THE ADAM GOD DOCTRINE REVISITED Thirty five years ago as a young returned missionary full of enthusiasm and some knowledge of the Gospel (in those far off days Church literature published in Great Britain was available to missionaries at cost, and most of us brought home a couple of suitcases full -- I think I paid ten shillings [then $1.40] for my copy of Jesus The Christ -- and our Mission President encouraged doctrinal study, not mere memorization of the mission lessons), I found myself working the afternoon-evening shift at ZCMI in downtown Salt Lake City. I had an hour for supper about 5:00 p.m., and customarily spent it in the nearby Salt Lake Library (now the Hansen Planetarium). In those days of unbelievable simplicity, readers actually had access to the rare books collection, and my doctrinal (and historical) studies continued for another two years until I finally left Utah for thirty-eight years in the U.S. diplomatic service. (As an aside, when the Hoffman documents began to show up, it struck me as awfully convenient that they were all uncovered by the same person over an exceptionally brief period of time, and that they conveniently comprised almost every important missing document from early Church history, as I'd identified these through my extensive reading in Salt Lake, and later at the Weidener Library at Harvard. And, most importantly, the Hoffman papers contained nothing that had not already been fully reported in one form or another in documents readily available to interested readers in the Salt Lake Library, including the Joseph Smith III blessing and the Salamander story. I can't say that I immediately assumed forgery, but I can honestly say that given the not-far-distant experience of the forged Howard Hughes will and the fabricated Howard Hughes biography, the thought crossed my mind, as it must have other historically knowledgeable members of the Church). But back to Adam-God: in all my reading, the most significant encounter (to me) was the series of Brigham Young sermons recorded in the Journal of Discourses regarding the so-called Adam God Doctrine. This was new to me. And as Heber C. Kimball used to say, "It tasted good' and, moreover, as I interpreted President Young's words, it sounded true. I asked my doctrinally well-founded Bishop father about this. In bare-bones fashion he told me of the problems Orson Pratt (one of my heros) found with the doctrine, the controversy which continued over several years between some General Authorities and President Young, and that whatever truth the doctrine contained, it had pretty well been garbled in the general understanding of members. As a result, he suggested I'd be better off sticking to the clearer and simpler understanding of the Godhead which eventually emerged from these exchanges. This made sense. It was clear to me that many Church doctrines had been revealed in skeletal form, with fullness of understanding having emerged "line upon line" through clarifying discussion and further revelation to the leading brethren. But then one day while reading Moses 5:9, I had one of those startling insights which sometimes come, and decided I was on to something significant. Again, living in a simpler era when the Church was smaller and we all felt we knew "the Brethren" personally, I wrote a brief note to (then) Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith who had the reputation of being the Church's greatest scriptorian, and who at the time was Church Historian. Quoting from the Journal of Discourses which cites Brigham Young as having said, "We worship three distinct personages, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael, perfectly represented in the Godhead as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost", I asked Elder Smith if this were correct. I received back my letter with a terse penned note at the bottom saying, "Brigham Young never said this". Don't know why he felt this way. It still seems an unexceptional statement to me. But maybe Elder Smith knew where my thinking was headed. At any rate, I am today less certain of Elder Smith's reply. Leonard Arrington in his Brigham Young: American Moses says that while Church Historian himself, he carefully compared sermons as printed in the Journal of Discourses with dozens of speech outlines and the notes of reporters, and while he found a few minor variances, he believes the JD accurately records the talks as given in the Tabernacle by General Authority speakers. Certainly if President Young actually said what he is quoted as saying -- and it doesn't strike me as particularly undoctrinal so far as I understand Church teachings regarding the Preexistence -- it provides a significant clue to understanding what he said later about our relationship to Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael, the First Presidency of the Heavens. In the Spring 1982 Dialogue, David John Buerger provides about as comprehensive a review of the Adam-God doctrine as one could hope for. But Buerger leaves unexamined a few matters which might have been looked at more closely. For