- Jun 28, 2015
- 9,750
- 2,615
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
2nd President Brigham Young
“Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken—HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do” (Brigham Young, April 9, 1852, Journal of Discourses 1:50).
“What a learned idea! 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. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation” (Brigham Young, April 9, 1852, Journal of Discourses 1:51).
“I will give you a few words of doctrine, upon which there has been much inquiry, and with regard to which considerable ignorance exists. Br. Watt will write it, but it is not my intention to have it published, therefore pay good attention, and store it up in your memories. Some years ago, I advanced a doctrine with regard to Adam being our father and God, that will be a cause [curse?] to many Elders of Israel because of their folly. With regard to it they yet grovel in darkness and will. It is one of the most glorious revealments of the economy of heaven, yet the world holds it [in] dirrision [sic]. Had I revealed the doctrine of baptism from the dead instead [of] Joseph Smith there are men around me who would have ridiculed the idea until dooms day. But they are ignorant and stupid like the dumb ass” (“The Adam-God Doctrine,” David John Buerger, citing a discourse given by Brigham Young on October 8, 1861. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1982, p. 29).
“How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which is revealed to them, and which God revealed to me – namely that Adam is our father and God” (Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 18, 1873, p. 308).
4th President Wilford Woodruff
“Meeting Adjourned till evening when the House was filled again. Was Addressed…by Brigham Young…I will now preach you another Sermon. There is one great Master and Head in all kingdoms & g[overnment?]. So with our Father in Heaven. He is a Tabernacle. He Created us in the likeness of his own image. The Son has also a Tabernacle like the Father & the Holy Ghost is a minister to the people but not a tabernacle. Who begat the Son of God? Infidels say that Jesus was a Bastard but let me tell you the truth Concerning that matter. Our Father begat all the spirits that were before any tabernacles were made. When our Father came into the Garden He came with his celestial body & brought one of his wifes with him & eat of the fruit of the garden untill He could begat a tabernacle. And Adam is Michael or God And all the God that we have any thing to do with. They Eat of this fruit & formed the first Tabernacle that was formed. And when the VIRGIN MARY was begotton with Child it was By the Father and in no other way ownly as we were begotton. I will tell you the truth as it is in God. The world dont know that Jesus Christ Our Elder Brother was begotton by our Father in Heaven. Handle it as you please. It will either seal the damnation or salvation of m[e/a?]n. He was begotton by the Father & not by the Holy Ghost. When you go to Preach & believe that Jesus Christ was begotton by the Holy Ghost dont lay Hands upon the Heads of Females for the reception of the Holy Ghost lest it Beget her with Child And you be acused. I have told you nothing in this thing but what you have red in the Bible. I do not frame it” (Wilford Woodruff, Waiting for World’s End: The Diaries of Wilford Woodruff, Susan Staker, ed., p. 150. Recounting Brigham Young’s conference sermon from April 9, 1852. Ellipses, brackets, spelling, and punctuation in original).
“Some have said that I was vary presumptuous to say that Brother Brigham was my God & Saviour. Brother Joseph was his God. The one that gave Joseph the keys of the kingdom was his God which was Peter. Jesus Christ was his God & the God & Father of Jesus Christ was Adam” (Waiting for World’s End: The Diaries of Wilford Woodruff, Susan Staker, ed., p. 150. Recounting Heber C. Kimball’s conference sermon from April 10, 1852. Spelling and punctuation in original).
“Some have thought it strange what I have said Concerning Adam But the period will Come when this people of faithful will be willing to adopt Joseph Smith as their Prophet Seer Revelator & God But not the father of their spirits for that was our Father Adam” (Waiting for World’s End: The Diaries of Wilford Woodruff, Susan Staker, ed., p. 299. Recounting Brigham Young’s sermon from December 11, 1869. Spelling and punctuation in original).
10th President Joseph Fielding Smith
“SOURCE OF ADAM-GOD THEORY. President Brigham Young is quoted—in all probability the sermon was erroneously transcribed!—-as having said: ‘Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the Garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, about whom holy men have written and spoken—He is our father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do’” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation 1:96. Italics in original).
12th President Spencer W. Kimball
“We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. 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” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Adam-God Theory Denounced,” Church News, October 9, 1976, p. 11).
