54 And the Lord appeared unto them, and they rose up and blessed Adam, and called him Michael, the prince, the archangel.
55 And the Lord administered comfort unto Adam, and said unto him: I have set thee to be at the head; a multitude of nations shall come of thee, and thou art a prince over them forever.
He had access to this revelation from Joseph that clearly positions Adam as Michael and states the Lord administered to Adam. So how come the guy that talks directly to God made such a ridiculous claim about Gods identity?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Consig knows a lot about the BY Adam God teachings.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Because he was referring to "Adam Sr" who is God the Father. According to BY, He, along with his wife "Eve Sr", partook of the physical fruit of the earth and became capable of bearing mortal children, Adam Jr and Eve Jr. It was those last who partook of the forbidden fruit and fell.
That is the only rational explanation when you combine the "traditional" Adam-God JoD quotes with everything else BY taught and believed about Adam in that and the WWJ and other works.
Moot as neither the Adam-God hypothesis or the actual Adam Sr Adam Jr that BY taught is doctrine.
Moot as neither the Adam-God hypothesis or the actual Adam Sr Adam Jr that BY taught is doctrine.
Ignoring your trotting out of the lame "Adam Sr" misdirection, you do agree that it USED to be official doctrine, right? Published by the church and taught in the temple and all that?
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Ignoring your trotting out of the lame "Adam Sr" misdirection, you do agree that it USED to be official doctrine, right? Published by the church and taught in the temple and all that?
Can't ignore Adam Sr because the evidence for it is too strong. So no, Adam-God never was doctrine.
Ignoring your trotting out of the lame "Adam Sr" misdirection, you do agree that it USED to be official doctrine, right? Published by the church and taught in the temple and all that?
Can't ignore Adam Sr because the evidence for it is too strong. So no, Adam-God never was doctrine.
There is no evidence whatsoever for "Adam Sr." It's an apolegetic invention of necessity.
I'm glad to see you agree your entire concept of doctrine is a sham.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Maybe evidence for two Adams lies buried at the Mesoamerica Hill Cumorah?
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Maybe evidence for two Adams lies buried at the Mesoamerica Hill Cumorah?
I think FAIR would disagree with you along with the numerous statements BY made that conflict with the notion of Adam God.
I know what you mean. Statements like this are really confusing.
Who did beget him [the Son of God]? His Father, and his father is our God, and the Father of our spirits, and he is the framer of the body, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Who is he? He is Father Adam; Michel; the Antient of days. Has he a Father? He has. Has he a mother? He has. Now to say that the son of God was begotten by the Holy Ghost, is to say the Holy Ghost is God the Father, which is inconsistant, and conterary to all the revelations of God both Moderen, and antient. (Brigham Young Sermon, February 19, 1854, p. 7, Brigham Young Collection (HDC). (Extract from rough report, original spelling retained.)
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)