President Spencer W. Kimball’s 1976 Denouncement of the Adam–God Theory

A Call to Scriptural Orthodoxy, Not a Revelatory Correction

Introduction

In the Priesthood Session of the October 1976 General Conference, President Spencer W. Kimball (1973–1985) publicly denounced the Adam–God theory as false doctrine. This marked one of the clearest formal rejections of the teaching ever delivered from the pulpit by a sitting prophet. However, when viewed in its broader context, the statement reflects a call to scriptural orthodoxy, pastoral caution, and doctrinal unity rather than a revelatory reversal of President Brigham Young’s earlier teachings.

The Key Statement

From President Kimball’s address “Our Own Liahona” (Ensign, November 1976, pp. 77–79):

“We hope that you who teach in the various organizations, whether on the campuses or in our chapels, will always teach the orthodox truth. We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations.

Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine.”

Nature of His Warning

President Kimball’s language places emphasis on two priorities: (1) that doctrine should align with scripture, and (2) that teachers should avoid propagating theories “alleged” to have come from earlier leaders. Several key points stand out:

• Scriptural Alignment Over Historical Quotation: President Kimball’s definition of “orthodox truth” is directly tied to the scriptures. Teachings not explicitly grounded in canon were to be treated with caution, regardless of their historical attribution.
• Ambiguity in Attribution: By using the phrase “alleged to have been taught,” President Kimball introduces measured distance from both the content and authorship of the doctrine. He does not name President Young, nor does he accuse him of false teaching. This may reflect both legal care and deference to a former prophet.
• Framing as Theory, Not Revelation: Unlike President Young, who said the doctrine had been “revealed to me” (Deseret News, Vol. 22, No. 308, June 8, 1873), President Kimball offers no claim of revelatory contradiction. The “Adam–God theory” is not refuted by new revelation, but dismissed on the basis of scriptural inconsistency.
• Pastoral Tone: The phrase “hope that everyone will be cautioned” aligns more with shepherding than judicial rebuke. It is an effort to safeguard spiritual wellbeing rather than to issue final doctrinal judgment.

Historical Context

At the time of this address, fundamentalist offshoots were still using the Adam–God doctrine to justify their teachings. President Kimball’s caution may have served to draw a firm line between the modern Church and these divergent groups. His address also preceded the 1978 priesthood revelation, at a time when Church leadership was focused on clarifying doctrine and healing internal divisions.

Anecdotal reports offer further context. According to Elden Watson, a Church employee who attended a private meeting with President Kimball, the prophet clarified that his warning was directed at misinterpretations of President Young’s teachings, rather than the teachings themselves (FAIR; mormonr.org). This suggests that President Kimball’s goal was to suppress misuse, not to repudiate President Young directly.

What He Likely Did Not Know

While President Kimball was a careful and inspired leader, he did not have access to the extensive body of records that is now available. Most of President Young’s teachings on Adam–God remained buried in hard-to-search volumes of the Journal of Discourses, private journals, meeting minutes, and obscure early publications. Many of these have only become searchable in digital form in recent years.

For example:

• The Journal of Discourses was not digitized or text-searchable during President Kimball’s lifetime.
• Key supporting quotes were scattered across difficult-to-access documents such as the Wilford Woodruff Journals, Deseret News sermons, Millennial Star, and Women of Mormondom.
• Dozens of corroborating witnesses—from fellow apostles to temple workers—have now been compiled into a single resource, available here: Adam–God Doctrine: Historical Quotes.

These sources confirm that President Young’s teachings were not isolated, misheard, or singular, but part of a larger body of belief that would have been difficult for later leaders to fully evaluate.

Conclusion

President Spencer W. Kimball’s 1976 denouncement of the Adam–God theory was a call for scriptural consistency and doctrinal unity in a complex time. While firm in tone, it lacked the language of revelatory correction and did not directly name President Young. When viewed in the context of what is unlikely for President Kimball to have known, his position appears pastoral and prudent. It represents a conscious turn toward scripture as the primary standard for doctrine, without necessarily resolving the complex historical roots of the Adam–God teachings.

---

Reference: Ensign, November 1976 – “Our Own Liahona”