Michael Is Part Of The Trinity

[CMZ]

...

[Drewm777]

What we have here is one person pointing out quotes and saying, "Infer as you will," and another person getting all bent out of shape that quotes are being pointed out.

In all honesty, MormonMason has brought up some wonderful quotes that clearly contradict your concept of Michael. You mostly just brushed them off. If anyone has reason to be bent out of shape, it would be he, and not because of your quotes, but your lack of acknowledge his contribution to the topic.

[CMZ]

...

[Drewm777]

I just went through my collection of quotes connecting Adam and the Holy Ghost and found there's some stuff there that's about as plain as day. Quotes by Mark E. Petersen, Talmage, McConkie, J. Reuben Clark, etc.

Here's one from Mark. E. Petersen to support your view.....

Brigham Young taught that Adam, or Michael, assisted the Deity in the creation of the world. He said: "It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Elohim, Yahovah and Michael, these three forming a quorum." Then he distinguished these three from the Holy Trinity, as he spoke in the same paragraph defining "the Deity as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." (JD, 1:51.) [Adam, Who is He?, 83]

Wait a second.. That contradicts your view.

Sorry.

Like I said, I'm not trying to say I'm right and somebody else is wrong. People can bring up whatever they want. I'm not refuting anybody's quotes (unless they are from apostates) because we are supposed to consider all the things that have been said on the subject. There's a misunderstanding here that I am trying to prove something. I am simply bringing up quotes. That is all.

You bring up your quotes to substantiate your views about Michael. However, your quotes don't seem to substantiate them at all. If anything, they substantiate views that are contrary to them.

[CMZ]

...

[Drewm777]

This quote also might be pertinent to the discussion at hand:

"We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in his Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." This is a simple statement of the persons in whom we believe and whom we revere as we are commanded to do. God our eternal Father is the Father of Jesus Christ and is the Father of Adam, or rather Michael, the name of that person before he came in the flesh. There is nothing new in what I am saying; it is all very old to me, and to members of the Church who have investigated the latter-day work from the revelations of God. Now, this ought to be clear to all our minds, and yet, among some of the classes in the Priesthood and in our Sunday school classes, and other organizations, some disputes arise. There shouldn't be any; there is no need for it. I would not try to limit the thoughts of men, nor their progress in understanding the things of God and the things of man. I believe in eternal progression, but when the Lord has revealed something very plain and simple to us, we should take that for granted and let that be sufficient for us until he reveals something further. (Charles Penrose, April 1922 General Conference)

Allow me to repeat myself: Since the topic was brought up I then went ahead and posted some quotes that can show where this idea came from (and not even all of them). Anybody else can post any quotes they want, including Mark E. Petersen ones I already know about. Nowhere have I said, "You must believe Adam is the Holy Ghost." But people's postings here seemed to be based off of the idea that I have said that.

Okay. Sorry. I got that impression somehow.

[Drewm777]

In our public and private devotions let us lift our souls to Him who is the God and Father of the spirits of all men from and including Adam to the last that shall tabernacle in the flesh, and be willingly obedient to His behests as conveyed by Christ His beloved Son, through the light and power of the Holy Ghost and the voice and authority of the constituted authorities of the Church of God. This will be a sufficient guide in this life and will lead us into that fulness of knowledge and might and glory that awaits us in His Divine, immediate presence. (Improvement Era, 1914, Vol. Xvii. June, 1914 No. 8 )

Here's another helpful quote.

[Drewm777]

There still remains, I can tell by the letters I have alluded to, [i.e. those coming to the First Presidency] an idea among some of the people that Adam was and is the Almighty and Eternal God . . . the notion has taken hold of some of our brethren that Adam is the being that we should worship…. I am sorry that has not been rectified long ago, because plain answers have been given to brethren and sisters who write and desire to know about it, and yet it still lingers, and contentions arise in regard to it, and there should be no contentions among Latter-day Saints….Who was the person Adam prayed to? Adam prayed to God…. So Adam was neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Ghost, was he? Then who was he? Why, we are told he was Michael in his first estate, and as Adam he will stand at the head of his race. (Charles Penrose, April 6, 1916, General Conference)

