Adam-God Makes Sense To Occultists

[Tsuzuki]

This is a good article on how Brigham Young's Adam-God doctrine is really about the Adam Kadmon from Hermetic Kabbalah.

 

http://church-discipline.blogspot.com/2012/03/thoughts-about-adam-god.html

 

"Joseph in teaching Adam Kadmon would have been teaching a lost doctrine of early Christianity (at least of some major sects) that is engaging in Christian restoration. His belief in this doctrine would be fully consistent with the  'bible is true in so far as it is translated correctly ' as this is a doctrine which comes directly from a good understanding of the originals. This doctrine justifies many of his other theological shifts. And the doctrine isn't even much of a stretch since, the idea of a heavenly Adam can easily be thought of as the  'spirit child Adam '.

I think it not just possible but likely that Brigham was preaching this, but being a bit loose on a few occasions about distinguishing between Adam Kadmon and material Adam. What's more Adam Kadmon in Judaism is the father of all human souls, which is Elohim's role in traditional Mormonism. As mentioned above Adam Kadmon is seen as either the father of the earthly Jesus, or earthly Jesus is an incarnation of Adam Kadmon. And equally material Adam is either the son or an incarnation of Adam Kadmon. So I can easily see how the roles in a few paragraph summary of Brigham's sermons got muddled. For example in the December 28 1845, Adam-God sermon Brigham talks about how Adam got his name from the  'more ancient Adam ', which would be confusing to anyone not familiar with this doctrine.

[...]
 

And so I propose:

a) That Joseph Smith ran across a very mainstream Hermetic Christian doctrine in his studies.
b) That Joseph Smith taught this theory to Brigham.
c) That Brigham gave a few lectures on it over a period of decades, but did not cite the Hebrew. Rather he used terms like 'father Adam' for Adam Kadmon and Adam/'our father Adam' for material Adam.
d) Because he did a bad job explicating this theory, the roles got muddled in the reports of these lectures and a folk Mormonism developed with these muddled roles / theology.
e) The muddled roles got passed on to fundamentalist sects and codified.

Is all you have to believe to fully believe the LDS church's version of events. What I would suggest is go back and read Brigham's reported sermons with this doctrine in mind, and you'll see how they suddenly make sense."

 

[stemelbow]

I guess it's all possible. Makes ya wonder why Brigham thought it so important that we must all accept it. It doesn't seem that important to believe it or doubt it.

All those doubters...

[HappyJackWagon]

I guess it's all possible. Makes ya wonder why Brigham thought it so important that we must all accept it. It doesn't seem that important to believe it or doubt it.

All those doubters...

I agree.

 

On a side note, in church this past Sunday one of the prayers invoked "father Adam" which immediately perked my ears as Adam/God code language. But I'm curious, is "father Adam" used in more traditional circles?

[mfbukowski]

Thanks Tsuzuki

I always felt something like this was going on. This explains the confusion well

[Maedros]

Very interesting stuff...I enjoy your posts (even though you are an occultist) I admire how you stand your ground. I'm reading the Book of Thoth and its very intriguing. 

[Tsuzuki]

Very interesting stuff...I enjoy your posts (even though you are an occultist) I admire how you stand your ground.

Thanks! It's easy to stand your ground when the evidence is in your favor.

 

I'm reading the Book of Thoth and its very intriguing. 

Which Book of Thoth? The one on the tarot by Crowley or the "Book of Thoth" that is a metaphor for revealed knowledge in general?

[halconero]

Yeah, the Heavenly Adam was a theme even among mainstream Jews and Christians during the 2nd temple era and immediately after. Philo Judaeus associates him with the Logos ton Theou (Word of God), as does the Gospel of Thomas. Even Paul teaches a plurality of Adams, which was quite widespread among Greco-Judeans.

[ksfisher]

I agree.

 

On a side note, in church this past Sunday one of the prayers invoked "father Adam" which immediately perked my ears as Adam/God code language. But I'm curious, is "father Adam" used in more traditional circles?

 

It's used in the Doctrine and Covenants

 

5 I saw Father ^aAdam and ^bAbraham; and my ^cfather and my mother; my brother ^dAlvin, that has long since ^eslept;

D&C 137

 

38 Among the great and ^amighty ones who were assembled in this vast congregation of the righteous were Father ^bAdam, the ^cAncient of Days and father of all,

D&C 138

[HappyJackWagon]

KSFisher,
Thanks. I get that. But as a modern phrase I don't ever hear "father Adam" being referenced except when someone believes in Adam/God doctrine. That's why I think it works well as code. It's not inaccurate or without precedence, but "father Adam" still seems to have an underlying meaning for many people. But maybe I'm wrong about that and it's perfectly normal in other areas.

