Confusion about Adam and Eve:

[Anonymous]

Good discussion. I might also add that I think we all pick and choose our scriptures and how we interpret them to make something meaningful for our life (proof-texting for practical reasons).

The Creation took place in six days. The sixth day was when Adam and Eve were put in the Garden. There was a day of rest. There was a fall and death was introduced to the earth.

Russell M Nelson taught:

Quote:

In Genesis and Moses, those periods are called days. But in the book of Abraham, each period is referred to as a time. Whether termed a day, a time, or an age, each phase was a period between two identifiable events—a division of eternity.

Scriptures using different words (day, time, age, etc) need to be interpreted to make sense, and here we are letting go of literal interpretation of “days”, and putting the meaning “division of eternity” to those words in the scriptures.

So, it would seem consistent to take the rest of the Adam and Even story with the same approach, realizing words are being used to convey a message, but the methods and meanings may not be understood in fullness with literal facts that will never change. So if “six days” doesn’t mean six literal days, then “Adam and Eve put in the Garden of Eden” might not really mean they literally were put in a Garden, right? And there might not really be a talking serpent, and there might not really be zero death of any kind prior to the fall, there might not be some tree with magical fruit to put blood in Eve’s veins, and there might not really even be an Adam and Eve.

But it seems sometimes people take things literal, and then let go of it elsewhere (i.e. there really was a man Adam, but there really wasn’t a talking snake, etc). Why is that? Is it to help us feel more certain of our knowledge of things? But can we really “know”?

In fact, in the same article, Elder Nelson is telling us we don’t “know” everything for sure, we can’t.

Quote:

Though our understanding of the Creation is limited, we know enough to appreciate its supernal significance. And that store of knowledge will be augmented in the future. Scripture declares: “In that day when the Lord shall come [again], he shall reveal all things— [D&C101:32-34]

Taken from Ensign May 2000

Hey, if an apostle is telling me we can’t know everything now, then I can live with that. And I find greater meaning in an allegorical, non-literal, Adam and Eve story. And I give others the right to interpret it however works best for them.

More important than the details, what value do we get from knowing the Creation stories (literal or allegorical)?

Elder Nelson wrote:

As beneficiaries of the divine Creation, what shall we do? We should care for the earth, be wise stewards over it, and preserve it for future generations. And we are to love and care for one another.

Amen.

[Anonymous]

jeffwalshgen wrote:

Please would you define for me the bias that you imply that I have.

that there is only one way to interpret gospel truth: your way, literally.

jeffwalshgen wrote:

If it is because I believe that the placing of Adam and Eve in the garden, the fall and the process whereby mankind came into being to populate this world, then I would ask you to explain how mankind did come into being. I ask Ray, Cwald GB Smith and others the same question

i’ll play your game.

I dont knowfor sure, but i think that the most likely answer is that humans (physical bodies) came into being through the power of god as applied to this telestial kingdom: natural law (see section 88). according to bh roberts and other faithful LDS scientists, evolution may well be the process god used.

now your turn – pick either section A or B, and answer all questions in the selected section.

Section A – explaining the literal model.

1. if death did not exist before the fall, please explain dinosaurs.

2. were carnivorous beasts herbavores before the fall?

3. was eve literally created by surgically removing a rib from adam?

4. is menstrual pain and post partum depression a direct consequence of eve partaking of the fruit?

5. did water refract light differently before the flood?

6. did the sun and moon get created after the earth? or, did the earth only start rotating after “the waters” were separated from the dry land?

7. please explain the etymology of “firmament”, or if you know hebrew, of “rakia”.

8. please explain what “windows of heaven” and “fountains of the great deep” refer to in the flood story.

Section B – Embracing diversity

1. does a belief that god acts through natural power detract from the respect and worship of God?

2. How does a specific belief in a given speculation as to origins help you live a more authentic life here and now?

[Anonymous]

jeffwalshgen wrote:

…then I would ask you to explain how mankind did come into being. I ask Ray, Cwald GB Smith and others the same question…

I don’t know.

Let me repeat that…I don’t know.

If I had to guess, I lean towards evolution, because it makes the most sense to me, and meets Occam’s razor. Also it is possible that we got “seeded” from another planet by an alien life form. Creation is another possibility.

I think the point I would like to make, is I don’t think it is important, and I don’t think anyone can really know how this happened. I don’t think I, as an LDS member, need to choose between creation (adam and eve), evolution or aliens.

I have no problem if one has faith in a literal Adam and Ever (creation) belief. But I don’t think i need to believe it. I have know problem if one says, “I believe in a literal Adam and Eve. Great. I might have a problem though, if one says, “I KNOW that Adam and Eve are literal beings, and you need to have faith that I am right.”

[Anonymous]

Jeff, we discuss differing opinions here all the time, but we don’t “debate”. There is a very important, very fundamental difference between those two structures – and it’s important to emphasize right now. We aren’t here to convince others to believe exactly as we believe. It just isn’t how we operate and actually is contrary to our mission and purpose.

I also have NO problem with people believing in a literal Garden of Eden. That’s not how I see it, but I know it’s how most of the people I love dearly see it – and I’m totally fine with that. They think I’m wrong; I think they’re wrong; that’s totally fine with me.

To answer your question more directly, I believe the 1909 First Presidency statement on “The Origin of Man” is an excellent, very carefully worded statement. It explicitly leaves open the possibility that our physical bodies were created through an evolutionary process and that Adam (“man”) and Eve (“mother”) were the result of the insertion of per-mortal spirits into bodies prepared by God through such an evolutionary process. My own view is much like that statement – and it was reprinted in the Ensign during this young century as the official position of the LDS Church.

In essence, it says, “We don’t know about the creation of the physical body, but we do know we are spirit children of God and unique in that way from “the animal kingdom.”

If you want a far more in-depth parsing of some of the statement, read the following link:

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2906&p=36015&hilit=embryo#p36015

and, again, we don’t “debate” here. It’s not a place where we are trying to “convert” people to our view. We don’t have a consensus view on anything, so trying to covert people to a non-existent consensus would be futile.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I believe that the apostle Peter in 2pet3:3-4 was referring to these scientist/phillosophers as scoffers walking after thair own lusts

I actually tend to jog rather than walk but that’s another matter. I believe the way I do becuase to me that makes the most sense but I do have the sense to know that is just a matter of belief. ( how’s that for a bit of chiasmus?) We’ll find out soon enough but in the mean time it’s still a matter of bearing one anothers burdens, etc … wether Eden is a place or not.

[Anonymous]

I normally leave this sort of thread alone…primarily because I have fundamentalist views, but….

I’d like to throw the Adam-God doctrine in the mix, since it hasn’t really been mentioned.

Could it be that Adam and one of his wives came here, or were brought here, from another sphere? Could it be that all previous hominids were a result of a previous “creation”?

Of course the mainstream church doesn’t talk about this much anymore. I guess it comes down to….

1) Brigham Young was full of it.

or

2) We weren’t ready for it.

[Anonymous]

Ray, Sorry debate was the wrong word. jeff

[Anonymous]

Bruce in Montana wrote:

Could it be that Adam and one of his wives came here, or were brought here, from another sphere? Could it be that all previous hominids were a result of a previous “creation”?…

Sure, it’s possible. It’s just a modified version of the the Alien theory.

[Anonymous]

Bruce in Montana wrote:

I normally leave this sort of thread alone…primarily because I have fundamentalist views, but….

I’d like to throw the Adam-God doctrine in the mix, since it hasn’t really been mentioned.

Could it be that Adam and one of his wives came here, or were brought here, from another sphere? Could it be that all previous hominids were a result of a previous “creation”?

Of course the mainstream church doesn’t talk about this much anymore. I guess it comes down to….

