- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Just as an fyi, there is a new Seminary manual for church history, and it includes information from the new materials that have been written and posted online. I will post this in another current thread, as well, but it also includes the following, which I love:
Quote:“The 7,000 years [in D&C 77:6–7] refers to the time since the Fall of Adam and Eve. It is not referring to the actual age of the earth including the periods of creation.”
It seems this is more of a topic about the age of the earth/time since the fall rather than the church history manual. In which case:
The latest official statement by church leaders, reprinted in 2002:
Quote:It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men. The word of the Lord declared that Adam was “the first man of all men” (Moses 1:34), and we are therefore in duty bound to regard him as the primal parent of our race…
There is nothing in this, however, to indicate that the original man, the first of our race, began life as anything less than a man, or less than the human germ or embryo that becomes a man…
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity.
http://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/02/the-origin-of-man?lang=eng I agree that there’s nothing in there that talks about the age of the earth. But it affirms that the entire human race is descended from Adam and Eve. That they are the first parents of us and the “first of all” men and women.
To extend sources to manuals/official LDS resources:
Quote:Ponder for a moment your own relationship to Adam and Eve—your ever-so-great grandparents. Have the ensuing millennia made them seem unreal to you, like fictional characters in a novel? They are real and they are alive. Adam will return to earth prior to the Millennium to preside under Christ at the great council of Adam-ondi-Ahman (see Daniel 7; D&C 116), and he will lead the armies of the Almighty God to battle against the assembled hosts of Satan in the last great battle of the earth (see D&C 88:112–15).
The world would have you believe that Adam and Eve were primitive and superstitious, that they brought about the Fall through immorality, or even that they are imaginary, mythical persons. But as you read about them remember how the Lord views these two great souls. Think of what special qualities they must have possessed to have been chosen to lead the way.
I find no support in any LDS source that Adam and Eve lived anything other than 6000 years ago. The idea that the entire human race started from two people, 6,000 years ago is frankly ludicrous. I don’t believe it. Science doesn’t support it. I’m happy to see them as symbolic moments in human history. I’m happy to see them as symbolic principles representing every person’s journey through the eternities. But not as the origin of the human species.
I agree that we should differentiate this from the age of the rock we stand on and the process of bringing the earth into its natural cycles:
Quote:A third theory says that the word day refers to a period of an undetermined length of time, thus suggesting an era. The word is still used in that sense in such phrases as “in the day of the dinosaurs.” The Hebrew word for day used in the creation account can be translated as “day” in the literal sense, but it can also be used in the sense of an indeterminate length of time (see Genesis 40:4, where day is translated as “a season”; Judges 11:4, where a form of day is translated as “in the process of time”; see also Holladay, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, pp. 130–31). Abraham says that the Gods called the creation periods days (see Abraham 4:5,
.If this last meaning was the sense in which Moses used the word day, then the apparent conflict between the scriptures and much of the evidence seen by science as supporting a very old age for the earth is easily resolved. Each era or day of creation could have lasted for millions or even hundreds of millions of our years, and uniformitarianism could be accepted without any problem. (For an excellent discussion of this approach see Henry Eyring, “The Gospel and the Age of the Earth,” [Improvement Era, July 1965, pp. 608–9, 626, 628]. Also, most college textbooks in the natural sciences discuss the traditional dating of the earth.)
While it is interesting to note these various theories, officially the Church has not taken a stand on the age of the earth. For reasons best known to Himself, the Lord has not yet seen fit to formally reveal the details of the Creation. Therefore, while Latter-day Saints are commanded to learn truth from many different fields of study (see D&C 88:77–79), an attempt to establish any theory as the official position of the Church is not justifiable.
But that leaves one problem. Can you find an LDS source supporting the idea of death before the fall? I can only find it in the other direction:
Quote:Latter-day revelation teaches that there was no death on this earth before the Fall of Adam. Indeed, death entered the world as a direct result of the Fall (2 Ne. 2:22; Moses 6:48).
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd/death Quote:Before the Fall, there were no sin, no death, and no children.
