Mormon Miscellaneous Worldwide Talk Show

Episodes of Mormon Miscellaneous, a talk show on Mormon history, scripture, doctrine and many controversial topics, by LDS host, Van Hale, now in its 35th year. All points of view are welcomed.
Brigham Young’s Belief that Adam is God
Feb 8th, 2008 by mormonmisc at 1:04 pm

Brigham Young's Belief that Adam is God

On this talk show I answer a number of questions regarding Brigham Young's unique beliefs regarding Adam. This has been a controversial topic for more than 100 years. Answers the following questions are included:

  1. What did Brigham Young believe?
  2. To what extent did he teach his views?
  3. Did he consider his authoritative; that is, official Mormon doctrine?
  4. Does his role as president and prophet demand that his views be accepted by LDS?
  5. Did his contemporaries in the Church hierarchy accept his views?
  6. Did his views on Adam differ from those of Joseph Smith?

Callers and Email

  • Joseph Smith's view that spirits are eternal and Brigham Young's view that spirits begin to exist through a spirit birth.
  • A caller spoke in defense of his view that Adam is God citing some passages and arguments.
  • Change of one word in the introduction of the Book of Mormon.    

Talk Show host: Van Hale, LDS

Official website: http://www.mormonmiscellaneous.com/

Podcast address: http://www.mormonmisc.podbean.com/

Talk Show Blog: mormonmiscellaneous.com/radioprogramblog

This is the 18 November 2007 episode of the Mormon Miscellaneous Worldwide Talk Show, now in its 28th year.

To listen to future Talk Shows live, go to http://www.k-talk.com/ Sunday evenings 5:00 - 7:00 pm MST.

If you have a question or comment, your participation is invited, regardless of your point of view.

Your voice will be heard around the world.

Click to visit my eStore Catalog of Digital Articles related to some of my Podcast Episodes

To make a comment, click on “Comment” below.

00:0000:00

Share | Download

  • Art Bulla

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/artbulla/2008/11/19/Topics-pertaining-to-Zion

    Mar 2, 2009 at 3:06 pm
  • Art Bulla

    The wicked Mr. Hale in denial removed my comment posted on March 2, 2009. Amazing! But here is another proving that Joseph Smith taught the doctrine:

    He (Joseph Smith) taught us that God was the great head of the human procreation–was really and truly the father of both our spirits and our bodies. (Letter from Benjamin F. Johnson to George S. Gibbs)

    September 4, 1860 Brother Cannon said there was a learned doctor that wanted to be baptized. * * * He is satisfied that the doctrine of the plurality of God and that Adam is our Father is a true doctrine revealed from God to Joseph & Brigham. For this same doctrine is taught in some of the old Jewish records which have never been in print, and I know Joseph Smith nor Brigham Young have never had access to, and the Lord has revealed this doctrine unto them or they could not have taught it. (W. Woodruff’s Journal)

    December 16, 1867 Adam is Michael the Archangel and he is the Father of Jesus Christ and is our God and Joseph taught this principle. (Brigham Young, W. Woodruff Jrnl.)

    Brother Horne and I chatted again tonight about the Gospel and the Adam-God Doctrine, as we have done many times before. Brother Horne, who grew up in Salt Lake City and was the son of Richard Horne and grandson of Joseph Horne, said–in reference to the Adam-God Doctrine–that when he first went through the Temple (Salt Lake) for his endowment in 1902 before going on his mission he was surprised to hear the teachings during the temple ceremony that “Adam was our God” and that “He came here with Eve, one of His wives.” Also, it was taught that “Eve bore our spirits” (i.e., the spirits of all men). He asked his father about it but he declined to give any opinion about it. After Brother Horne returned from his mission a few years later, in 1905, he noted these teachings had been removed from the temple ceremony. He feels that they were left over from Brigham Young’s influence, but that he himself (Brother Horne) couldn’t believe such doctrine. He thinks perhaps Brigham just got off in his speculation. (From C. Jess Groesbeck’s Elders Journal, Vol. 1, p. 291)

    Date:May 19, 1838 Place:Spring Hill, Daviess County, Mo To:Joseph Smith

    1 SPRING Hill is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman, because, said he, it is the place where Adam shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.

