Adam-God Theory

[_BenBritton]

sorry, I did a weird accidental quote double post...

[_grindael]

Ben,

Brigham did stand with a united quorum because (or did you miss it) Orson Pratt confessed his error. So we can toss that out. And even if they say they are "united" there is no way to know since the modern "apostles" and "prophets" keep all their minutes secret, don't they? There might have been some that bowed to pressure like Pratt did. That is what secrecy buys you ... doubts.

As for Jo teaching that Adam was god.. well,

Joseph taught that the Father was Jehovah. Why is he now Elohim? As Boyd Kirkland wrote,

With the interchangeability of the roles of the Father and the Son in earliest Mormon theology, it is impossible to identify specifically Joseph's first few Jehovah references as either the Father or the Son. However, after the identities of the Father and the Son were more carefully differentiated in Mormon theology around 1835, Joseph clearly began to use the divine name Jehovah to refer to the Father.16 Significantly, he apparently never specifically identified Jehovah as Jesus, nor Jehovah as the Son of Elohim.17 Rather, the Prophet followed the biblical Hebrew usage of the divine names and either combined them or used them interchangeably as epithets for God the Father. The following prayer, which he wrote in 1842, demonstrates this: "O Thou, who seest and knowest the hearts of all men-Thou eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Jehovah - God - Thou Elohim, that sittest, as saith the Psalmist, 'enthroned in heaven,'look down upon Thy servant Joseph at this time; and let faith on the name of Thy Son Jesus Christ, to a greater degree than Thy servant ever yet has enjoyed, be conferred upon him."18 On a few occasions, Joseph referred to the Father by just the title Elohim alone.19

Other Mormon writers during the 1830s followed this same pattern. They most often used Jehovah as the name of God the Father, and only occasionally used the name Elohim. They evidently also considered the Father to be the god who appeared in the Old Testament.20 For example, the following was published in the Times and Seasons as the Mormon belief in 1841: "We believe in God the Father, who is the Great Jehovah and head of all things, and that Christ is the Son of God, co-eternal with the Father."21 Sunstone 9:2/37 (Aug 84)

16. D&C 109: 4, 10, 14, 22, 24, 29, 34, 42, 47, 56, 68; Joseph
Smith, Jr., History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ed. B. H. Roberts, 2d ed. rev., 7 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1932-51), 5:94, 127; hereafter cited as History of the Church.
17. Many Latter-day Saints would point to D&C 110:3 as evidence that Joseph Smith identified Jesus as Jehovah. But the fact that Joseph called the Father Jehovah several times in his dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland temple just seven days earlier than this revelation (see note 16 above) suggests that other possible interpretations of this verse are more likely. Perhaps Joseph had not yet made a clear separation of the Father and the Son in his theology. Or, this verse in the Doctrine and Covenants might be describing the sound of Christ's voice as being like that of Jehovah's voice (rather than actually being Jehovah's voice). This interpretation is suggested by the previous parallel phrase which states "his voice as the sound of the rushing of great waters," not literally understood to be the sound of rushing waters.
18. History of the Church, 5:127.
19. See Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook, comps., and eds., The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Religious Studies Center, 1980), pp. 198, 221, 229, and 356.
20. Parley P. Pratt, A Short Account of a Shameful Outrage, Committed by a Part of the Inhabitants of the Town of Mentor, upon the Person of Elder Parley P. Pratt, While Delivering a Public Discourse upon the subject of the gospel, 7 April 1835 ([Kirtland? 1835]), p. 8; idem, Mormonism Unveiled: Zion's Watchman Unmasked; and its Editor, Mr. L. R. Sunderland, Exposed: Truth Vindicated: The Devil Mad & Priestcraft in Danger (New York: Published by author, 1838), p. 43. See also the Millennial Star 1 (January 1841): 217; 2 (April 1842): 184, 187; Times and Seasons 2 (1 September 1841): 524; History of the Church, 4:256. In the History of the Church, the name Jehovah is used ninety-nine times to mean simply God, fourteen times to mean the Father, and three times to mean Jesus. The name Elohim is used nine times to mean the Father and three times to mean "head god" or "council of gods."
21. Times and Seasons 3 (15 November 1841): 578.