[Drewm777]

Our Godhead consists of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They are supreme over all, and though they administer their kingdoms through a hierarchy of appointed angels who also are exalted, one of whom is Adam or Michael, in the ultimate sense these members of the Eternal Godhead are the only Gods with whom we have to do. We worship the Father, in the name of the Son, by the power of the Holy Ghost. We follow the Son as he follows his Father. We labor and strive to be like the Son as he is like the Father, and the Father and Son and Holy Ghost are one. For these holy Beings we have unbounded love, reverence, and worship. (The Promised Messiah: The First Coming of Christ [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1978], 13.)

[CMZ]

...

[CMZ]

...

[MormonMason]

I never said anything about "multiple persons filling various Godhead offices."

Wait a minute. You never said anything about this? That seems a bit strange since you have been posting quotes that you yourself have claim lend support to the idea of Michael being the Holy Ghost at the creation. This, of course, means that he no longer is the Holy Ghost because he ended up being embodied and having someone else be the Holy Ghost. Sure looks like "multiple persons filling ... Godhead offices" to me.

I have said that I pointed out a few quotes that lend credence to the idea since somebody else brought up the topic. If you think it means I'm trying to bring somebody into a fold then I'm sorry that you have such a misunderstanding.

But, as I have shown, they do not lend credence to the position when examined from the context of the remarks and the views of the persons making the remarks that are so misused.

Besides, you are twisting my words again. I never said that you, personally, have such an agenda or are doing such. You twist my words, sir, as you twist the words of the General Authorities you have thus far cited. Please stop twisting people's words. Otherwise, I will begin to think that you really are one of such persons wth such an agenda, as that is what they do.

I venture to guess you would be bothered by someone insisting that you had an apostate agenda but apparently I'm not supposed to be bothered by somebody doing the same to me. Are you saying I'm just supposed to agree with it?

Ummmm.... I have not said that you, personally, have an apostate agenda. Please take my words as I say them, not as your rigid mindset wishes to bend them for your own purposes out of habit. Yes, I likely would be a little bothered if someone referred to me as an apostate as anyone who knows me and who reads what I post, either knows or will know that this is the furthest thing from the truth.

But, you really are bothered by something I never said or directed specifically to you and have made this the focus of the discussion. Do you not see this as a bit comical? You spend time addressing something I never said rather than the topic at hand. Don't spend time on Red Herrings; spend time defending why you think you provide valid quotes that allegedly support such a position as that discussed in this thread.

I brought up the thing about the temple because it is a place where people can discuss things and since you conjectured (w/o any evidence whatsoever) that I was wanting to not pay attention to general conference. So, then when I bring up a place where discussion is allowed you still read a bad motive into things I have said. Umm . . . thanks a lot. Seriously, thanks a lot.

The temple is a place of divine work, worship and contemplation, not a discussion board or conference room. If you did not want me to draw such a conclusion as might be apparent from what I have written, perhaps you should unbind your rigid mindset and should word your responses a little more clearly. You have to admit that giving me a range of times without specifically stating that you wanted to discuss these things in between sessions and not during the sessions, would lead to such a supposition. Besides, I did not specifically say that you had the intent of doing such, I simply asked three questions trying to get some clarification from you in a conclusion that might be drawn from your own words. Aside from this, your position is indefensible because you stated in your own words:

...You could've had this whole discussion with me last Sunday in the Conference Center between the hours of 1:30 and 4:30pm Mountain Daylight Time.

This whole discussion we have been having would not have taken but a half-hour here and a half-hour there. It would have cut into Conference time, assuming that I could have been there to begin with. Additionally, such a discussion is not appropriate for such a venue and we should have gone outside to discuss it further so as not to affect anyone who might be listening to the conversation inside. Definitely not a good idea. Perhaps, in fairness, I could have worded my responses a little more clearly at times. If so, my bad.

What we have here is one person pointing out quotes and saying, "Infer as you will," and another person getting all bent out of shape that quotes are being pointed out.