1) Brigham Young was full of it.

or

2) We weren’t ready for it.

all possible, somewhat unlikely, but a lot depends on definitions.

the truth about the nature if god is unknowable, and therefore any truth claim is speculative. that a prophet states something means that the speculation should be taken seriously, but it should not be asserted as fact.

bertrand russell had a wonderful way of putting these things: if something is provably true, accept it, if something is proved false, then reject it. if something is unknown or unknowable/unprovable, then suspend judgment.

by suspended judgment, it also means i dont assert as True that which cannot be proven false.

this works for me.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

by suspended judgment, it also means i dont assert as True that which cannot be proven false.

This basically is how I see things, but I will phrase it in a slightly different way:

We see through a glass, darkly.

Once I close my mind to any possibility, I dam my ability to gain insight from it – so I better be 100% sure I believe it has been proven false to me. Others might not believe it is false; that’s OK. I just need to make sure I’m convinced it is undeniably false before I shut my mind to what truth it might teach me – and, even in those situations, pondering WHY it is false often can teach me about truth.

There’s a difference between suspending judgment and suspending critical thinking – and I never, ever, never, ever want to suspend critical thinking. (not critical as in “demeaning” or “inclined to find fault”, but merely as in “considering in detail” and “engaged in careful analysis”) Even when I might feel I “know” something (anything – true, false or anywhere in between), I still can gain further light and knowledge by thinking critically about it.

[Anonymous]

jeffwalshgen wrote:

Hi GBsmith, Are you then saying evoulution is proven fact and creation is a faith belief? I really would like to debate this with you, I believe you need more faith to accept evolution as the vehicle mankinds exststence than you do to believe in God. For instance the coming together by chance of the myriad submicroscopic parts that formed the first spec of life is so infinitly small it is impossible. You may think that science has all the answers but all they have is theory and another meaning of the word is guess.

I’ve always wondered why Evolution and Creationism are at odds. It seems much more likely to me that creating an Earth full of life would take some serious time. Even if you are God, we are talking about converting and moving billions of tons of matter. And then bringing forth first an ecosystem that could support mankind. Could not millions of years of evolution be the means to creating man and this world?

For me, the Adam and Eve story breaks down when we think of the mass inbreeding that would have been required for the 3rd generation.

[Anonymous]

you make really good points, Ray.

one of the greek scholars responsible for the footnotes on the 1984 LDS scripture revisions passed thru my ward for a while… we were talking about deutero-isaiah, and he made a comment i wont forget: there are too many scholars chasing too few texts…

at some point, there is only so much critical thinking you can do, JS and BY only said so many things–a lot of speculation, with in the end no really coherent theology. it is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Watfarer. I am sending this post in 2 parts because something happened to the reply, after I had typed the whole thing, when I tried to save it as a draft, I was directed back to the sign in page, after I had signed in again I went to open the draft only to find it had not been saved.. Help!!!!!.

We Will try again, Part 1.

First of all I should explain that I do not take everything literally, of course there are many things in the scriptues that have hidden meanings, ie. the parables of the Saviour, but I am sure that there are things we can take literally and sometimes we need not look beyond the mark, the Spirit manifests to us the truthfulness of the things we are not sure about.

I want also to say that many of the questions you asked me to respond to could have a logical and simple answer if we accept that the flood in Noah’s day really took place and that it was of mountain covering depth. I would recommend a book called “The Genesis Flood” co authored by 2 scientists John C Whitcomb and Henry M Morris who by the way are not members of our church, I find the conclusions arrived at by the authors to comply with the accounts in scripture and also with conclusions of President Joseph Fielding Smith, By the way I am familiar with the debate between President Smith, B H Roberts and James E Talmage.

Right here we go:-

Question 1 I believe the dinosaurs perished in the flood along with all other air breathing creatures and all their fossilised remains are found in the rock layers, the flood took place, according to biblical cronology 2344BC this obviously was after the fall. I recently revisited the newly reopened Dinosaur National Monument near Vernal Utah. The large rock wall in the quarry contains many bones all massed together embedded in the wall, these bones have been identified as being of half the different dinosaurs thought to have roamed North America. I was told that some 160 different dinosaurs have been identified. What I did not see was any signs of a meteor which some scientists say was the cause of the extinction so we will need to look elsewhere for the cause of their demise. I could though imagine flood water rising which would cause the creatures to find higher ground until they eventually perished in the mountain covering flood. By the way, and I admit this is conjecture on my part, backed up by some BYU professors that reptiles never stop growing whilst the are alive, how big would you say an iguana would grow to if it lived nearly 1000 years!!!!