example, it is understood that angels, or one or another member of the Godhead, may speak "by investiture", i.e. in the name of another, And the doctrine of "name titles" is now somewhat better understood than formerly (Buerger says something of this). But the fact remains that from time to time a member of the Godhead might just possibly be speaking in his own name. And that the name title used in a given scripture might just possibly be a name title accorded to the speaker for use in this world and not a previous stage of creation. And it just might be that Brigham Young was not confused, mistaken, or badly misquoted, but said just about what he meant -- and that it is the rest of us who've fallen short of understanding the substance of Adam-as-God. I don't insist on the following interpretation as doctrine, but revisiting the Adam-God teaching on the basis of the following assumptions doesn't seem to me to violate anything doctrinal that we know about Adam, the Holy Ghost, Jehovah "the only begotten in the flesh", or Father Elohim -- and it helps make sense of what was for many years a major item of doctrinal dispute in the Church. Let's start with the Preexistence (or Pre-Mortal Life as some are coming to call it). "Go down", said Father Elohim, "and prepare a new world". Who went? His spirit sons and co-members of the Presidency of Heaven Jehovah and Michael. And when the earth was prepared, who was the first quasi-mortal who came to live in the Garden of Eden. I think it is agreed that it was Michael (earthly name-title "Adam"). How did he get here? Here comes the difficult part. I think it is agreed that Adam was created upon natural principles: but to some this means begotten by immortal parents and some think otherwise. It helps to recall that the scriptures speak of two Adams -- one spiritual and one earthly. And this is what I think Brigham meant when he said, "Adam [alternative name-title for a resurrected, perfected Being with the celestial name-title of Elohim, but using the name title of Adam while acting in the temporary role of visiting a new world for the purpose of begetting mortal, or quasi-mortal, children with his wife "Eve" similarly adopted as role-connected temporary name-title] came down with one of his wives [Eve] and begot children". Much of the confusion arises because the children were also called Adam and Eve -- name-titles for their roles as first people in this world and as first parents to the human race]. Trying to clear up some of this confusion, we might ask, "What is more natural than for a son to be given the name of his father, especially if the purpose in doing so is reinforced by the need for identical name-titles to reflect the related role each is playing -- the Father (Elohim/First Adam) as first (immortal) on earth; the son (Michael/Second Adam) as first mortal?" The Father, being of a previous generation of creation, was the only one of the three members of the Godhood having a perfected body of flesh and bone, and thus the only one capable (with his wife -- the First Eve) by ingesting earthly food -- as Brigham Young understood matters -- to beget quasi-mortal children. Having performed this essential task, the First Adam then returns to the Heavens to oversee the economy of the Universe. (Nothing in this requires multiple deaths Brother Orson [Buerger article, Dialogue Spring, 1982]). The First Adam's son, premortal name Michael (earth name-title Adam), still a "God" though temporarily seconded to earth duty, becomes the Father of the human race -- "Our father and our God" in B.Y.'s words -- but at this stage of earth history not yet "the only God with whom we have to do" , to complete Brigham's famous phrase. For, as I interpret Moses 5:9, Jehovah, the second member of the Godhead, whom we all accept as the God of the Old Testament, speaking in His own name , (and not an angel speaking by investiture, as many assume) "fell upon Adam" (in His role of Holy Ghost -- where else do we hear of the Holy Ghost in Old Testament times?) Indeed, the yet unembodied Jehovah, God of the Old Testament, is nothing if not "The Holy Spirit" of "Spirit of God" so often encountered in the O.T., saying: "I am the Only Begotten of the Father etc. etc." (Moses 5:9). In other words, with Michael, a member of the Godhead confined to earth for almost 930 years during his mortal life, his elder brother Jehovah, as spirit being, could and readily did fill the role of Spirit-Messenger-God bringing inspiration, revelation, and guidance to Adam and his posterity during this First Dispensation and evidently down to the Dispensation of the Meridian of Time when He was born into the world as Jesus of Nazareth to fulfil his role as Savior of the World. During which time He was generally known as Jehovah (who, in fact, He was -- though the tetragram JHVH was never written and is said to have been spoken but once a year by the High Priest in the Holy of Holies of the Temple). So far as I have been able to discover, the name "Holy Ghost" is used but once in Old testament times, and that is in Moses, as