The "Adam-God Theory"

[_gdemetz]

Yea, I know that a lot of people in the church itself were confused by some of his statements.

[_consiglieri]

Yes you have. I personally was coming to an Adam Sr Adam Jr explanation when I came across this:

http://eldenwatson.net/7AdamGod.htm

Game, set, match. An Adam God theory is incompatible with other statements of BY and is also incompatible with doctrine extant at the time.

This paper was written by Watson in 1998, 13-years after Bruce R. McConkie was no longer with us and unable to rebut the palpable falsehood contained on the last page:

The Eugene England Letter

In October of 1982 a letter was made public which had been written on February 19, 1981 by Bruce R. McConkie in response to some questions which had been asked him by Eugene England. In this response Br. McConkie told Brother England that Brigham Young had apparently taught that Adam [Jr.] was God, but that he was simply wrong. When this letter was printed and distributed by an anti-Mormon group, we went to Br. McConkie and told him that we had been teaching differently than him, and we did not want to be teaching anything that was incorrect. We told Br. McConkie that if we were wrong, we wanted to know, and we would quit teaching it. After considerable discussion Br. McConkie told us to keep teaching what we had been teaching, because it was he that was wrong. He said if he had known of our views, he never would have said what he did in his letter to Eugene England, and we had his permission to tell anyone we wanted that Br. McConkie had said he was wrong in saying that Brigham Young had taught that Adam was God.

Sure.

Like that ever happened.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_gdemetz]

Brigham Young never stated, "Adam, Jr." No matter who misunderstood him, the fact remains that he never taught what many people claimed, and it should be very clear in his August 28, 1952 statement (which the critics use) what he meant! He is even talking about future exalted "Adams" and "Eves"! Read and quote that statement!

[_Tobin]

LOL Ok, apologists. Let me help you out. Brigham Young did indeed teach a lot of false doctrine (and contradicted HIMSELF). I think that has been pointed out very conclusively in prior posts in this thread. The fact is, Brigham Young was a fallible man and was quite capable of getting it wrong. It is a problem we all suffer from.

The mistake Mormon apologists make is that they don't afford Brigham Young the ability to be mistaken and wrong because (why?) he was a prophet. For some reason, Mormon apologists are under the impression that if someone is a prophet they are perfect (in essence God) and can't be wrong. You do know that critics of Mormonism are going to make you look completely absurd if you assume that don't you?

[_gdemetz]

I agree with you, Tobin, that prophets can make mistakes such as Nathan did when he told king David to go ahead and build a temple to the Lord, however, all I have seen here so far are statements being made by people in the church who believed (wrongly) that that was a teaching of Brigham Young, but I have yet to see a quote from Brigham Young that I requested to support their statements that he believed that! I have read all of his discourses and have found only the two I mentioned!

[_Darth J]

Brigham Young never stated, "Adam, Jr." No matter who misunderstood him,

E.g., every single contemporary member of the LDS Church.

the fact remains that he never taught what many people claimed, and it should be very clear in his August 28, 1952 statement (which the critics use) what he meant! He is even talking about future exalted "Adams" and "Eves"! Read and quote that statement!

I agree we should be skeptical about any statements by Brigham Young in 1952.

[_Darth J]

LOL Ok, apologists. Let me help you out.

Given their adoration of a bastardized pseudo-Mormonism of their own invention, maybe Mopologists will indeed find your Mormon fanfic to be helpful.

[_thews]

LOL Ok, apologists. Let me help you out. Brigham Young did indeed teach a lot of false doctrine (and contradicted HIMSELF). I think that has been pointed out very conclusively in prior posts in this thread. The fact is, Brigham Young was a fallible man and was quite capable of getting it wrong. It is a problem we all suffer from.

I really hate the "LOL" used to imply the critic's argument is supposedly laughable... really? Brigham Young supposedly spoke with God. Either you believe that, or you do not believe that. It's one or the other and not both, so why is it supposedly "LOL" worthy to claim that because he was wrong in the Adam-God teachings, he really wasn't conversing with God? Where is the line? Did God sometimes speak with Brigham young and fail to point out where he was wrong? Or is it more logical Brigham Young never spoke with God and was a liar?

The mistake Mormon apologists make is that they don't afford Brigham Young the ability to be mistaken and wrong because (why?) he was a prophet.

By what metric are you using to state your argument? God is perfect and does not make mistakes... ok. Either God screwed up or Brigham Young wasn't talking to God... pick one.

For some reason, Mormon apologists are under the impression that if someone is a prophet they are perfect (in essence God) and can't be wrong.

You are correct. God is never wrong... only humans are wrong. "Perfection" is not the correct metric here regarding humans, but it is if you're including God. At what point do you consider Brigham Young and Joseph Smith were lying? Is this even a possibility in your mind, or is the foregone conclusion they are correct and all other possibilities not worth considering?

You do know that critics of Mormonism are going to make you look completely absurd if you assume that don't you?

The one thing I assume is that you are an obedient cult member. You don't even question the truth based on facts, because you do as you're told. Why not wake up? The truth is the truth based on facts... weigh them.

[_gdemetz]

I have a hypothetical question for you Thews. What would you have thought if you lived in the days of Abraham and heard him say that Sarah was his sister when you knew already that she was his wife? Would you have thought also that he was a liar and a false prophet?

[_Tobin]

...

thews,
If you had really received a testimony of the gospel by really speaking with God, it does not matter what any man (prophet or no) says. It only matters what God tells you. There are really basically two types of Mormons in the church today:
1) Mormons that have never seen or spoken with God.
2) Mormons that have seen and spoken with God.
Group 1 is likely as not to eventually be ex-mormons. They really don't have a testimony of God. They never bothered to read and do what the Book of Mormon says to do. They are Mormon because they are pressured to, or "feel" it is right, or for a host of other reasons.
Group 2 are the "real" Mormons. They will never be impressed by anti/ex-mormon arguments. They know there is a God because they've seen and spoken with him. They recognize the flaws in the Church and understand that in time the Lord will correct things. Anything you might point out as character flaws in prophets, apostles, or members of the Church is simply you pointing out they are human beings and get things wrong from time-to-time. That is just life and you stating it over and over again is not impressive.