LDS Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, pp. 114 - 115, 1863.
I’ll have to look that up later (after work) and reply. Thank you for responding.
This is a good example of taking a quote out of context.
John Taylor is talking about the sacrament (of the Lord's supper). He says (and yes, I cut out parts - it is a rather long sermon):
Faith in this ordinance would necessarily imply that we have faith in Jesus Christ, that he is the only begotten of the Father, that he came from the heavens to the earth to accomplish a certain purpose which God had designed − even to secure the salvation and exaltation of the human family. . . The death of Jesus Christ would not have taken place had it not been necessary. That this ceremony should be instituted to keep that circumstance before the minds of his people, bespeaks its importance as embracing certain unexplained purposes and mysterious designs of God;. . . It is not fully comprehended why it was necessary that Jesus Christ should leave the heavens, his Father's abode and presence, and come upon the earth to offer himself up a sacrifice; . . . why it was necessary that his blood should be shed is an apparent mystery. It is true that we are told that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. . . Jesus Christ is spoken of in the Scriptures as "The Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world." What sins of the world did he take away? We are told that it is the sin which Adam committed.
This is an admittedly interesting comment. Especially since John Taylor was not a fan of Calvin and the idea of "total depravity." His background pre-LDS was as a Methodist preacher. As I have observed many times before, such language out of a non-Mormon mouth would not be questioned in such a manner, but would be understood to be referring to the fallen state of mankind and that sin entered the world through Adam. "For since by man came death" and thus a need for a redeemer. I suspect that a similar conversation could be had on Calvinism thread without angst.
More from this sermon:
There must be some reason why he was allowed to suffer and to endure; why it was necessary that he should give up his life a sacrifice for the sins of the world. . . It behoves us to be made well aware which call we belong to, that if we are not already among the redeemed we may immediately join that society, that when the Son of God shall come the second time. . . we shall be among that number who shall be ready to meet him with gladness in our hearts and hail him as our great deliverer. . .
[I]t is necessary we should know . . . something about our interests in that redemption wrought out for us through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, whose death and sufferings we are now commemorating [with the sacrament].
Hence we are told, "This is the stone which was set at naught by you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved,"
Things take place that we cannot always reconcile to our judgment. I do not know why Jesus should leave his Father's throne and be offered up a sacrifice for the sin of the world, and why mankind have to be put through such an ordeal as they have to pass through on this earth; we reason upon this, and the Scriptures say that it is because man cannot be made perfect only through suffering. We might ask why could not mankind be saved in another way? Why could not salvation be wrought out without suffering? I receive it in my faith that this is the only way, and I rejoice that we have a Savior who had the goodness to come forth and redeem us, and I rejoice that we have a Savior who yet looks forward to the redemption of the world. . . God will bring order out of all the confusion that existed, measure out mercy to all Adam's posterity and give to all a fair opportunity of being saved. . .we discover that God has extended mercy so far as he possibly could to the veriest wretch that ever crawled on the earth, and has brought forth and redeemed all the human family. . .
"a sacrifice for the sins of the world"
"[we are] among the redeemed"
"redemption wrought out for us through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ"
"a sacrifice for the sin of the world"
"man cannot be made perfect only through suffering"
"why could not mankind be saved in another way?"
"we have a Savior who had the goodness to come forth and redeem us"
"brought forth and redeemed all the human family"
All that, yet that sticky quote about "the sin that Adam committed."
I think the rest of the sermon makes it clear that John Taylor understood that Christ's sacrifice was was for all mankind, and not just for Adam. It would appear that his reference to "the sin that Adam committed" was reference to man's fallen nature.
I need to thank you for the fun research project. I usually don't get to spend a lot of time researching the obscure sermons of our early church leaders. It is interesting to see how some of the common phrases have evolved, and yet still see early start of other phrases that we still use today. For example, the "fair opportunity" is commonly used today (usually phrased as a "fair first chance" to accept the gospel).
Just in case you follow up with Penrose's discussion of original sin, keep in mind that Mormons talk about two kinds of separation from God - physical and spiritual. Through Adam we have both physical and spiritual death, and the atonement of Christ covers both. Physical death through the resurrection, and spiritual death through the taking upon Himself our sins. We believe that the resurrection is a "free gift" given to all mankind (that every one will be resurrected) but that redemption from sin requires actions (what we call ordinances - like baptism). When Penrose says we have nothing to do with the work of atonement for the sin of Adam, he is talking about resurrection, and when he talks about action required to gain redemption from our own sins, he is talking about faith, repentance, baptism, etc.
I understand that you (the general "you") don't feel that way or agree with that doctrine, but it is what the LDS teach.