A I understand it the first dinosaur fossil that was found was called and Iguanadon because it just looked like the bones of a huge iguana.

It is an interesting study to explore the tremendous effects of the hydraulic forces of water under flood conditions with the action of the moon causing tidal flows and the destructive forces they would cause Imagine that happening for many months while the water covered the earth

Question 2 We are told in the scriptures tha before the fall Adam and Eve were not subject to death, I would have to assume that death had not come to the earth at that time, so yes I believe that all of the beasts were herbavores. 2 Ne 2:22-23 tells us that if Adam had not fallen he and every else that had been organised would have remained in the same state and they would have remained for ever and had no end. We are also told in the scriptures that at the second coming this earth will receive its paradiscal glory and become a terrestial sphere and again be like unto the garden of eden and we also are told that when this happened the lion shall eat straw like the ox and that the emnity betwen mankind and the wild beasts will disapear.

Question 3 I think I will let Parley P Pratt answer this question, he said following the fall:- ….when man was driven from the face of his Heavenly Father, to toil and droop and die, when heaven was veiled from view, and with few exceptions man was no longer counted worthy to retain the knowledge of his heavenly origin, when darkness veiled the past and future from the heathen mind, man neither knew himself, from whence he came, nor whither he was bound. At length a Moses came, who knew his God, and would fain had led mankind to know Him too, to see His face, but they would not receive His heavenly laws or abide His presence.

Thus the holy man was forced to veil the past in mystery, and in the beginning of his history assign man to an earthly origin. Man moulded from the earth as a brick!!!!!!, Woman manufactured from a rib!!!!!!, thus parents would fain conceal from budding manhood the mysteries of procreation, or the scource of life’s ever flowing river, by relating some childish tale of new born life , engendered in the trunk of some old tree, or springing with spontaneous growth life mushrooms from the heaps of rubbish. O MAN! WHEN WILT THOU CEASE TO BE A CHILD OF KNOWLEDGE? MAN AS WE HAVE SAID, IS THE OFFSPRING OF DEITY. The entire mystery of the past and the future, with regard to his existence, is not yet solved my mortals ( the natural man) ( my insertion). (Key to Theology 1938 edition, pp 54-56.

Moses himself was given the true nature of the organising of the bodies of Adam and Eve, the Lord said:-

“That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of Mine Only Begotten”.

To be continued

[Anonymous]

Wayfarer, Part 2

Question 4. Referring once more to 2N2 2:23 we are told that they could not have children if the remained in the garden. Following tha fall though the consequence of becoming mortal was spelt out by God, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception, in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children.” Adam an Eve transgressed the law for staying in the Garden of Eden, Eve’s act of transgression was the vehicle which initiated the fall, the various changes which God pronounced upon Adam and Eve were not punishments, they were consequences. So yes Eve’s partaking of the fruit brought about the natural pain and suffering incidental to bringing forth of children.

Could our Heavenly Father have spared this suffering, I do not know we will eventually know many of these things, including why the Saviour had to die so painfully, we do not know, I believe that Cleon Skousen’s explanation comes near the truth.

Questions 5, 7, 8. I assume you are referring to the Rainbow Covenant in Gen 9:13, I think my answer would also cover the 3 questions Genesis tell us that on the 2nd day of creation, God separated the wates from above the firmament from the waters below the firmament. The bible dictionary tells us this is the expanse

of heaven and depending on the context the atmosphere or the sidereal heavens. So the waters above the firmament according to my understanding formed a water vapour canopy which completely surrounded the planet, this would cause a greenhouse effect involving the surface of the whole earth. This by the way would explain why there is sub-tropical vegetation under the polar ice caps. It would seem from the scriptures that before the flood there was no rain, as we know it, so Genesis tells us that there went up a mist from the earth which watered the face of the whole earth. this was God’s method of providing moisture for things to grow. By the way there is one reference in the scriptures refering to rain, but Moses uses it has a discriptive word to tell us how Enoch’s tears fell, of course Moses would be well aquainted with rain.