    (D&C 116:1)

    Adam is Michael the Archangel and he is the Father of Jesus Christ and is our God, and Joseph taught this principle. (Wilford Woodruff Diaries, Dec. 16, 1957)

    The first article in this questionable publication “Gospel Problems” is in defense of the Adam-God doctrine as taught by Brigham Young. Was he, too, crazy? Was Joseph Smith crazy when he gave us the 116th section of the book of Doctrine and Covenants, and the prophet Daniel as there referred to (Dan. 7, 9, 10) or do we hold Jesus Christ responsible for these revelations? Bishop Heber Bennion, Gospel Problems

    Some of our friends say, “O, it is scriptural and reasonable enough, and truthful, but is out of harmony with the living oracles and therefore must be wrong.” We answer, “If it is in harmony with the scriptures, the law and the prophets, truth and reason, who is to blame for its lack of harmony with the living oracles?” But, it is objected, what is the use of a head if you do not follow it? We answer, “What is the use of a neck if it is too stiff to turn the head? What is the use of a heart if it cannot soften and mellow a cold philosophical brain? Can one part of the body say to the other members of the body, “We have no need of thee.” Rather, are all the members of the body necessary?”–Paul. Others protest, what is the use of leaders and praying for them if we are not going to sustain them? Does that mean we must uphold them in everything, right or wrong, as [4] though they were infallible? Is it inconsistent for us to vote and pray for them even though we differ with them? Should not Republicans pray for Democratic Presidents, and vice versa, a Democrat pray for a Republican President? These objections are so weak and purile that they tend to strengthen Gospel Problems rather than weaken them. It is further objected that “there is not one constructive idea in the book.” We respond, “It does not claim to be a new revelation, direction or dictation of a new program for the church. If so it would be open to criticism as usurping the prerogative of the President of the church. The presumption would be that God had not revealed sufficient to the prophet Joseph Smith and other Presidents, but that some lay member must introduce something new. Gospel Problems do not aspire to anything new. “There is nothing new under the sun.”–Solomon. It only presumes to defend, and contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints,” and uphold the doctrine of Adam-God as taught by Brigham Young, revealed through Joseph Smith and the prophet Daniel; the correct and literal translation of the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of the Holy Ghost. It is a defense of the constructive idea of the United Order, given to the Saints through the prophet Joseph Smith “for their temporal and spiritual salvation” in contrast with the present financial systems of Zion, which tend to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, the very antipodes of each other. It is a defense of the constructive idea of the revelation to Joseph Smith on plural marriage, providing for the temporal and spiritual salvation of the millions of widows and mateless maidens that mourn “because of the inhumanity of man to man.” It is a protest against the laws of man in direct opposition to the laws of God as revealed in the Doctrine and Covenants, Book of Mormon and the Bible. We maintain that these principles are all constructive and opposition to them is destruction–destructive of faith in God and the principles of eternal truth and righteousness as recorded in the holy scriptures. Declarations against these principles are being applauded in our great tabernacle. One of the imported speakers in the late Educational Convention said that private ownership of property was the very basis of civilization, and that any [5] abrogation of it was anarchy–the doctrine of the Reds, and the penalty deportation; and he was applauded to the echo. And yet God has said “And let not any man among you say that it is his own, for it should not be called his, nor any part of it.” (Doc. & Cov. Sec. 104-70). And again, “It is not meet that one man should possess that which is above another; therefore the world lieth in sin.” The Superintendent of Public Instruction declared in the tabernacle that the French was the most idealistic nation on the earth,” and was most vociferously applauded. Surely the Lord must cut His work short in righteousness or there will be no flesh saved. Can we wonder that the Lord wondered “if He should find faith in the earth at His coming.” There is little doubt that God was offering man a chance to have his eyes opened, his understanding enlightened and to become as the Gods. This is the doctrine taught by the Prophet Joseph–that it is possible for man to grow in wisdom and power until he becomes as God.