While I could see why I might be bent out of shape, I in reality am not in such a mental state. It is you who seems to be getting "bent out of shape" and making certain things I never actually said the focus of the discussion. You are doing more than simply saying "infer as you will" as you seem either to get upset that I can find reasons to debunk the meaning of the quotes you are providing, or you do not actually address much of what it is that I actually am saying and showing to you, especially those things that expressly contradict your position on the meanings of the quotes and what you say to try to wiggle out of what I quote in opposition to what you say a quote means. Actually, this whole conversation is amusing to me. I am myself nowhere near "bent out of shape." Now, can we get back to the subject? If your quotes really do say what you say they infer, defend your position and refute mine.

[CMZ]

...

[MormonMason]

In the most recent Penrose quote referred to he seems to be saying, "Adam wasn't the Father so he couldn't be the Holy Ghost either." Jesus is a member of the Godhead and prayed to the Father and (presumably) was baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Irrespective of what the above seems to say to you and what you understand when you read it, it sets the tone for President Penrose and shows agreement with the quote I already gave earlier on from him, which quote is quite clear I might add, and that is that Penrose nowhere held the view that Michael is or was the Holy Ghost--quite the contrary; he refutes such a position and that refutation is clear, contrary to your assertions of the word either meaning only two and only two of the three of whom Penrose was discussing in the earlier quote I cited above. Penrose absolutely refutes the position of belief in Michael being the Holy Ghost and in no sense allows for it.

[CMZ]

...

[MormonMason]

Since you have a problem with any place I bring up for discussion (and, yes, discussion is allowed in the celestial room and in other areas of the temple - you can wrongly infer that I am implying talking during an endowment session if you so wish) then where would you suggest such a thing be discussed? I am hesitant to make any suggestions because you will tell me how wrong I am.

Discussion is allowed in the temple? Perhaps you misunderstand the specific instructions given to every participant in the temple before the presentation of the endowment proceeds. We are asked to refrain from talking--even after passing through the veil into the Celestial Room!--but that, if we must communicate, we should whisper in order to preserve the quiet reverence that should prevail in the house of the Lord.

Time and again I have been in temples in my travels around the country and there are so many "quiet" conversations that it becomes a loud roar in that room. I hear discussions about things having nothing to do with the temple and laughter, and all manner of carrying on during what should be quiet times. This is not reverence, this is travesty. Quite honestly, many times I get the urge to pull off my belt and start driving people out of the Celestial Room by the lash. Usually, when it gets really bad I either leave for the next session or I try to hush people up where I can. I often try to attend the temple when there will not be so many people so as not to get the urge that Jesus himself got and acted upon when he saw all the noise and commotion in his Father's house.

Then why did you throw the red herring out and accuse me of "a guilty conscience?"

I did not make it the focus of the discussion. You are, and therefore, you turned it into a Red Herring. I nowhere accused you of a guilty conscience. I simply asked whether you had one. Please try, oh try to get my words right and take them as what I mean rather than what you want and think them to be. I would be most appreciative if you would stop twisting my words and the words of the General Authorities as you are.

You still misunderstand what I am doing here. Learning the gospel doesn't work by debate and refuting others into submission.

I misunderstand nothing of the sort. I see what you are saying and doing and then I see what you say you are saying and doing here. Michael = Holy Ghost is NOT the gospel. It is speculation and speculation can and ought to be debated here and NOT in the conference center or in any temple.

I never said that.

You say your quotes can be taken to infer the subject of this thread and have futily tried to defend them as meaning that, or even that quotes I have given are such that they can be taken to allow for such a position when the context shows otherwise. That is close enough for government work to me.

[Drewm777]

For the sake of the discussion, I've collected all of the quotes given so far AGAINST the theory that Adam is a member of the Godhead. I would love to see someone on the other side of the issue to gather up the quotes from the thread so far on that side. Then we can see it all in perspective.

Here it is:

(Moses 5:9) "And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will."

