Brigham Young?

[Robert F. Smith]

On 9/10/2017 at 3:09 PM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

If in your view BY sometimes couldn't tell the difference between revelation and non-revelation, then why do you expect me to be able to? 

Did you ask God if BY taught Adam/God? If you didn't get an answer it means BY didn't teach it. 

I don't know whether you actually believe in LDS theology, so can't say whether you are able to distinguish revelation from non-revelation.  Since you clearly do not know the meaning of the word "revelation," I doubt that you are capable of handling any discussion of it.

As for me, I already know that Brigham taught Adam-God theory, based on full historical records.  I don't need revelation on the subject.   Indeed, in the economy of God, one is expected to seek revelation or inspiration only when necessary.

Quote

You don't have to be perfect to be an expert. In General Conference Sister Pearce taught, "Here are my experts: the prophets " 

Was Sister Pearce teaching apostate doctrine in General Conference? 

Pearce was using the normal meaning of "expert," which you are unable to do.  You use it as a synonym of "infallible," which is apostate and anti-Mormon usage.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

That Satan inspired someone to make changes.  

Dozens of them?
To minutes of general authority meetings?  To people's personal journals?  To newspaper articles?

You are delusional if you believe that.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I don't know whether you actually believe in LDS theology, so can't say whether you are able to distinguish revelation from non-revelation.  Since you clearly do not know the meaning of the word "revelation," I doubt that you are capable of handing any discussion of it.

Okay what is the meaning of the word revelation? Can I find that definition in church sources?

You told me BY sometimes couldn't tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts, so in your view how is LDS revelation useful and reliable?  Just asking out of curiosity.

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

As for me, I already know that Brigham taught Adam-God theory, based on full historical records.  I don't need revelation on the subject.   Indeed, in the economy of God, one is expected to seek revelation or inspiration only when necessary.

Why tell me to do something that you are not willing to do?

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Pearce was using the normal meaning of "expert," which you are unable to do.  You use it as a synonym of "infallible," which is apostate and anti-Mormon usage.

I am not using the word "expert" as a synonym of "infallible", but I do expect that prophets can tell the difference between the spirit and their own thoughts. I do believe revelation is useful and reliable. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Dozens of them?
To minutes of general authority meetings?  To people's personal journals?  To newspaper articles?

You are delusional if you believe that.

Dude you believe in Adam/God

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Dude you believe in Adam/God

So did Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and probably other prophets too (Wilford Woodruff, Joseph F. Smith, etc).
I think I will go with their judgement over yours.

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Okay what is the meaning of the word revelation? Can I find that definition in church sources?

You could look them up on your own, if you were open to learning.  Here are some online definitions:

"3. (Christianity) God's disclosure of his own nature and his purpose for mankind, esp through the words of human intermediaries. something in which such a divine disclosure is contained, such as the Bible."

"The English word revelation is translated from a Greek word apocalypse, meaning to make known or uncover." (LDS Bible Dictionary, online at https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd?lang=eng&letter=r )

"Revelation then is the act of revealing or disclosing something that has not been known or seen before and the biblical definition fits very nicely with this secular definition."  This  is just  one sentence from a good comprehensive evangelical definition is by Jack Wellman, "What Does Revelation Mean?  A Biblical Definition of Revelation," Patheos, Aug 18, 2015, online at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christiancrier/2015/08/18/what-does-revelation-mean-a-biblical-definition-of-revelation/ .  Now, if you only understood the definition of a "prophet."

9 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

You told me BY sometimes couldn't tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts, so in your view how is LDS revelation useful and reliable?  Just asking out of curiosity.

All of us are in that bind.  There is always uncertainly.  We do the best we can with what we have, including Brother Brigham.  The membership of the LDS Church is the body of Christ.  We are a community in which no one is more important than anyone else.  We move forward or backward as a body, not as individuals.  As Pres Uchtdorf has said, mistakes have been made, and we need to accept our fallible human nature.  However, precisely because revelation and inspiration are reliable and useful, the body is able to move forward over time -- despite hiccups here and there.

9 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Why tell me to do something that you are not willing to do?