First Presidency
“That first man sent his own Son to redeem the world, to redeem his brethren; his life was taken, his blood shed, that our sins might be remitted. That Son called twelve men and ordained them to be Apostles, and when he departed the keys of the kingdom were deposited with three of those twelve, viz.: Peter, James, and John” (Heber C. Kimball, June 29, 1856, Journal of Discourses 4:1).
Apostles
“Brigham Young’s much-discussed sermon says that ‘Jesus was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the Garden of Eden and who is our Father in heaven.’ Enemies of the Church, or stupid people, reading also that Adam is ‘our father and our God.’ have heralded far and wide that the Mormons believe that Jesus Christ was begotten of Adam. Yet, the rational reading of the whole sermon reveals the falsity of such a doctrine. It is explained that God the Father was in the Garden of Eden before Adam, that he was the Father of Adam and that this same personage, God the Father, who was in the Garden of Eden before Adam, was the Father of Jesus Christ, when the Son took upon himself a mortal body. That is, the same personage was the Father of Adam and of Jesus Christ. In the numerous published sermons of Brigham Young this is the doctrine that appears; none other. The assertion is repeatedly made that Jesus Christ was begotten by God, the Father, distinct by any stretch of imagination from Adam. This is a well-established Latter-day Saint doctrine” (John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, p. 56).
“There are those who believe, or say they believe that Adam is our father and our god. That he is the father of our spirits and our bodies, and that he is the one we worship. The devil keeps this heresy alive as a means of obtaining converts to cultism. It is contrary to the whole plan of salvation set forth in the scriptures. Anyone who has read the Book of Moses, and anyone who has received the temple endowment and who yet believes the Adam-God theory, does not deserve to be saved” (Bruce R. McConkie, “The Seven Deadly Heresies,” an address given at Brigham Young University on June 1, 1980. Transcribed from actual speech).
“Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This, however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel. But, be it known, Brigham Young also taught accurately and correctly, the status and position of Adam in the eternal scheme of things. What I am saying is that Brigham Young, contradicted Brigham Young, and the issue becomes one of which Brigham Young we will believe. The answer is we will believe the expressions that accord with the teachings in the Standard Works” (Bruce R. McConkie, Letter to Eugene England, February 19, 1981, p. 6).
Seventies
“Some of the sectarian ministers are saying that we Mormons are ashamed of the doctrine announced by President Brigham Young, to the effect that Adam will thus be the God of this world. No, friends, it is not that we are ashamed of that doctrine. If you see any change coming over our countenance when this doctrine is named, it is surprise, astonishment, that any one at all capable of grasping the largeness and extent of the universe, the grandeur of existence and the possibilities in man for growth, for progress, should be so lean of intellect, should have such a paucity of understanding as to call it in question at all. That is what our change in countenance means – not shame for the doctrine Brigham Young taught” (B.H. Roberts, Mormon Doctrine of Deity, pp. 42-43).
“Our Father Adam.—The extract from the Journal of Discourses may startle some of our readers, but we would wish them to recollect that in this last dispensation God will send forth, by His servants, things new as well as old, until man is perfected in the truth. And we would here take occasion to remark, that it would be well if all our readers would secure a copy of the Journal of Discourses as it is issued, and also of every standard work of the Church; and not only secure these works, but attentively read them, and thoroughly study the principles they contain. Those of the Saints who fail to obtain the standard publications of the Church, will not be likely to prove very intelligent Saints, and will be very liable to wake up some day, and find themselves wonderfully behind the times, and consequently will not be able to stand the day of trial, which will come upon all the world. Without the intelligence that comes through the Holy Priesthood, the Saints cannot gain salvation, and this intelligence is given in the various publications of the Church. Who then will endanger his salvation by being behind the times? Not the wise, certainly” (The Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star 15:780. Samuel W. Richards, ed., November 26, 1853. Italics in original).
“The St. George endowment included a revised thirty-minute ‘lecture at the veil’ first delivered by Young. This summarized important theological concepts taught in the endowment and contained references to Young’s Adam-God doctrine” (David John Buerger, Mysteries of Godliness, p. 110).
