By Jerald and Sandra Tanner
Brigham Young, the second President of the Mormon Church, once stated: “Now, remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, page 51). This statement is in conflict with both the Bible and the Book of Mormon (see Matthew 1:18-20; Book of Mormon, Alma 7:10). In spite of the teachings of the Bible and the Book of Mormon, Joseph Fielding Smith, who recently became President of the Church, has denied that Christ was begotten by the Holy Ghost: “They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. I challenge that statement. The Book of Mormon teaches no such thing! Neither does the Bible” (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, page 19).
Since Mormon theology teaches that God himself is a man instead of a spirit and is the literal father of Christ, the birth of Christ is considered a natural, rather than miraculous, occurrence. The Mormon writer Carlfred B. Broderick made these comments:
There are two basic elements in the Gospel view of sexuality as I interpret it from the scriptures. The first is that sex is good—that sexuality, far from being the antithesis of spirituality, is actually an attribute of God. . . .
In the light of their understanding that God is a procreating personage of flesh and bone, latter-day prophets have made it clear that despite what it says in Matthew 1:20, the Holy Ghost was not the father of Jesus. . . . The Savior was fathered by a personage of flesh and bone, and was literally what Nephi said he was, “son of the Eternal Father.” (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1967, pages 100-101)
Brigham Young had this to say concerning the birth of Christ:
The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband. (Deseret News, October 10, 1866)
The Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt stated:
The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of husband and wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful Wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully. It would have been unlawful for any man to have interfered with Mary, who was already espoused to Joseph; for such a heinous crime would have subjected both the guilty parties to death, according to the law of Moses. But God having created all men and women, had the most perfect right to do with His own creation, according to His holy will and pleasure: He had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son, although she was espoused to another; for the law which he gave to govern men and women was not intended to govern Himself, or to prescribe rules for his own conduct. It was also lawful in Him, after having thus dealt with Mary, to give her to Joseph her espoused husband. Whether God the Father gave Mary to Joseph for time only, or for time and eternity, we are not informed. Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in this mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity. (The Seer, page 158)
On April 9, 1852, Brigham Young, the second President of the Mormon Church, went so far as to declare that Adam “is our Father and our God” and that he is the Father of Jesus:
Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! 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 Arch-angel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken—he is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later . . . When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; . . . Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven . . . Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. I will repeat a little anecdote. I was in conversation with a certain learned professor upon this subject, when I replied, to this idea— “if the Son was begotten by the Holy Ghost, it would be very dangerous to baptize and confirm females, and give the Holy Ghost to them, lest he should beget children, to be palmed upon the Elders by the people, bringing the Elders into great difficulties.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pages 50-51)
Although this doctrine is no longer taught by the Mormon leaders, there is a great deal of evidence to show that it was taught and accepted for many years. For instance, on Wednesday, February 7, 1877, L. John Nuttall recorded in his journal that Brigham Young taught in the Temple that Jesus was the son of Adam:
Wed. 7 at Temple. I officiated as Recorder at the font—. . . Prest Young was filled with the spirit of God & revelation & said, . . . Adam was an immortal being when he came on this earth . . . and had begotten all the spirit that was to come to this earth and Eve our common Mother who is the mother of all living bore those spirits in the celestial world . . .
Father Adam’s oldest son (Jesus the Savior) who is the heir of the family is Father Adam’s first begotten in the spirit world, who according to the flesh is the only begotten as it is written. (In his divinity he having gone back into the spirit world, and come in the spirit to Mary and she conceived . . . (“Journal of L. John Nuttall,” vol. 1, pages 18-21, taken from a typed copy at the Brigham Young University)
As late as 1888 George Q. Cannon, a member of the First Presidency, was teaching that Adam was the father of Jesus. His son recorded the following in his journal on March 10, 1888:
As we drove home Father told me that all his success in life was due to his zeal for the work of God. . . . He asked me what I understood concerning Mary conceiving the Savior; and as I found no answer, he asked what was to prevent Father Adam from visiting and overshadowing the mother of Jesus. “Then,” said I, “he must have been a resurrected Being.” “Yes,” said he, “and though Christ is said to have been the first fruits of them that slept, yet the Savior said he did nothing but what He had seen His Father do, for He had power to lay down His life and take it up again. Adam, though made of dust, was made, as Pres. Young said, of the dust of another planet than this.”— I was very much instructed by the conversation and this days services. (“Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon,” vol. 10, page 178, original located at Brigham Young University, Special Collections)
On June 23, 1889, Abraham H. Cannon recorded this statement in his journal:
Father proved to my entire satisfaction this morning by passages from the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants that all men, even the sons of perdition, will be resurrected and stand before God to be judged. He believes that Jesus Christ is Jehovah, and that Adam is his Father and our God; that under certain unknown conditions the benefits of the Savior’s atonement extend to our entire solar system. (“Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon,” June 23, 1889, page 39)
Even before the turn of the century the Mormon leaders seemed to be ashamed of the Adam-God doctrine. On November 28, 1898, George Q. Cannon stated:
I was stopped yesterday afternoon by a young man, who wanted to know whether Adam was the Father of our Lord and Savior—whether he was the being we worshipped, etc. . . . Concerning the doctrine in regard to Adam and the Savior, the Prophet Brigham Young taught some things concerning that; but the First Presidency and the twelve do not think it wise to advocate these matters. (Proceedings of the First Sunday School Convention of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, 1899, as quoted in “The Position of Adam in Latter-day Saint Scriptures and Theology,” Master’s thesis, Brigham Young University, August, 1953, pages 69-70)
In our book, The Case Against Mormonism, vol. 3, we plan to devote a chapter to the Adam-God doctrine and one to the virgin birth in Mormon theology.
Originally appeared in: