Adam forgetting all

[baddonkey]

I was thinking about how Adam is supposed to have forgotten all and become as a little child, and I wonder what it was that caused that to take place. I also wonder why it was necessary if Adam already was a little child, having been procreated here by Heavenly Father and Mother. That also caused me to wonder how Heavenly Father and Mother are able to switch between having spirit children and having physical children. What do you guys think about these things?

[David T]

The bodies of Adam and Eve were probably not physically literally procreated by God any more than your or my bodies were.

They forgot all 'as a child' just as you and I forget all when our spirits enter our physical bodies and become mortal children.

[LeSellers]

I was thinking about how Adam is supposed to have forgotten all and become as a little child, and I wonder what it was that caused that to take place.

He went through the same "veil of forgetfulness" we all do and for the same reasons.

I also wonder why it was necessary if Adam already was a little child, having been procreated here by Heavenly Father and Mother.

He was, they were, not "procreated here". Whatever the process on this earth, it was not procreation.

That also caused me to wonder how Heavenly Father and Mother are able to switch between having spirit children and having physical children.

You seem to believe (and it is your right) that spirit children are engendered via some sort of sexual union. This may be true, but it more likely not. We know essentially nothing about the process of begetting spirit children. It is pointless to speculate on the matter.

Further, you also seem to believe (and this, too, is your right)that Adams' and Eves' bodies are physically procreated by Father and Mother. Again, we do not have any specific information and very little general revelation on how physical bodies are created.

I believe that the imagery in Genesis, and even in the Temple, is figurative. But I do not have a concrete idea of the mechanisms that result in either spiritual or physical bodies for our Parents' children. And, as far as I know, no one else does, either.

Lehi

[MDalby]

The bodies of Adam and Eve were not physically literally procreated by God any more than your or my bodies were.

CFR - Can you provide a statement from the prophets and scriptures that verify your statement?

22 And this is the genealogy of the sons of Adam, who was the son of God, with whom God, himself, conversed.

(Moses 6:22)

3 It (the Priesthood) was conferred upon me from the fathers; it came down from the fathers, from the beginning of time, yea, even from the beginning, or before the foundation of the earth, down to the present time, even the right of the firstborn, or the first man, who is Adam, or first father, through the fathers unto me.

(Abraham 1:3)

[changed]

Jesus is the "only" begotten, so Adam was not begotten.

(New Testament:Luke 3:38)

c JST Luke 3:45 ... who was formed of God, and the first man upon the earth.

(New Testament | Luke 3:38)

38 Which was the ason of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of bAdam, cwhich was the dson of God.

If Adam and Eve had not gone through the veil of forgetfulness, it would have been a sin, not a transgression....

There is a lot we don't know about Adam, he must have had a previous life - he was a perfect celestial beings who was made Lord over a new world... tell me, how do you become a perfect celestial being who is made lord over a world? Adam must have lived before...

[MDalby]

Jesus is the "only" begotten, so Adam was not begotten.

Jesus is the Firstborn and is different than the firstborn. There is a difference between the creation of the Savior and the creation of Adam. The Savior was born the Son of God on this mortal earth and hence the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh with the ability to lay down his life and take it up again. Adam's creation was different and so Jesus is the Only Begotten.

I am looking for a reference from the scriptures and the brethren that states that Heavenly Father was not the Father of Adam.

Here is a statement from the First Presidency that states otherwise.

But President Young went on to show that our father Adam, -- that is, our earthly father, -- the progenitor of the race of man, stands at our head, being "Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days," and that he was not fashioned from earth like an adobe, but "begotten by his Father in Heaven."

(JOSEPH F. SMITH, ANTHON H. LUND, CHARLES W. PENROSE,First Presidency, (James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 4:266-67, letter of 20 Feb. 1912)

[David T]

CFR - Can you provide a statement from the prophets and scriptures that verify your statement?

22 And this is the genealogy of the sons of Adam, who was the son of God, with whom God, himself, conversed.

(Moses 6:22)

3 It (the Priesthood) was conferred upon me from the fathers; it came down from the fathers, from the beginning of time, yea, even from the beginning, or before the foundation of the earth, down to the present time, even the right of the firstborn, or the first man, who is Adam, or first father, through the fathers unto me.

(Abraham 1:3)

The same chapter, Moses 6, continues to lay out how Adam is a son of God:

"66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with fire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and theSon, from henceforth and forever;

67 And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity. Behold, thou art one in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my sons. Amen."

Also, this revelation came in 1830. Context shows this was long before anyone had any idea of, or began thinking about, the concept of Divine Procreation in the Church.