I am not using the word "expert" as a synonym of "infallible", but I do expect that prophets can tell the difference between the spirit and their own thoughts. I do believe revelation is useful and reliable. 

Reliable and useful, yes.  Perfectly so, no. You are ignoring the hiccups and errors which we humans inevitably make along the way.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

20 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

So did Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and probably other prophets too (Wilford Woodruff, Joseph F. Smith, etc).
I think I will go with their judgement over yours.

In General Conference President Kimball taught "Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine."  Now we believe Satan inspired men to make changes to the Bible and the 116 pages, why couldn't Satan do the same with other documents?   

[SamuelTheLamanite]

12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

All of us are in that bind.  There is always uncertainly.  We do the best we can with what we have, including Brother Brigham.  The membership of the LDS Church is the body of Christ.  We are a community in which no one is more important than anyone else.  We move forward or backward as a body, not as individuals.  As Pres Uchtdorf has said, mistakes have been made, and we need to accept our fallible human nature.  However, precisely because revelation and inspiration are reliable and useful, the body is able to move forward over time -- despite hiccups here and there.

Reliable and useful, yes.  Perfectly so, no. You are ignoring the hiccups and errors which we humans inevitably make along the way.

Do you believe Young taught Adam/God for many years? A prophet that can tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts wouldn't teach false doctrine for years.  

If Young really taught Adam/God why didn't he retract? or felt bad? or felt the spirit withdrawing?  I know Young was not perfect, but you are making Young indistinguishable from someone that is not a prophet.    

Do you believe God loved Young and his church? Do you believe God would have allowed false doctrine in his church for years? 

Edited September 12, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Robert F. Smith]

57 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Do you believe Young taught Adam/God for many years? A prophet that can tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts wouldn't teach false doctrine for years.  

If Young really taught Adam/God why didn't he retract? or felt bad? or felt the spirit withdrawing?  I know Young was not perfect, but you are making Young indistinguishable from someone that is not a prophet.    

Do you believe God loved Young and his church? Do you believe God would have allowed false doctrine in his church for years? 

God often allows false doctrine and bad behavior in His congregation, and He applies appropriate punishment for it.  He does not stop human mistakes, because (unlike you) He supports free agency.  For most of history, the people of God have been allowed to do as they chose, many times being sent into exile as punishment.  You mustn't conveniently forget history when it suits you, Sam, and the history of the chosen people of God is one of repeated failures.  It's a learning experience.  For you, the plan of God is too messy, so you foolishly reach out to steady the ark.  Your lack of a healthy sense of historical perspective is your greatest failing, leaving you unable to distinguish truth from falsehood.

However, on the off chance that you actually seriously want to understand the ways of God and His Church, you may want to carefully read through a series of three articles on the very issue you are addressing here.  I recommend it not because it agrees with me (it doesn't), but because the discussion is broad and deep.

Duane Boyce, “A Lengthening Shadow: Is Quality of Thought Deteriorating in LDS Scholarly Discourse Regarding Prophets and Revelation? Part One,” Interpreter, 26 (2017): 1-48, online at http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/a-lengthening-shadow-is-quality-of-thought-deteriorating-in-lds-scholarly-discourse-regarding-prophets-and-revelation-part-one/ . 

Duane Boyce, “A Lengthening Shadow: Is Quality of Thought Deteriorating in LDS Scholarly Discourse Regarding Prophets and Revelation? Part Two,” Interpreter, 26 (2017):49-92, online at http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/a-lengthening-shadow-is-quality-of-thought-deteriorating-in-lds-scholarly-discourse-regarding-prophets-and-revelation-part-two/ . 

Duane Boyce, “A Lengthening Shadow: Is Quality of Thought Deteriorating in LDS Scholarly Discourse Regarding Prophets and Revelation? Part Three,” Interpreter, 26 (2017):93-122, online at http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/a-lengthening-shadow-is-quality-of-thought-deteriorating-in-lds-scholarly-discourse-regarding-prophets-and-revelation-part-three/ . 

I consider Boyce to be fundamentally wrong for the same reasons I have been giving in reply to you, but his discussion is a good deal more informed and sophisticated than the one we have been having here.

