soren,
I’ve been down this Adam/God road many times on these forums. I’ve pointed out the link to Joseph Smith, etc.
I hope some LDS forum members will respond to your posts; because I’m not the one you have to convince.
Anna
Anna,
That topic has indeed been recently discussed. Here is part of my response previously:
BY was stating his own opinion in that entire instance, including his opinion you have cited at the end of his sermon that referred to the subject.
The president of the LDS church is not “greater” than the principle laid down by Joseph Smith through revelation, that united council leadership will participate in decisions that include the doctrinal teachings of the church. He is not authorized by his authority to differ from that principle. So since BY presented a teaching that was not authorized by that process, it is his own opinion and has no bearing on needing to be followed by anyone at all. Here is the applicable united council leadership principle presented in Doctrine and Covenants Section 107:
22 Of the Melchizedek Priesthood, three Presiding High Priests, chosen by the body, appointed and ordained to that office, and upheld by the confidence, faith, and prayer of the church, form a quorum of the Presidency of the Church.
23 The twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling.
24 And they form a quorum, equal in authority and power to the three presidents previously mentioned.
25 The Seventy are also called to preach the gospel, and to be especial witnesses unto the Gentiles and in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling.
26 And they form a quorum, equal in authority to that of the Twelve special witnesses or Apostles just named.
27 And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the unanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other—
28 A majority may form a quorum when circumstances render it impossible to be otherwise—
29 Unless this is the case, their decisions are not entitled to the same blessings which the decisions of a quorum of three presidents were anciently, who were ordained after the order of Melchizedek, and were righteous and holy men.
30 The decisions of these quorums, or either of them, are to be made in all righteousness, in holiness, and lowliness of heart, meekness and long suffering, and in faith, and virtue, and knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity;
31 Because the promise is, if these things abound in them they shall not be unfruitful in the knowledge of the Lord.
After the days of Brigham Young (after he had died), as the Wikipedia article pointed out, there was never a united agreement by the leading councils of the LDS church regarding the opinion which had been presented by BY during his life on this issue. Since that issue, during the ensuing years, has become a point of contention among some members of the church (whether few or many), and since Satan is always the “father of contention” as taught by Christ–
3 Ne. 11: 29
29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.
–then Bruce R McConkie would have the duty as an apostle to protect the members of the LDS church from falling into the entanglement of contending or teaching about an opinion or teaching of Brigham Young that was his own personal opinion and had never been sanctioned by the Twelve within their stewardship to protect the integrity of the scriptural doctrines of the LDS church.
The use of the term “false doctrine” in your question at the end of your post, depends on the connotation intended by the one who uses the words. If anyone presents such a teaching or opinion as though it is a “doctrinal statement of belief”, then that would mean they have adopted BY’s opinion as their own opinion also and thus any such teaching by them would be “false doctrine” because it has never been sanctioned through the process established to protect the doctrinal teachings of the church, and is instead leading other members on a path of straying from those scriptural doctrinal teachings. It could just as correctly be called a “false opinion”.
Of course Elder McConkie was aware that the Adam-god theory as it came to be called originated from the opinions of Brigham Young. He said that the teachings are “heresy.” It would not be correct to say that BRM was calling BY a “heretic”, because during BY’s life the opinion was not corrected as “heresy” by the leading councils of the church.
It was an opinion that should have died with him, since all it was was an opinion, even if he had taught it using the word “doctrine”. It also should have died with him since it brings contention when discussed, and thus leads on a downward path instead of an upward path toward keeping the Spirit in one’s life and keeping the Spirit within a group discussion.
