory and dominion, but not Truth or KNowledge -- and that anybody who said differently was foolish and heretical -- pretty much anybody who disagreed with him was foolish and heretical -- but there are other ways of understanding the idea of God's progressing in Glory, Truth and knowledge (in addition to dominion) that are completely consistent with LDS teachings/ doctrines.

may I ask you a couple questions Gaia?

-where are you getting your materials? Do ya have actual books, official records, or are they coming from an unofficial site somewhere.

GAIA:

I get my material from LDS sources.

First, I was blessed to be a research assistant to some of the best (BYU) Religion Profs and experts in LDS history and doctrine -- I had access to the Church Historian's office and even the Archives/ Vault, so i do have some materials not readily available to others, but i try to limit my use of them on boards like this.

Secondly and probably more important and relevant to these discussions -- Well, i'll give you my secret, but don't tell *g* -- I have a special program....Since you asked so nicely , I'm sending you more information on it in email, ok?

I don't generally visit "anti-Mormon" sites (like the Tanners) because i don't much trust them, but more than that, i don't like their motives or tactics, and i don't want to support them.

And yes, you may ask me questions :)

Blessings --

~Gaia

[checkerboy]

I like how this site is called LDSTalk yet for some reason a majority of the threads are dominated by those who are either former members or not members at all. And a lot of the topics seem to be about things that most LDS could care less about. I know that for me I just care about the things I need to do to get me into heaven.

Don't get me wrong or misquote me, wink wink, I don't have anything against non-members (or members for that matter) coming here and putting there two cents in but when it is blatent that the only reason they are doing so is to illicit some sort of controversial response then I think it is time to take our boards back.

If you want to come here and learn something about the church then welcome, if you want to come here and muck up controversy then I would kindly ask that you post somewhere else. There are forums here that are meant for this kind of controversy. Maybe we can move this there so at least I know what I am getting into if I choose to read.