“A classic example of an anomaly in the LDS tradition is the so-called ‘Adam-God theory.’ During the latter half of the nineteenth century Brigham Young made some remarks about the relationship between Adam and God that the Latter-day Saints have never been able to understand. The reported statements conflict with LDS teachings before and after Brigham Young, as well as with statements of President Young himself during the same period of time. So how do Latter-day Saints deal with the phenomenon? We don’t; we simply set it aside. It is an anomaly. On occasion my colleagues and I at Brigham Young University have tried to figure out what Brigham Young might have actually said and what it might have meant, but the attempts have always failed. The reported statements simply do not compute - we cannot make sense out of them. This is not a matter of believing it or disbelieving it; we simply don’t know what ‘it’ is. If Brigham Young were here we could ask him what he actually said and what he meant by it, but he is not here, and even expert students of his thought are left to wonder whether he was misquoted, whether he meant to say one thing and actually said another, whether he was somehow joking with or testing the Saints, or whether some vital element that would make sense out of the reports has been omitted” (BYU Professor Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? pp. 19-20).
“The point is that while anti-Mormons can believe whatever they want, the Latter-day Saints have never believed that Brigham Young taught the ‘Adam-God theory’ as explained in anti-Mormon literature, and that whether Brigham Young believed it or not, the ‘Adam-God theory’ as proposed and interpreted by non-Mormons simply cannot be found in the theology of the Latter-day Saints” (BYU Professor Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? p. 20).
“The identities and roles of the temple creation gods became the focus of a controversy between Bishop Edward Bunker and his counselor Myron Abbott in Bunkerville, Nevada, in 1890. This controversy culminated in 1892 in a St. George, Utah, stake high council meeting attended by church president Wilford Woodruff and his counselor George Q. Cannon. Bunker and his father, Edward Sr., felt that the ‘Lecture before the Veil,’ as it was then presented in the St. George Temple, contained false doctrine. This veil lecture, dictated by Brigham Young in 1877, clearly implied that Adam was God the Father by explaining that prior to coming to this earth, Adam and Eve had been resurrected and exalted on a former world. In their exalted state they begot the spirits of all humankind. Under the direction of Elohim and Jehovah, gods of the creation council, Adam then created this earth and brought Eve here with him to fall in order to provide their spiritual offspring with physical tabernacles” (Boyd Kirkland, “The Development of the Mormon Doctrine of God,” Line Upon Line: Essays on Mormon Doctrine, pp. 42-43).
“Pratt was not the only member unwilling to embrace certain of Young’s views. Yet his calling as Apostle placed him at the forefront of dissent. Following a strong Adam-God statement delivered by Young during the October 1854 general conference, one member observed, ‘[T]here were some that did not believe the sayings of the Prophet Brigham. Even our beloved Brother Orson Pratt told me that he did not believe it. He said he could prove by the scriptures it was not correct. I felt sorry to hear Professor Orson Pratt say that. I fear lest he should apostatize’” (Gary James Bergera, “The Orson Pratt-Brigham Young Controversies: Conflict Within the Quorum 1853-1868,” Dialogue, A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol.13, No.2, p. 13; citing the journal of Joseph P. Robinson, October 6, 1854. Brackets in original).
“Four years later the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve again addressed the issue, in a pamphlet entitled ‘The Father and the Son.’ The purpose of this publication was to clarify title and role definitions of God the Father and Jesus Christ. The Presidency stated, unequivocally, ‘God the Eternal Father, whom we designate by the exalted name-tide ‘Elohim,’ is the literal Parent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and of the spirits of the human race.’ This, notwithstanding some definitional imprecision, seems a clear rejection of at least part of Brigham’s understanding, for Mormons had always distinguished ‘Elohim’ from Adam (i.e., Michael). Despite the seeming finality of this language, questions still persisted. President Penrose, who had continued to speak regularly on the subject, again responded, this time in General Conference, April 6, 1916… A few years later Penrose was even more explicit as he affirmed that ‘Jesus of Nazareth, born of the virgin Mary, was literally and truly the Son of the Father, the Eternal God, not of Adam.’ Thus it was Penrose more than any of his colleagues who articulated the new, ‘official’ interpretation of or response to Brigham Young’s theological innovation. Indeed, his logic and interpretation became the pattern for virtually all twentieth-century Mormon responses to Adam-God” (David John Buerger, “The Adam-God Doctrine,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Volume 15, Number 1, pp. 42-43. Ellipsis mine).
“Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken—HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do” (Brigham Young, April 9, 1852, Journal of Discourses 1:50).
“What a learned idea! 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. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation” (Brigham Young, April 9, 1852, Journal of Discourses 1:51).
“I will give you a few words of doctrine, upon which there has been much inquiry, and with regard to which considerable ignorance exists. Br. Watt will write it, but it is not my intention to have it published, therefore pay good attention, and store it up in your memories. Some years ago, I advanced a doctrine with regard to Adam being our father and God, that will be a cause [curse?] to many Elders of Israel because of their folly. With regard to it they yet grovel in darkness and will. It is one of the most glorious revealments of the economy of heaven, yet the world holds it [in] dirrision [sic]. Had I revealed the doctrine of baptism from the dead instead [of] Joseph Smith there are men around me who would have ridiculed the idea until dooms day. But they are ignorant and stupid like the dumb ass” (“The Adam-God Doctrine,” David John Buerger, citing a discourse given by Brigham Young on October 8, 1861. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1982, p. 29).
“How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which is revealed to them, and which God revealed to me – namely that Adam is our father and God” (Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 18, 1873, p. 308).
4th President Wilford Woodruff
“Meeting Adjourned till evening when the House was filled again. Was Addressed…by Brigham Young…I will now preach you another Sermon. There is one great Master and Head in all kingdoms & g[overnment?]. So with our Father in Heaven. He is a Tabernacle. He Created us in the likeness of his own image. The Son has also a Tabernacle like the Father & the Holy Ghost is a minister to the people but not a tabernacle. Who begat the Son of God? Infidels say that Jesus was a Bastard but let me tell you the truth Concerning that matter. Our Father begat all the spirits that were before any tabernacles were made. When our Father came into the Garden He came with his celestial body & brought one of his wifes with him & eat of the fruit of the garden untill He could begat a tabernacle. And Adam is Michael or God And all the God that we have any thing to do with. They Eat of this fruit & formed the first Tabernacle that was formed. And when the VIRGIN MARY was begotton with Child it was By the Father and in no other way ownly as we were begotton. I will tell you the truth as it is in God. The world dont know that Jesus Christ Our Elder Brother was begotton by our Father in Heaven. Handle it as you please. It will either seal the damnation or salvation of m[e/a?]n. He was begotton by the Father & not by the Holy Ghost. When you go to Preach & believe that Jesus Christ was begotton by the Holy Ghost dont lay Hands upon the Heads of Females for the reception of the Holy Ghost lest it Beget her with Child And you be acused. I have told you nothing in this thing but what you have red in the Bible. I do not frame it” (Wilford Woodruff, Waiting for World’s End: The Diaries of Wilford Woodruff, Susan Staker, ed., p. 150. Recounting Brigham Young’s conference sermon from April 9, 1852. Ellipses, brackets, spelling, and punctuation in original).
“Some have said that I was vary presumptuous to say that Brother Brigham was my God & Saviour. Brother Joseph was his God. The one that gave Joseph the keys of the kingdom was his God which was Peter. Jesus Christ was his God & the God & Father of Jesus Christ was Adam” (Waiting for World’s End: The Diaries of Wilford Woodruff, Susan Staker, ed., p. 150. Recounting Heber C. Kimball’s conference sermon from April 10, 1852. Spelling and punctuation in original).
“Some have thought it strange what I have said Concerning Adam But the period will Come when this people of faithful will be willing to adopt Joseph Smith as their Prophet Seer Revelator & God But not the father of their spirits for that was our Father Adam” (Waiting for World’s End: The Diaries of Wilford Woodruff, Susan Staker, ed., p. 299. Recounting Brigham Young’s sermon from December 11, 1869. Spelling and punctuation in original).
10th President Joseph Fielding Smith
“SOURCE OF ADAM-GOD THEORY. President Brigham Young is quoted—in all probability the sermon was erroneously transcribed!—-as having said: ‘Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the Garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days, about whom holy men have written and spoken—He is our father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do’” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation 1:96. Italics in original).
12th President Spencer W. Kimball
“We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. 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” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Adam-God Theory Denounced,” Church News, October 9, 1976, p. 11).
