belly button


Stidgeion
 Share

Recommended Posts

John 4:24 God is a Spirit

Gordon B. Hinckley

“I remember the occasion of more than 50 years ago when, as a missionary, I was speaking in an open-air meeting in Hyde Park, London. As I was presenting my message, a heckler interrupted to say, ‘Why don’t you stay with the doctrine of the Bible which says in John [4:24], God is a Spirit?’

“I opened my Bible to the verse he had quoted and read to him the entire verse: ‘God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.’

“I said, ‘Of course God is a spirit, and so are you, in the combination of spirit and body that makes of you a living being, and so am I.’

“Each of us is a dual being of spiritual entity and physical entity. All know of the reality of death when the body dies, and each of us also knows that the spirit lives on as an individual entity and that at some time, under the divine plan made possible by the sacrifice of the Son of God, there will be a reunion of spirit and body. Jesus’ declaration that God is a spirit no more denies that he has a body than does the statement that I am a spirit while also having a body.

“I do not equate my body with His in its refinement, in its capacity, in its beauty and radiance. His is eternal. Mine is mortal. But that only increases my reverence for Him. I worship Him ‘in spirit and in truth.’ I look to Him as my strength. I pray to Him for wisdom beyond my own. I seek to love Him with all my heart, might, mind, and strength. His wisdom is greater than the wisdom of all men. His power is greater than the power of nature, for He is the Creator Omnipotent. His love is greater than the love of any other, for His love encompasses all of His children, and it is His work and His glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of His sons and daughters of all generations (see Moses 1:39).” (“The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,” Ensign, Mar. 1998, 4)

Eldred G. Smith

’The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's, the Son also.’ (D&C 130:22.)

“Now John says, ‘God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.’ (John 4:24.)

“Man is also a spirit clothed with flesh and bones, so, too, is God. Again the Lord has said in modern revelation ‘For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy.’ (D&C 93:33.) Birth is the uniting of this spirit and elements of physical bodies. Death is the separation. The resurrection is the reuniting of the spirit and the physical body, which the Lord says, ‘inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy.’(Conference Report, October 1961, Afternoon Meeting 27.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Speak for yourself. It may be likely that you couldn't understand it but I have a general understanding of how people are born.

I wasn't talking about 'people.' Why do you insist on taking what I say out of context. We were talking about the original creation of Adam and Eve's body before the breath of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't talking about 'people.' Why do you insist on taking what I say out of context. We were talking about the original creation of Adam and Eve's body before the breath of life.

Wrong. I took nothing out of context. In a discussion about PEOPLE'S belly buttons you said:

"Because Bruce R. McConkie says that the nature of the creation of Adam and Eve is unknown and will be revealed to the saints at some future time. Likely, because we couldn't understand it. If that is the case, why would I think it is anything like what we know to be birth and 'creation' in that sense? It would not be like any person you or I have met."

That is exactly the context. Read your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not exactly true. There are two separate and different creation myths in Genesis.

Genesis 1: Man and woman are created simultaneous - no description of the creative process is given. The story is the newer of the two and may have been written as late as the 5th century BCE.

Genesis 2: Man is created first, out of the dust and afterwards, Eve is created from Adam's rib. This is the older story and dates to about 1000 BCE from southern tradition.

Snow, problem with this assessment is the Book of Moses was given as direct revelation to Joseph Smith. It provides the same scenario as the Book of Genesis. There is no latitude given with the story in Genesis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snow, problem with this assessment is the Book of Moses was given as direct revelation to Joseph Smith. It provides the same scenario as the Book of Genesis. There is no latitude given with the story in Genesis.

Regardless of whether there are or are not conflicting accounts in the Book of Moses, there are, in fact, two contradictory accounts in the Book of Genesis. One in Chapter 1, and one in Chapter 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have asked a question – Where in scripture does it talk about the creation of Adam separate from “man”? Also it appears to me that the scriptures testify that the observable characteristics of man are in the “image” and “likeness” of G-d. If there is an exception – is there a scripture that justifies that exception?

I am beginning to wonder if certain people that say they believe scripture really do. Birth is an integral part of man’s relationship with and understanding of G-d. There is nothing more symbolic of man’s birth than a bellybutton. It is not like for 6,000 years man was not aware he had a bellybutton and was born. To separate this from creation and isolate man mocks the scripture that man is the image and likeness of G-d.