[ALarson]

KSFisher,

Thanks. I get that. But as a modern phrase I don't ever hear "father Adam" being referenced except when someone believes in Adam/God doctrine. That's why I think it works well as code. It's not inaccurate or without precedence, but "father Adam" still seems to have an underlying meaning for many people. But maybe I'm wrong about that and it's perfectly normal in other areas.

If you do a google search for "Father Adam", the results come up with information about the Adam-God doctrine or theory. 

[thesometimesaint]

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

[ksfisher]

KSFisher,

Thanks. I get that. But as a modern phrase I don't ever hear "father Adam" being referenced except when someone believes in Adam/God doctrine. That's why I think it works well as code. It's not inaccurate or without precedence, but "father Adam" still seems to have an underlying meaning for many people. But maybe I'm wrong about that and it's perfectly normal in other areas.

 

I think it would be used more by older people than younger, especially in a more formal setting such as a prayer or sacrament meeting talk.  Not used in conversation anymore I don't think.

[Ahab]

Yeah, right. But talking about this should alwaya be prefaced with the music and intro for the Twilight Zone.

[HappyJackWagon]

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

From FairMormon

 

 

If the Adam-God doctrine isn't true, how come D&C 27:11 calls Adam the Ancient of Days which is clearly a title for God in Daniel 7:?

To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, click here

  Answer

The critics are here not asking a sincere question; they are trying to catch the LDS in a contradiction, since a previous question assumed that Adam-God theory was official Church doctrine. This question, then, is often posed insincerely.

The real question should be how do LDS justify their interpretation of Ancient of Days as Adam. LDS are not dependent upon biblical interpretation for a complete understanding of the meaning of this or any other term. Since LDS have a more expanded idea of Adam's role, it is not surprising that they interpret some verses differently.

What a load.

 

This seems like a very legitimate question. If the church currently disavows Adam/God it seem disengenuous for FAIR to criticize someone trying to understand the inconsistency of current teachings with the teachings of a past prophet.

 

In any case, "father Adam" sounds like code to me so I'm inclined to think the gentleman talking about Father Adam in his prayer is likely to believe in that doctrine. I may just ask him but he's a crusty, mean old guy. Not sure I want to do that.

[ALarson]

Well, it was taught by Brigham Young and he called it "doctrine".  He also threatened church discipline for Orson Pratt who opposed the doctrine and spoke out publicly against it. And, it was added to the temple endowment as a "lecture at the veil".  

[thesometimesaint]

I'm neither crusty nor mean, but I am old.

 

When an idea like Adam is our God is presented as LDS doctrine. it does little good to use just one source, in this case Brigham Young. Brother Brigham said many contradictory thing about his idea of Adam is our God. The idea of Adam as our God has never been accepted by the Church. That isn't how the Church works.

 

He like every other member is free to believe anything they like, and I'm not about to gainsay him on his person ideas.

[thesometimesaint]

Well, it was taught by Brigham Young and he called it "doctrine".  He also threatened church discipline for Orson Pratt who opposed the doctrine and spoke out publicly against it. And, it was added to the temple endowment as a "lecture at the veil".  

 

CFR That the Adam God theory has ever been accepted by the Church. I just can't find it in my Scriptures.

[ALarson]

CFR That the Adam God theory has ever been accepted by the Church. I just can't find it in my Scriptures.

Where did I state that the Adam God theory was ever accepted by the church?

Edited October 13, 2015 by ALarson

[Calm]

But I'm curious, is "father Adam" used in more traditional circles?

My experience is definitely, Mother Eve and Father Adam is often used in the traditional beliefs about them. Perhaps it is all those years spent in Primary where I heard it.

A search on lds.org yields a number of examples.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2008/04/faith-of-our-father?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual/the-book-of-moses?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2014/01/adam?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1985/08/what-i-hope-you-will-teach-your-children-about-the-temple?lang=eng

Edited October 13, 2015 by Calm

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

Atum

More fun with Atum

Nibley's 1986 lecture on The Council:

https://youtu.be/hC4Ll1wZfhw?t=35m55s

Atum is the big thing. At Heliopolis he is everything. It's very interesting. In the very old Coffin Texts, he is called Adamu, using the Canaanite ending u and also the soft d instead of t. In fact, Lefebure, the famous French Egyptologist went to quite a great length to show that this is the same as Adam, and he obviously is Adam here. So it says here, Atum who was begotten and who then became the father of the pesedj or the Great Council. The pesedj is always translated Ennead, but is it the Ennead? I notice how Sethe sums it up here. Ennead doesn't have to be nine or eight, or any particular number. It means the vast number. The numberless Council of the Gods is what it means. I wish I could see how he put ennead here. (Well, who cares?) But it's important though. There are the nine gods, but there are dozens of lists of them. Sometimes they will add one or take some off, or add five or six. Originally, half should be female and half male, with Ptah making the odd number, you see. It breaks down into couples such as Shu and Tefnut and Geb and Neith.

But first Atum. His name is a very important one. Rudolf Anthes has written several long articles and monographs about the name of Atum. It means "many," as we are told in Moses l:34. And, of course, it means "many" here. I notice that even Siegfried Lawrence, a very prejudiced character, says what it means is a gesammtheit-a gathering, a compound, or a complex. It includes everything in itself, and you will see why. The word is very productive in Egypt. It's a word that means almost anything. You just draw a sled, and this is tm. It's a regular verb meaning "to be," but it also means "not to be." It means "to complete, to complete a circle." Immediately, you think of the Hebrew word for perfect. Job was an upright man, yashar watamim, upright and perfect. Tamim means a perfect circle. It comes right back to the beginning where it started. Of course, tamam is the standard Arabic word for perfect or complete. Well, Atum is the one who is perfect and complete. Oh, there are all sorts of things. When we get to the Atum literature, we may talk about them. But in Egyptian it means "to be complete, to be everything, to be nothing, and not to be." The basic meaning they give is mes-tm, "one who begot all." Well, that's what it's written as here. The father of all. Mes is like Moses, etc. It means "to beget, to have a child." And Mes-tm is the one who begot all. And Anthes says the name of Adam represents all that has gone before himself and all that comes after himself. He is the great bottleneck. As to his own origin, we are told it is deliberately left unrevealed or unreported. There are various theories, of course. But in the Pyramid Texts, the oldest writings we have after this, he is the primal god who comes down to earth-the first one to set foot on the primal hill when the waters divide. When the land becomes habitable, Atum is the first one to occupy it. We are told in one text he needed no magic because he came first. He was a real fact. He doesn't need to create something. He has a companion, Amun's pallakida, his mate. That's a very interesting way of putting it, as Bonnet does. This was his companion, his helpmeet. This was Hathor, the woman who settled the land. The priestesses of the Atum temple were always called Hathors. That goes back, he thinks, to a tree cult because they have this tree of life business here.

Edited October 13, 2015 by JeremyOrbe-Smith

[Nofear]

I think you may have something Tsuzuki. Elden Watson received a lot of criticism for his proposal of the two Adam hypothesis, and that is what Brigham Young was meaning. Clark Goble, like you, argues that the Adam Kadmon thinking may have influenced Brigham's language and lends credence to Watson's perspective.

http://www.ldsgospeldoctrine.net/kn/random/cg-ag2.txt

[thesometimesaint]

Where did I state that the Adam God theory was ever accepted by the church?

 

Sorry I misunderstood. It just came across that way to me.

[ALarson]

Sorry I misunderstood. It just came across that way to me.

No problem

[HappyJackWagon]

I'm neither crusty nor mean, but I am old.

 

When an idea like Adam is our God is presented as LDS doctrine. it does little good to use just one source, in this case Brigham Young. Brother Brigham said many contradictory thing about his idea of Adam is our God. The idea of Adam as our God has never been accepted by the Church. That isn't how the Church works.

 

He like every other member is free to believe anything they like, and I'm not about to gainsay him on his person ideas.

It was accepted and taught by the prophet. It was also part of the temple endowment (lecture at the veil for many years). So while it is currently disavowed it once was held up as a church teaching in that it was an institutionalized teaching in the endowment. I can't answer a CFR on this due to board guidelines. However, I believe it can be found Devry Anderson's book The Development of LDS Temple Worship

[thesometimesaint]

It was accepted and taught by the prophet. It was also part of the temple endowment (lecture at the veil for many years). So while it is currently disavowed it once was held up as a church teaching in that it was an institutionalized teaching in the endowment. I can't answer a CFR on this due to board guidelines. However, I believe it can be found Devry Anderson's book The Development of LDS Temple Worship

 

I won't address the Endowment directly either, except to say that as of June 1972 there was no Adam is our God claim in the Endowment. If someone wants to believe it that's fine with me, but I don't and see no reason to believe it.