Using your logic, since we have no record at all of Joseph teaching that Jesus is Jehovah, we have to throw that out too. And you are not understanding in what way Jesus was superior to Adam/Michael. Joseph taught on August 8, 1839,

The Priesthood was first given to Adam: he obtained the first Presidency & held the Keys of it, from generation to Generation; he obtained it in the creation before the world was formed as in Gen. 1, 26:28,--he had dominion given him over every living Creature. He is Michael, the Archangel, spoken of in the Scriptures,--Then to Noah who is Gabriel, he stands next in authority to Adam in the Priesthood; he was called of God to this office & was the Father of all living in his day, & To him was given the Dominion. These men held keys, first on earth, & then in Heaven.--

What? Then how did Michael help create the world? If he wasn't already a god, and did not have the "priesthood" until he came to earth, how in the world could he help create the earth, as the Endowment teaches?

The Priesthood is an everlasting principle & Existed with God from Eternity & will to Eternity, without beginning of days or end of years. the Keys have to be brought from heaven whenever the Gospel is sent.--When they are revealed from Heaven it is by Adams Authority. Dan VII Speaks of the Ancient of days, he means the oldest man, our Father Adam, Michael; he will call his children together, & hold a council with them to prepare them for the coming of the Son of Man. He, (Adam) is the Father of the human family & presides over the Spirits of all men, & all that have had the Keys must stand before him in this great Council. This may take place before some of us leave this stage of action. The Son of Man stands before him & there is given him glory & dominion.--Adam delivers up his Stewardship to Christ, that which was deliverd to him as holding the Keys of the Universe, but retains his standing as head of the human family.

The Priesthood existed with God, not Jesus. So then Christ has to be subservient to Adam because the "keys" have to be brought from heaven under the direction of Adam. And how did Adam get "the keys of the Universe"? (Which one by the way). Why is Christ the Great High Priest of this world? Joseph Smith taught,

I saw my Father work out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom I shall present it to my Father, so that he obtains kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt his glory, so that Jesus treads in his tracks to inherit what God did before; (Discourse, April 7, 1844)

As the firstborn, Jesus inherits this earth and is thus the "Great High Priest". Also Christ was the Savior, and the one and only High Priest chosen for this world to redeem it. Adam (if he were not God) could never hold the keys of the Universe. The idea is ludicrous. That is why Brigham Young was right to place Adam at the head of the entire family, both as mortal and spiritual father. Joseph continued in his 1839 Discourse,

The Spirit of Man is not a created being; it existed from Eternity & will exist to eternity. Anything created cannot be Eternal. & earth, water &c1 --all these had their existence in an elementary State from Eternity. Our Savior speaks of Children & Says their angels always stand before my father.

The Father called all spirits before him at the creation of Man & organized them [I Abraham saw the intelligences which were organized before the world was] . He (Adam) is the head, was told to multiply. The Keys were given to him [Adam], and by him to others & he will have to give an account of his Stewardship, & they to him. The Priesthood is everlasting. The Savior, Moses, & Elias--gave the Keys to Peter, James & John on the Mount when they were transfigured before him. The Priesthood is everlasting, without beginning of days or end of years, without Father, Mother &c,--

Smith speaks of "the Father" calling all the spirits before him at the creation of man (before the world was) Adam is the head. Why? Why not Christ? He is after all by today's Mormon teachings the God of this world, right? Who does Adam/Michael give an accounting to? His Father, Yahovah. All that have had keys (Christ included) must stand before Adam, the Ancient of days. Then Joseph speaks of the Priesthood for this earth,

If there is no change of ordinances there is no change of Priesthood. Wherever the ordinances of the Gospel are administered there is the priesthood. How have we come at the priesthood in the last days? it came down, down in regular succession. Peter James & John had it given to them & they gave it up. Christ is the Great High priest; Adam next.--Paul speaks of the Church coming to an innumerable company of Angels, to God the Judge of all, the Spirits of Just men made perfect, to Jesus the mediator of the New Covenant, &c. Heb. XII, 23. I saw Adam in the valley of Ah-dam-ondi-Ahman--he called together his children & blessed them with a Patriarchal blessing.