[Robert F. Smith]

21 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

So did Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and probably other prophets too (Wilford Woodruff, Joseph F. Smith, etc).
I think I will go with their judgement over yours.

And you want to set that over against the teachings of current prophets, including Orson Pratt back in Brigham's day?  Here's what Bruce R. McConkie had to say on Adam-God:

Quote

"I do not know all of the providences of the Lord, but I do know that he permits false doctrine to be taught in and out of the Church and that such teaching is part of the sifting process of mortality. I repeat: Brigham Young erred in some of his statements on the nature and kind of being that God is and as to the position of Adam in the plan of salvation"   Letter to Eugene England, February 19, 1981.

 

[Benjamin Seeker]

Samuel is struggling with the idea that BY got something wrong, continued to get it wrong for the entirety of his life, and believed it was a result of revelation. I think it's fair to say that many members of the church would be similarly surprised to learn that BY taught Adam-God the entire time he was president of the church, believed he'd learned it at least partially by revelation, and was mistaken about the whole thing. Basically, he's dealing with a very common problem, and he's essentially in denial, dealing with the issue somewhat similar to how many other members of this forum have reacted, giving various explanations for how BY was misunderstood, misquoted, etc. Samuel's explanation is just more extreme than everyone else's and probably because he hasn't studied enough of the history to wrap his head around how unlikely what he is suggesting is (he doesn't seem to very responsive to the new data either though). Anyways, just cut him a break and let him live his denial peacefully. I think he's.been hounded and made to his explain his position enough.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

God often allows false doctrine and bad behavior in His congregation, and He applies appropriate punishment for it.  

Okay you say "He applies appropriate punishment for it". When did God apply appropriate punishment to Young for teaching Adam/God? 

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 He does not stop human mistakes, because (unlike you) He supports free agency.  

Agreed, but in the scriptures God chastens his prophets that make mistakes.  Give me one example in the scriptures where God allowed a true prophet to teach false doctrine for his entire life? Just  one please.  

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 It's a learning experience.  

If Young couldn't tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts, then why should we trust our own spiritual impressions? Why should we trust them during life or death situations? or to make a life changing decision like to go on a mission? 

9 hours ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

Samuel is struggling with the idea that BY got something wrong, continued to get it wrong for the entirety of his life, and believed it was a result of revelation.

Same questions. Give me one example in the scriptures where God allowed a true prophet to teach false doctrine for his entire life?

If Young couldn't tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts, then why should we trust our own spiritual impressions during life or death situations? or to make an important decision like to go on a mission in Brazil? 

9 hours ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

he's essentially in denial

Are you sure? 

Edited September 12, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

You guys are making Young indistinguishable to a non-prophet. You really can't tell the difference.    

Edited September 12, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[JLHPROF]

13 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

In General Conference President Kimball taught "Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine."  Now we believe Satan inspired men to make changes to the Bible and the 116 pages, why couldn't Satan do the same with other documents?   

Yes, he did.
Which means either President Young was wrong or President Kimball was wrong.
Which one claimed to have received the word of God on the matter?

[JLHPROF]

12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

And you want to set that over against the teachings of current prophets, including Orson Pratt back in Brigham's day?  

Every time.
Only one is authorized to receive the will of the Lord at any given time.
That limits opinions on Adam-God to Brigham Young and Spencer W. Kimball.  No others expressed a definitive teaching on the matter (although Woodruff and Joseph F. Smith alluded to it).

And of Young and Kimball, which one claimed their teaching came by revelation?  And which did not, making it purely opinion?

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Every time.
Only one is authorized to receive the will of the Lord at any given time.
That limits opinions on Adam-God to Brigham Young and Spencer W. Kimball.  No others expressed a definitive teaching on the matter (although Woodruff and Joseph F. Smith alluded to it).

And of Young and Kimball, which one claimed their teaching came by revelation?  And which did not, making it purely opinion?