Holy Ghost: The third member of the Godhead and, as the name implies, a personage of Spirit, not possessing a body of flesh and bones (D&C 130:21-22). The Holy Ghost has been manifest in every dispensation of the gospel since the beginning, being first made known to Adam (1 Nephi 10: 17-22). (Bible Dictionary)

Before I sit down I want to say a word to the Elders of Israel on another subject. I am called an old man; I guess I am. I was thinking just now, in speaking of the Apostles and Prophets that were with Joseph Smith when he made his last speech, I am the only man living that was with him at that time. The rest are to-day in the spirit world. How much longer I shall talk to this people I do not know; but I want to say this to all Israel: Cease troubling yourselves about who God is; who Adam is, who Christ is, who Jehovah is. For heaven's sake, let these things alone. Why trouble yourselves about these things? God has revealed Himself, and when the 121st section of the Doctrine and Covenants is fulfilled, whether there be one God or many gods they will be revealed to the children of men, as well as all thrones and dominions, principalities, and powers. Then why trouble yourselves about these things? God is God. Christ is Christ. The Holy Ghost is the Holy Ghost. That should be enough for you and me to know. If we want to know any more, wait till we get where God is in person. I say this because we are troubled every little while with inquiries from Elders anxious to know who God is, who Christ is, and who Adam is. I say to the Elders of Israel, stop this. Humble yourselves before the Lord; seek for light, for truth, and for a knowledge of the common things of the kingdom of God. The Lord is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever. He changes not. The Son of God is the same. He is the Savior of the world. He is our advocate with the Father. We have had letter after letter from Elders abroad wanting to know concerning these things. Adam is the first man. He was placed in the Garden of Eden, and is our great progenitor. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, are the same yesterday, to-day and forever. That should be sufficient for us to know. (Wilford Woodruff in Brian H. Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, 5 vols., 4:292, bold emphasis mine)

(Joseph Fielding Smith, Gospel Doctrine, Pg.12)

PRE-EXISTING STATES.

Mrs. Martha H. Tingey, President, Y. L. M. I. A.

DEAR SISTER: The First Presidency have nothing to advance concerning pre-existing states but that which is contained in the revelations to the Church. The written standards of scripture show that all people who come to this earth and are born in mortality had a pre-existent, spiritual personality as the sons or daughters of the Eternal Father. (See Pearl of Great Price, Chap. 3, verses 5-7.) Jesus Christ was the Firstborn. A spirit born of God is an immortal being. When the body dies the spirit does not die. In the resurrected state the body will be immortal as well as the spirit. Speculations as to the career of Adam before he came to the earth are of no real value. We learn by revelation that he was Michael, the Archangel, and that he stands at the head of his posterity on earth (Doctrine and Covenants, Sec. 107:53-56.) Dogmatic assertions do not take the place of revelation, and we should be satisfied with that which is accepted as doctrine, and not discuss matters that, after all disputes, are merely matters of theory.

Your brethren,

JOSEPH F. Smith,

ANTHON H. LUND,

CHARLES W. PENROSE,

First Presidency.

-- Young Woman's Journal, Vol. 23, pp. 162, 163, 1912.

Original Manuscript, in the hand of Robert B. Thompson: In order to investigate the subject of the Priesthood so important to this as well as every succeeding generation, I shall proceed to trace the subject as far as I possibly can from the Old and new Testament. There are two Priesthoods spoken of in the Scriptures, viz the Melchisadeck and the Aaronic or Levitical Altho there are two Priesthoods, yet the Melchisadeck Priesthood comprehends the Aaronic or Levitical Priesthood and is the Grand head, and holds the highest Authority which pertains to the Priesthood the keys of the Kingdom of God in all ages of the world to the latest posterity on the earth and is the channel through which all knowledge, doctrine, the plan of salvation and every important matter is revealed from heaven. Its institution was prior to "the foundation of this earth or the morning stars sang together or the Sons of God shouted for joy," and is the highest and holiest Priesthood and is after the order of the Son [of] God, and all other Priesthoods are only parts, ramifications, powers and blessings belonging to the same and are held controlled and directed by it.It [that is, the Melchizedek Priesthood!] is the channel through which the Almighty commenced revealing his glory at the beginning of the creation of this earth and through which he has continued to reveal himself to the children of men to the present time and through which he will make known his purposes to the end of time—Commencing with Adam who was the first man who is spoken of in Daniel as being the "Ancient of days" or in other words the first and oldest of all, the great grand progenitor of whom it is said in another place he is Michael because he was the first and father of all, not only by progeny, but he was the first to hold the spiritual blessings, to whom was made known the plan of ordinances for the Salvation of his posterity unto the end, and to whom Christ was first revealed, and through whom Christ has been revealed from heaven and will continue to be revealed from henceforth. Adam holds the Keys of the dispensation of the fulness of times, i.e. the dispensation of all the times have been and will be revealed through him from the beginning to Christ and from Christ to the end of all the dispensations that have [been and] are to be revealed...(Joseph Smith)