This world was given to Christ by his Father, therefore Christ is the Great High Priest, Adam next. It is the same principle as the Bishop of a Ward. They are first over their ward, and make judgement according to the dictates of their office. An "apostle" can't come into a Ward and usurp the Bishop's authority (just because he has a higher position). He can counsel and use his influence (which they do constantly), but he can't just come in and usurp a Bishop if the Bishop is acting within the guidelines of his office. This is the same principle as the Father and Jesus for this world. Christ is the ultimate "authority" over this world, the "Great High Priest", because of the atonement and his right as Firstborn. This world is Christ's, because the Father gave it to him. That would be Adam, who held the keys of the Universe in the pre-existence. Joseph F. Smith taught it this way,

The organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is quite as [p.124] perfect as any of the armies of the world. But some of us have been in the habit of paying but slight attention to the authority of the Priesthood; and we have come to think that to acknowledge that authority would be to stultify ourselves and to belittle ourselves in the eyes of men. I have for many years had the honor of being an Apostle in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and for some years I have been called to act as a Counselor, first to President Taylor and then to President Woodruff. In the ward in which I live, from time to time—not often, I am sorry to say—teachers come into my house to teach me. Perhaps one is an Elder in the Melchisedek Priesthood, and another is a Priest or a Teacher in the Aaronic Priesthood. Supposing, however, that the two Teachers who come to my house are really a Priest and a Teacher in the Aaronic Priesthood. They come to my house in the capacity of Teachers. What would be my duty there? Would it belittle me to take off my hat and bow to these Teachers; invite them and my family to sit down and hear what they had to say and hearken to their counsel? I ask you, would this belittle me because I am an Apostle, or because I am Counselor to the President of the Church? Or is it my duty to respect the Teacher when he comes into my house? Is it not a part of the discipline of the Church that the Teacher shall visit the houses of the Saints? Yes; then he has authority in my house, he visits me as a member of the Church, and he comes by authority. I tell you that the man who, because he is a High Priest, or a Seventy, or an Apostle, or a President, ignores the Teacher that comes to his house to teach him is devoid of a right conception of the discipline of the Church and of the order of the Priesthood; he is in ignorance of his duty, and ought to be reprimanded or reproved, until he repents and acknowledges the right of the Teacher to visit his house to teach him whenever he is sent there. And let me tell you more: If an Apostle should ignore the Teacher that comes to teach him in his house, it would be perfectly proper for that Teacher to complain of his conduct to the Bishop, and it would be the right of the Bishop to summon him and try him on his fellowship as a member of the Church in that ward; and unless he repented and acknowledged the Lesser Priesthood just as much as though he were a lay member of the Church, the Bishop could withdraw the hand of fellowship from him. This is a part of the discipline of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And I am not ashamed of it. It does not belittle me to listen to a Teacher, to obey his counsel and treat him respectfully. If I fail to do this, I prove myself unworthy of my calling and responsibility. (Joseph F. Smith, Brain Stuy, Collected Discourses Vol. 5, p.124, April 19, 1896).

Smith continues

The Lord appeared in their midst, & he (Adam) blessed them all, & foretold what should befall them to the latest generation--See D.C. Sec III 28,29 par [LDS D&C 107]--This is why Abraham blessed his posterity: He wanted to bring them into the presence of God. They looked for a city, &c.--Moses sought to bring the children of Israel into the presence of God, through the power of the Pristhood, but he could not. In the first ages of the world they tried to establish the same thing--& there were Elias's raised up who tried to restore these very glories but did not obtain them. But (Enoch did for himself & those that were with Him, but not for the world. J.T. [note inserted by John Taylor]) they prophesied of a day when this Glory would be revealed.--Paul spoke of the Dispensation of the fulness of times, when God would gather together all things in one &c&. Those men to whom these Keys have been given will have to be there. (I.E. when Adam shall again assemble his children of the Priesthood, & Christ be in their midst) the Ancient of Days come &c &c J.T.) And they without us cannot not be made perfect. These men are in heaven, but their children are on Earth. Their bowels yearn over us. God sends down men for this reason, Mat. 13. 41. & the Son of man shall send forth his Angels &c--All these authoritative characters will come down & join hand in hand in bringing about this work--

This is why Wilford Woodruff taught this in 1889 when he was "prophet":

