1. History

Mormonism is a dynamic tradition characterized by continual re-evaluation of long-held doctrines. Throughout our history, we have revisited core beliefs and decided whether to uphold, modify, or abandon them based on evolving spiritual and cultural needs.

Not even the conception of God was immune from this re-evaluation, and Joseph Smith Jr. went through many during his 15-year ministry. His last conception was articulated in the sermon now known as the “King Follett Discourse”.

In this groundbreaking sermon Joseph Smith introduced transformative ideas about the nature of humanity and divinity. Smith taught that human spirits are eternal, uncreated, and co-eternal with God. He proposed that humans have the potential for exaltation – achieving godhood – through gaining knowledge and progressing eternally. Eternal life, according to Smith, was deeply tied to understanding the true nature of God and becoming like Him.

After Joseph Smith Jr.’s death came the Succession Crisis, and with it the Mormon movement’s conception of God also fractured. Some took on a more Trinitarian point of view, while others expounded upon Joseph’s late theological innovations. Some notable theologians during this time were Orson Pratt and Brigham Young. While both Pratt and Young agreed upon the concept of spiritual procreation – departing from Smith’s idea of uncreated spirits – they differed significantly in other areas.

Pratt preached that the Holy Spirit was “Prime Mover” – which Pratt called “The Great First Cause”- which organized the first gods on another planet. God lived a mortal life where He took on Divine attributes and was exalted. In this exalted state God could grow and learn no more. Pratt also taught that people who had these attributes, to some degree, were gods who may be worthy of worship.

Conversely, Brigham Young rejected the notion of a “Prime Mover” and introduced the idea of an “infinite regression” of gods. According to Young, gods eternally produce spiritual children who can achieve godhood through obedience to their own deity. Each god is worshipped only by their direct spiritual offspring, reinforcing a patriarchal hierarchy in the heavens.

Both of these were unique approaches to Mormon theology, and both had appeal within the Utah branch of Mormonism. However, these theologians’ viewpoints were largely at odds with one another, and they often fought within the public sphere. In the end, Brigham Young held more hierarchical sway, and Orson Pratt’s theology was condemned and Pratt retracted his statements out of fear of excommunication.

One of Young’s most controversial teachings, known as the Adam-God Doctrine, posited that Adam is “our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do” (Journal of Discourses 1:50). This teaching was quite divisive, and eventually even Brigham Young stopped pushing it in public. By the 20th century, theologians like B.H. Roberts defended it openly, whereas Joseph Fielding Smith claimed it had never been official church doctrine, asserting it was simply misunderstood. Ultimately, the Adam-God concept was largely discarded, although the broader teaching of infinite regression and spiritual procreation remained influential.

2. The Dance Continues

Before discussing my own interpretation of our theological mythology and cosmology, I’d like to highlight three significant quotes from Brigham Young that underscore the Mormon approach to revelation and theological diversity:

“I do not believe that there is a single revelation, among the many God has given to the Church; that is perfect in its fullness. The revelations of God contain correct doctrine and principle, as far as they go, but it is impossible for the … inhabitants of the earth to receive a revelation from the Almighty in all its perfections. He has to speak to us in a manner to meet the extent of our capacities.” (Journal of Discourses 2:314)

From this, we can see that Brigham Young took a Special Conceptual perspective on revelation. Read my recent post “The Gift of Revelation” for more information on this type of revelation. In short, revelation – and thus the very understanding of God – is contextualized to the people, culture, and time that it came from.

Brigham Young also said:

“Were the former and Latter-day Saints, with their Apostles, Prophets, Seers, and Revelators collected together to discuss [the nature of Deity], I am led to think there would be found a great variety in their views and feelings upon this subject … It is as much my right to differ from other men, as it is theirs to differ from me, in points of doctrine and principle, when our minds cannot at once arrive at the same conclusion.” (Journal of Discourses 2:123)

From this, we can see that even within the Mormon tradition Brigham Young anticipated that there would be a vast array of understandings about God.

And finally, Brigham Young also said:

“I could tell you much more about [the Adam-God Doctrine]; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and overrighteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone… I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told.” (Journal of Discourses 1:51)

This quote highlights that even within Mormon theology, certain teachings have complexities that go beyond mainstream acceptance, suggesting that deeper, perhaps unique insights remain to be explored.

Now, the final quote I would like to recount is from George Q. Cannon, who said:

“[God] has not called us to be like other people, but to become a peculiar people” (Journal of Discourses 22:278-285)

Indeed, Mormonism’s strength lies in its unique theological perspectives, embracing rather than suppressing its peculiar nature. Yet, there are some branches of Mormonism who seek to reject their peculiarity in an effort to be more accepted by Christians. We have even seen the LDS church, who has a legacy of carrying on the Nauvoo theology, distance itself from the full scope of the doctrine of exaltation.

