Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Public forum to discuss questions about Mormon history and doctrine.
Brown
Posts: 344
Joined: 28 Feb 2011, 01:23

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by Brown » 06 Feb 2012, 18:51

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.

User avatar
wayfarer
Posts: 1335
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 15:59
Location: in ye olde world
Contact:

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by wayfarer » 06 Feb 2012, 21:50

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.
"Those who speak don't know, those who know don't speak." Lao Tzu.
My seat in the bloggernacle: http://wayfaringfool.blogspot.com

jeffwalshgen
Posts: 22
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 08:17

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by jeffwalshgen » 07 Feb 2012, 05:03

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

jeffwalshgen
Posts: 22
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 08:17

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by jeffwalshgen » 07 Feb 2012, 06:41

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

jeffwalshgen
Posts: 22
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 08:17

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by jeffwalshgen » 07 Feb 2012, 06:56

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

jeffwalshgen
Posts: 22
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 08:17

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by jeffwalshgen » 07 Feb 2012, 07:39

Hi GB SMITH Sorry I referred to you as JB in the last post I was for a moment back in SL going to JB's for breakfast my keyboard has a life of its own sometimes, just another thought about your post, as we are all spirit children with the same parents, then we are to a certain extent all inbreeding, this would only apply to Adam's children marrying each other, then the next generation could be pared up together as cousins, then half cousins etc. Just a thought hope it helps Jeff Walsh

User avatar
Brian Johnston
Site Admin
Posts: 3486
Joined: 22 Oct 2008, 06:17
Location: Washington DC

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by Brian Johnston » 07 Feb 2012, 08:04

I'm a little late on this in the comment stream, but wanted to make a small point: When Joseph Smith or other early leaders talked about things being accurate as long as they were "translated correctly," they were NOT talking about academic, technical language translation.

They had a more magical and spiritual view of the word "translation." To them, it meant more about making hidden things revealed, or to improve upon existing "truths" through a process similar to Jewish Midrash tradition (although I am not sure they understood the differences we are talking about).

The best example of how they understood this was the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. This was one of JS's great passions. We all know that he wasn't working on source manuscripts or with ancient languages. It is an open historical story even in our Correlated version of Church history. He was reading the King James English Bible, and then riffing on it via revelation from "The Spirit." He was translating English to English :shock: and adding what he thought were corrections to make the meaning more clear (or to fit into his theology better). This was "translation" to him.

The Book of Moses, Book of Abraham, and to a large extent The Book of Mormon were "translated" in similar ways.

It leaves the door wide-open to further diversity of thought, IMHO.
"It's strange to be here. The mystery never leaves you alone." -John O'Donohue, Anam Cara, speaking of experiencing life.

User avatar
cwald
Posts: 3628
Joined: 10 Aug 2015, 06:39

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by cwald » 07 Feb 2012, 08:40

Well Jeff, that is interesting. You sound like a very fundamental and traditional Mormon. I have no problem with your faith, and your belief in a literal Adam and Eve and the whole Noah's Flood thing. But you won't answer my question.

Do I have to believe it? Is there room in this church for those like Wayfarer and myself who just cannot accept a literal translation of the Bible stories you have mentioned, and perhaps see it as only mythology meant to teach man spiritual truths about the nature of humans and their relation with the gods?
  Jesus gave us the gospel, but Satan invented church. It takes serious evil to formalize faith into something tedious and then pile guilt on anyone who doesn't participate enthusiastically. - Robert Kirby

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16014
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by Curt Sunshine » 07 Feb 2012, 09:12

I'll let Jeff answer for himself, but my own answers and short commentary:
Do I have to believe it?


No.
Is there room in this church for those like Wayfarer and myself who just cannot accept a literal translation of the Bible stories you have mentioned, and perhaps see it as only mythology meant to teach man spiritual truths about the nature of humans and their relation with the gods?


Yes.

I say that for two reasons:

1) There certainly is room in the Church for me;

2) There certainty has been room in the Church for apostles and Prophets who would have and did state their views in very similar terms.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

GBSmith
Posts: 967
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 08:51

Re: Confusion about Adam and Eve:

Post by GBSmith » 07 Feb 2012, 09:17

cwald wrote:Well Jeff, that is interesting. You sound like a very fundamental and traditional Mormon. I have no problem with your faith, and your belief in a literal Adam and Eve and the whole Noah's Flood thing. But you won't answer my question.

Do I have to believe it? Is there room in this church for those like Wayfarer and myself who just cannot accept a literal translation of the Bible stories you have mentioned, and perhaps see it as only mythology meant to teach man spiritual truths about the nature of humans and their relation with the gods?
I remember an Ensign article in the last 10-12 years on the flood and at one point the author said something to the effect that no true Latter-Day Saint would not believe in a literal world wide flood. Well, I didn't then and I don't now and I realized that believing this sort of thing has precioius little to with staying LDS. It doesn't get the home teaching done or a roof on someone's house or food for a single mom or dad that's out of work. It doesn't get the girls to girls camp or boys to their summer 50 miler or comfort someone who's lost a spouse, a child, or a parent. It has nothing to do with trying to be a decent person or a good neighbor or a better spouse or parent. So until someone tells me I have to believe in this version of things, I won't and if possible try to be what I'm supposed to be, that is an LDS version of a Christian. I've not made it yet but then I'm still above ground and there's still daylight.

Post Reply