In the first place, I will say that the Prophet Joseph taught us that Father Adam was the first man on the earth to whom God gave the keys of the Everlasting Priesthood. He held the keys of the Presidency, and was the first man who did hold them. Noah stood next to him. These keys were [p.216] given to Noah, he being the father of all living in his day, as Adam was in his day. These two men were the first who received the Priesthood in the eternal worlds, before the worlds were formed. They were the first who received the Everlasting Priesthood or Presidency on the earth. Father Adam stands at the head, so far as this world is concerned. Of course, Jesus Christ is the Great High Priest of the salvation of the human family. But Adam holds those keys in the world today; he will hold them to the endless ages of eternity. And Noah, and every man who has ever held or will hold the keys of Presidency of the Kingdom of God, from that day until the scene is wound up, will have to stand before Father Adam and give an account of the keys of that Priesthood, as we all will have to give an account unto the Lord, of the principles that we have received, when our work is done in the flesh. ~Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses Vol. 1, p. 216

Here we have Woodruff teaching exactly what I said Joseph Smith taught. Exactly. Jesus is the "Great High Priest" of the salvation of the human family. But ADAM holds those keys in the world today; he will hold them to the endless ages of eternity. Christ answers to Adam, as we answer to Christ. This is plain and simple. Joseph did teach what Young said he did. But there are bigger problems than that, for the whole thing has been cobbled together by Joseph, who taught that the Father was a Spirit, the Son the incarnation of the Father and the Holy Spirit the mind of God for the first sixteen years of his calling... and then after 1836 changed it all when he invented the Book of Abraham. God was then three people, with the Holy "Ghost" being a spirit body. Jesus was not Jehovah, that came later. In fact, Spencer Kimball was shocked when he first learned about this early in the 20th century...

“I was surprised and perhaps shocked a little when I learned that it was the Son, Jehovah, or his messengers who led Abraham from Ur to Palestine, to Egypt, and back to the land of Palestine. I did not realize that it was Jesus Christ, or Jehovah, who inspired the long line of prophets in their leadership of the people of God through those centuries.” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 8)

He probably wasn't the only one.

[_grindael]

So it took the Lord over 130 years to "steady the ark"? Right. That makes total sense. Then all those "prophets" that said they were guided by "the Lord" in those intervening years were just full of....themselves? Then why follow them? You could be following blind guides for all you know.

This, of course is NOT what Mormonism's "authorities" teach at all. Good luck promoting that. Really, your personal opinions matter little because they are only that, your opinion. You have not proven that Brigham did not understand Joseph's teachings, or not understand what he himself taught. In fact all you have done is just give your own opinion about it. I see no quotes by real "authorities" to back up what you say.

[_Fence Sitter]

A question for you Fence Sitter, have you studied and prayed about all of these issues as you keep commandments and covenants? In other words, I believe I'm offering some valid points, but I think the truth of all things is best learned through the Holy Ghost.

Hey Ben,

Thanks for your responses. I believe Grindael has already pointed out most of the same objections I would have, and to a much greater extent I might add.

Regarding your question above. It is my experience that trying to determine truth through prayer is a exercise in confirmation bias which does not result in reliable or consistent results. As Grindael has shown, even apostles using that method were convinced of the truth of Adam God.

[Guest]

Graendel, You are tireless! I'll do my best to keep up.

First off, I appreciate your acknowledgement that Orson Pratt only united with the quorum after being threatened. We will only be able to confirm that Spencer W. Kimball's quorum's was unified if they choose to release the minutes, which if the church continues on it's recent pattern of releasing secret minutes we may seem them at some future point.

I don't agree with your interpretation of Joseph's teaching about Adam and Christ. Using your interpretation, this quote, "Then to Noah who is Gabriel, he stands next in authority to Adam in the Priesthood; he was called of God to this office & was the Father of all living in his day, & To him was given the Dominion. These men held keys, first on earth, & then in Heaven.--" would mean that Noah is second to Adam, not Christ, and that doesn't line up with Adam-God or modern godhead doctrine. That quote makes the most sense when it is assumed that Christ stands above Adam in authority.

Joseph clearly taught that Christ was superior to Adam in Priesthood authority. Here are two fantastic quotes illustrating such (both of them come from July 1829).

"Daniel in his seventh chapter speaks of the Ancient of Days; he means the oldest man, our Father Adam, Michael, he [who] will call his children together and hold a council with them to prepare them for the coming of the Son of Man. He (Adam) is the father of the human family, and presides over the spirits of all men, and all that have had the keys must stand before him in this grand council. This may take place before some of us leave this stage of action. The Son of Man stands before him, and there is given him glory and dominion. Adam delivers up his stewardship to Christ, that which was delivered to him as holding the keys of the universe, but retains his standing as head of the human family"

"Christ is the Great High Priest; Adam next."

There can be no confusion with the second quote, and I find the first one to clearly indicate the superiority of Christ in Priesthood authority as well. According to the 1828 Webster's dictionary - stewardship: the office of a steward. steward: A man employed in great families to manage the domestic concerns. In other words Adam is "employed" by Christ, not the other way around.

I am aware that Joseph Smith used both Jehovah and Elohim to refer to the Father, however his revelations attribute the title to Jehovah. Following are some quotes from Joseph Smith's revelations that attribute the title of Jehovah to Jesus Christ (despite Joseph Smith not making the connection).

D&C 29:1 "Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your Redeemer, the Great I AM, whose arm of mercy hath atoned for your sins;"

D&C 110:3-4 "His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying: I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father."

I believe I've already answered your other questions in my previous posts.

[_BenBritton]

Fence Sitter, I hear you, brother.

Would you mind if I used your original questions in a follow up article I put on my blog?

[_ludwigm]

Ludwigm, I wanted to acknowledge your comments and say that I don't think we share any common ground for a conversation on the subject of Adam-God, considering you have no faith in any religion or God. Without those I would not see any foundation in my arguments just as you don't.

Should be everybody who have an opinion about carcinoma
1. carcinous ?
2. carcinologist ?

The Adam-God doctrine (opinion, teaching, take Your pick) is an existing entity.
One should not believe anything (religion&god) to read - and think - about this entity.

BY has taught it.
Joseph F. Smith "approved or endorsed" the doctrine at the meeting were Henry Grow, D. B. Huntington, John Lyon, George B. Wallace, and Joseph F. Smith was present, when the latter stating that "the enunciation of that doctrine gave him great joy."
Later, the same Joseph F. Smith denied that doctrine (opinion, teaching, take Your pick again...).
These are facts. We have the documents - thanks grindael.

When I say that around "Adam-God Theory" there is some inconsistency among different prophets (seers, revelators), should I believe in any god ?

Our common ground IS - even You deny it - not the faith. Not the existence/nonexistence of god.

The common ground is the Adam-God Theory/Doctrine/Teaching. This is the topic.

[_grindael]

Graendel, You are tireless! I'll do my best to keep up.

First off, I appreciate your acknowledgement that Orson Pratt only united with the quorum after being threatened. We will only be able to confirm that Spencer W. Kimball's quorum's was unified if they choose to release the minutes, which if the church continues on it's recent pattern of releasing secret minutes we may seem them at some future point.

I don't agree with your interpretation of Joseph's teaching about Adam and Christ. Using your interpretation, this quote, "Then to Noah who is Gabriel, he stands next in authority to Adam in the Priesthood; he was called of God to this office & was the Father of all living in his day, & To him was given the Dominion. These men held keys, first on earth, & then in Heaven.--" would mean that Noah is second to Adam, not Christ, and that doesn't line up with Adam-God or modern godhead doctrine. That quote makes the most sense when it is assumed that Christ stands above Adam in authority.

Joseph clearly taught that Christ was superior to Adam in Priesthood authority. Here are two fantastic quotes illustrating such (both of them come from July 1829).

"Daniel in his seventh chapter speaks of the Ancient of Days; he means the oldest man, our Father Adam, Michael, he [who] will call his children together and hold a council with them to prepare them for the coming of the Son of Man. He (Adam) is the father of the human family, and presides over the spirits of all men, and all that have had the keys must stand before him in this grand council. This may take place before some of us leave this stage of action. The Son of Man stands before him, and there is given him glory and dominion. Adam delivers up his stewardship to Christ, that which was delivered to him as holding the keys of the universe, but retains his standing as head of the human family"

"Christ is the Great High Priest; Adam next."

There can be no confusion with the second quote, and I find the first one to clearly indicate the superiority of Christ in Priesthood authority as well. According to the 1828 Webster's dictionary - stewardship: the office of a steward. steward: A man employed in great families to manage the domestic concerns. In other words Adam is "employed" by Christ, not the other way around.

