LDS LDS: Adam God & Brigham Young's Credibility?

[drstevej]

From Fair Mormon:

Brigham Young taught that Adam, the first man, was God the Father. Since this teaching runs counter to the story told in Genesis and commonly accepted by Christians, critics accuse Brigham of being a false prophet. Also, because modern Latter-day Saints do not believe Brigham's "Adam-God" teachings, critics accuse Mormons of either changing their teachings or rejecting teachings of prophets they find uncomfortable or unsupportable.

They suggest 5 Apologetic Approaches

Approach #1: Adam as the patriarch of the human family
Approach #2: Scribal error
Approach #3: "Adam Sr." and "Adam Jr."
Approach #4: Brigham was wrong
Approach #5: We don't know the reason
​

Under #5 the following is offered:

An anomaly is something unexpected that cannot be explained by the existing laws or theories, but which does not constitute evidence for changing the laws and theories. An anomaly is a glitch.... A classic example of an anomaly in the LDS tradition is the so-called "Adam-God theory." During the latter half of the nineteenth century Brigham Young made some remarks about the relationship between Adam and God that the Latter-day Saints have never been able to understand.

​

==================

• Are any of these valid?
  
• Or would any LDS like to defend BY as accurate on this issue?

I offer:

Approach #6 (drstevej approach)

Acknowledge that Brigham Young was a false prophet and this is an embarrassment.
​

​

 

[drstevej]

Brigham Young [Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 1:50-51. (Emphasis in the original.)]

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 or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later. They came here, organized the raw material, and arranged in their order the herbs of the field, the trees, the apple, the peach, the plum, the pear, and every other fruit that is desirable and good for man; the seed was brought from another sphere, and planted in this earth. The thistle, the thorn, the brier, and the obnoxious weed did not appear until after the earth was cursed. When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal.​

 

[fatboys]

From Fair Mormon:



They suggest 5 Apologetic Approaches

Approach #1: Adam as the patriarch of the human family
Approach #2: Scribal error
Approach #3: "Adam Sr." and "Adam Jr."
Approach #4: Brigham was wrong
Approach #5: We don't know the reason
​

Under #5 the following is offered:

​

==================

• Are any of these valid?
  
• Or would any LDS like to defend BY as accurate on this issue?

I offer:

Approach #6 (drstevej approach)

Acknowledge that Brigham Young was a false prophet and this is an embarrassment.
​

​

It was taught at one time but the teaching became so distorted after Brigham young had died that it is no longer a teaching. As I have said before ther are many things we believe but don't know enough about and which is not necessary for our salvation to know that it is not important. No members wouldn't understand it and most members wouldn't it. I am not going to try and explain it to you to have you guys hammer each little point when we don't have enough info to answer the questions. I mean I could ask you questions about what you beleive which you could not answer. You could attempt to but I could play the say game you guys are.

 

[drstevej]

So was Brigham right as he taught the doctrine?

 

[withwonderingawe]

So was Brigham right as he taught the doctrine?

Wherever BY went he took a couple of scribes who would write down what he said. They would match up their different versions then give it to BY and when he would pass it that is what got printed. So no one can claim those are not the words of Young. He definitely taught the Adam God theory which I’ve never been able to comprehend.

I’ve looked at all of the different talks and journal quotes, there is a website which gives them in chronological order. My very own conclusion is one Sunday morning he misspoke, he’d been giving straight Mormon doctrine when suddenly he veered off on this strange line. He gets back on track and goes on but the damage was done. Later he began pondering on the subject and from there his theory grew.

But it was rejected by the whole of the Church, that’s why the Lord gave us a system of checks and balances. The full Quorum of the Twelve Apostles would have had to pass it but there was so much disagreement Young never even tried to bring it up for a vote. Orson Pratt and Brigham had a number of heated conversations on the subject. Heber C. Kimball seemed at first to support BY but then in 1863 he teaches this;

"We have been taught that our Father and God, from whom we sprang, called and appointed his servants to go and organize an earth, and, among the rest, he said to Adam, "You go along also and help all you can …. that the Almighty sent Jehovah and Michael/Adam to do the work….Father Adam was instructed to multiply and replenish the earth, to make it beautiful ….. God the Father made Adam the Lord of this creation" JD 10:235

Here is Young’s first speech on the subject I’ve pulled out the important parts and added my thoughts;

….One thing has remained a mystery in this kingdom up to this day. It is in regard to the character of the well-beloved Son of God, upon which subject the Elders of Israel have conflicting views. Our God and Father in heaven, is a being of tabernacle, or, in other words, He has a body, with parts the same as you and I have; …. His son Jesus Christ has become a personage of tabernacle, and has a body like his father. The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Lord, and issues forth from Himself, … but He is not a person of tabernacle as we are, ... (completely in line with Mormon doctrine)

The question has been, ….who it was that begat the Son of the Virgin Mary. ... Our Father in Heaven begat all the spirits that ever were, or ever will be, upon this earth; and they were born spirits in the eternal world. Then the Lord by His power and wisdom organized the mortal tabernacle of man. We were made first spiritual, and afterwards temporal. (again Mormon doctrine)

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. (his own basis for plural marriage)

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 (Mormon doctrine)

—HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do. (not Mormon doctrine, it sounds like he is calling Adam God )

….When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal. When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. (Mormon doctrine)

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 (depends on how one reads it) …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….”