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd/fall-of-adam-and-eve?lang=eng Quote:“There was no death in the earth before the fall of Adam. …
“The gospel teaches us that if Adam and Eve had not partaken of that fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they would have remained in the Garden of Eden in that same condition prevailing before the fall. … In regard to the pre-mortal condition of Adam and the entire earth, Lehi has stated the following:
“‘And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end’ [2 Nephi 2:22]” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1:108–9).
This is still the predominant published position of the church.
I managed to find some obscure quotes from Elder James E Talmage.
Elder James E. Talmage said,
Quote:“life and death have been in existence and operative in this earth for ages prior to [Adam].”
Talmage to Heber Timothy, 28 Jan. 1932, Talmage Papers; cited in Richard Sherlock, “A Turbulent Spectrum: Mormon Responses to the Darwinist Legacy,” Journal of Mormon History 4:? (1975): 45–69.Quote:The oldest, that is to say the earliest, rocks thus far identified in land masses reveal the fossilized remains of once living organisms, plant and animal. The coal strata, upon which the world of industry so largely depends, are essentially but highly compressed and chemically changed vegetable substance. The whole series of chalk deposits and many of our deep-sea limestones contain the skeletal remains of animals. These lived and died, age after age, while the earth was yet unfit for human habitation.
Address Delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Utah Sunday, 9 August 1931
http://en.fairmormon.org/Evolution:Primary_sources:Earth_and_Man With the approval of the First Presidency, this address was given in the Tabernacle and later published in the Deseret News, as a Church pamphlet, and in The Instructor. I’ve managed to dig and have found the talk quoted in the Ensign/on LDS.org
Quote:Latter-day Saints share Elder James E. Talmage’s conviction that “within the gospel of Jesus Christ there is room and place for every truth thus far learned by man, or yet to be made known.”
Foremost, the scriptures testify of Jesus Christ and how we may receive the blessings of salvation and exaltation through his atonement. They reveal why (not necessarily how) the earth was created, and what laws and principles a person must follow to obtain eternal life. The goal of science, on the other hand, is to learn how (not why) the world was made and to understand the laws and principles governing the physical world.
The different roles science and religion play is illustrated in a study of the dinosaurs. From the fossil record we learn that the dinosaurs were the dominant animals on earth between 225 and 67 million years ago. Some were carnivorous, others herbivorous. Some were small, while others were gigantic, weighing up to eighty tons and growing to lengths of more than ninety feet.
The existence of these animals is indisputable, for their remains have been found in rocks all over the earth. What eternal purpose they played in the creation and early history of the earth is unknown. The scriptures do not address the question, and it is not the realm of science to explore the issue of why they were here. We can only conclude, as Elder Talmage did, that “the whole series of chalk deposits and many of our deep-sea limestones contain the skeletal remains of animals. These lived and died, age after age, while the earth was yet unfit for human habitation.” (“The Earth and Man.”)
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/09/i-have-a-question?lang=eng The talk was briefly referenced in a January 1998 article:
http://www.lds.org/ensign/print/1998/01/in-the-beginning-a-latter-day-perspective?lang=eng&clang=eng Unfortunately (some might say), Joseph Fielding Smith, followed by his son in law Bruce R. McConkie disagreed with Elder Talmage and ensured that from the 1960s onwards the “no death before the fall” message became embedded in LDS consciousness.
In the end this whole thing reminds me that I have to continually lower my expectations of what doctrines a prophet can proclaim with certainty or authority. I think the only thing we should expect them to teach are the “doctrine of Christ.” All of other LDS “doctrines” (and I mean all of them) seem like transient opinions based on the environment the leader has been raised in.
Quote:The Prophet Joseph Smith confirmed the Savior’s central role in our doctrine in one definitive sentence: “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and
all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”
http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/the-doctrine-of-christ?lang=eng The spirit might still teach me to live and apply the other teachings or “doctrines.” But that doesn’t make them God’s universal reality for the whole world. Just a man-made toolkit to be applied to my life and a small minority of fellow saints. Not doctrines, simply personalised principles applicable to my circumstances.
A 7,000 year old earth was off topic in the thread where it was one of 7 points brought up in a lawsuit, I suppose it is off topic in a thread about a new seminary manual where it is surely less than 1/7th of the material presented. 