Another usage of the term the same year, D&C 34: "My son Orson, hearken and hear and behold what I, the Lord God, shall say unto you, even Jesus Christ your Redeemer; The light and the life of the world, a light which shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehendeth it not; Who so loved the world that he gave his own life, that as many as would believe might become the sons of God. Wherefore you are my son; And blessed are you because you have believed;"

[MDalby]

The same chapter, Moses 6, continues to lay out how Adam is a son of God:

"66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with fire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and theSon, from henceforth and forever;

67 And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity. Behold, thou art one in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my sons. Amen."

Also, this revelation came in 1830. Context shows this was long before anyone had any idea of, or began thinking about, the concept of Divine Procreation in the Church.

Another usage of the term the same year, D&C 34: "MY son Orson, hearken and hear and behold what I, the Lord God, shall say unto you, even Jesus Christ your Redeemer; The light and the life of the world, a light which shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehendeth it not; Who so loved the world that he gave his own life, that as many as would believe might become the sons of God. Wherefore you are my son; And blessed are you because you have believed;"

Reference the statement form the First Presidency that states otherwise.

[MDalby]

We did not spring from spawn. Our spirits existed from the beginning, have existed always, and will continue forever. We did not pass through the ordeals of embodiment in the lesser animals in order to reach the perfection to which we have attained in manhood and womanhood, in the image and likeness of God. God was and is our Father, and his children were begotten in the flesh of his own image and likeness, male and female.

(Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p. 25)

[MDalby]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity.

(First Presidency of the Church, The Origin of Man)

[MDalby]

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; and the things that pertain to God and to heaven were as familiar among mankind, in the first ages of their existence on the earth, as these mountains are to our mountain boys, as our gardens are to our wives and children, or as the road to the Western Ocean is to the experienced traveller.

(President Brigham Young, JD, 9:149)

We are all the children of Adam and Eve, and they are the offspring of Him who dwells in the heavens, the Highest Intelligence that dwells anywhere that we have any knowledge of.

(Brigham Young, Discourses of Brigham Young, p.94)

[David T]

Reference the statement form the First Presidency that states otherwise.

I will. And I'll add context that you left out.

The letter to a is an apologetic ( read: Damage Control) attempt to explain some of Brigham Young's Adam teachings in the Journal of Discourses. While it's conclusions do not accurately express what Brigham was teaching in context, It does a wonderful job in going for a 'softer' approach, attempting to correlate properly understood doctrine in the mix. Your original citation is in red. The surrounding is what you left out.

If you will carefully examine the sermon to which you refer, in the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, you will discover that, while President Young denied that Jesus was "begotten of the Holy Ghost," he did not affirm, in so many words, that "Adam is the father of Jesus Christ in the flesh." He said, "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. Who is our "Father in Heaven"? Here is what President Young said about him; "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." Was He in the Garden of Eden? Surely He gave commandments to Adam and Eve; He was their Father in Heaven; they worshiped Him and taught their children after the fall to worship and obey Him in the name of the Son who was to come.

But President Young went on to show that our father Adam,-that is, our earthly father,-the progenitor of the race of man, stands at our head, being "Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days," and that he was not fashioned from earth like an adobe, but "begotten by his Father in Heaven."

Adam is called in the Bible "the son of God" (Luke 3:38). It was our Father in Heaven who begat the spirit of him who was "the Firstborn" of all the spirits that come to this earth, and who was, also his Father by the Virgin Mary, making him "the only begotten in the flesh."

Read Luke 1:26-35. Where is Jesus called "the only begotten of the Holy Ghost?" He is always singled out as "the only begotten of the Father." (John 1:14; 3:16, 18, &c) The Holy Ghost came upon Mary, and her conception was under that influence, even of the spirit of life; our Father in Heaven was the Father of the Son of Mary, to whom the Savior prayed, as did our earthly father Adam.

Its purpose it to attempt to prove that Adam couldn't be the Father of Jesus, because Adam (specifically his spirit, Michael) is said in the scriptures to be a son of God, and it uses an additional citation of Brigham to show this is what he must have meant. It shows only that Adam is a begotten spirit son of God, and not the Father of Jesus, in spirit or otherwise.

Also note that the Luke 3:38 reference cited was changed in the JST to 'was formed of God'. This was written very shortly after the Moses verse you cited - it's a good interpretative tool to show understood intent.

JFS felt the brunt of damage control in sorting out and setting in order and attempting to correlate the doctrinal confusion created by President Young's self-admittedly speculative Adam Sermons.

I feel he did an admirable job, all things considered.

[MDalby]

I will. And I'll add context that you left out.

The letter to a member is actually ambiguous in context. Note that it is an apologetic ( read: Damage Control) attempt to explain some of Brigham Young's Adam teachings in the Journal of Discourses. Unfortunately, it's conclusions do not accurately express what Brigham was teaching in context. It goes for a 'softer' approach, and is not very clear at that.

Its purpose it to attempt to prove that Adam couldn't be the Father of Jesus, because Adam (specifically his spirit, Michael) is said in the scriptures to be a son of God, and it uses an additional citation of Brigham to show this is what he must have meant.