I am aware that Joseph Smith used both Jehovah and Elohim to refer to the Father, however his revelations attribute the title to Jehovah. Following are some quotes from Joseph Smith's revelations that attribute the title of Jehovah to Jesus Christ (despite Joseph Smith not making the connection).

D&C 29:1 "Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your Redeemer, the Great I AM, whose arm of mercy hath atoned for your sins;"

D&C 110:3-4 "His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying: I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father."

I believe I've already answered your other questions in my previous posts.

You have only given opinions in your previous posts. At least this post has some substance. But you are mistaken about Adam and Noah. You did not factor in what Wilford Woodruff taught (who was in a position to know EXACTLY what Joseph taught way better than you). It was not MY interpretation, but Woodruff's who said he got it directly from Joseph Smith.

Joseph was speaking of Priesthood held by Adam and Noah ON THIS EARTH. And you did not factor in that Adam, like an Apostle, could have greater authority than Christ, yet Christ would have greater authority ON THIS EARTH. That is what Joseph Smith speaks of and Woodruff affirms.

Your quotes about Jehovah are given in extreme naïvété. Joseph was teaching in 1830, (when he gave the first quote) that The Father and Jesus were one person. The Father a being of Spirit, and Jesus the mortal incarnation of the Father. He was still teaching this in 1832 when he wrote the first rendering of his claimed 1820 vision. He saw "the Lord". He wrote it that way because it was inconceivable to him at that time that the Father could appear to him as he was a "Spirit" and could not be seen by men, but only as the mortal incarnation which was Jesus Christ. You obviously did not read Boyd Kirkland's quote:

Many Latter-day Saints would point to D&C 110:3 as evidence that Joseph Smith identified Jesus as Jehovah. But the fact that Joseph called the Father Jehovah several times in his dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland temple just seven days earlier than this revelation (see note 16 above) suggests that other possible interpretations of this verse are more likely. Perhaps Joseph had not yet made a clear separation of the Father and the Son in his theology. Or, this verse in the Doctrine and Covenants might be describing the sound of Christ's voice as being like that of Jehovah's voice (rather than actually being Jehovah's voice). This interpretation is suggested by the previous parallel phrase which states "his voice as the sound of the rushing of great waters," not literally understood to be the sound of rushing waters.

That the Latter Day Saints believed in the Trinity in early Mormonism is evident from this quote, given during the same month that Joseph probably wrote his 1832 History. This was under the Title "The Excellence of Scripture",

‘The Excellence of Scripture’:

“Through Christ we understand the terms on which God will show favour and grace to the world, and by him we have ground of a PARRESIA access with freedom and boldness unto God. On his account we may hope not only for grace to subdue our sins, resist temptations, conquer the devil and the world; but having ’fought this good fight, and finished our course by patient continuance in well doing, we may justly look for glory, honor, and immortality,’ and that ‘crown of righteousness which is laid up for those who wait in faith,’ holiness, and humility, for the appearance of Christ from heaven. Now what things can there be of greater moment and importance for men to know, or God to reveal, than the nature of God and ourselves the state and condition of our souls, the only way to avoid eternal misery and enjoy everlasting bliss!

“The Scriptures discover not only matters of importance, but of the greatest depth and mysteriousness. There are many wonderful things in the law of God, things we may admire, but are never able to comprehend. Such are the eternal purposes and decrees of God, THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY, the incarnation of the Son of God, and the manner of the operation of the Spirit of God upon the souls of men, which are all things of great weight and moment for us to understand and believe that they are, and yet may be unsearchable to our reason, as to the particular manner of them.” (The Evening And Morning Star, Vol. I, INDEPENDENCE, MO. JULY, 1832. No. 2. page 12, emphasis mine)

Calling Jesus Jehovah in 1832 would be the same as calling the Father Jehovah. Jesus, of course spoke with the voice of Jehovah because he was literally (in early Mormonism) the Father. This is attested to by the Lectures on Faith, especially Lecture V, which Joseph himself wrote,

“There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing and supreme power overall things…They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man, or, rather, man was formed after his likeness, and in his image;–he is also the express image and likeness of the personage of the Father: possessing all the fulness of the Father, or, the same fulness with the Father; being begotten of him, and was ordained from before the foundation of the world to be a propitiation for the sins of all those who should believe on his name, and is called the Son because of the flesh.” (Lectures on Faith, 5:2, emphasis mine)