False.  Any member may consult the will of the Lord at any time, and he many discover (pro or con) the truth or falsity of any claim made by the Brethren.  Indeed, it is his responsibility to do so.  What the Prophet and his associates seek to find out is the mind and will of the Lord for the Church at large.  All members have the right and obligation to seek the mind and will of the the Lord via the Holy Spirit as a result of any claims made by the Prophet or the remainder of the Brethren.  This is a communal undertaking -- in which Brother Brigham, for example, insisted repeatedly that every member should discover for himself whether what he (Brigham) said was of the Lord, or not.  In other words, members fully participate in that decision-making process.  Thus, Apostle Bruce R. McConkie said:

Quote

"I do not know all of the providences of the Lord, but I do know that he permits false doctrine to be taught in and out of the Church and that such teaching is part of the sifting process of mortality. I repeat: Brigham Young erred in some of his statements on the nature and kind of being that God is and as to the position of Adam in the plan of salvation" - Bruce R McConkie, 
Letter to Prof. Eugene England, February 19, 1981, online at http://www.mrm.org/bruce-mcconkies-rebuke-of-eugene-england . 

What gave Elder McConkie the right to say this?  The same right any of us has, at any time, to follow the Holy Spirit.

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Okay you say "He applies appropriate punishment for it". When did God apply appropriate punishment to Young for teaching Adam/God? 

I do not know when or if God punished Brigham for his false Adam-God doctrine, but Orson Pratt was surely a thorn in Brigham's side.  And Bruce McConkie is very clear on the matter"

Quote

"I do not know all of the providences of the Lord, but I do know that he permits false doctrine to be taught in and out of the Church and that such teaching is part of the sifting process of mortality. I repeat: Brigham Young erred in some of his statements on the nature and kind of being that God is and as to the position of Adam in the plan of salvation" - Bruce R McConkie, 
Letter to Prof Eugene England, February 19, 1981, online at http://www.mrm.org/bruce-mcconkies-rebuke-of-eugene-england . 

6 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Agreed, but in the scriptures God chastens his prophets that make mistakes.  Give me one example in the scriptures where God allowed a true prophet to teach false doctrine for his entire life? Just  one please.  

All prophets (except Jesus) had at least one, two, or maybe three elements of false doctrine or wrong thinking during their entire lives.  That is the human condition, which you fail to accept.

6 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

If Young couldn't tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts, then why should we trust our own spiritual impressions? Why should we trust them during life or death situations? or to make a life changing decision like to go on a mission? .....................................................................................

If Young couldn't tell the difference between the spirit and his own thoughts, then why should we trust our own spiritual impressions during life or death situations? or to make an important decision like to go on a mission in Brazil? ..................................

All of us, including Brigham, must take responsibility to discover the truth via the Holy Spirit.  We will not always be successful in that endeavor, but we are expected to try.  That is all that is asked of us.  None of us needs to be perfect.  Somehow,  most members seem to manage to get it right, Sam.  Does that bother you?

[SamuelTheLamanite]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 Somehow,  most members seem to manage to get it right, Sam.  Does that bother you?

Get what right? 

[Glenn101]

One poster noted that Joseph F. Smith had alluded to the Adam-God theory in some of his sermons, etc. I was curious as to what the former prophet had said. I found this:

President Smith closed the conference with his usual brilliant, thoughtful remarks. He bore a strong
testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel and said in part: "I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet of
God; I know that God is a being with body, parts and passions and that His Son is in His own likeness, and
that man is created in the image of God. The Son, Jesus Christ, grew and developed into manhood the
same as you or I, as likewise did God, His Father, grow and develop to the Supreme Being that He now is.
Man was born of woman; Christ, the Savior, was born of woman; and God, the Father, was born of
woman. Adam, our earthly parent was also born of woman into this world, the same as Jesus and you and
I."
JOSEPH E. NOBLE,
Stake Clerk.
(Deseret News, Dec. 27, 1913, Sec. III, p. 7)
[Deseret News Church Section, Sept 19, 1936 pp 23]

I know that we have read here and there that the creation of Adam from the dust of this earth is figurative as is also the creation of Eve from One of Adam's ribs. This is the first clear statement from someone other than Brigham Young that Adam was born just the same as you or I.
Then there is the following letter addressing the question of Adam-God from the First Presidency.