Also note that the Luke 3:38 reference cited was changed in the JST to 'was formed of God'. This was written very shortly after the Moses verse you cited - it's a good interpretative tool to show understood intent. felt the brunt of damage control in sorting out and setting in order and attempting to correlate the doctrinal confusion created by President Young's self-admittedly speculative Adam Sermons.

I feel he did an admirable job, all things considered.

None of what you posted has anything to do with the statement that was made that, "Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, and that he was not fashioned from earth like an adobe, but "begotten by his Father in Heaven."

This is obviously referring to Adam's physical creation, not his spiritual creation.

[David T]

None of what you posted has anything to do with the statement that was made that, "Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, and that he was not fashioned from earth like an adobe, but "begotten by his Father in Heaven."

This is obviously referring to Adam's physical creation, not his spiritual creation.

From the statement I cited:

"Here is what President Young said about him; "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."

Read it again in context. Your conclusion is not the intent of JFS's interpretation of Brigham's words (I recognizer Brigham certainly understood it as procreation - JFS, however, is trying to play that down).

[MDalby]

From the statement I cited:

"Here is what President Young said about him; "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."

Read it again in context. Your conclusion is not the intent of JFS's interpretation of Brigham's words (I recognizer Brigham certainly understood it as procreation - JFS, however, is trying to play that down).

So what are you saying? Are you saying we are all literal spiritual children of our Heavenly Father? Which I agree with. Then how could Brigham Young's statement be spiritual. It is obviously a physical relationship that he is referring to.

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

; and the things that pertain to God and to heaven were as familiar among mankind, in the first ages of their existence on the earth, as these mountains are to our mountain boys, as our gardens are to our wives and children, or as the road to the Western Ocean is to the experienced traveller.

(President Brigham Young, JD, 9:149)

[MDalby]

From the statement I cited:

"Here is what President Young said about him; "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."

Read it again in context. Your conclusion is not the intent of JFS's interpretation of Brigham's words (I recognizer Brigham certainly understood it as procreation - JFS, however, is trying to play that down).

I disagree with your interpretation of what President Smith is saying. It is very clear that he said Adam's physical creation was not from adobe but was begotten from his Father. Period.

[MDalby]

We can just agree to disagree but you cannot say that Adam definitely was not begotten from his Heavenly Father. You have no such statements to support that stance.

[David T]

I agree that Brigham Young taught physical procreation. It's a key part of his Adam-God developing understanding. (I believe his speculations, in their context, were way off.)

Joseph F. Smith was attempting to re-interpert his words to teach something closer to understood orthodoxy.

In short: The intent of JFS's letter is different than the intent of Brigham Youngs' sermons.

[David T]

We can just agree to disagree but you cannot say that Adam definitely was not begotten from his Heavenly Father. You have no such statements to support that stance.

Which is why before I even saw your post, I added 'probably' to my post.

[MDalby]

Which is why before I even saw your post, I added 'probably' to my post.

Sorry, I missed that "probably". I think it would most accurate to say "possibly" rather than "probably".

[David T]

I disagree with your interpretation of what President Smith is saying. It is very clear that he said Adam's physical creation was not from adobe but was begotten from his Father. Period.

No, he says that Michael was not created like an adobe. "being "Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days," and that he was not fashioned from earth like an adobe, but "begotten by his Father in Heaven." - right after talking about God begetting all spirits.

Physical creation is not referenced. Not as 'period' as you would like.

[MDalby]

No, he says that Michael was not created like an adobe. "being "Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days," and that he was not fashioned from earth like an adobe, but "begotten by his Father in Heaven." - right after talking about God begetting all spirits.

Physical creation is not referenced. Not as 'period' as you would like.

So BY was saying Adam's spirit was not "fashioned from earth like an adobe". That makes no sense.

[David T]

No, what I presented was JFSs interpretation/explanation of BYs words. As I've said -The original intent and JFSs interpretation do not agree.

[David T]

FWIW, this may help for context of the view of Joseph F. Smith's presidency:

The First Presidency, in their regular column in the Improvement Era,"Priesthood Quorums' Table," [ in 1910] stated the following: "Whether the mortal bodies of man evolved in natural processes to present perfection, through the direction and power of God; whether the first parents of our generations, Adam and Eve, were transplanted from another sphere, with immortal tabernacles, which became corrupted through sin and the partaking of natural foods, in the process of time; whether they were born here in mortality, as other mortals have been, are questions not fully answered in the revealed word of God" (pp. 43

[Lightbearer]

So BY was saying Adam's spirit was not "fashioned from earth like an adobe". That makes no sense.

You may as well give up, because you are fighting with one of the many evolutionist apologists here on the board. You can't win, they will just end up calling you ignorant or arrogant...