cited. Otherwise, mention is made only of the "Spirit of God" or "The Lord". At this point, some may find it interesting to note that Herodotus considered the Jews and the Hellenes to be cousins. And it is food for thought that the chief god of the Greeks was "Jove " (cf. Javeh , the commonly assumed pronunciation for JHVH. Cf. also Jupiter, chief god of the Romans -- the "p" and "v" being frequently interchanged in Indo-European tongues, giving the Latin "Jove-pater ", or Father Jove. When Michael, or Adam, died, what became of him? As all other mortals, he entered the Spirit World, and there he was detained with the spirits of all his descendants, both those who had pre-deceased him, and those who followed, until released upon the arrival of Jehovah (known by then to history as Jesus the Christ, his earth name). It is probable that Michael/Adam presided over affairs in the Spirit World as he had presided during his lifetime on earth (see D&C 138:38). This meant that Father Elohim was in the Heavens (with a brief excursion before the earth was populated to beget Michael as Adam), Jehovah was filling the role of Spirit of God-Messenger to earth, and Michael/Adam was presiding in the Spirit World until he and his righteous descendants were released upon the arrival of Jehovah/Jesus who had been given all power by his Father to redeem the quick and the dead following his atoning death on the cross. Consider: with the Third Member of the Godhead confined to the Spirit World, and with the Father limited by reason of his exceeding Glory from visiting mortals on other than the most exceptional occasions, who was to act as overseer and messenger on earth during this pre-incarnation period, if not Jehovah, who given the absence of physical tabernacle prior to his birth could freely act as the God-of-Spirit of the Old Testament until the Meridian of Time when he became a being of tabernacle? The events of Jesus' baptism offer confirmation of this interpretation. During Jesus' mortality, according to this reading there was no Holy Ghost on earth. Michael was in Spirit Prison, Jehovah was in earthly tabernacle, and Elohim presided in the Heavens. Indeed, we are told that Jesus was instructed during his youth and early manhood not by the Holy Ghost, but by special angelic messengers, translated beings (among whom Moses and Elias: see Matt. 17:3), individuals who had been spared death and consequent imprisonment in the Spirit World specifically to fulfil this essential calling. Scripture thus emphasises that the Third Member of the Godhead was, in fact, not present at the baptism of Jesus, being symbolically represented by the Spirit of God descending "as a dove" -- a sign arranged we are told before the foundation of the earth -- presumably because it was known the Holy Ghost Himself could not attend this event (why?), but with God the Father speaking from the Heavens saying, "Thou art my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased." (Mark 1:10). It will be recalled that towards the end of his ministry Jesus told his disciples, "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient . . . that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you" (John 16:7). And where did Jesus go immediately upon his death? Not to the Father, but to the Spirit World, where he visited with the Great Ones of yore, including his brother and co-Deity Adam/Michael. After preaching and setting further in order the affairs of the Spirit World (possibly setting-apart Enoch or another mighty leader as successor to Father Adam as presiding authority), Jesus opened the doors and "set the prisoners free". And why could the "Comforter" not come unless Jesus departed? Because Michael had been detained in Paradise without the keys to depart until the Savior brought them. As we know, following the Savior's visit, "many were resurrected and were seen in the Holy City by many". The same thing happened in the Western Hemisphere; indeed the Nephites were chastised by the Savior during his visit because they had not recorded this signal event in their scripture. As I interpret the scriptures and what Brigham Young was saying, Michael, or Adam, was freed at this time, but his calling was not yet to be resurrected, but rather, in accordance with the Premortal Plan of Salvation, to resume (or better said, reassert) his role in the Godhead as minister to his posterity in mortality by taking up the position of God-of-Spirit, or Holy Ghost, the "comforter" promised by Jesus to his disciples. The possibility of this name re-titling and investiture switching should not astound anyone familiar with these doctrines. Note: With the exception of the relatively few mortals who preceded Adam in death, a member of the Godhead has always been in a position to minister directly to all three stages of Man's progress: a) pre-mortal spirits being presided over by the Father; b) mortals administered to by Jehovah, as God of the Old Testament until his incarnation, and thereafter for the duration of his earthly lifetime by Jesus as "Immanuel" or "God-with-us"; and c) post-mortal spirits