In the questions and answers, at the end of each lecture, we find clarification:

Q. What is the Father?
A. He is a personage of glory and of power. (5:2.)…

Q. What is the Son?
A. First, he is a personage of tabernacle. (5:2.)…

Q. Why was he called the Son?
A. Because of the flesh.

Q. Do the Father and the Son possess the same mind?
A. They do.

Q. What is this mind?
A. The Holy Spirit.

There are NO later quotes of Joseph calling Jesus Jehovah. You will have to try harder if you are to convince anyone that he equated the two as the same. In 1841, this was published in the Times and Seasons,

“We believe in God the Father, who is the great Jehovah and head of all things, and that Christ is the Son of God, co-eternal with the Father; yet he is our Savior, Redeemer, King, and Great Prototype;-was offered as a sacrifice to make an atonement for sin-rose from the dead with the same flesh and bones, not blood, and ascended to heaven, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father.” Times and Seasons, 3:578 (15 November 1841).

Two distinct personages now, but the Father is still Jehovah. In this letter by Smith to Wilson Law in 1842, he calls Jehovah ‘the Eloheim’:

“Shall we shrink at the onset? No! Let every man's brow be as the face of a lion; let his breast be as unshaken as the mighty oak, and his knee confirmed as the sapling of the forest' and by the voice and loud roar of the cannon; and the loud peals and thundering of artillery; and by the voice of the thunderings of heaven as upon Mount Sinai; and by the voice of the heavenly hosts; and by the voice of the eternal God; and by the voice of innocent blood; and by the voice of innocence; and by the voice of all that is sacred and dear to man, let us plead the justice of our cause; trusting in the arm of Jehovah, the Eloheim, who sits enthroned in the heavens; that peradventure He may give as the victory; and if we bleed, we shall bleed in a good cause, in the cause of innocence and truth; and from henceforth will there not be a crown of glory for us? And will not those who come after hold our names in sacred remembrance? And will our enemies dare to brand us with cowardly reproach?” History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.5, p.94

He separates Jesus from this personage in his diary entry of August 23, 1842:

“There are many souls whom I have loved stronger than death. To them I have proved faithful—to them I am determined to prove faithful, until God calls me to resign up my breath. O Thou, who seest and knowest the hearts of all men—Thou eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Jehovah—God—Thou Eloheim, that sittest, as saith the Psalmist, "enthroned in heaven," look down upon Thy servant Joseph at this time; and let faith on the name of THY SON Jesus Christ, to a greater degree than Thy servant ever yet has enjoyed, be conferred upon him, even the faith of Elijah; and let the lamp of eternal life be lit up in his heart, never to be taken away; and let the words of eternal life be poured upon the soul of Thy servant, that he may know [p.128] Thy will, Thy statutes, and Thy commandments, and Thy judgments, to do them.” History of the Church, Vol.5, ch.6, p.127

Here Smith calls JEHOVAH – GOD - THOU ELOHEIM, and his SON Jesus Christ. The title Jehovah is here given to the Father, not the son. In a Proclamation to the World in April of 1845, the Twelve reversed the order and affirmed:

“KNOW YE:— THAT the kingdom of God has come: as has been predicted by ancient prophets, and prayed for in all ages; even that kingdom which shall fill the whole earth, and shall stand for ever.

The great Eloheem Jehovah has been pleased once more to speak from the heavens: and also to commune with man upon the earth, by means of open visions, and by the ministration of HOLY MESSENGERS. By this means the great and eternal High Priesthood, after the Order of HIS Son, even the Apostleship, has been restored; or, returned to the earth.”

Where are any quotes where these men call Jesus Jehovah? Not to be found.

And Orson Pratt may have been threatened, but he was converted. He later made reference to Adam-god in a positive light in one of his later discourses. But he did not have to acknowledge that Young was right and he was wrong. He could have just shut up about it. Pratt did not want to do that though.