President Smith saw Adam and Eve in the spirit world among those who "looked upon the long absence of their spirits from their bodies as a bondage" (D&C 138:38-39, 50).

He then says,

“These the Lord taught, and gave them power to come forth, after his resurrection from the dead, to enter into his Father's kingdom, there to be crowned with immortality and eternal life...”

"The Holy Ghost is yet a spiritual body and waiting to take to himself a body as the Savior did or as god did or the gods before them took bodies" (The Words of Joseph Smith, 382).

That has to be fulfilled after Adam and Eve are resurrected from the grave. Have they yet been resurrected? I think so. There were a great many that were resurrected at the time of the resurrection of Christ. Christ was the first fruits of the resurrection, and then there were a great many Saints who came forth out of their graves and were resurrected, and permitted to enter into the celestial glory and dwell at his right hand. Among the number, I have no doubt but what our first parents Adam and Eve, were permitted to come forth and enter into celestial glory; and I have no doubt but what they have been fulfilling the commandment given to them before they fell. (Orson Pratt JD21:291-292)

We worship the Father, in the name of the Son, by the power of the Holy Ghost; and Adam is their foremost servant, by whom the peopling of our planet was commenced...

(Bruce R. McConkie, Seven Deadly Heresies, 6, 8 )

When Joseph the prophet received his first manifestation from God, the Father and the Son appeared. The Father did not say a great deal, but we shall find that has been His course from the very beginning, because the Son was His Word. He declared: "This is my beloved Son, hear Him." And He, the Son, was that being, as He told the Nephites, who gave the law to Moses (Third-Nephi 15:5) and He was the Being who had charge of matters from the very beginning. In the Deity there are the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, and our father Adam was baptized in their holy name and he is not either one of them. Just remember that.(Charles W. Penrose, Conference Report, April 1916, p.20)

Brigham Young taught that Adam, or Michael, assisted the Deity in the creation of the world. He said: "It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Elohim, Yahovah and Michael, these three forming a quorum." Then he distinguished these three from the Holy Trinity, as he spoke in the same paragraph defining "the Deity as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." (JD, 1:51.) [Adam, Who is He?, 83]

In our public and private devotions let us lift our souls to Him who is the God and Father of the spirits of all men from and including Adam to the last that shall tabernacle in the flesh, and be willingly obedient to His behests as conveyed by Christ His beloved Son, through the light and power of the Holy Ghost and the voice and authority of the constituted authorities of the Church of God. This will be a sufficient guide in this life and will lead us into that fulness of knowledge and might and glory that awaits us in His Divine, immediate presence. (Improvement Era, 1914, Vol. Xvii. June, 1914 No. 8 )

We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in his Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." This is a simple statement of the persons in whom we believe and whom we revere as we are commanded to do. God our eternal Father is the Father of Jesus Christ and is the Father of Adam, or rather Michael, the name of that person before he came in the flesh. There is nothing new in what I am saying; it is all very old to me, and to members of the Church who have investigated the latter-day work from the revelations of God. Now, this ought to be clear to all our minds, and yet, among some of the classes in the Priesthood and in our Sunday school classes, and other organizations, some disputes arise. There shouldn't be any; there is no need for it. I would not try to limit the thoughts of men, nor their progress in understanding the things of God and the things of man. I believe in eternal progression, but when the Lord has revealed something very plain and simple to us, we should take that for granted and let that be sufficient for us until he reveals something further. (Charles Penrose, April 1922 General Conference)

