LDS Freedom Forum

That other errors were made by reporters who recorded sermons of the brethren of that day is well attested. As one case in point, we provide the following statement made on October 7, 1903, by President Joseph F. Smith:

"I want to call your attention to an important matter. There is being printed in circular form now by unauthorized persons a sermon delivered years ago by President Brigham Young on the question of High Priests and Seventies, that is not correct. When I was presiding over the British Mission some years ago, this sermon was printed in the Deseret News and when it came to Liverpool, Charles W. Nibley and Henry W. Naisbitt were laboring with me there assisting me in publishing the Millennial Star. They had the form set up ready to print and brought me the copy and I said, `That discourse cannot be printed in the Star.' `But,' said Brother Nibley, `is it not the sermon of President Brigham Young?' `Perhaps it is,' said I, `but it can not go in the Star.' Then these brethren took up a labor with me to convince me that I had no business to interfere with President's discourses. I said, `It makes no difference, that discourse is not true as it is before you, it does not state the truth, it is not true, it is contrary to the word of the Lord and it can not be put in the Star.' Next morning I heard a rap at the door and when I asked what was the matter, this was long before daylight, and when I went to see, lo and behold it was a cablegram from President Brigham Young, commanding me not to publish that discourse in the Millennial Star, and it never was printed, by the authority of President Brigham Young." (Quoted in Daily Journal of John M. Whitaker, p. 95, in files of Church Historical Department.)

"Note: The Millennial Star was first published by Joseph F. Smith on Monday, June 4, 1877 - Albert Carrington, in his last issue quoted from the May 1 issue of the Deseret News. From April 1 to the demise of President Brigham Young, there were in the Deseret News eight discourses of Brigham Young that were not printed in the Millennial Star:


(Mark E. Petersen, Adam: Who Is He? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1976], 17 - 18.)

I am not here to argue the truthfulness or lack there of on this, but really nogreater, what are you trying to say by that quote?

Are you saying Brigham didn't talk about that subject dozens upon dozens of times?

Are you saying others didn't report Brigham saying it as many times if not more often?

Are you saying Brigham and Orson Pratt didn't have arguments over their differences on this dozens of times?

Are you saying it at the very least never a part of the Temple ceremony?

Is your testimony based on what you perceive to have or have not been taught?

What if you found out it was taught from Joseph Smith to the early 1900's?

Seriously, let's not look stupid, especially when challenged by others that have actually done some research on the matter outside of our faith. If they know more than we do, is that good for missionary work?

I am sure Elder Peterson had good intentions for implying what he did. The reasons he may have done so is why anti's bring this up a lot. It is tough for folks to handle. But seriously, let's do some research and find out for ourselves until we find out we thought one thing and have an investigator prove to us something else is what really happened.

Seriously, let's not look stupid

Sorry that you feel you are looking stupid. I was not trying to portray that.

But seriously, let's do some research and find out for ourselves

So are you implying that since I do not agree with your teachings that I have not done my research? Quite the contrary. I have researched this subject thoroughly. Brigham Young never taught it and he never believed it.

LOL good come back, and possibly one I deserve. 8)

They are not my teachings. i am taking no position on them whatsoever here other than let's be honest on what was said and by whom.

Did you have a chance to check out the numerous quotes given by Luke on the other thread on the topic of an apologist paper on the subject?

http://ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.ph ... 9&start=60

NoGreaterLove wrote:

Seriously, let's not look stupid

Sorry that you feel you are looking stupid. I was not trying to portray that.

But seriously, let's do some research and find out for ourselves

So are you implying that since I do not agree with your teachings that I have not done my research? Quite the contrary. I have researched this subject thoroughly. Brigham Young never taught it and he never believed it.

Can you provide a quote from Brigham to that effect?

Look at the original source documents, it isn't only the JoD, it is personal journals, Stake Conference addresses, temple addresses, personal letters (written in his own hand in some cases), etc. They're all misquotes to the same effect?

Can you provide a quote from Brigham to that effect?

