On Sunday I participated in a debate with Hayden Carroll where I argued that the Bible is the ultimate source that allows us to know God’s will. Hayden defended a variety of sources including LDS Apostles and LDS scriptures, personal revelation, spiritual impressions, logic, reason, etc.
During the debate I asked Hayden about the Adam-God doctrine and whether Brigham Young was wrong. He said that he thought Brigham Young had been misunderstood and that what Brigham taught was basically just that Adam was another title for God.
While we were discussing this topic, I mentioned how LDS leaders declared that since Brigham Young had spoken the debate was over and Adam-God was true doctrine from God. I also mentioned that converts were kept from Baptism in the British mission as a result of the controversy over the Adam-God doctrine.
Someone in the chat of the YouTube video accused me of being a liar and making this up. So I wanted to point out my sources.
I also want to be clear about what I am and am not claiming since I likely overspoke during the debate or at least was not as clear as I would like to be especially after being able to review these documents again and hearing feedback from others.
Adam-God was never required as a baptismal interview question. No one was forced to say that they agreed with Adam-God in order to to be baptized. To the extent that I suggested that, I misspoke.
On the other hand, people who disagreed with Adam-God were told that God had spoken and that this teaching regarding Adam-God was doctrine. They were not told it was a secondary subject or a matter of debate. They were not told that they could disagree. They were told that it was doctrine from God and warned about the danger of disagreeing with the Prophet. At least one documented individual was kept from baptism during this time period as a result of disagreement with this doctrine (whether on his own initiative or the initiative of Church leaders isn’t entirely clear). And when Franklin D. Richards an LDS Apostle learned of this he didn’t say that the man should be encouraged to be baptized becuase it was a secondary issue. He emphasized that God had spoken through Brigham Young and that the man should be told to accept it as such.
I am going to be looking at a small slice of this history focused on the British Isles, in 1853-54, but I note that this is just the tip of the spear and that there are many sermons and journal entries showing that Brigham Young really did teach the Adam-God doctrine and that this doctrine was really taught to members of the Church as the “mind and will” of God and true doctrine.
Brigham Young first put forward his Adam-God doctrine in general conference on April 9, 1852. This was not the first hint of Brigham’s elevated view of Adam. But it was the first time that Brigham Young officially declared that Adam “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.” This line is significant, as Michael was identified by Joseph Smith as the angelic name of Adam and Joseph Smith identified Adam as the Ancient of Days a divine title used in Daniel. This makes it clear that Brigham Young is talking about the man Adam and not just a generic title for God as Hayden suggested during the debate.
Those listening to Brigham Young understood what he meant. Hosea Shout recorded the following in his journal for that day: “President Brigham Young taught that Adam was the father of Jesus and the only God to us. That he came to this world in a resurrected body and etc. more hereafter.”
Similarly, Wilford Woodruff recorded this in his journal: “Our Father begot all the spirits that were before any tabernacle was made. When our Father came into the Garden He came with his Celestial body & brought one of his wives with him and ate of the fruit of the Garden until He could beget a Tabernacle. And Adam is Michael God and all the God that we have anything to do with. They ate of this fruit & formed the first Tabernacle that was formed. And when the Virgin Mary was begotten with child it was by the Father and in no other way only as we were begotten. I will tell you the truth as it is in God. The world don’t know that Jesus Christ our Elder Brother was begotten by our Father in Heaven. Handle it as you please, it will either seal the damnation or salvation of man. He was begotten by the Father & not by the Holy Ghost.”
And on April 16, 1852, Samuel Holister Rogers wrote the following: “President Brigham Young said that our spirits were begotten before that Adam came to the Earth and that Adam helped to make the Earth, that he had a Celestial body when he came to the Earth and that he brought his wife or one of his wives with him, and that Eve was also a Celestial being, that they eat of the fruit of the ground until they begat children from the Earth, he said that Adam was the only God that we would have, and that Christ was not begotten of the Holy Ghost, but of the Father Adam, that Christ, was our elder brother.”
Those who heard Brigham therefore had no doubt that he taught that Adam was in fact our God and the father of Jesus Christ (both spiritually a physically).
It took a while for these teachings to make it to the British Isles. But on November 26, 1853, Brigham Young’s teaching was reprinted in the Millennial Star the primary paper of the Church in the British Isles.
An editorial accompanied the publication of Brigham’s talk. The editorial noted that this teaching “may startle some of our readers” but reminded them 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.” The editorial warned that those who failed to “attentively read” and “thoroughly study” these new truths that they are “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.” Indeed, “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 implication of this warning was clearly that Brigham Young’s teachings had to be accepted and that salvation was on the line for those who failed to do so.
