So has anybody discussed the Adam God theory recently?

[SoCalCoug]

Did you read the link? He even did a comparison table between Wilford Woodruff's journal and Brigham Young's discourse.

Your rant would be more persuasive if you had read the link and then pointed out his failings.

I don't like the whitewashing, either. In fact, I read this article with the assumption that there had been whitewashing of Brigham Young's sermon going on. Now, I'm not so sure.

[SteelBlue]

that you keep referring to?

[Dan]

... first of all, have YOU read all of the quotes from the links that I provided earlier in this thread? If so, you would be aware of the mass of material that is completely swept under the rug when even discussing this topic. How can you take an article like this too seriously when it only addresses the part of the evidence that melds with their theories?

Yes, he has some WW quotes, but mainly from the part where the original discourse was quoted. But that is a red herring. The original discourse has enough ambiguity to be picked apart. What is not quoted are the plethora of other quotes not just from WW but from others who are not cited in this article by Watson. If you would like to see such quotes, open the link I provided and start reading. It won't take much more than 20-30 minutes before you realize there really isn't any doubt what was taught.

Does anyone else find this part of the article [quoted immediately below]completely laughable? Or is it only me? So we have an apostle that admits he (i.e., BRM) purposefully obfuscated BY's real teachings because BY was, in BRM's opinion, wrong. When BRM is cornered and would basically sound like an idiot if he further denied what BY really taught (because Eugene England had presented BRM undeniable evidence), BRM admitted the truth. Then later, the article appears to claim BRM was taught the "Two Adam" theory, of which BRM was apparently previously unaware, and BRM does another 180 and says he was totally wrong in claiming what he did to EE. I ask again, am I the only one who finds this amusing and ridiculous? This type of garbage is why I tend to roll my eyes any time some zealot tries to use BRM as support for some controvercial topic. The only thing, IMO, that you can trust BRM for on such topics is that he will say anything to try to harmonize teachings and try to cling to whitewashed, faith-promoting history. Most of his stuff is great, but when he gets into the controvescial stuff, I find him pretty unauthoritative. Let me summarize the reality ... BRM's teachings are confronted by EE, who proves them wrong. BRM admits to EE that EE is right. Someone comes to BRM and shows an alternative theory that may be able to harmonize things, so BRM says to claim what BRM said to EE was false. Let me just say, that anyone who has done any indepth study on the topic KNOWS what BY taught [i.e., "Friend" from earlier in this discussion thread]. It is a given. There is no doubt. The doubt sets in when those who will lie to cover things up, or who are trying to apologetically tackle the issue say things that others take to be authoritative, people get confused.

[start quote]

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.

[end quote]

Let me end by citing the Lecture at the Veil from John Nuttall's diary (Nuttall was BY's, JT's, & WW's personal secretary):

[begin quote]

In the creation the Gods entered into an agreement about forming this earth. & putting Michael or Adam upon it. these things of which I have been speaking are what are termed the mysteries of godliness but they will enable you to understand the expression of Jesus made while in Jerusalem. This is life eternal that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. We were once acquainited [acquainted] with the Gods & lived with them but we had the privilige of taking upon us flesh that the spirit might have a house to dwell in. we did so and forgot all and came into the world not recollecting anything of which we had previously learned. We have heard a great deal about Adam and Eve. how they were formed &c some think he was made like an adobie and the Lord breathed into him the breath of life. for we read "from dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return" Well he was made of the dust of the earth but not of this earth. he was made just the same way you and I are made but on another earth. Adam was an immortal being when he came. on this earth he had lived on an earth similar to ours he had received the Priesthood and the Keys thereof. and had been faithful in all things and gained his resurrection and his exaltation and was crowned with glory immortality and eternal lives and was numbered with the Gods for such he became through his faithfulness. and had begotten all the spirit that was to come to this earth. and Eve our common Mother who is the mother of all living bore those spirits in the celestial world. and when this earth was organized by Elohim. Jehovah & Michael who is Adam our common Father. Adam & Eve had the privilege to continue the work of Progression. consequently came to this earth and commenced the great work of forming tabernacles for those spirits to dwell in. and when Adam and those that assisted him had completed this Kingdom our earth he came to it. and slept and forgot all and became like an Infant child. it is said by Moses the historian that the Lord caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam and took from his side a rib and formed the woman that Adam called Eve-this should be interpreted that the Man Adam like all other Men had the seed within him to propagate his species. but not the Woman. she conceives the seed but she does not produce it. consequently she was taken from the side or bowels of her father. this explains the mystery of Moses's dark sayings in regard to Adam and Eve. Adam & Eve when they were placed on this earth were immortal beings with flesh. bones and sinews. but upon partaking of the fruits of the earth while in the garden and cultivating the ground their bodies became changed from immortal to mortal beings with the blood coursing through their veins as the action of life. Adam was not under transgression until after he partook of the forbidden fruit that was nesesary that they might be together that man might be. the woman was found in trans-gression not the Man- Now in the law of Sacrifice we have the promise of a Savior and man had the privilege and showed forth his obedience by offering of the first fruits of the earth and the firstlings of the flocks- this as a showing that Jesus would come and shed his blood
[Four lines without any writing on them.]
Father Adam's oldest son (Jesus the Saviour) who is the heir of the family is Father Adams first begotten in the spirit World. who according to the flesh is the only begotten as it is written. (In his divinity he having gone back into the spirit World. and come in the spirit [glory] to Mary and she conceived for when Adam and Eve got through with their Work in this earth. they did not lay their bodies down in the dust, but returned to the spirit World from whence they came.
I felt myself much blessed in being permitted to associate with such men and hear such instructions as they savored of life to me-