How many quotes do you want? I will find ten. Will that convince you he did not believe this? I will have to post them Sunday. I am not at my computer. I found four or five quotes from BY the day I posted the one above that counter what you teach about BY. He absolutely did not believe what you say he did and I will prove it by his own words when I get back to my library.

yes there were occasions he taught against it. He said it would damn many people, so he would hold back.

However, even with those times he taught against it, what do you have to say about those hundreds upon hundreds that say the other?

what do you have to say about those hundreds upon hundreds that say the other?

I am not from Missouri, but you will have to show me. And not from some anti mormon site either.

NoGreaterLove wrote:

what do you have to say about those hundreds upon hundreds that say the other?

I am not from Missouri, but you will have to show me. And not from some anti mormon site either.

Good. Did you check out the link I gave a couple posts up? You can verify them very easily. They have the references

http://ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.ph ... 9&start=60

Do you believe that Spencer W. Kimball was speaking as a prophet of God when he made this statement?

Another matter. We hope that you who teach in the various organizations, whether on the campuses or in our chapels, will always teach the orthodox truth. We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine.
Spencer W. Kimball, “Our Own Liahona,” Ensign, Nov 1976, 77

Will you follow his counsel when he warns you to stop disseminating this? Or will you continue otherwise?

Is that what you are going to say to your none member investigator who asks you about the hundreds of quotes on the subject?

I am NOT taking sides on this one way or the other. Are you listening? We are talking about if it was said or not, not if it is true or not. That is between you and the Lord.

If an investigator comes to you asking about the hundreds of statements on the subject are you going to tell them they were all misquotes, even the ones that were a part of the Temple and in the journals of Apostles and Presidents of the Church?

Are you going to yell at them and tell them to stop disseminating such material?

I cannot imagine a thinking person taking either of those tactics very well.

NoGreaterLove wrote:Do you believe that Spencer W. Kimball was speaking as a prophet of God when he made this statement?

Another matter. We hope that you who teach in the various organizations, whether on the campuses or in our chapels, will always teach the orthodox truth. We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine.
Spencer W. Kimball, “Our Own Liahona,” Ensign, Nov 1976, 77

Will you follow his counsel when he warns you to stop disseminating this? Or will you continue otherwise?

Hold up boss. We can have a conversation about whether it was taught and believed by some without creating a problem. I don't personally espouse it as doctrine, but I don't think its useful to deny that it was taught at one point.

For me, this is a big picture issue. People read and research a topic like this to figure out what was said and what it means. I think we do a service for ourselves and those that follow after reading our words when we're totally straightforward about what occurred. To say that he never taught it is clearly not true, just as it is clearly untrue to say that the Church holds it today in reserve as a doctrine we believe, but don't preach. Dismissive hand waving on either side doesn't present a solution to someone genuinely interested in getting to the bottom of the question.

The gospel is not forwarded by convincing a non member that Brigham Young never believed nor taught the Adam-God theory. A person is converted when the spirit bears witness that this is the His church. Once that conversion takes place all other principles of the Gospel are true.

I went back and re read those quotes by Luke. BY was not teaching that Adam was our Heavenly Father. He was teaching however, that Adam is our father and a God. Both of which are true. The one where he speaks of the celestial wives has been discounted as false and was never spoken by BY.
No one is going to be converted to the Gospel by proving anti-mormon statements are false. It does not work that way. I am concerned though that good and faithful LDS would spend there time rehashing whether this false doctrine is true or not. It has been settled already.

who is talking about if it is true or not??

oh never mind

The role of Adam is next unto Christ. He is at our head, the father of all mankind. He is a god and has played roles that I will not discuss here. He is not however God the Father who organized our spirits. BY never taught that he was. People who know very little about the gospel or who are anti, take statements made by BY that were meant for people who had a greater understanding of the Gospel, and make those statement look as if BY was teaching that God our Father is Adam. They base it upon the one misquoted statement and then add other statements that could be misconstrued when shown together with the misquoted statement to show a false picture.
BY taught that God the Father, Adam and Christ are three separate individuals. He taught it over and over again. Now why would he teach this and then teach something contrary? This would mean he was lying at one time or the other. Something so simple, yet we are making it complicated.