You have not given any convincing evidence that you are correct about what Joseph taught. As Boyd Kirkland wrote,

The gods involved in the creation were designated in Joseph's temple endowment ceremony as Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael.26 Joseph had previously identified Michael as "Adam the ancient of days" (D&C 27:11). Whether he identified either this Elohim or Jehovah to be God the Father as he had previously used these titles is unclear. We have seen that he used the title Elohim in various modes, none of which included Jesus, and he also used the name Jehovah to refer the Father. Given all of these possibilities, to Joseph's endowment ceremony, then, did not seem to include Jesus among the creation gods. This is a curious situation, since many scriptural passages previously produced through Joseph, as well as the Bible, attribute a major role in the creation to Jesus.27 Unfortunately, Joseph Smith was killed before he was able to elaborate further on these newer, more esoteric ideas. ~Sunstone 9:2/38 (Aug 84)

In the final months of his life Joseph gave the endowment ceremony to Brigham Young who later said that, "this is not arranged right but we have done the best we could under the circumstances in which we are placed, and I... wish you to take this matter in hand and organize and systematize all these ceremonies..." (Diary of L. John Nuttall, 7 Feb. 1877)

Joseph could easily have taught Brigham Young about Adam during that time period, as Brigham Young attested on three occasions that Joseph did indeed teach him the Adam-god Doctrine. It is not a stretch to believe this, because Joseph had changed his theology from a Trinity of ONE GOD in his early teachings, to two flesh and bone gods in his later years. This was Joseph's pattern, change what he did not like, or when he was influenced by something he read or came in contact with, and add or delete scriptures when his authority was challenged to strengthen that authority (as with the Angelic Priesthood Ordinations). The problem you have, is that you (and Spencer Kimball) are calling Brigham Young a liar (without ANY proof) if you don't believe him, for he certainly understood what he was teaching, (as did his apostles - as Wilford Woodruff attests) and Young claimed that he got it from Joseph Smith and that God also revealed it to him.

[_BenBritton]

Grindael, I will follow up with all the information you have put out there later tonight, but in the mean time let's continue the conversation about priesthood.

Wilford Woodruff's quote does not appear to me to indicate that Adam has higher authority than Christ. His "of course" introduction to the statement about Christ as High Priest seems to me to indicate that he teaching here that Christ has superior authority to Adam. It is not at all surprising that Wilford Woodruff would be teaching something different than Adam-God in this quote. In fact, it is extremely likely that he would NOT be teaching Adam-God considering this quote is from 1889, just 4 years after his own counsel to the Saints deemphasizing Adam-God and commanding the Elder's to end their speculation on the subject.

You said, "...ADAM holds those keys in the world today; he will hold them to the endless ages of eternity," however the Joseph Smith quote I offered in my last post refutes that. Adam will deliver his stewardship up to Christ, that which was given to him as to holding the keys of the universe. Webster's 1828 definition for universe is: "U'NIVERSE, n. [L. universitas. ]The collective name of heaven and earth, and all that belongs to them; the whole system of created things." Adam retains his standing as head of the family, but the authority over the entire system of creation, which Adam was temporarily entrusted with (according to the term stewardship), is given to Christ. Joseph Smith placed Christ above Adam in the eternal worlds, and I see no evidence that he was teaching something parallel to Adam-God in any of his quotes on priesthood authority and Adam or Michael.

Wilford Woodroof has regressed in his quote, in my opinion, to this interpretation of Priesthood authority that Joseph Smith taught.

[_Fence Sitter]

Ben,

May I point out that relying on a consistent view, regarding doctrine, from the prophets and apostles, especially in the early church is not much of a defense against Adam God being taught as doctrine or against it being doctrinally wrong. These men were trying to work out what they believed was new doctrine and many times may have contradicted themselves while doing so. These contradictions are not an indication they did not believe the doctrine, it merely means they had not figured it out yet. Additionally there was much greater latitude, even between leaders, that was expressed publicly, about doctrinal points. And lastly Adam God is only one of a host of doctrinal views that those in the time of BY and Joseph Smith viewed differently than we do today. I doubt very much that Joseph Smith would recognize the Church today that he founded 180 years ago.

You can use what ever questions of mine you would like, though I think there are those here who could provide you with much better questions. For example we have a poster here by the name of Consiglieri that is quite capable of writing a book about Adam God (I hope he does someday) who would be much better equipped to review your thoughts on this subject. And, I maight add, Grindael isn't doing a bad job either.