Question concerning “Continuing Revelation”

[Maverick]

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

But if you accept it the way you explain, it makes zero sense.

This is a perfect example of what I’m talking about. Many people found it very confusing and difficult to accept from day one. 

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

The reasons is that in the case you mention, then Adam would be in three places at the same time, meaning he is exhibiting three different exhibitions at the same time at the same place.

I don’t think he would have to be in three places at the same time. Instead what we would see is a hierarchy of God’s who fulfill various different roles with different titles at different times. 

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

  We don't believe that and neither did Joseph or any others.  In fact, the final version that he has of the First Vision directly contradicts this.

If Adam-God is true, then the person standing next to Jesus in the air during the first vision would have been Father Adam. 

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

the word Adam is referring to MAN

Yes, it is true that the Adam and man are the same word in Hebrew in many instances. Hence Christ referring to himself as the Son of Man, which in Hebrew is Ben Adam, or son of Adam. 

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Thus, by simply saying Adam, one could be referring not only to the Adam in the garden, but to the race of man, or to a specific man...including you or I even.

Brigham Young was very clear that he was referring specifically to the singular individual known as Adam in the garden of Eden. He did also teach that there’s an Adam on each planet and that exalted men and women will become the Adam and Eve on their own planets. 

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

We are talking more about Lorenzo Snow, Joseph F. Smith, and the most forward of them, Joseph Fielding Smith.  This is also included in more modern Apostles such as Bruce R. Mckonkie and of course Talmadge also indicates heavily in regards to our modern theology on this rather than the misunderstanding that many others had. 

I would be interested to see the statements from these men claiming that Brigham was speaking about two Adams. Can you please share these with

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

If you want to continue this in a more private conversation I'd be happy to do so, but I don't feel it is proper to really discuss this in public currently.

You’re welcome to PM me if you’re more comfortable with that.