There still remains, I can tell by the letters I have alluded to, [i.e. those coming to the First Presidency] an idea among some of the people that Adam was and is the Almighty and Eternal God . . . the notion has taken hold of some of our brethren that Adam is the being that we should worship…. I am sorry that has not been rectified long ago, because plain answers have been given to brethren and sisters who write and desire to know about it, and yet it still lingers, and contentions arise in regard to it, and there should be no contentions among Latter-day Saints….Who was the person Adam prayed to? Adam prayed to God…. So Adam was neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy Ghost, was he? Then who was he? Why, we are told he was Michael in his first estate, and as Adam he will stand at the head of his race. (Charles Penrose, April 6, 1916, General Conference)

Our Godhead consists of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. They are supreme over all, and though they administer their kingdoms through a hierarchy of appointed angels who also are exalted, one of whom is Adam or Michael, in the ultimate sense these members of the Eternal Godhead are the only Gods with whom we have to do. We worship the Father, in the name of the Son, by the power of the Holy Ghost. We follow the Son as he follows his Father. We labor and strive to be like the Son as he is like the Father, and the Father and Son and Holy Ghost are one. For these holy Beings we have unbounded love, reverence, and worship. (The Promised Messiah: The First Coming of Christ [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1978], 13.)

[alter idem]

I brought up what I have about apostates because this idea of the multiple persons filling various Godhead offices had its origination with apostate groups.

Where do you think they got their ideas? Many "apostate" ideas were once accepted doctrines among earlier Saints. What makes you think the Adam/Michael/Holy Ghost wasn't speculated on in earlier times?

Some who are of that persuasion encourage people to remain members of the Church with active temple recommends so that they can try to sow the seeds of their teaching amongst the members of the Church in hopes of bringing more people into their folds. I do not necessarily say that you are one of these apostates but I have to say that I find it strange that what I said about that bothers you so much. It is like you cannot let it go and keep trying to get me to state that it is you. Guilty conscience, perhaps?

You find it strange that it bothers him? You don't think it would be upsetting for someone to imply you're an apostate? Personally, I'd be offended at that insinuation--I'd assume other good members of the church would be too.

It's a theory..it's certainly not "doctrine" and I don't believe anyone here was claiming it was. I find it interesting to consider and read the different arguments for and against....Isn't that what the board is for?

[Drewm777]

It's a theory..it's certainly not "doctrine" and I don't believe anyone here was claiming it was. I find it interesting to consider and read the different arguments for and against....Isn't that what the board is for?

Yes, I think so! See my post above.

Anyone up to gathering the quotes on the other side?

[CMZ]

...

[Drewm777]

....

[CMZ]

...

[Drewm777]

Can we return to the topic at hand?

[alter idem]

In all honesty, I'm tired of the badgering and sarcastic comments on this thread. It doesn't add to the quality of the discussion at all. Maybe you should PM him if you want to continue to argue, but if you want to discuss the topic, then please do so!

Granted, this thread is very long now, but I think if you'll read it through, you'll find where the discussion broke down--It was in how some responded to CMZ's posts. He took offense at the suggestion that he had ulterior motives in his postings..I think most of us would be insulted by that kind of insinuation.

Personally, I've learned to be careful in my discussions on the board when subjects get deep--especially when we move into the speculatory areas. A scripture was mentioned earlier, but the Savior's remark at the end is also worth mentioning..."lest they turn around and rend you". I think this is a good example of what he meant.

We may not mean to "rend" or hurt eachother, yet, it happens.

[Sargon]

I whisper and quitely talk every time I am in the Celestial Room, and often while I am waiting to go through the veil. I have never felt the H.S. leave, nor have I felt that I was doing anything irreverent or inappropriate.

But then again, perhaps I am an apostate. Sorry Drew, on this Saturday afternoon I have a few other things to do besides responding to your long long long post, most of which is irrelevant to any theory about Adam being the H.S., although some of it is.

If it is apostate to speculate about things we don't have alot of information about you need to include B.Y., Eliza Snow, and a host of others on that list. Being wrong is not the same as being apostate.

Sargon