    [185]

    Chapter 13

    FURTHER TEACHINGS ON ADAM

    A multitude of people were acquainted with the Prophet Joseph Smith, but only a few did he trust with some of the deeper doctrines. To these closer friends, like those of Jesus who were entrusted with the “pearls” and the “meat” of the Gospel, Joseph taught some of the mysteries of the doctrines of Deity.

    I do not say that you have not been taught and learned the principle; you have heard it taught from this stand from time to time by many of the elders and from the mouth of our beloved and martyred prophet Joseph. Therefore my course will not be to prove the doctrine, but refer to those things against which your minds are revolting. Consequently, I would say to this vast congregation of Saints, when we enter into the temple of God to receive our washings, our anointings, our endowments and baptisms for the saving of ourselves, and for the saving of our dead, that you never will see a man go forth to be baptized for a woman, nor a woman for a man. If your minds should be in any dubiety with regard to this, call to mind a principle already advanced, that when an infinite being gives a law to his finite creatures, he has to descend to the capacity of those who receive his law, when the doctrine of baptism for the dead was first given, this church was in its infancy, and was not capable of receiving all the knowledge of God in its highest degree; this you all believe. I would keep this one thing in your minds, and that is that there is none, no not one of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve, that ever received the fullness of the celestial law at the first of the Lord’s commencing to reveal it unto them.

    September 17, 1854: President Young preached this afternoon and spoke upon the law of consecration and had an interesting conversation in our prayer circle. The subject of Elder Orson Pratt publishing the Seer and the doctrine it contained was brought up in conversation. President Young said he ought not to have published the marriage ceremony. It was sacred and one of the last ceremonies attended to in the Endowments ought not to have been given to the world. Brother Pratt said that he thought it was no harm as the plurality of wives, and its doctrine, was to be published to the world. He said he should not have done it if he had thought there had been the least harm in it. President Young said he was satisfied that he intended no wrong in it. He said that the doctrine taught in The Seer that God had arrived at that state whereby He could not advance any further in knowledge, power and glory was a false doctrine and not true. There never will be a time to all eternity when all the Gods of Eternity will cease advancing in power, knowledge, experience and glory. For if this were the case Eternity would cease to be and the glory of God would come to an end; but all of celestial beings will continue to advance in knowledge and power worlds without end. Joseph would always be ahead of us. We should never catch up with him in all Eternity, nor he with his leaders. Brother Pratt also thought that Adam was made of the dust of the earth; could not believe that Adam was our God or the Father of Jesus Christ. President Young said that He was, that He came from another world and made this, brought Eve with him, partook of the fruits of the earth, begat [68] children and they were earthly and had mortal bodies. And if we were faithful, we should become Gods as He was. He told Brother Pratt to lay aside his philosophical reasoning and get revelation from God to govern him and enlighten his mind more, and it would be a great blessing to him to lay aside his books and go into the canyons as some of the rest of us were doing and it would be better for him. He said his philosophy injured him in a measure. Many good things were said by President Young–that we should grow up in revelation so that principle would govern every act of our lives. He had never found any difficulty in leading this people since Joseph’s death.

    September 4, 1860: Brother Cannon said there was a learned doctor that wanted to be baptized; he believed in this work but wanted to close up his business in New York City first. Said when he was baptized that he should lay aside his practice of medicine, as he believed the Lord had provided means for the healing of his Saints without the practice of medicine. He is satisfied [140] that the doctrine of the plurality of God and that Adam is our Father is a true doctrine revealed from God to Joseph and Brigham; for this same doctrine is taught in some of the old Jewish records which have never been in print and I know Joseph Smith nor Brigham Young have had access to, and the Lord has revealed this doctrine unto them or they could not have taught it. President Young said if all that God had revealed was in fine print, it would more than fill this room, but very little is written or printed which the Lord has revealed.

    December 16, 1867: At meeting of School of the Prophets: President Young said Adam was Michael, the Archangel, and he was the Father of Jesus Christ and was our God and that Joseph taught this principle.

    *Here, George Q. Cannon is recorded by Wilford Woodruff to have said that God revealed to Joseph that “Adam is our Father”. This is three witness to this: George Q. Cannon, Wilford Woodruff, and Brigham Young.

    Aug 18, 2009 at 1:05 am