in prison being cared for following his death by Adam/Michael. Following the opening of the prison doors, and Christ's resurrection, Michael was again able as spirit yet lacking a resurrected body, to minister to mortal men as Holy Ghost, The Father continues to watch over his (dwindling) pre-mortal spirit offspring, while Jehovah is now able to visit freely both the resurrected of the Kingdom and those righteous spirits who remain in Paradise for the purpose of carrying out missionary work among the as yet unconverted "honorable men of the world" (D&C 138). When will Michael/Adam take up his resurrected body to assume with the rest of God's righteous children the full blessings of Exaltation? Why, we are told he will do so on the Day of Judgment when at Adam-ondi-Ahman the Ancient of Days (who is Adam) will have completed all there is to do with regard to his earthly assignment, and will as Head of the First Dispensation ceremoniously receive back the keys from all succeeding priesthood leaders of dispensations, turn these over to Christ who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords and Head of all Dispensations, who will render them to His Father: after which they will be returned (presumably as a grand act of graduation/promotion) to those who righteously fulfilled their callings in mortality. This will be the "great winding up scene", after which the world will enter into the Celestial era. There is a symmetry in this which appeals to me and tastes of the careful foreplanning evident in the rest of the Plan of Salvation. It helps us understand why a Presidency, Stake, Mission, of Bishopric consists of three persons instead of two, or four, or six. A member of the Godhead is essential to oversee at first hand the Preexistent Sphere of unembodied spirits, the Mortal Sphere, and the Post-mortal world of unembodied spirits awaiting resurrection. This reading at least clarified for me, and gives logic to Brigham's assertion that "Adam is our father" -- (a simple truism, see para. 1, above), "and our God" (has anyone ever doubted this? Adam, or Michael, was the Third Member of the Godhead in premortality, and there has never to my knowledge been a vote presented under the Law of Common Consent to sustain anyone else? If so, who? And when? Has the reader ever heard another name for the Third Member of the Godhead?) "And the only God with whom we have to do". If Michael/Adam is now fulfilling the role of Holy Ghost of "Comforter", with whom do we have more to do? He is the bearer of our prayers to Heaven, and Heaven's inspiration, revelation, and comfort to us. He is our constant companion, protector, and friend according to the promise made at Confirmation following baptism into the Church -- at least insofar as we haven't alienated Him by unrighteous actions. And with the rare exceptions mentioned, neither Jehovah nor Elohim are in the custom of appearing or dealing directly with any but their Prophet on earth. Finally, it makes sense of Brigham's assertion that Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael are "perfectly represented in the Godhead as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." Of course Brother Brigham was speaking concerning circumstances prevailing in the lives of the people of his day, not to post-Adamites or the disciples who accompanied Christ during His ministry, when circumstances, as we've seen, were somewhat different regarding people's relationship with Michael. It also clarifies events at Adam's baptism as well as that of Christ -- both of which otherwise require special interpretation. And this view adds new dimension to President Joseph F. Smith's beautiful revelation concerning the events which took place following the Savior's ascension to Paradise as contained in D&C 138. To me, this interpretation of President Young's Adam-God sermon is scriptural, harmonious, balanced, and symmetrical. It has to be close to what Brigham heard from the Prophet Joseph and what he intended to convey to his listeners, however imperfect his explanation, however garbled the impression some carried away, or whatever possible "misconstruction or misremembering" (Buerger's words) may have taken place. I see nothing radical or undoctrinal in any of these readings. All is in full accord with traditional teachings except for some of the insights regarding the exchange of roles of Jehovah and Michael as God-of-Spirit during alternative periods of history -- and this seems adequately based on a reasonable reading of D&C 138 and what Jesus said to his disciples about the Holy Ghost being unable to come until he left to fulfil his mission to the Spirit World ( John 16:7). Given the modestly innovative interpretations offered above, Adam-God need not be a mystery; it need not be controversial; and it need not be avoided as undoctrinal. With Lorenzo Snow, this reconciliation seems to me to be "[A] beautiful thought . . . [which] brings God nearer to us", and with Franklyn D. Richards, I sense "an inspiring thrill through the whole body" in reflecting on it. (cited in Buerger, op. cit. p.34).