bcspace wrote:
Yes, that is the same Adam (Sr) who is the Father of our spirits and who coming to earth, partook of the physical fruits so as to produce with his wife, the physical bodies of the Adam (Jr) and Eve who partook of the forbidden fruit. Adam being a name title in the former case.
Yes. they actually help my case as opposed to yours.
More intellectual dishonesty. Amazing.
Tell me BC when BY said this....
April 9, 1852
"When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He 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. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or nonÄprofessing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later. They came here, organized the raw material, and arranged in their order the herbs of the field, the trees, the apple, the peach, the plum, the pear, and every other fruit that is desirable and good for man; the seed was brought from another sphere, and planted in this earth. The thistle, the thorn, the brier, and the obnoxious weed did not appear until after the earth was cursed. When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal." (Brigham Young, Journal of Disources, volume 1, p. 50)
...if he was referring the Adam Sr who you say is God and not Adam Jr, the dude that ate the fruit and fell, why did he say Adam ( no distinguishing Sr here) came with a celestial body with one of his wives Eve then say HE, this particular Adam, is Michael. Keep in mind Michael was the Adam that fell in the garden, the first mortal man, if in fact this was God the Father him who we call Eloheim. Why the hell didn't he just say that? Or why not use Sr and Jr if that is what he meant?
Why did he go on to say everyone would have to here it, even professing Christians, sooner or later unless he was teaching something shocking and new, that Adam, no Adam Sr or Jr, just plain old Adam the first man, is our God and the Father of Jesus. That was shocking, that was new and al the world would have to here it.
If it was in keeping with what we had believed about Adam before that why did Orson Pratt oppose it? Why did those who heard it write about it in their journals that showed they understood that BY meant that Adam was our God and they did not get Adam Sr or Jr out of it? Why as soon as BY died did the leaders just drop all the teachings about it if it was so benign as to be talking about God/Eloheim/Adam Sr?
Simple answer. Because you are wrong. BY taught Adam was God. Not Adam Sr.
I know that if you admit this it will rock your world since it appears that BY really did not know who God was and that seems a problem for a Prophet really. I mean a Prophet ought at least know who God is. And because this will rock your world you need to play these astounding mental gymnastics to make BY say something he never did. I feel for you. I used to do it too. I used to thing the two Adam thing worked because I wanted it too so badly. But when I admitted I was not being honest about it it was an amazing and liberating thing.