Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Adam God Theory

Jim Stiles

By Jim Stiles
in General Discussions

Recommended Posts

ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted (edited)

Since this doctrine is not taught by the LDS Church today and was not taught by Joseph Smith, how should we interpret the apparent calling of church presidents Brigham Young, John Taylor, and Wilford Woodruff?

 

We accept them as prophets called of God who taught something that nobody today understands and apparently wasn't understood in their day.  Their teachings on this may or may not have any validity but they are irrelevant to the present day.

 

See:

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Repudiated_concepts/Adam-God_theory

Edited by ERayR
Link to comment
JAHS Grand Master

JAHS

Posted
Posted
I don't think we know everything about what president Young was thinking when he came up with this idea. What makes his statements about the Adam/God theory confusing is that within the same speeches and in other discourses where he mentions it, he definitely states that "Adam is 

Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days;" which means that Adam is not Elohim, or God the Father.

 

President Young also explained that Adam helped to make the earth. If he only helped then that means that he was subordinate to someone who was superior. Young also states, "It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael." Here he places Adam, or Michael, third in the list, and hence the least important of the three mentioned.

 

He also said:

"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."

Why would he say this if he thought that Adam was God the Father? 

 

The apostle Joseph F. Smith had this to say about the theory:

"President Young no doubt expressed his personal opinion or views upon the subject. What he said was not given as 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, and was never formally or otherwise accepted by the Church. It is therefore in no sense binding upon the Church." 

 

While God does reveal things and inspire his prophets on what to do and say, He does not take over a prophet's brain and make him think or say everything perfectly. They maintain their agency to think about some things and come up with ideas of their own. 

What ever he thought about this particular subject it has no bearing or effect on my eternal life.
Link to comment
ERayR Grand Master

ERayR

Posted
Posted

 

I don't think we know everything about what president Young was thinking when he came up with this idea. What makes his statements about the Adam/God theory confusing is that within the same speeches and in other discourses where he mentions it, he definitely states that "Adam is 
Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days;" which means that Adam is not Elohim, or God the Father.
 
President Young also explained that Adam helped to make the earth. If he only helped then that means that he was subordinate to someone who was superior. Young also states, "It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael." Here he places Adam, or Michael, third in the list, and hence the least important of the three mentioned.
 
He also said:
"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."
Why would he say this if he thought that Adam was God the Father? 
 
The apostle Joseph F. Smith had this to say about the theory:
"President Young no doubt expressed his personal opinion or views upon the subject. What he said was not given as 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, and was never formally or otherwise accepted by the Church. It is therefore in no sense binding upon the Church." 
 
While God does reveal things and inspire his prophets on what to do and say, He does not take over a prophet's brain and make him think or say everything perfectly. They maintain their agency to think about some things and come up with ideas of their own. 
What ever he thought about this particular subject it has no bearing or effect on my eternal life.

 

 

Yes, he never publicly fully developed his theology on this and we have no way of knowing where it was going.  I can think of one or two scenarios that would work but have no way of knowing. 

Link to comment
Ahab Grand Master

Ahab

Posted
Posted

I don't think we know everything about what president Young was thinking when he came up with this idea. What makes his statements about the Adam/God theory confusing is that within the same speeches and in other discourses where he mentions it, he definitely states that "Adam is

Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days;" which means that Adam is not Elohim, or God the Father.

President Young also explained that Adam helped to make the earth. If he only helped then that means that he was subordinate to someone who was superior. Young also states, "It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael." Here he places Adam, or Michael, third in the list, and hence the least important of the three mentioned.

He also said:

"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."

Why would he say this if he thought that Adam was God the Father?

The apostle Joseph F. Smith had this to say about the theory:

"President Young no doubt expressed his personal opinion or views upon the subject. What he said was not given as 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, and was never formally or otherwise accepted by the Church. It is therefore in no sense binding upon the Church."

While God does reveal things and inspire his prophets on what to do and say, He does not take over a prophet's brain and make him think or say everything perfectly. They maintain their agency to think about some things and come up with ideas of their own.

What ever he thought about this particular subject it has no bearing or effect on my eternal life.

It all becomes clear when you realize the word God has multiple meanings, referring not only to our Father or Jesus or the Holy Ghost but more generally to anyone who is the same kind of being, even including all of us who are children of our Father in heaven. So yes Adam is God, and the only God we have something to do with.

It's really strange for me to see so many people who don't understand this. And Joseph knew it and taught it as well as brother Brigham.

1
Link to comment
sunstoned Grand Master

sunstoned

Posted
Posted

Adam God was something the BY taught on and off over a number of years.  There was a lot of push back by several of the twelve with his views on Adam God.   It is not something that was every accepted by the church as a whole and it really just died out after few years after BY passed away.

