Mormonism says "ancient of days" is Adam - most others say it's God. Thoughts on that?

[jfro18]

I'm doing a write-up on Adam and Eve for this project I'm working on, so I'm scrolling through some of the topic pages on Adam on the church's website.

They refer to Adam as the "ancient of days" in Mormonism - the heading for Daniel 9 says:

Daniel sees four beasts representing the kingdoms of men—He sees the ancient of days (Adam) to whom the Son of Man (Christ) will come—The kingdom will be given to the Saints forever.

The verse (Daniel 7:9) this is referring to says:

I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.

Am I missing something in this being God? Perhaps this is part of why Adam-God began? I assume the church is stuck with this concept due to D&C 116:

Spring Hill is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman, because, said he, it is the place where Adam shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.

Just googling the "ancient of days" shows that most people seem to think it's clearly God that's being referred to.

I'm just wondering if anyone had come across this before - the Adam and Eve section is really complicated to do but I'm trying to keep it concise... this seems like a gross misreading though unless I'm missing something, which I certainly could be.

[Hagoth]

Am I missing something in this being God? Perhaps this is part of why Adam-God began?

Yeah, maybe it depends on whether you're looking through the modern correlated lens or the Brigham lens.

[jfro18]

Am I missing something in this being God? Perhaps this is part of why Adam-God began?

Yeah, maybe it depends on whether you're looking through the modern correlated lens or the Brigham lens.

So my guess here is that Joseph Smith called Adam the 'Ancient of days' in D&C 116 which forces the church to then bring that into Daniel... but that equates Adam to our God.

There is no one else who even considers that this is Adam and the apologetics are basically "Joseph's revelations know better than corrupted Biblical texts do," which is about as good as you can hope for.

I've never come across this before and it seems like a really bad misreading by Joseph Smith with regards to Adam, who wasn't even a real, historical figure.

[moksha]

This is in line with the Golden Spiral Bound Notebook unearthed from a cardboard box in Levan Utah, which refers to former BYU instructor Louis Midgley as the "ancient goat of days".

[Hagoth]

Well, he didn't get it from Adam Clarke: "The Ancient of days - God Almighty; and this is the only place in the sacred writings where God the Father is represented in a human form."

[jfro18]

Well, he didn't get it from Adam Clarke: "The Ancient of days - God Almighty; and this is the only place in the sacred writings where God the Father is represented in a human form."

It's funny - I went straight there as well when trying to think of where Joseph Smith came up with this idea.

Joseph made no changes to the JST in this area, so there's no indication that JS made the 'Ancient of Days' connection to Adam until they got to Missouri and he was just happening to stumble upon Adam's alters.

the FAIR rebuttal is pretty weak and I read one other one last night that basically amounts to "Joseph got further light so we're going with that even though every scholar disagrees"

eta: here's an 1839 quote from Joseph which seems to really hint at Adam being our God, doesn't it?:

“Daniel in his seventh chapter speaks of the Ancient of Days; he means the oldest man, our Father Adam, Michael, he will call his children together and hold a council with them to prepare them for the coming of the Son of Man. He (Adam) is the father of the human family, and presides over the spirits of all men, and all that have had the keys must stand before him in this grand council. … The Son of Man stands before him, and there is given him glory and dominion. Adam delivers up his stewardship to Christ, that which was delivered to him as holding the keys of the universe, but retains his standing as head of the human family.”

[Palerider]

Some of the boys over at Mormon dialogue are claiming Sydney Rigdon came up with this and taught it to Joseph, who took it and ran with it. It may also have a connection with doctrinal theories from the Kabbalah.

"In formatting them to do so, I came across this statement from the May 1834 edition of the Evening and Morning Star, in Rigdon's 'Millennium, no. V': (Rigdon is revealed as the author in the 2nd volume of the Messenger and Advocate):

Quote
In the 24 chapter of Isaiah, and 23 verse, the prophet, after having described one of the greatest desolations ever pronounced on the head of any generation of men, says, "Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously."We have before s een that this reign was to last a thousand years; and his ancients, before whom he was to reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, gloriously, were all the redeemed from among men, of every tongue, language, kindred, and people.
According to Daniel, he was to come to the ancient of days: here he is said to reign before his ancients, that is, all the saints from our father Adam, down; for who could the ancient of days be but our father Adam? surely none other: he was the first who lived in days, and must be the ancient of days. And to whom would the Savior come, but to the father of all the race, and then receive his kingdom, in which he was to reign before, or with his ancients gloriously? Let it here be remarked, that it is said to be in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, where the Lord is to reign before his ancients gloriously."

[Palerider]

Further as do others here, I think there is no doubt the "Ancient of Days" refers to God. How anyone could construe otherwise from the Biblical texts is beyond me. You have to go far afield to make this become Adam.

[jfro18]

Some of the boys over at Mormon dialogue are claiming Sydney Rigdon came up with this and taught it to Joseph, who took it and ran with it. It may also have a connection with doctrinal theories from the Kabbalah.

This is fascinating - thank you for finding this.

And now it makes sense why Joseph Smith did not make any changes in the JST for Daniel, but later added it in as he learned these ideas from Rigdon.

And it also explains why Joseph Smith retrofitted this idea into D&C 27 when he changed the revelation, adding a ton of words in God's mouth about the restoration.