February 20, 1912
Prest. Samuel O. Bennion
Independence,
Dear Brother:
Your question concerning Adam has not been answered before because of pressure of
important business. We now respond briefly, but, we hope, plainly. You speak of "the
assertion made by Brigham Young that Jesus was begotten of the Father in the flesh by
our father Adam, and that Adam is the father of Jesus Christ and not the Holy Ghost,"
and you say that Elders are challenged by certain critics to prove this.
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.
When President Young asked, "who is the Father?" he was speaking of Adam as the
father of our earthly bodies, who is at our head, as revealed in Doctrine and Covenants,
Section 107, verses 53-56.
In that sense he is one of the gods referred to in numerous scriptures, and particularly by
Christ (John 10:3436). He is the great Patriarch, the Ancient of Days, who will stand in his
place as "a prince over us forever," and with whom we shall "have to do," as each family will
have to do with its head, according to the holy patriarchal order. Our father, Adam, perfected
and glorified as a God, will be the being who will carry out the behests of the great Elohim
in relation to his posterity. (See Daniel 7:914.)
While, as Paul puts it, "there be gods many and Lords many (whether in heaven or in
earth), unto us there is but one God the Father, of whom are all things, and one Lord
Jesus Christ by whom are all things." The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday
Saints worships Him, and Him alone, who is the Father of Jesus Christ, whom He worshiped,
whom Adam worshiped, and who is God the Eternal Father of us all.

Your brethren,
(signed)
JOSEPH F. SMITH,
ANTHON H. LUND,
CHARLES W. PENROSE,
First Presidency.
[James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency, 4:266267]

That is a letter signed by a president of the church who had been a counselor to Brigham Young starting in 1866. Maybe he had a better insight to what Brigham meant than people who are just reading about what he said. President Smith felt that Brigham was quoted incorrectly in that speech. (I have quoted excerpts from the journal of Willford Woodruff that shows a misquote or an edited quote to be a distinct possibility. But everyone is allowed to believe what they wish.) But we need not attribute to Satan what imperfect recorders can accomplish on their own. Just look at what we have learned of the book of Mormon translation process. Hopefully Sam will not attribute all of those mistakes to Satan.

Glenn

[blueglass]

On 9/5/2017 at 5:17 PM, RevTestament said:

Joseph Smith usually worked through scribes. If this was originally recorded through a scribe, I would attribute it to scribal error later caught by JS and corrected. Further, it was usually dictated without punctuation which was later added by a scribe, but may not always be the best representation of what was meant.

Looking at the original handwriting on the scan I think that attributing the separate and distinct "father Adam", and Abraham, and Michael as scribal error is not realistic.  It looks clear that this is what Joseph said as you have Abraham separating the two persons.  It's very similar to the  Elias and Elijah confusion in D&C 110:12-13, where no one knows who this Elias guy is which held crucial keys which all temple sealers hold for celestial marriage. 

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

One poster noted that Joseph F. Smith had alluded to the Adam-God theory in some of his sermons, etc. I was curious as to what the former prophet had said. I found this:

That is a letter signed by a president of the church who had been a counselor to Brigham Young starting in 1866. Maybe he had a better insight to what Brigham meant than people who are just reading about what he said. President Smith felt that Brigham was quoted incorrectly in that speech. (I have quoted excerpts from the journal of Willford Woodruff that shows a misquote or an edited quote to be a distinct possibility. But everyone is allowed to believe what they wish.) But we need not attribute to Satan what imperfect recorders can accomplish on their own. Just look at what we have learned of the book of Mormon translation process. Hopefully Sam will not attribute all of those mistakes to Satan.

Glenn

 - prophets and apostles other than Brigham Young statements concerning Adam-God.