In light of these, I wanted to propose a new conception of Divinity which is uniquely Mormon. I have written about this conception in The Book of the Lavens, The Doctrine and Covenants of a Reform Mormon, and in various blog posts like “A New Approach to Exaltation”, but I wanted to put it in a bit more clear and concise terms here, so I can join with my predecessors in pondering about the nature of God. I call this understanding the “Heavenly Parents Doctrine”.

3. The Heavenly Parents Doctrine

There was a prime mover, which we call the Holy Spirit and acts as a pantheistic element for all of reality. This spirit gathered scattered intelligences and, over eons, shaped them into an advanced species called the Elohim. The Elohim possessed vast power yet experienced spiritual stagnation due to the lack of growth through experience.

Recognizing this limitation, the Elohim convened a council at Kolob, deciding that true progression required surrendering their Celestial knowledge so they may experience mortality, joy, and sorrow. They also determined that one Elohim should retain their Celestial knowledge to comfort, guide, and lead them in their human forms. After their mortal probation, each person would progress to one of three communities based on their spiritual growth: Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial.

Two Elohim, Jehovah, the Beloved Son, and Lucifer, the Morning Star, volunteered as this Comforter. Jehovah’s plan honored human agency, allowing genuine spiritual growth through individual choice, whereas Lucifer aimed to ensure universal exaltation by removing choice and preventing suffering. The Elohim chose Jehovah, leading Lucifer to rebel and depart from Kolob, taking followers with him. To prevent Lucifer and his followers from returning, a system of tokens was developed that would only be able to be gained in mortality.

Sophia, the Lady of Wisdom, and Michael, the Ancient of Days, were chosen to lead the design of the planet where mortality would occur, including the bodies that the Elohim would inhabit. The Council of Kolob was so pleased with their work that they asked Sophia and Michael to be the first to take on these mortal forms.

Sophia and Michael were placed in a garden named Eden where they would be able to get used to their bodies, and they could indicate they were ready for the hardships by eating a specific fruit. Sophia and Michael renamed each other “Eve, the Mother of All Living” and “Adam, the Son of the Earth”. Eve tended to the plants of the earth and Adam tended to the animals. Lucifer, now known as Satan, wanted to see them suffer, and so he convinced them to partake of the fruit after only 8 years.

After Adam and Eve’s transition into true mortality began with their departure from Eden, Satan continually attempted to manipulate them into obeying him. However, they resisted his advances. Adam and Eve met Divine messengers from Kolob who imparted wisdom through laws, covenants, and tokens.

Of particular interest was how their son Cain came to devote himself to Satan and murder his brother Abel in order to gain what Abel had. Abel’s spirit told the Council of Kolob that he had not learned enough in mortality, and he requested that their plan for exaltation be amended due to this new knowledge and permit multiple mortal probations. The Council accepted Abel’s experiential wisdom, and Abel was reborn as Seth.

After 930 years Adam and Eve’s mortal probation concluded, and they felt no desire for another. At the veil they presented the tokens they learned in mortality. Despite not living another mortal probation, they realized they deeply miss their mortal bodies, recognizing their value in experiencing the dualities of life. Eve proposed that exalted beings should be allowed to take up perfected, immortal bodies, which the Council unanimously approved. In this new state, Adam takes the name El, God of Creation and Artistry, while Eve takes the name Asherah, Goddess of Life and Wisdom, signifying their exaltation. Asherah and El set another example in exaltation: they sought to help guide their children on earth to also reach their exaltation. In doing so, they became our first Heavenly Parents.

Many have now achieved exaltation and are Heavenly Parents. We can cultivate these Divine attributes so that we too may become a Heavenly Parent.

4. Conclusion

Mormonism has never been a static tradition; it thrives precisely because it dares to question, innovate, and even discard theological concepts that no longer serve the spiritual growth of its adherents. As we’ve seen, the evolution of Mormon conceptions of divinity – from Joseph Smith’s uncreated spirits and human potential for godhood, through Pratt’s ‘Prime Mover,’ Brigham Young’s ‘Adam-God’ teachings – clearly illustrates this dynamic nature.

What remains constant, however, is the tradition’s profound engagement with questions of identity, Divinity, and progression. By acknowledging the inherent variability and imperfection of revelation, Mormonism creates space for continuous dialogue and personal revelation, inviting each generation to reimagine and reconstruct its relationship with the Divine.

The conception of deity presented here, drawing from historical teachings and modern spiritual insights, affirms the unique Mormon legacy of ongoing revelation, eternal progression, and our shared journey towards becoming Heavenly Parents. Embracing our peculiar heritage, we can confidently continue the dance, allowing new truths and deeper understandings to lead us forward into ever-expanding spiritual horizons.