The following month, on December 10, the Millennial Star published a full-length editorial defending the Adam-God Doctrine. The editorial notes that the announcement of the doctrine came a “little to the surprise of some of its readers” and “the sentiment may have appeared blasphemous to the ignorant” but that it would appear correct to the “more candid and comprehensive mind.” The editorial argues that Adam was the person most worthy of the “appellation” of God in human history other than Jesus Christ and that “we have no account in scripture that Adam ever wilfully transgressed.” Adam’s fall was “virtually required” after Eve had transgressed and Adam selflessly fell and “accompanied the woman sharing in all the miseries of the curse” that she deserved for her rebellion against God. Adam/Michael is therefore “established as father, patriarch, god … for all his children who come into this world” and his watch care is ever over mankind that by his own approbation and direction gospel dispensations have been revealed from heaven to earth in different ages of the world.” Indeed, “the earth and all things upon it were created for Adam and it was given to him of his father to have dominion over it.” Adam will eventually receive “possession of the dominion given to him before the fall which was over every living thing that moved upon the earth which rendered him the universal Sovereign and Lord of all.” It is Adam to whom the nations of the dead shall awake and come forth to judgment, and there render an account” and all shall “know that he is their Judge, their Lawgiver, and their God.” Adam will deliver his kingdom to “the great Elohim” but he will remain “God over all those who are made gods from among men.”
Brigham Young’s view on Adam being the only God that we are to worship is thus vigorously defended based on Joseph Smith’s teachings regarding the fall and Adam as the Ancient of Days. It does appear that the author of the editorial (likely Samuel W. Richards) didn’t understand the full implications of Brigham Young’s Adam-God doctrine as he does not appear to see Adam as the father of our spirits as Brigham Young did. Nevertheless, the message of unequivocal support for Brigham Young’s teachings is very clear.
LDS missionaries in the British Isles dutifully conveyed this important new doctrine to the members of the Church and to those interested in the Church and this doctrine led to some opposition and doubt both among members and among those who were investigating the Curch. In June 1854, the Church held a special conference of the British mission that was presided over by Franklin D. Richards. Issues of the Millennial Star from July 29 and to September 2 carry minutes from this conference.
At one point in the conference Elder Caffall got up to report on the missionary work in his region. (August 5 edition) He noted that some of the officers of the Church had not been meeting in council and that “they are lacking faith on one principle the last cat that was let out of the bag.” Elder Caffall explains that “polygamy has been got over pretty well that cloud that cloud has vanished away but they are troubled about Adam being our father and god.” He noted that there was one “very intelligent person investigating our principles and who has been a great help to the saints.” This man “has all the works and can get along very well with everything else but the last cat and as soon as he can see that clearly he will become a Mormon.” Brigham Young’s Adam-God doctrine was therefore sufficiently well-known and publicized to be an even greater roadblock than the announcement of polygamy had been.
A short time after Elder Caffall another Elder Joseph Hall got up and explained that in his mission area “relative to the principles recently revealed we have not the least difficulty if Adam being our Father and God cannot be proved by the bible it is all right.” Therefore it is clear that the Adam-God doctrine was being taught and discussed in his mission as well. (August 5 edition)
At that same conference one Elder (Elder James A. Little) bore his testimony of “the principle of obedience” and declared that “ if I am told that Adam is our Father and our god I just believe it.” (August 26 issue)
Elder Richards an LDS Apostle got up and declared his thoughts “[c]oncerning the item of doctrine … that Adam is our father and God.” Richards argued that God was revealing truth that had never before been revealed. He asked “where will [you] find scripture to prove those things by which have never before been revealed” and noted that “some seem to feel it their duty to prove everything which belongs to our faith from the bible” but I do not and I will excuse you from all obligation to prove this from the old scriptures for you cannot.” (August 26 edition) Richards emphasized that “from henceforth you may expect more and more of the word of the lord giving us instructions which are nowhere written in the old scriptures.” Indeed, if the focus is on what is taught in the scriptures “can be proved from the scripture we shall never know much of the lord ourselves nor be able to teach the children of men to any very considerable extent.”
Elder Richards then addressed those individuals who were being kept from membership in the Church because they struggled to embrace the Adam-God doctrine. For those “who are waiting at the door of the church for this objection to be removed” the missionaries should “tell such the prophet and apostle Brigham Young has declared and that it is the word of the lord, that is vastly stronger proof than christendom can give for much that they profess to believe.” (August 26th Edition)
Believing in the Adam-God doctrine was thus seen as an essential component of believing in and sustaining the Prophet of God. Richards did NOT say that this was a secondary matter or that one could disagree and still join the Church. No, he made it clear that accepting this doctrine was a test of faith for those who would embrace latter-day revelation.
At the conclusion of the Conference Richards again got up and emphasized that it was vital for him to “feel towards Brother Brigham that he was beyond sin or doing wrong” and that if he did not feel that way “the spirit would not flow freely from me to you neither would it flow freely through the conerences.”(September 2edition) Richards assured the leaders of the British mission that “if I can learn Brother Brigham’s mind or word upon any thing whatever, it is the mind and word of the Lord to me and all the twelve.” He “look [s] upon President Young and his counselors with the utmost confidence in all things” and he “feel[s] as though they were sanctified and they could not sin” and therefore “there is no more fear in my bosom about their doing wrong than there is about God Himself.”
It was clear based on the proceedings of the conference that one of those teachings that Richards wanted members of the Church in the British Isles to have full confidence in was Brigham’s Adam-God doctrine that he saw as “the mind and the word of the Lord.”
But this doctrine is now rejected as a great damning heresy. So it appears that Richards confidence in Brigham Young was deeply mistaken, no?
Boasting In Christ Alone 