What are we to understand about this discussion? Are we not really in the image and likeness of G-d if we have a bellybutton?

Since I believe I am in the image and likeness of G-d – I observe that I have a bellybutton. Therefore, I accept the notion that G-d also has a bellybutton and so does Adam. Is there scripture to refute this notion of mine? Please provide this in scripture or wherever and let’s discuss it.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have asked a question – Where in scripture does it talk about the creation of Adam separate from “man”? Also it appears to me that the scriptures testify that the observable characteristics of man are in the “image” and “likeness” of G-d. If there is an exception – is there a scripture that justifies that exception?

I am beginning to wonder if certain people that say they believe scripture really do. Birth is an integral part of man’s relationship with and understanding of G-d. There is nothing more symbolic of man’s birth than a bellybutton. It is not like for 6,000 years man was not aware he had a bellybutton and was born. To separate this from creation and isolate man mocks the scripture that man is the image and likeness of G-d.

What are we to understand about this discussion? Are we not really in the image and likeness of G-d if we have a bellybutton?

Since I believe I am in the image and likeness of G-d – I observe that I have a bellybutton. Therefore, I accept the notion that G-d also has a bellybutton and so does Adam. Is there scripture to refute this notion of mine? Please provide this in scripture or wherever and let’s discuss it.

The Traveler

If you have a mole on the left side of your nose, do you then believe that God does too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"there is one before it." Says nothing as to the mechanism in which it was made. I agree we don't know how it was done, except those that have seen it and in the afterlife we will recall all we already knew about it. But just to say there is one before it could simply mean that this is how it was done before and always done, it doesn't mean that "Adam" was born to someone. If I find a 'perfect' computer, I can create that computer from scratch without taking any parts from the other one but using the same design. So there was one before but, one did not produce the other. It is just a replica of the previous. And if that perfect replica in the image of God is the same model God uses then it is God (in form). "there is one before it" says nothing as to the relationship that physical body has with God or how it is made. It doesn't have to be in the manner in which corrupted bodies reproduce themselves. We don't know that.

Let correct the last statement: “Yes! We can know what was, what is, what will be. It is up to you to find it.”

As I read your post, if you are implying our beloved FATHER is the first among ADAMS, I don't believe HE was! Even our location in this finite universe what is term Heaven for us, it is not the Universe center but what is local to our own galaxy cluster. This means, there is more than our own FATHER here…and this doesn’t places our beloved FATHER less than any other in the same realm.

Now, as the Savior stated in the New Testament, mentioning He only followed the example of what the FATHER did – meaning – being a Savior. If that is the case, even our beloved FATHER had a FATHER who created HIM. Joseph Smith learned and stated this as he was translating the Bible through revelation. We can believe it or not to believe it, it is your choice.

It goes to reason, every earth has the same play but filled with different actors… ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have the evidence that we are now mortal. Adam and Eve fell from their immortal state, meaning there was a consequence for a real act they made in transgression.

God would never punish anyone as the result of an allegory.

I believe Adam and Eve were both born as infants. :) All very good questions you ask, that I fear enough people don't ask themselves as they read the scriptures.

Not only members do not question what is given, they have no desire to see it for themselves. Joseph Smith set the pattern when he asked to see what John saw on the Isle of Patmos. I follow the same example...if I do not understand it by Spirit, then would ask to view it myself.

Concur with your statement "God would never punish anyone as the result of an allegory."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a mole on the left side of your nose, do you then believe that God does too?

Yes I do if it is part of the "nature" of my species and present in all of my "kind". Otherwise it is an unimportant variation unique to me.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have asked a question – Where in scripture does it talk about the creation of Adam separate from “man”? Also it appears to me that the scriptures testify that the observable characteristics of man are in the “image” and “likeness” of G-d. If there is an exception – is there a scripture that justifies that exception?

I am beginning to wonder if certain people that say they believe scripture really do. Birth is an integral part of man’s relationship with and understanding of G-d. There is nothing more symbolic of man’s birth than a bellybutton. It is not like for 6,000 years man was not aware he had a bellybutton and was born. To separate this from creation and isolate man mocks the scripture that man is the image and likeness of G-d.

