Close Topic Options

Mormon God-Adam Theory - Page 4

True but it is obvious is not something that is taking away Pres. Hinckley's sleep or that he asked revelation to God concerning this matter.

Theory God-Adam Mormon

Or, as I suspect is the case, he has sought and received revelation on it, and knows that it is a matter for each person to get their own revelation on, so he must keep it strictly sacred.

I always find it interesting that people who proclaim that this is a true doctrine, because they have received revelation on it for themselves, then seem to expect others to immediately believe it. This seems to me to be one of the most sacred of subjects. That is, real knowledge about it would ONLY come through revelation. As such, it would not be appropriate for someone to "follow" it because Pres. Hinckley said that he believed it. I believe that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young gave enough information to stimulate us, when we are ready, to ask the Father to clarify it for ourselves. Then we keep this knowledge to ourselves, except for the few times when the Spirit directly commands us to share that knowledge.

Thus, this "pearl" is not cast before the "swine".

Personally, I am not even interested in pursuing it until after I have received the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost. Without that, the knowledge would be useless to me (IMHO).

Mormon God-Adam Theory Studies Doctrine Mormon

Did Joseph Smith also said that Adam is God?

Page 4 Theory God-Adam Mormon

Nighthawk,

I've introduced myself and had you on as my referral.

LDS_Forever, Brigham Young did say on at least two occasions (and possibly three, if I remember correctly) that it was Joseph Smith who taught him about Adam-God. He also said that Joseph could not reveal it to anyone (obviously because of unbelief). This is recorded in the journal of Wilford Woodruff and another place as well.

If you want to do some more reading about Adam-God, click on www.bordeglobal.com/foruminv/index.php?showforum=120 which has a lot of "deep" (sometimes possibly far out) doctrine stuff on it (there may be both truths and falsehoods contained therein, just warning you!). The section about Adam-God should be of some help to you.

As with Nighthawk, I too believe that the Adam God doctrine is a very sacred one that should not be triffled with. And, Nighthawk, I agree with you on searching and looking out for your baptism of fire - I have recently been compelled to do the same thing as I have studied out the baptism of fire/ born again state. After a short confusion state arising from one author's belief that born again was equal to translation... I am now reading "Experiencing the Mighty Change" and it is an excellent book. Highly recommended!!

erdoch

Theory God-Adam Mormon

Thanks for the reference. If you have any more info or link about Joseph Smith and this doctrine, I would like to read it.

Mormon God-Adam Theory

Nighthawk wrote:

and erdoch wrote:

My understanding is that nothing is too sacred to talk openly about, except when it comes to those things spoken of in the temple, and in that case, we can talk openly about those things IN THE TEMPLE. There are, of course, things that are unlawful to speak, such as those things which the Three Nephites heard and saw and were prohibited from saying, but other than that, church doctrine can and should be openly discussed. If not, such "sacred" matters are really just "secret doctrines" and we know that the Lord works not in secret or in darkness, but the evil one does.

The simple fact that is has been claimed that Brigham Young preached this doctrine openly shows that this thing isn't as sacred as each of you claim it is. All of the doctrine of Christ is sacred and important to our salvation, but we nevertheless seek to get all men to understand it and we do so openly.

Let me ask the two of you, is the Adam-God theory within the bounds of the scriptures, outside of the bounds of the scriptures or contrary to the scriptures? By within the bounds of the scriptures, I mean that the scriptures themselves do promote this doctrine, do explain it, expound it, teach it, preach it. By outside the bounds of the scriptures, I mean that the scriptures speak nothing concerning this doctrine, one way or the other, whether to its condemnation or approbation. In other words, the scriptures are silent about it and the acceptance of this doctrine does not directly or indirectly contradict the doctrine found in the scriptures. By contrary to the scriptures, I mean that the scriptures condemn such a theory either directly or indirectly; that either they speak against the theory or that the theory is completely incompatible with the revealed doctrine of Christ as found in the Standard Works.

So, what do each of you say? Is the Adam-God theory within, outside or contrary to the scriptures?

Please do present scriptural evidence to support whichever view you take. We all can profess belief in this and that, but belief alone doesn't cut it. A well-intentioned, incorrect belief will just as much lead us from the true path as evil intent. I think it was Brigham Young himself that said that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Mormon God-Adam Theory - Page 4

Clarify that point of the temple with an example please. I want to ensure I understand what you meant by that.

Mormon God-Adam Theory Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 4

My understanding is that if you receive a revelation, personally, on a subject, that unless you are specifically given permission by the Lord, you are obliged to keep it to yourself. That is what I was saying about Adam/God.

I believe that there are scriptures that support the general idea, but don't directly address it. I have read a few references to it, including an excellent defense of the idea by Ogden Kraut. However, I don't have a testimony one way or another.

I know basically what Brigham Young taught. I know what President Kimball said about what Brigham Young taught, and that creates a major conflict for me, as taking President Kimball's words at direct face value indicates that Brigham Young taught false doctrine in General Conference several times.

As for scriptural support, sorry, don't have it either way, and I am not so worked up about the idea as to go looking for it. I have more important things to work on spiritually (the Baptism of Fire and the Holy Ghost), after which I may find a need to get an answer to this.