[end quote]

Sorry SoCal that you felt I was ranting before, it is just that the information I provided previously in this thread through links covered support for what I had said for the most part.

[Dan]

... after letting the AG concept sink in and the soul searching is underway:

"Some years ago, I advanced a doctrine with regard to Adam being our Father and God. That [doctrine] will be a curse to many of the 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 hold[s] it [in] derision. Had I revealed the doctrine of Baptism for the dead instead of Joseph Smith, there are men around me who would have ridiculed the idea until doomsday, but they are ignorant and stupid like the dumb ass." (10/8/1861, Manuscript addresses of Brigham Young)

[Dan]

... here is one more thing I want to bring up as I browse through some of my electronic documents:

[begin]

Journal of Wilford Woodruff; Church Historical Department Ms/f/115; October 6th-8th 1854.

General Conference commenced this morning at the tabernacle at 10 O clock

The Presidency were present--of the twelve apostles[:] O. Hyde, O. Pratt, W. Woodruff, G. A. Smith, E. T. Benson, L. Snow, as all the business of the Conference is published in the Deseret News of Oct 12 No. 31 I deem it unnecessary to record it here. Conference closed Sunday Evening

Oct. 8th President Young preached to a congregation of several thousand, out of doors and I believe that he preached the greatest sermon that ever was delivered to the Latter day Saints since they have been a people. Elder Watt reported. I also took minutes.

[end]

Well, would anyone like to read what WW called "the greatest sermon that ever was delivered to the Latter day Saints since they have been a people ..."?

I happen to have an electronic copy of this talk (it is very entertaining, BTW), if anyone is interested. I would post it here, but, uh, the talk takes up about 40 Word pages. And, also BTW, the talk is quite clear about what BY believes. The silly 'two Adam' theory Watson believes (which, IIRC, Watson did not actually originate) just has no place. Not that a God is not properly called an "Adam", so there would be multiple Adams, but the way some apologists try to argue 'what BY really meant' while doing mental gymnastics to try to harmonize things. The funny thing is that such people do not worry about contorting through such means as such people are usually convinved that they 'know BY must have meant something else', therefore they are just facilitating some sort of means to allow for what they 'already know' must be different. And those very people get mad at people like the Tanners, et.al., for allowing the ends to justify the means.

So just let me know if you would like a copy of the talk and I will send you an electronic version. Or if MikeWaters thinks it is ok, I will post it all here. IMO, WW may have been correct about the greatness of this talk. Too bad Watson did not include the clarity of BY in the 'greatest talk ever given to the saints' when contorting through the nonsensical 'two Adam' theory.

[UtahDan]

on this topic. It would probably get them excommunicated but that would be a small price to pay to satisfy my intellectual curiosity.

[Dan]

... 'greatest sermon ever' in private messages, please send your email addresses so I can attach a copy of the Word document to an email. I do not know if the whole article will fit in a board mail. I can try it though if someone does not have an email account.

[MikeWaters]

I looked at this thread and it had 77 replies and 666 views.

Tell me that doesn't mean something!

(of course I have now disrupted that)