The things I hear most often:
Creative periods called “days.” I’ve heard a wide range of things. The low estimate: a day is a thousand years unto the Lord = creation lasted 7 thousand years. The higher estimate: creation took millions and millions of years, a certain period was called a “day” when certain goals were accomplished, not when a certain amount of time had passed. I almost never hear a day of creation was a period of 24 hours anymore. If the 24 hour day is mentioned the answer to reconcile with science then becomes the earth was formed out of existing material that was ancient.
- The verse in D&C goes out of the way to mention that the 7000 years refers to the
temporal existenceof the earth, the time since the fall. The age of the planet is a separate issue, one that has largely already been rationalized away. There is still the issue that science generally believes that the human race has been around for longer than 6,000 years. - There’s the whole theory of evolution to deal with. Evolution requires death, strife, enmity to function. Things that supposedly did not exist before the fall. I’ve heard theories to reconcile science and doctrine in this regard as well. The garden of eden was a small location where death didn’t exist and meanwhile the rest of the world was raging. Another theory that evolution was allowed to take it’s course (death in the world) during creation and at a certain point the earth was made into a garden of eden where there was no longer death, etc. (but the fossilized record of the earth remained), afterwards there was a fall back to the previous state of death. I’ve heard many other things as well.
It’s a fruitless exercise. Interpretations will shift to conform to accepted science, science will be viewed as evil, etc. How will it all affect my daily life? As it turns out not that much. To me it just serves as a reminder to not get so locked down in one set of beliefs as to let that set of beliefs take me down the path of contention or close mindedness.
I once had a teacher in college explain the 7000 years thing. He used the theory of relativity which states the faster you get to light speed the more time slows down for you compared to things not traveling at light speed. Well he did this huge mathematical formula that stated 7000 years is equal to the 4.6 billion years the rocks tell us. It was pretty cool actually. As far as Adam and Eve and evolution goes I think most TBM’s are willing to accept evolution but not that we descended from apes. I think the laws of physics states that you can’t create something from nothing so God couldn’t just create man from nothing. I think he probably used evolution to help create new life forms to make that jump from water to land and so on. I don’t believe that Adam and Eve were the only humans on the earth at the time of The Fall – among other things, it would have meant their sons and daughters would have to marry (and procreate with) *each other.* Ick. You can’t propagate a species with only two members since the lack of genetic diversity will make it super inbred and unstable – a point I brought up to my husband about a million times when we were watching the movie ‘Rio.’
😆 Doesn’t really explain and in fact contradicts This
http://m.phys.org/news/2011-02-scientists-oldest-sub-arctic-human.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://m.phys.org/news/2011-02-scientists-oldest-sub-arctic-human.html As well as this
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ötzihttp://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ötzi” class=”bbcode_url”> As well as 30,000-40,000 year old art from humans in caves
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_paintinghttp://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_painting” class=”bbcode_url”> These are facts that don’t fit the explanation or theory-crafting of the manual.
I wouldn’t want my future child to think these things are false or wrong, they are what they are and except it.
Can we make a educationally and emotionally healthy manual that fit the known facts? I hope so, for my future kids sake.
As the “artful” one 😆 , I simply will point out that much of this can be laid at the feet of literalism (and over-extrapolation / over-generalization). It can be explained as the result of expanding something beyond the necessary meaning. There are plenty of ways to reconcile the Book of Mormon reference to death and the Fall, but it requires a non-comprehensive, non-literal perspective that most people simply lack. Thus, my disagreements, at the most fundamental level, aren’t with the conclusions (although I disagree with them) but rather the paradigms that produce them.Change the paradigms and the conclusions change automatically.It is very easy for me to construct a solid, reasonable argument for a different paradigm – but it’s very difficult for many other people to do that. Fine. I’ll continue to share my paradigm within the circle of my own influence and use statements like this new one to support it.
Interestingly, the following posted on my personal blog today. I wrote it prior to this conversation beginning:
“
I See How I See, and Others See How They Need to See” ( http://thingsofmysoul.blogspot.com/2014/02/i-see-how-i-need-to-see-and-others-see.html
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.