• "Pres. Daniel H. Wells remarked that Pres. Young touched on ... that doctrine pertaining to Adam being our Father & our God... He [Pres. Wells] bore a powerful testimony to the truth of the doctrine, remarking that if he had received a testimony of any doctrine in this church he had of the truth of this... The doctrine was approved or endorsed by Henry Grow, D. B. Huntington & Joseph F. Smith." - S.L. School of Prophets minutes June 9,1873
   
• "The Lord told me that Adam was my father and that he was the God and father of all the inhabitants of this earth." - Heber C. Kimball Apr. 30, 1862
   
• "Concerning the item of doctrine alluded to... that Adam is our Father and God... the Prophet and Apostle Brigham has declared it, and that it is the word of the Lord." - Franklin D. Richards, Aug. 26, 1854 Millennial Star
   
• "Elder George Q. Cannon fully endorsed the doctrine that Father Adam was our God and Father." - Minutes of Salt Lake School of Prophets Oct 15, 1870
   
• "Orson Hyde preached to us, and he told us what we had heard before, that Adam is our God." - Jens Christian Anderson Weibye Jan 25, 1871
   
• Brigham Young, as recorded in the Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871. Church Archives "Elohim, Yahovah and Michael were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth and Michael became Adam."
   
• "Adam is the father of our bodies. Who is to say he is not the father of our spirits. Pres. John Taylor Jan. 13, 1880 L. John Nuttall Papers
   
• "Pres. Snow led out on Adam being our father and God. How beautiful the thought - it brought God nearer to us. Bro. Franklin [D. Richards] said it made him thrill through his whole body." - Brigham Young Jr. Diary Oct 12, 1897
   
• "Adam is our father and our God and no use to discuss it with Josephites or anyone else." - Brigham Young Jr. Dec. 16, 1897
   
• “... the period will come when the people will be willing to adopt Joseph Smith as their Prophet, Seer and Revelator and God! but not the Father of their spirits, for that was our Father Adam” (Brigham Young - in the Journal of Wilford Woodruff, Dec. 11, 1869)
   

• "At two-o'clock I was at my Quorum meeting where were present all the Presidency and myself, as also Bro. Lyman; Geo. Gibbs, clerk. Bro. Jos. F. Smith was mouth in prayer. Thereafter some conversations followed as to whether Adam is our God or not. There are some in the Church who do not accept of the statement of Pres. Young that such is the case, but to me it seems reasonable to think that Adam has at least much to do with our present condition, and will control greatly our future destiny."
  - Apostle Abraham H. Cannon, Journal of Abraham H. Cannon, May 26, 1892

Daniel H. Wells
Joseph F. Smith
Heber C. Kimball
Franklin D. Richards
George Q. Cannon
Orson Hyde
John Taylor
Lorenzo Snow
Brigham Young Jr.
Abraham H. Cannon

So no, not just Brigham.
 

 

Edited September 12, 2017 by JLHPROF

[Glenn101]

44 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

 - prophets and apostles other than Brigham Young statements concerning Adam-God.

• "Pres. Daniel H. Wells remarked that Pres. Young touched on ... that doctrine pertaining to Adam being our Father & our God... He [Pres. Wells] bore a powerful testimony to the truth of the doctrine, remarking that if he had received a testimony of any doctrine in this church he had of the truth of this... The doctrine was approved or endorsed by Henry Grow, D. B. Huntington & Joseph F. Smith." - S.L. School of Prophets minutes June 9,1873
   
• "The Lord told me that Adam was my father and that he was the God and father of all the inhabitants of this earth." - Heber C. Kimball Apr. 30, 1862
   
• "Concerning the item of doctrine alluded to... that Adam is our Father and God... the Prophet and Apostle Brigham has declared it, and that it is the word of the Lord." - Franklin D. Richards, Aug. 26, 1854 Millennial Star
   
• "Elder George Q. Cannon fully endorsed the doctrine that Father Adam was our God and Father." - Minutes of Salt Lake School of Prophets Oct 15, 1870
   
• "Orson Hyde preached to us, and he told us what we had heard before, that Adam is our God." - Jens Christian Anderson Weibye Jan 25, 1871
   
• Brigham Young, as recorded in the Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871. Church Archives "Elohim, Yahovah and Michael were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth and Michael became Adam."
   
• "Adam is the father of our bodies. Who is to say he is not the father of our spirits. Pres. John Taylor Jan. 13, 1880 L. John Nuttall Papers
   
• "Pres. Snow led out on Adam being our father and God. How beautiful the thought - it brought God nearer to us. Bro. Franklin [D. Richards] said it made him thrill through his whole body." - Brigham Young Jr. Diary Oct 12, 1897
   
• "Adam is our father and our God and no use to discuss it with Josephites or anyone else." - Brigham Young Jr. Dec. 16, 1897
   
• “... the period will come when the people will be willing to adopt Joseph Smith as their Prophet, Seer and Revelator and God! but not the Father of their spirits, for that was our Father Adam” (Brigham Young - in the Journal of Wilford Woodruff, Dec. 11, 1869)
   

• "At two-o'clock I was at my Quorum meeting where were present all the Presidency and myself, as also Bro. Lyman; Geo. Gibbs, clerk. Bro. Jos. F. Smith was mouth in prayer. Thereafter some conversations followed as to whether Adam is our God or not. There are some in the Church who do not accept of the statement of Pres. Young that such is the case, but to me it seems reasonable to think that Adam has at least much to do with our present condition, and will control greatly our future destiny."
  - Apostle Abraham H. Cannon, Journal of Abraham H. Cannon, May 26, 1892

Daniel H. Wells
Joseph F. Smith
Heber C. Kimball
Franklin D. Richards
George Q. Cannon
Orson Hyde
John Taylor
Lorenzo Snow
Brigham Young Jr.
Abraham H. Cannon

So no, not just Brigham.
 

 

None of those quotes contravene the statement by the first presidency.

"In that sense he is one of the gods referred to in numerous scriptures, and particularly by
Christ (John 10:34-36). He is the great Patriarch, the Ancient of Days, who will stand in his
place as "a prince over us forever," and with whom we shall "have to do," as each family will
have to do with its head, according to the holy patriarchal order. Our father, Adam, perfected
and glorified as a God, will be the being who will carry out the behests of the great Elohim
in relation to his posterity. (See Daniel 7:914.)"

 

Edited to add: And one of your quotes pretty much confirms one thing, that God the Father is not the same being as Adam/Michael the Archangel.

"Brigham Young, as recorded in the Joseph F. Smith Journal, 17 June 1871. Church Archives "Elohim, Yahovah and Michael were father, Son and grandson. They made this Earth and Michael became Adam.""

That also reinforces a statement from his April 9, 1852 talk where he is quoted as saying "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. JD 1:51, Brigham Young, April 9, 1852

The view by the first presidency that Adam was born of a woman just like any other person would help make sense of a something else that Brigham Young stated as noted by Willford Woodruff in his journal that "Mother Eve was the daughter of Adam." [WWJ 7:152, Aug 31, 1873]. But only if God the Father was also given the title of Adam by Brigham Young.

Glenn

Edited September 12, 2017 by Glenn101
addition and spelling

[Bob Crockett]

33 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So no, not just Brigham.
 

 

I certainly agree with you.  Efforts to discredit JoD 1:50 fall on my deaf ears because of all of these quotes. 

Having said that, I go back to my original position.  The Church is run by the Q12.  The First Presidency is its executive officer(s).  If something like Adam/God is not endorsed by the Q12, it isn't correct, true or doctrine or worthy of publication in manuals.  Perhaps in Joseph Smith's day, the prophet spoke ex cathedra but it hasn't been set up that way with the succession.  No other prophet since then does it that way.  I can read for myself what President Joseph F. Smith said to the Senate subcommittee seeking to unseat Reed Smoot.  One day, when asked, he said he had never received a revelation.  He'd been president for some time.  Then, the next day, his lawyers said he wanted to correct his testimony and he explained how decisions were made in concert with the Q12 and by the Holy Spirit.   A stake runs no differently than the Church, and there have been probably many stake presidency members on this board who can so attest.  Now, I don't deny the ministering of angels and such, as I am a witness to it myself.  But in terms of Church administration, things are run in an orderly fashion, be it the selection of a temple site, a new apostle, a new stake president, proclamation or new section of the D&C.

It's like the way an apostle is selected.   An apostle is not selected and appointed by the President of the Church, he is selected and appointed by the Q12.  Now, maybe the President has a lot to say about whom he wants, but in the end the decision is the Q12's. 