Link to comment
Freedom Grand Master

Freedom

Posted
Posted

I have heard that some of the past leaders of the church listened to country music and voted republican. Yet they were still called of God. Perhaps I am wrong, but I am not aware of any primary sources that suggest BY taught this. I have heard that it was incorporated into the temple ceremony but I have not seen the proof. 

Link to comment
sunstoned Grand Master

sunstoned

Posted
Posted

I have heard that some of the past leaders of the church listened to country music and voted republican. Yet they were still called of God. Perhaps I am wrong, but I am not aware of any primary sources that suggest BY taught this. I have heard that it was incorporated into the temple ceremony but I have not seen the proof. 

There are plenty of primary souses that verify that BY taught Adam God.  Most common source is the Journal of Discourses.  I'm not a big Wiki fan, but its entry on Adam God does cite many primary references.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%E2%80%93God_doctrine

2
Link to comment
JLHPROF Grand Master

JLHPROF

Posted
Posted

Since this doctrine is not taught by the LDS Church today and was not taught by Joseph Smith, how should we interpret the apparent calling of church presidents Brigham Young, John Taylor, and Wilford Woodruff?

 

Personally I believe the Adam-God doctrine as taught by Brigham, John, Wilford (and Jos. F. Smith).  I also believe, despite the lack of historical record, that at least some of it was taught by Joseph Smith (as his wife Eliza said).

 

The fact that it was summarily removed from all authorized teachings after the early 1900's is irrelevant.  Lot's of things got changed doctrinally in the days of Pres. Grant.  That's ok.

 

Whenever there is conflict between the teachings of two prophets, since they were both called of God, I believe we get to study and pray and choose for ourselves which theological belief we hold to.  Even Brigham said it didn't matter to our salvation if we believed the Adam-God doctrine.  I choose to believe.  Most choose not to.  Doesn't matter at all.

4
Link to comment
Teancum Grand Master

Teancum

Posted
Posted

Personally I believe the Adam-God doctrine as taught by Brigham, John, Wilford (and Jos. F. Smith).  I also believe, despite the lack of historical record, that at least some of it was taught by Joseph Smith (as his wife Eliza said).

 

The fact that it was summarily removed from all authorized teachings after the early 1900's is irrelevant.  Lot's of things got changed doctrinally in the days of Pres. Grant.  That's ok.

 

Whenever there is conflict between the teachings of two prophets, since they were both called of God, I believe we get to study and pray and choose for ourselves which theological belief we hold to.  Even Brigham said it didn't matter to our salvation if we believed the Adam-God doctrine.  I choose to believe.  Most choose not to.  Doesn't matter at all.

Hmmmm

Seems to me the prophet really ought to know who and what God is. JS taught that knowing who God is and what gods attributes are were the first principle of revealed religion .

1
Link to comment
Rivers Grand Master

Rivers

Posted
Posted

Personally I believe the Adam-God doctrine as taught by Brigham, John, Wilford (and Jos. F. Smith). I also believe, despite the lack of historical record, that at least some of it was taught by Joseph Smith (as his wife Eliza said).

The fact that it was summarily removed from all authorized teachings after the early 1900's is irrelevant. Lot's of things got changed doctrinally in the days of Pres. Grant. That's ok.

Whenever there is conflict between the teachings of two prophets, since they were both called of God, I believe we get to study and pray and choose for ourselves which theological belief we hold to. Even Brigham said it didn't matter to our salvation if we believed the Adam-God doctrine. I choose to believe. Most choose not to. Doesn't matter at all.

Can you explain the Adam-God theory in a way that is in harmony with the standard works?

Link to comment
JLHPROF Grand Master

JLHPROF

Posted
Posted

Can you explain the Adam-God theory in a way that is in harmony with the standard works?

 

On this board...that would be some trick.  There are many hundred+ page books out there that address the theology, scripture, and teachings of the prophets.

 

Personally, I see very little (if anything) in the scriptures that actually disagrees with anything in the Adam-God doctrine.

1
Link to comment
Coreyb Experienced

Coreyb

Posted
Posted

Hmmmm

Seems to me the prophet really ought to know who and what God is. JS taught that knowing who God is and what gods attributes are were the first principle of revealed religion .

He said it was the first principle of the gospel to know what KIND of a being God is, and then he revealed that he was a man, like you and me.

Link to comment
Coreyb Experienced

Coreyb

Posted
Posted

Can you explain the Adam-God theory in a way that is in harmony with the standard works?

No, because the standard works are not in harmony with each other (did I just say...). That's like saying "the Bible says" or "a biblical doctrine".

Link to comment
Alan Veteran

Alan

Posted
Posted

The Adam-God theory, as it is called, is nothing of the sort. A more accurate title would be the Adam-God Heresy.

 

We just have to accept that Brigham and the others taught heresies. Either that, or our modern leaders do.

1
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...