Adam-God Doctrine

The ConspiricometerThat One Doesn’t Hold Up

In 1852, Brigham Young preached that Adam was God the Father, a teaching later rejected by leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Adam-God Doctrine emerged from a series of sermons delivered by Brigham Young, second president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, beginning in April 1852. Young taught that Adam, the first man, was literally God the Father incarnated in physical form, and the only deity with whom humanity had direct dealings on Earth.

Young’s doctrine held that Adam came to Earth as a resurrected being bringing one of his celestial wives, Eve, to establish the human race through physical procreation. According to this teaching, Adam was both the Ancient of Days mentioned in biblical prophecy and the literal father of Jesus Christ through Mary. Young explicitly stated that Adam was “our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do.”

The doctrine represented a radical departure from traditional Christian theology and even from earlier Mormon teachings by Joseph Smith Jr., who had not taught that Adam held divine status. Young’s interpretation drew from his understanding of Mormon cosmology, which included beliefs about eternal progression and the possibility for humans to become gods themselves.

Contemporary Mormon leaders and theologians expressed confusion and concern about the doctrine’s implications for established Christian teachings about the Trinity and the nature of God. However, Young continued to preach these ideas throughout the 1850s and 1860s, insisting they represented divine revelation.

The doctrine was formally repudiated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in later decades, with church leaders declaring it a false doctrine contrary to established Mormon scripture. Modern church publications explicitly reject the Adam-God theory and classify it among historical teachings that are not considered doctrinally binding.

The episode remains significant in Mormon history as an example of doctrinal development and revision within the church’s theological framework.

Bibliography: