The following is the summation of the Two Adam theory of the Adam/God
theory.  While this theory is somewhat controversial, it does avoid
the problems and contradictions that the Adam/God theory has.  This
segment was written by Elden Watson.


Actually, the only concept which is not readily found in LDS literature
is the concept that ADAM is a name of our Heavenly Father, and EVE is
a name of our Heavenly Mother.  I am using ADAM and EVE (all caps) to
designate our heavenly parents, and Adam and Eve to designate those
individuals to whom we normally refer by those names.

  [As an aside, there is some evidence for this in 19th century
   theology.  The following quotes can be read as supporting this
   useage.

        "Adam and Eve are the names of the fathers and mothers of
        worlds ... These were father and mother of a world of
        spirits who had been born to them in heaven."  (Women of
        Mormondom, p. 180)

        "Before me I see a house full of Eves.  What a crowd of
        reflections the word Eve is calculated to bring up!  Eve
        was name or title conferred upon our first mother, because
        she was actually to be the mother of all the human beings
        who should live upon this earth.  I am looking upon a
        congregation designed to be just such beings."  (B. Young,
        Millennial Star, 31:267)
  ]

With that introduction, the basic scenario is as follows:  ADAM and
EVE once lived in a mortal state.  They were faithful and received
their resurrection and exaltation, and as resurrected beings begat
all of the spirits who would eventually populate this earth.  Their
first born spirit child who would live on this earth was Jehovah.

When the time came to create a world, the grand council was
assembled (which consisted of our heavenly parents and all their
spirit children who would have the opportunity to come to this
earth) and the plan of salvation was presented.  Satan had a "better
idea" and rebelled, drawing one third part of the spirits with him.
This earth was created (and I believe that we all participated in
the creation of it) under the direction of Jehovah and Michael,
who were under the direction of the Father (ADAM).

After the earth was created, our heavenly parents (ADAM and EVE)
came down into the garden of Eden and lived for a period of time.
According to BY, they ate of the fruits of the trees of the garden
until their bodies were charged with the physical particles of
this earth, and hence when they begat children, the physical
bodies of the children were comprised of the elements of this
earth.  The type of body which is formed within the womb of a
resurrected mother is dependent upon the type of material
available within the body during pregnancy.  Thus, by eating of
the fruits of theGarden and charging their bodies with the
physical particles which belong to this earth, they produced
physical bodies rather than spirit bodies.

The first body thus produced was the physical body for Michael,
whom they named Adam (after the father), and when they had a
girl, Adam named her Eve, because "she was the mother of all
living".  But Eve wasn't the mother of anybody, she was Adam's
sister, and wife, but had never had children.  She was named
Eve because "she" (EVE) was the mother of all living.  In other
words, Adam named her Eve, after his mother, just as he was
named Adam, after his father.

Everything else is traditional LDS theology.  Elohim is Elohim,
although the word is a Hebrew word meaning "Gods" and should
technically not be used as a personal name (see TPJS 372).
Jehovah is Jehovah, although contrary to our traditional usage,
there are a couple of exceptions for it being used exclusively
to designate the ante-mortal Jesus Christ (see PS 110).

I have numerous quotations from scripture and LDS authorities,
but basicly that's it.  I find it delightful that Brigham
Young and his teachings harmonize with both the scriptures and
with today's LDS theology on all points relating to these
principles.  There are a few immediate apparent difficulties,
but they are all easily resolved.

        Elden Watson


--------------------------------------------------------------------

The following is a post I wrote about Apocryphal and other parallels
to the idea of there being two different Adams.  It turns out that
in early writings this wasn't that unique an idea.


I've found quite a few new sources about the two Adams.  Specifically
Philo writes about this.  I found a really interesting article in
the _Journal for the Study of the New Testament_, 39:95-109.  There
they talk about Adam worship, the way NT rhetorical treatment of
Christ came from the earlier treatment of both Adam and Wisdom.
The author also goes on about how Wisdom is treated as a consort of
God.  The way she is presented along with Adam is very similar to
the treatment Brigham gives them.  (Minus the coming from an other
planet and some of the materialism)

The really interesting bits are there being two Adams in the garden.
One is tied to the logos and is tied to both "Adam Kadmon who sits
on the Merkabah throne and...[is] the creator of the cosmos."

We have in Philo something akin to the emanations of the Stoics and
Neoplatonists as well.  Whether this is the Hellenistic influence
or Philo working from Jewish legends, I'm not sure.  (I'd assume
the former)  "...Logos is said to be the child of God, his father,
and Wisdom, his mother, through whome the universe came to birth."

The article argues that Philo ties this Logos to Adam.   The Logos
is the image of God, ala Genesis 1.  This Adam is distinct from
the moulded Adam of Genesis 2.  "Elsewhere the Logos is described
as the heavenly man, the true father of men, who is one of the two
men put in Eden and called the father of the virtuous."  The
author argues that Philo unifies the Wisdom and Adam themes.

This Logos is the "governor and administrator of all things."
Philo also ties this Logos with being the high priest.  Ezek 28:12ff
ties the primordial man as an angelic priest in Eden and as a
guardian in Eden.  This parallels Philo's two men in Eden with one
being the moulded Adam and the other the guardian.


I've found a few other possible references as well.  Some of these
may be wild goose chases, while some may eventually lead somewhere.

The Apocalypse of Adam 66:25-67:1 has a strange quote that sounds
like one of BY's on Eve.  This is Adam speaking after three men
tell Adam to 'Arise...from the sleep of death and hear about the
aeon and the seed of that man to whom life has come and who came
from you and from Eve, your wife."

    Then the god, who created us [Adam and Eve], created a son
    from himself and Eve, your [Seth's] mother.

There are lots of other good references in the Nag Hammadi texts
as well.  For one thing the First Man (God) is called Adamas
along with the First Mother and the Son (Christ).  (That is the
Sethian Gnostic version - the other gnostic groups have slightly
different cosmologies)  They then create an other Adam and Eve.
It is significant that most of these texts identify the meaning
of both Adam and Eve as Father and Mother.  This formulation is
found in a variety of texts.

In an other variety of gnosticism we have the head Archon
creating Adam in the image of the main Father.

In the Hypostasis of the Archons we have them creating Adam.
Adam then looks at the spirit-endowed woman who awakens Adam.
He then calls her Eve, the Mother of all living, because "it is
she who is my mother...and she who has given birth."  There is
then a second Eve who falls with Adam.

On the Origin of the World has the interesting comment, "he
was called Adam, that is 'father,' according to the name of
the one that existed before him."  In this book there are
two Adams as well.  The first is the Adam of Light who is
the primordial Adam.  His consort is Zoe, the Eve of Life.
Zoe is the daughter of Sophia and God.  Zoe is the mother
of Adam and here we get a comment by Adam on Eve Zoe the
same as in the Hypostasis of the Archons.  There is also a
third Adam, who appears to be the fallen Adam.

  Now the first Adam, Adam of Light, is spirit endowed
  and appeared on the first day.  The second Adam is
  soul endowed and appeared on the sixth day, which is
  called Aphrodite.  The third Adam is a creature of the
  earth, that is, the man of the law, and he appeared on
  the eighth day, the tranquility of poverty, which is
  called Sunday.
    On the Origin of the World, 117:28-118:6

The Melchezedek text may be referring to two Adams as well.
Unfortunately it is fragmentary, so the text can be read
in several ways.  It does have the enigmatic sentence, "But
this is not the true Adam nor the true Eve."

Finally the Manichaen text has the following: "Adam says,
`How is my mother, the mother of the living?"' From The
Great Old Manichaean Song Book cited in the  Collected Works
of Hugh Nibley,  vol. 1 p. 156.

Anyway, the idea of two Adams sounds more and more common.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The following was from a discussion on Kabbalism and some of
Brigham's teachings.

The multifaceted interrelationship of Adam, Adam Kadmon, and
God perfused Kabbalistic material--including the Zohar (see
Idel, below, p119).  The same idea subsequently worked upon
the Hermetic concept of the Macrocosmos and the Microcosmos.
This is not an issue that is obscure in Kabbalah.  On can
determine this by picking up any of several works on
Kabbalah, and thoroughly read all the citations under Adam
and Adam Kadmon.  Moshe Idel gives a very good summary in
"Kabbalah:  New Perspectives", pp. 112-122.  Idel completes
his long discussion of the Anthropos--the first Adam, or
Adam Kadmon--thus (p. 121):

"I would interpret the above findings as follows:  a
hypothetical Jewish account of Creation [that is, a very
early account] consisted of a description of the first
creature as man. . . .  This creature is intermediary in the
Creation of the world, which is sometimes envisaged as
existing within him.  This pre-Christian, pre-Gnostic view
presumably underwent several metamorphoses in the various
types of literature in which it was absorbed:  (1) the
Christian texts, such as Paul's epistle, identified it with
Christ. . . ; (2) Gnostic texts, which also showed their
author's awareness of the Christian versions of the Jewish
idea, sometimes identified the man as the son of man. . . ;
(3) rabbinic sources obliterated the anthropomorphic nature
of the creating anthropos but preserved the innocuous term
logoi as the principal means of creation; and (4) medieval
Kabbalah inheriting these presumably ancient Jewish
traditions, developed them in an elaborate form that is
closest to the Gnostic accounts. . . ."

Compare Idel's summary of the Kabbalistic ideas:  In Brigham
Young's view, there was some identification between Michael,
Adam, and Christ (if I have my Adam-God Doctrine right).
Adam, first man,  prexisted in anthropomorphic form and was
the intermediary of creation.  As creator, he was the
primary God of this world.  Somehow, according to Young,
Adam is also linked with the being of Christ.

These concepts find considerable parallel in a wide range of
Kabbalistic material, as is well summarized in the above
quote from Idel.  Idel (and I emphasize this) identifies
this tradition with a pre-Christian Jewish teaching.  I
suggest that Joseph Smith related to Young something about
Adam and God, something perhaps very similar to the "pre-
Christian" teaching Idel describes.  The crux of the issue
then becomes:  Where did Joseph get it?  Accepting that a
doctrine like this was an archaic, esoteric oral tradition of
Israel, is it possible Joseph formed his own ideas in
relation to something he encountered in some current of the
Hermetic-Kabbalistic tradition crossing his path of life?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[This section talks about a gematria linking Jehovah with
Adam]

The gematria is very simple; this is merely a misunderstanding on
your part on what it is actually derived from.

It is true that YHVH = 26.  However YODHAVAVHA = 45 = ADM.

We should also note that the Adam in reference here is Adam Kadmon,
the Primordial Man, not Adam the first man in the Garden of Eden.

This is kind of true, although Kabbalists generally describe Adam
Kadmon as the First Man (see Kaplan in his book _Meditation and
Kabbalah_). The distinction you are drawing, however, can be
misleading, since Kabbalists often cosider themselves as if they
were Adam Kadmon (which in fact, they are).

[Parallel that with the endowment]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Scholem tells us (Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, pp. 278-280)
"Adam Ha-Rishon [Adam the First], the Adam of the Bible,
corresponds on the anthropological plane to Adam Kadmon, the
ontological primary man."  "The first being which emanated from
the light [En-Sof] was Adam Kadmon, the 'primordial man'.  Adam
Kadmon is nothing but a first configuration of the divine light
which flows from the essence of En-Sof."  (p. 265)  In other
words, Kabbalah--in contradistinction to Mormonism--is
fundamentally neoplatonic.  From the En-Sof, emanates a great
light, which becomes Adam Kadmon.  This Primordial Man causes
further emanations, which culminate in "the last reflection of
Adam Kadmon, who makes his appearance in the lowest form of
'making' ('asiyah) as Adam, the first man of Genesis." (Scholem,
_On the Kabbalah and its Symbolism_)  Adam is the earthy
reflection on the material plane of the supernal Adam Kadmon.
Adam Rishon is the mortal image of Adam Kadmon, but is not the
same emanation (or "being" as Mormons would say) as Adam Kadmon.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The following argues that changing the punctuation changes the
meaning of Brigham's sermons.  I find this more problematic
because of secondary sources, but it is interesting.  These are
by Elden Watson as well, if I recall.  (I lost the reference)
I've edited things somewhat.