First Presidency
“That first man sent his own Son to redeem the world, to redeem his brethren; his life was taken, his blood shed, that our sins might be remitted. That Son called twelve men and ordained them to be Apostles, and when he departed the keys of the kingdom were deposited with three of those twelve, viz.: Peter, James, and John” (Heber C. Kimball, June 29, 1856, Journal of Discourses 4:1).
Apostles
“Brigham Young’s much-discussed sermon says that ‘Jesus was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the Garden of Eden and who is our Father in heaven.’ Enemies of the Church, or stupid people, reading also that Adam is ‘our father and our God.’ have heralded far and wide that the Mormons believe that Jesus Christ was begotten of Adam. Yet, the rational reading of the whole sermon reveals the falsity of such a doctrine. It is explained that God the Father was in the Garden of Eden before Adam, that he was the Father of Adam and that this same personage, God the Father, who was in the Garden of Eden before Adam, was the Father of Jesus Christ, when the Son took upon himself a mortal body. That is, the same personage was the Father of Adam and of Jesus Christ. In the numerous published sermons of Brigham Young this is the doctrine that appears; none other. The assertion is repeatedly made that Jesus Christ was begotten by God, the Father, distinct by any stretch of imagination from Adam. This is a well-established Latter-day Saint doctrine” (John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, p. 56).
“There are those who believe, or say they believe that Adam is our father and our god. That he is the father of our spirits and our bodies, and that he is the one we worship. The devil keeps this heresy alive as a means of obtaining converts to cultism. It is contrary to the whole plan of salvation set forth in the scriptures. Anyone who has read the Book of Moses, and anyone who has received the temple endowment and who yet believes the Adam-God theory, does not deserve to be saved” (Bruce R. McConkie, “The Seven Deadly Heresies,” an address given at Brigham Young University on June 1, 1980. Transcribed from actual speech).
“Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This, however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel. But, be it known, Brigham Young also taught accurately and correctly, the status and position of Adam in the eternal scheme of things. What I am saying is that Brigham Young, contradicted Brigham Young, and the issue becomes one of which Brigham Young we will believe. The answer is we will believe the expressions that accord with the teachings in the Standard Works” (Bruce R. McConkie, Letter to Eugene England, February 19, 1981, p. 6).
Seventies
“Some of the sectarian ministers are saying that we Mormons are ashamed of the doctrine announced by President Brigham Young, to the effect that Adam will thus be the God of this world. No, friends, it is not that we are ashamed of that doctrine. If you see any change coming over our countenance when this doctrine is named, it is surprise, astonishment, that any one at all capable of grasping the largeness and extent of the universe, the grandeur of existence and the possibilities in man for growth, for progress, should be so lean of intellect, should have such a paucity of understanding as to call it in question at all. That is what our change in countenance means – not shame for the doctrine Brigham Young taught” (B.H. Roberts, Mormon Doctrine of Deity, pp. 42-43).
“Our Father Adam.—The extract from the Journal of Discourses may startle some of our readers, but we would wish them to recollect that in this last dispensation God will send forth, by His servants, things new as well as old, until man is perfected in the truth. And we would here take occasion to remark, that it would be well if all our readers would secure a copy of the Journal of Discourses as it is issued, and also of every standard work of the Church; and not only secure these works, but attentively read them, and thoroughly study the principles they contain. Those of the Saints who fail to obtain the standard publications of the Church, will not be likely to prove very intelligent Saints, and will be very liable to wake up some day, and find themselves wonderfully behind the times, and consequently will not be able to stand the day of trial, which will come upon all the world. Without the intelligence that comes through the Holy Priesthood, the Saints cannot gain salvation, and this intelligence is given in the various publications of the Church. Who then will endanger his salvation by being behind the times? Not the wise, certainly” (The Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star 15:780. Samuel W. Richards, ed., November 26, 1853. Italics in original).
“The St. George endowment included a revised thirty-minute ‘lecture at the veil’ first delivered by Young. This summarized important theological concepts taught in the endowment and contained references to Young’s Adam-God doctrine” (David John Buerger, Mysteries of Godliness, p. 110).
“A classic example of an anomaly in the LDS tradition is the so-called ‘Adam-God theory.’ During the latter half of the nineteenth century Brigham Young made some remarks about the relationship between Adam and God that the Latter-day Saints have never been able to understand. The reported statements conflict with LDS teachings before and after Brigham Young, as well as with statements of President Young himself during the same period of time. So how do Latter-day Saints deal with the phenomenon? We don’t; we simply set it aside. It is an anomaly. On occasion my colleagues and I at Brigham Young University have tried to figure out what Brigham Young might have actually said and what it might have meant, but the attempts have always failed. The reported statements simply do not compute - we cannot make sense out of them. This is not a matter of believing it or disbelieving it; we simply don’t know what ‘it’ is. If Brigham Young were here we could ask him what he actually said and what he meant by it, but he is not here, and even expert students of his thought are left to wonder whether he was misquoted, whether he meant to say one thing and actually said another, whether he was somehow joking with or testing the Saints, or whether some vital element that would make sense out of the reports has been omitted” (BYU Professor Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? pp. 19-20).
“The point is that while anti-Mormons can believe whatever they want, the Latter-day Saints have never believed that Brigham Young taught the ‘Adam-God theory’ as explained in anti-Mormon literature, and that whether Brigham Young believed it or not, the ‘Adam-God theory’ as proposed and interpreted by non-Mormons simply cannot be found in the theology of the Latter-day Saints” (BYU Professor Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? p. 20).
“The identities and roles of the temple creation gods became the focus of a controversy between Bishop Edward Bunker and his counselor Myron Abbott in Bunkerville, Nevada, in 1890. This controversy culminated in 1892 in a St. George, Utah, stake high council meeting attended by church president Wilford Woodruff and his counselor George Q. Cannon. Bunker and his father, Edward Sr., felt that the ‘Lecture before the Veil,’ as it was then presented in the St. George Temple, contained false doctrine. This veil lecture, dictated by Brigham Young in 1877, clearly implied that Adam was God the Father by explaining that prior to coming to this earth, Adam and Eve had been resurrected and exalted on a former world. In their exalted state they begot the spirits of all humankind. Under the direction of Elohim and Jehovah, gods of the creation council, Adam then created this earth and brought Eve here with him to fall in order to provide their spiritual offspring with physical tabernacles” (Boyd Kirkland, “The Development of the Mormon Doctrine of God,” Line Upon Line: Essays on Mormon Doctrine, pp. 42-43).
“Pratt was not the only member unwilling to embrace certain of Young’s views. Yet his calling as Apostle placed him at the forefront of dissent. Following a strong Adam-God statement delivered by Young during the October 1854 general conference, one member observed, ‘[T]here were some that did not believe the sayings of the Prophet Brigham. Even our beloved Brother Orson Pratt told me that he did not believe it. He said he could prove by the scriptures it was not correct. I felt sorry to hear Professor Orson Pratt say that. I fear lest he should apostatize’” (Gary James Bergera, “The Orson Pratt-Brigham Young Controversies: Conflict Within the Quorum 1853-1868,” Dialogue, A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol.13, No.2, p. 13; citing the journal of Joseph P. Robinson, October 6, 1854. Brackets in original).
“Four years later the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve again addressed the issue, in a pamphlet entitled ‘The Father and the Son.’ The purpose of this publication was to clarify title and role definitions of God the Father and Jesus Christ. The Presidency stated, unequivocally, ‘God the Eternal Father, whom we designate by the exalted name-tide ‘Elohim,’ is the literal Parent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and of the spirits of the human race.’ This, notwithstanding some definitional imprecision, seems a clear rejection of at least part of Brigham’s understanding, for Mormons had always distinguished ‘Elohim’ from Adam (i.e., Michael). Despite the seeming finality of this language, questions still persisted. President Penrose, who had continued to speak regularly on the subject, again responded, this time in General Conference, April 6, 1916… A few years later Penrose was even more explicit as he affirmed that ‘Jesus of Nazareth, born of the virgin Mary, was literally and truly the Son of the Father, the Eternal God, not of Adam.’ Thus it was Penrose more than any of his colleagues who articulated the new, ‘official’ interpretation of or response to Brigham Young’s theological innovation. Indeed, his logic and interpretation became the pattern for virtually all twentieth-century Mormon responses to Adam-God” (David John Buerger, “The Adam-God Doctrine,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Volume 15, Number 1, pp. 42-43. Ellipsis mine).