Since God is an immortal man and the Father of our spirits he is the first of the human family but it sounds again like he’s saying as Adam is the first of the human family he is our Father in Heaven also . At the end he understands Eloheim is not Michael/Adam so it is confusing, very confusing.

I believe over time he kept going back to this and evolving it into a larger theory. He was wrong.

 

[withwonderingawe]

This is a letter written to “the Honorable A. Saxey, Provo, Utah from Joseph F. Smith; Jan. 9th, 1897” under the direction of President Woodruff,

"...With reference to Prest. B. Youngs remarks, in a discourse delivered in 1852. with reference to "Adam being the only God with whom we have to do" &c. I will say:---Prest. Young no doubt expressed his personal opinion or views upon the subject. What he said was not given as a 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 [p.2] and was never formally or otherwise accepted by the Church. It is therefore in no sense binding upon the Church nor upon the consciences of any of the members thereof, except perhaps only so far as some may have confidence in President Young, believing that he had light on the subject which was not given in connection with his public mention thereof. It is thought, even if there is truth in it, that the bare mention made my Prest. Young, with out indubitable evidence and authority being given of its truth, was unfortunate to say the least. But the sure test is to be found in "the law and the Testimony" and revealed truth. Whatsoever is not in accordance with these must fall. No scripture being of any private interpretation &c. but open to the understanding of every man who possesses the Holy Ghost, anyone thus endowed may apply the tests by the light of the good spirit. While I am not authorized to sit in judgment upon Prest. Young, I am at liberty to test the truth of his words or utterances by the Revealed and accepted word of God. Anything uttered by man which is contrary to the Divine law must fall, while that only [p.3] which is in harmony with it can remain, or stand. Generally--when the Lord speaks through his approved channel, he speaks with no uncertain sound. Yet many there be who cannot see the truth no matter how plain to the mind of the Spirit. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned, (1 Cor. 2:9-11-16.) but carnal things by the natural senses. When the inspired head, speaks by the power of the spirit & he is backed up by "thus saith the Lord"--, it becomes a serious matter to reject, or lightly pass it by. There is no such responsibility attached to this statement, made by Prest. Young…”

http://www.adamgod.com/evidence/1897-01-07-joseph-f-smith.html

 

[Hammster]

So can he be considered a prophet?

 

[drstevej]

I believe over time he kept going back to this and evolving it into a larger theory. He was wrong.

A great description of Mormonism. This is not restored Christianity.

 

[fatboys]

A great description of Mormonism. This is not restored Christianity.

What this is is meat before the milk. The LDS don't understand it and they are not getting the whole milk. You guys can't handle 1% milk

 

[Hammster]

What this is is meat before the milk. The LDS don't understand it and they are not getting the whole milk. You guys can't handle 1% milk

It seems we get this a lot. There seems to be a whole bunch of things you guys don't understand. Yet you hold on to the fact that it's true.

Did anyone ever believe Young was right concerning Adam being God?

 

[fatboys]

It seems we get this a lot. There seems to be a whole bunch of things you guys don't understand. Yet you hold on to the fact that it's true.

Did anyone ever believe Young was right concerning Adam being God?

Do you think that God has revealed every thing to you? No. I believe that what Brigham Young taught was true. But I don't understand all of it and certainly could not explain what I do understand of it.

 

[Hammster]

Do you think that God has revealed every thing to you? No. I believe that what Brigham Young taught was true. But I don't understand all of it and certainly could not explain what I do understand of it.

So you believe something the LDS rejects?

 

[fatboys]

So you believe something the LDS rejects?

I'm not going to go there. One of the best things about the gospel is that I can have my own personal thoughts. The more info I get my thoughts could change. I'm an infant still trying to grasp the gospel. What I do have a grasp on is the fact that I am a sinner and Jesus died for my sins. The rest is just knowledge

 

[Hammster]

I'm not going to go there. One of the best things about the gospel is that I can have my own personal thoughts. The more info I get my thoughts could change. I'm an infant still trying to grasp the gospel. What I do have a grasp on is the fact that I am a sinner and Jesus died for my sins. The rest is just knowledge

This is new. I thought you had to believe what the Church wants you to believe.

I'm curious how you rectify believing Adam was the Father with Mormon teachings that deny this.

 

[fatboys]

This is new. I thought you had to believe what the Church wants you to believe.

I'm curious how you rectify believing Adam was the Father with Mormon teachings that deny this.

Look I would not be able to explain it to you without you asking questions which I don't have the answers for. There is not enough information. It was a teaching but so many members and no. Members distorted it and had their own twist on it. Fundamentalist follow this teaching but they have it wrong as well. It isn't important enough to have been taught in the first place which is why Brigham Young stated that the only regret he had was he taught to much.