Creation of the earth

[Hypatia]

Marduk, don't think I'm slacking. I'm searching my Journal of Discourses for you. I know it mentioned Adam-God at least twice.

[Hypatia]

This will have to do for now until I can find my photo-copied version. http://jod.mrm.org/1/46#50

[Whistler]

@DL... eh, don't bother. I was just hoping those were things you had already learned about.

[Dragon Lady]

Marduk, don't think I'm slacking. I'm searching my Journal of Discourses for you. I know it mentioned Adam-God at least twice.

Let me make it easier for you. Go here. Click on the Individual Collections tab. Type your search term and choose Journal of Discourses from the drop down menu. Search to your heart's content.

Two things about this: a) I worked far too hard on collections like this to get them online to not tell people that it exists and is fully text searchable. (But I will not be held responsible if something doesn't search right. I blame the people we outsourced the OCR to. They were idiots.) b) From what I understand, at least half of what is in the JoD should not be believed nor taken as doctrine by any means. But that's just what I hear.

[Tao]

I know what the significance of the italicized words are in the KJV, is it similar in the JoD? Do we have conflicting records of those words or something? Sure, sometimes it could be translated as simply as emphasis, but others most definitely not. Bah, give me the OT anyday.

[Dragon Lady]

I know what the significance of the italicized words are in the KJV, is it similar in the JoD? Do we have conflicting records of those words or something? Sure, sometimes it could be translated as simply as emphasis, but others most definitely not. Bah, give me the OT anyday.

Eh… my knowledge of the JoD is pretty much limited to what it took to digitize it and the jokes the staff made about the credibility of it. Sorry not to be more helpful!

[Laser Jock]

Yeah, my understanding of the JoD is that its accuracy is very widely questioned. It wasn't transcribed verbatim (or even close); rather, people took notes as best they could about talks that were given, and those were later compiled. (At least, this is certainly how some of the content was gathered.)

Thus, the JoD is by no means considered doctrine; it's definitely not on the same level as, say, the official transcripts of general conference. (And even those aren't totally infallible.) Imagine if you had to take notes about all the conference talks, and someone else later rewrote them in sentences and published them as the official record of what all the apostles said.

[Marduk]

Right, and that was my point. All Adam-God theory information comes from poorly sourced and highly doubious JoD sources, and that's about the only place you can find it.

[Whistler]

I just looked up the Adam-God theory and am officially kinda weirded out

[Yarjka]

I actually quite like the Adam-God theory, although I think it is widely misunderstood (but then again, maybe I'm the one that doesn't understand it). Watch the Paul Toscano interview on Mormon Stories ... he does a good job of explaining it the way I like it. In fact, I like most of what he says in that interview. (but it is a long interview, and he's a strong personality, so you'll need patience).

Then if you want an example of how Adam-God is misunderstood, listen to the interview with Anne B. Wilde, a Mormon Fundamentalist. I think she takes it to a point it was never intended to go, but that many now believe was what it always meant.

I think a correct understanding of Adam-God would fit quite well in current LDS theology (aside from the fact that a number of general authorities have repudiated it).

[Portia]

I just looked up the Adam-God theory and am officially kinda weirded out

A fellow Board writer and myself became quite obsessed with "Sons of Michael, He Approaches" a few years ago. Bona fide Adam/God in a 1985 hymnbook. Ha.

Though the insipidness of "In Our Lovely Deseret" in French probably tops it for the sheer sublime. Somehow singing about despising "thé et café et tabac" in the ueber-gay, -boho, -café Marais district has to be one of the most interesting Church experiences I've ever had.

I'm not even sure they attempt "Sons of Michael" in France. Unbelievably, I know I have sung* it at least once in the US, to my sheer delight.

*damn you, participles

[Tao]

Wherein do you find Adam-God in "Sons of Michael, He approaches" without trying to put it in? There's as much Eve-God in it as Adam-God. Yes, you'll see he is likely referred to as our Eternal Father, but they also call Eve Endless, a name of God, so they're secretly calling her God too! And look! They capitalize Ocean too! Maybe It is God too! Adam-God, Eve-God, and Ocean-God, all in the same scandalous song!

Modernize captialization and it becomes even harder to see.

Sons of Michael, he approaches!
Rise; the eternal father greet:
Bow, ye thousands, low before him;
Minister before his feet:

Hail the patriarch's glad reign,
'Stablished now o'er sea and main!

Sons of Michael, 'tis his chariot
Rolls its burning wheels along!
Raise aloft your voices million
In a torrent power of song:

Hail our head with music soft!
Raise sweet melodies aloft!

Mother of our generations!
Glorious by great Michael's side;
Take thy children's adoration;
Endless with thy lord preside:

Lo, to greet thee now advance
Thousands in the joyous dance!

Raise a chorus, sons of Michael,
Like old ocean's roaring swell,
Till the mighty acclamation
Through rebounding space doth tell

That the Ancient One doth reign
In his paradise again!

Read up on Adam-ondi-Ahman if you want to understand the song better, but is there any point in the Eternities that we will no longer be Children of Adam? I can understand why they changed it in the newest hymnal, to avoid confusing the weak of mind or understanding, but honestly I wouldn't have blamed them for letting it stand.

[mic0]

I don't know, "the eternal father greet." "Eternal father" is also used with God. I can understand the two interpretations.

[Defy V]

I just take that to mean he's the father of the human race. "Eternal father" may be ambiguous, but it can be hard to find the right word when writing a poem (this from someone who has written a fair amount of poetry), and the author probably assumed it would make sense in context.

The first time I ever heard that "Sons of Michael, He Approaches" had anything to do with the Adam-God theory was when I accidentally happened upon the Wikipedia article about Adam-God (which I think happened because I was reading the article about Mormonism on Wikipedia one time and for some reason I clicked on the link). Since all the articles were pretty negative to start with, I don't think it can be used as evidence of the Adam-God theory.

Incidentally, it's my turn to choose the hymns this week. If I weren't so tired of all the obscure hymns week after week, I might pick this one.