The condensing out of this canopy would be what the scriptures call the opening of the windows of heaven which must have been a tremendous global downpour because it lasted for 40 days and 40 nights, this huge volume of water was greatly added to by the breaking up of the fountains of the great deep which released huge subterranian waters and the waters then covered the mountain tops to a depth of some 22 feet. This by the way gives the lie to speculation that the flood was a localised deluge in one of the Mesopatanean valley, this is rather a silly argument because surely Noah and the population of the earth including the animals could have just moved into the next valley, and why would Noah spend 100-120 years building an ark that would not have been wanted.

Following the asuaging of the flood waters, and by the way questions have been asked where did all the waters go, the authors of the Genesis Flood give what is to me a very convincing argument. They refer to Psalms 104:2-9 where the psalmist is speaking about the flood, they (the waters) go up by the mountains and down by the valleys to the place that thou hast founded for them. Simply put the Lord caused the ocean basisns to lower and then the centrifugal forces caused by the rotation of the earth would have need to have a counter-balancing force which would cause the mountains to rise to compenate for the lowering of the ocean beds . and so following the flood Genesis 8:21-22 tells us that the seasons began and seed time and harvest time was instituted and also the rain that we are familiar began. Following this the Lord made covenant with Noah that he would no longer flood the earth, as a sign of this covenant he showed Noah a rainbow, which can only be formed where there is rain and sunlight because now the full effects of the sun became the controlling feature of the cycles of the days and seasons of the planet. By the way there would not be any sign value if the rainbow was a familiar event, but it would be if it was the first time it had been observed.

Question 6 President Brigham Young taught us that when the earth was first organised it was nigh unto Kolob and it stayed there until the fall. After the fall he tells us that the earth itself fell also to its place in the Milky Way galaxy where it is today with the sun and the moon controling it revolutions. President Young never did elaborate on this statement so the implications that arise out of this statement will have to be revealed to us. I do not know when the planet started to revolve but I would guess that it must have occurred incidental to its organisation as a mortal /physical creation which was to house the spirit earth.

Section B 1) Our Heavenly Father uses known eternal laws to bring about the controlling laws which are used to perpetuate the rotation and the management of this planet this knowledge that our Heavenly Father is in control through the Saviour is very comforting. It is even more comforting to accept that Father will reaveal to us when He sees fit, and we have the faith to accept them, all of these natural laws which control the earth. Just think for a moment 300 years ago things had not altered much from the beginning, now what do we have Electricity, modern modes of travel, the ability to travel and return back from the moon, etc etc, (Even computers and the internet). All of these laws have always been here since the creation they were not new, only to us, So of course this does not detract from the worshipful reverence

I feel for our Heavenly Parents.

Section B 2) I believe that it is a sacred responsibility and calling to learn as much as we can about Him and His Son, including the things concerning the creation, indeed John 17:3 says that our eternal life depends on getting to know them. This is what the Prophet Joseph and the apostle Paul counselled us to strive to make our calling and election sure. I think my favorite scripture sums it up best:-

” Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who forsaketh his sins and cometh unto me, and calleth on my name

and obeyeth my commandments, shall see my face and KNOW that I am (D&C 93:1)

Have a good day Jeff walsh

[Anonymous]

Hi JBsmith, I do not think that there should be any conflict between creationism and evolution, a little sane thinking brings us to a realisation that if you take God out of creation man has to come up with wild and crazy ideas such as evolution. I would ask evolutionists to explain how a spirit evolves and where it comes from and even more important where does it go. Have a nice day Jeff

[Author]

Posts