Practically every Adam-God discourse by Brigham Young can be
read to understand that the Father was the progenitor of the
first people of the earth - except for his famous speech found
in Journal of Discourses, volume I page 50.  Note the two
following excerpts from other discourses, which are often used
to indicate Adam-God concepts.  In the first, consider that
Brigham Young was referring to Father Adam as the father of
Michael:

   Who did beget [Jesus Christ]? ...His Father, and his
   father is our God, and the Father of our spirits and
   he is the framer of the body, the God and Father of
   our Lord Jesus Christ.  Who is He? He is Father Adam.
   Michael, the Ancient of days, has he a Father?  He
   has.  Has he a mother? He has.  (punctuation altered
   slightly)

In the next quotation, Brigham Young refers to Adam's father
as "The Father." This is clearly an indication of the Heavenly
Father:

   Adam was as conversant with his Father who placed him
   upon this earth as we are conversant with our earthly
   parents.  The Father frequently came to visit his son
   Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children
   of Adam were more or less acquainted with their
   Grandfather, and their children were more or less
   acquainted with their Great-Grandfather.

[...]

The most difficult discourse to apply to the dual Adam concept
is the one which appears in J.D. vol. 1.  The difficult
passage is as follows:

   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.

There is a transition in the discourse from Father Adam to
Michael.  It occurs after "one of his wives with him" and
before "He helped to make and organize this world."
Unfortunately, the original account of this discourse is not
extant; however, two other accounts of the same discourse
indicate that pivotal words are missing from the account.
Both reports, one by Wilford Woodruff and one by Samuel
Hollister Rogers include these words before mention of
Michael: "and eat of the fruit of the garden until He could
beget a Tabernacle." If we insert these missing words into
the account, a different meaning is apparent:

   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. [They ate of the fruit of the
   garden until they could beget a Tabernacle].  He [the
   child] helped to make and organize this world.  He is
   MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom
   holy men have written and spoken.

[...]

One minor textual change in Abraham is significant.  A single
letter is changed and a whole new doctrinal meaning is
revealed.  Heretofore the text read, "the first man, who is
Adam, our  first father," which is a simple recitation of the
fact, also set forth in other scriptures, that Adam, the first
man, is also our first father.  If he is the first man he is
obviously the first father of other men. The new rendition,
according with the ancient manuscript, reads, "Adam, or first
father," making the word Adam a synonym for "first father."
That is, the name Adam  means first father. (Bruce R. McConkie
Ensign  December, 1985 p.59).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The scriptures indicate that Adam was born and that his father
was God.  The genealogy of the Savior as given by Luke
culminates with these words: "Which was the son of Seth which
was the son of Adam which was the son of God."  From the Book
of Moses we read the same doctrine: "And this is the genealogy
of the sons of Adam, who was the son of God, with whom God,
himself, conversed." (Moses 6:22.)  Bruce R. McConkie
commented on Luke's statement in his Doctrinal Commentary of
the New Testament  by saying that the words mean exactly what
they say.  In an effort to clarify Elder McConkie's position,
Reed Durham telephoned Elder McConkie and wrote this note
about the conversation:

I phoned B.R. McConkie on Friday afternoon, April 29th 1966 at
his home in regard to his commentary of Luke 3:38 in his new
text on the New Testament.

He answered that he had purposely left the door opened on that
point.  He said it was a true doctrine that God the Father,
Eloheim, a divine resurrected being came down to this earth
after its creation, with a wife and produced in the natural
way of sexual intercourse, a child who grew up and became
known as ADAM.  They did the same and brought forth a girl who
grew up and became Eve.  They had bodies of flesh and bone
etc., but were not mortal (not till they fell).  They (Adam
and Eve) were not resurrected and not translated beings.  God
really did create their bodies on this earth.  They were not
transported here (only their spirits).

He then said that his father-in-law told him that was a true
doctrine; that it had been taught a great deal by President
J.F. Smith (6th President).  He also added that President
Joseph Fielding Smith said it was too deep now for most saints
--that's the reason for saying about the creation of Adam and
Eve in the temple, "It's only figurative..."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Joseph Smith did comment on parallels between the Father and
Adam and made a distinction between the two:

   The Son had a tabernacle and so had the Father; but the
   Great God has a name by which He will be called which is
   Ahman - also in asking have reference to a personage
   like Adam for God made Adam just in His own image.  Now
   this is a key for you to know how to ask and obtain.
   (Joseph Smith, 9 March 1841.  McIntire Minute Book
   published in Words of Joseph Smith, p. 64.)


/// Clark Goble //// cgoble@fiber.net ///