Moses Thatcher, an apostle (prophet seer and revelator ("PSR")) believed in seances and table rapping.  Orson Pratt believed that God was really an aggregation of molecules of the universe.  Richard Lyman thought that he had a secret deal to be in plural marriage with his secretary.  They were all PSRs.  

John A Taylor, another PSR, believed that his father John Taylor received a revelation making plural marriage mandatory and eternal, never to be repealed.  The younger Taylor based that upon a document he found in his father's papers, purportedly in his father's handwriting (even Ogden Kraut points out problems with the document) saying such a thing.  But (I think the document is a forgery based on Kraut's conclusions) it could have been a trial balloon which President Taylor was going to give to the Q12, even though it was in "thus saith the Lord" jargon. If the Q12 doesn't accept it, it isn't true, real, doctrine or policy.  

I think, actually, that upon this ground the restrictions upon the priesthood were revoked.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Bob Crockett

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, Bob Crockett said:

I certainly agree with you.  Efforts to discredit JoD 1:50 fall on my deaf ears because of all of these quotes. 

Having said that, I go back to my original position.  The Church is run by the Q12.  The First Presidency is its executive officer(s).  If something like Adam/God is not endorsed by the Q12, it isn't correct, true or doctrine or worthy of publication in manuals.  Perhaps in Joseph Smith's day, the prophet spoke ex cathedra but it hasn't been set up that way with the succession.  No other prophet since then does it that way.  I can read for myself what President Joseph F. Smith said to the Senate subcommittee seeking to unseat Reed Smoot.  One day, when asked, he said he had never received a revelation.  He'd been president for some time.  Then, the next day, his lawyers said he wanted to correct his testimony and he explained how decisions were made in concert with the Q12 and by the Holy Spirit.  

It's like the way an apostle is selected.   An apostle is not selected and appointed by the President of the Church, he is selected and appointed by the Q12.  Now, maybe the President has a lot to say about whom he wants, but in the end the decision is the Q12's. 

Moses Thatcher, an apostle (prophet seer and revelator ("PSR")) believed in seances and table rapping.  Orson Pratt believed that God was really an aggregation of molecules of the universe.  Richard Lyman thought that he had a secret deal to be in plural marriage with his secretary.  They were all PSRs.  

John A Taylor, another PSR, believed that his father John Taylor received a revelation making plural marriage mandatory and eternal, never to be repealed.  The younger Taylor based that upon a document he found in his father's papers, purportedly in his father's handwriting (even Ogden Kraut points out problems with the document) saying such a thing.  But (I think the document is a forgery based on Kraut's conclusions) it could have been a trial balloon which President Taylor was going to give to the Q12, even though it was in "thus saith the Lord" jargon. If the Q12 doesn't accept it, it isn't true, real, doctrine or policy.  

I think, actually, that upon this ground the restrictions upon the priesthood were revoked.

I can respect your opinion on Adam-God far more than those who try to pretend it never happened.
Those who take the "it was never official, just Brigham's personal belief" approach have a leg to stand on.  I don't happen to agree, but they are dismissing the doctrine for a legitimate reason.
Those who try to show Brigham et al never taught it or manipulate it into meaning something other than the record shows are simply ostriches burying their heads.

That said, I am not sure I agree with the rest of your conclusions in this thread.
Joseph was given revelation as to which apostles to call.  John Taylor's revelation calling Heber J. Grant is another.  A vote of quorum inclusion may be taken, but the prophet calls the apostle, not the quorum itself.
Also, I happen to think the 1886 revelation was genuine - it matches the word of the Lord on the subject in the other uncanonized revelations from that time period.  It is not the outlier you would have it seem.

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

None of those quotes contravene the statement by the first presidency.

"In that sense he is one of the gods referred to in numerous scriptures, and particularly by
Christ (John 10:3436). He is the great Patriarch, the Ancient of Days, who will stand in his
place as "a prince over us forever," and with whom we shall "have to do," as each family will
have to do with its head, according to the holy patriarchal order. Our father, Adam, perfected
and glorified as a God, will be the being who will carry out the behests of the great Elohim
in relation to his posterity. (See Daniel 7:914.)"

Glenn

Starting to think you and our friend Samuel TL are two sides of the same coin...