What are we to understand about this discussion? Are we not really in the image and likeness of G-d if we have a bellybutton?

Since I believe I am in the image and likeness of G-d – I observe that I have a bellybutton. Therefore, I accept the notion that G-d also has a bellybutton and so does Adam. Is there scripture to refute this notion of mine? Please provide this in scripture or wherever and let’s discuss it.

The Traveler

MOSES 3:19 And out of the ground I, the Lord God, formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and commanded that they should come unto Adam, to see what he would call them; and they were also living souls; for I, God, breathed into them the breath of life, and commanded that whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that should be the name thereof.

Previous versus to 19 gives the term man. Why did GOD use the term man from previous versus and all of a sudden began calling this being - Adam - in verse 19? I can clearly see that he was called Adam from on the onset of creation and standing in GOD’s latchet shoes, to ease the understanding of the observer here – Moses – in depicting a perfect being perfect suddenly now receives a name later is not the case. Remember, I am not referring to Michael being Adam for our own creation but the gem of the story being told. What is the correlation of such vision with given statements of the earlier leaders of the church stating both Adam and Eve were borne into mortality? What was the intent of the FATHER in revealing this truth to Moses? Even Joseph Smith was quite on this subject and made no further explanation in writing with the exception of a closed door session with the Apostles and their wives. What was revealed to them is not written or revealed publicly for now…

Even my example of acceptance of being a recipient of visions, at that time of reception could not understand the mechanisms of such would receive an answer to match my understanding what was given. But later learned when spiritually mature enough come to that understanding what was really meant. How would you like to see the mechanism of Quantum Mechanics and then try to explain it with a immature mind? J

MOSES 3:22 And the rib which I, the Lord God, had taken from man, made I a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Elder B. H. Roberts admitted there is hidden mystery behind the rib story.

Now the man or Adam is now incomplete by the removal of such [less than 100-percent], we now have two halves that make a whole. So what is the whole real image? Was it just a rib itself or the complete physical and character makeover? Questions...questions and more questions!

Why did GOD use the term – brought? Was she created elsewhere? Or was it done in the garden itself? Remember, Adam was not created in the garden but 'brought' to the garden.

MOSES 3:23 And Adam said: This I know now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.

How did he know? We are missing account of instruction here after the removal of such bone or did Adam through experience learned for himself the ‘why’?

Edited by Hemidakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't know if they did or not...but if not, can you imagine the stress on eve when she had her first baby and there was an apparent whole in its stomach! imagine a brand new mother that has never seen a child before and doesn't have a belly button trying to process it!

Imagine a brand new mother scratching her head wondering why her stomach is getting so big... and then having to scream after 9 months, "There's a baby coming out WHERE????"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong. I took nothing out of context. In a discussion about PEOPLE'S belly buttons you said:

"Because Bruce R. McConkie says that the nature of the creation of Adam and Eve is unknown and will be revealed to the saints at some future time. Likely, because we couldn't understand it. If that is the case, why would I think it is anything like what we know to be birth and 'creation' in that sense? It would not be like any person you or I have met."

That is exactly the context. Read your post.

No, you are wrong! The OP clearly asks did Adam have a belly button, not people. That would be a very silly question, of course people have bellybuttons. And in the post you reacted to, I was responding to Vorts statement about why should we assume Adam's creation is any different from our births. I was answering his question. - that is why I posted his question before my statement, or did you miss that?

So to answer Vort's question I was stating that even Bruce R. McConkie says that we do not know all the details about it, the how and why, all we know is the when, "in the beginning." If he says we don't know the details about Adam and Eve's creation why would I assume it is anything like corrupted mortal birth. We already know the bodies are different, no blood. Umbilical cords transmit blood to the placenta and back. Well there is no blood! and we don't know how Adam's and Eve's body is made. What do you make of what Bruce R. McConkie said about that then?

And ... "Even so, some events related in Genesis 1–3 may be figurative in nature. For example, President Spencer W. Kimball taught: “ ‘And I, God, created man in mine own image, in the image of mine Only Begotten created I him; male and female created I them.’ [The story of the rib, of course, is figurative.]” 2 We have another example in the term used to describe the six creative periods. In the book of Abraham, the phases of creation are not called the “day” (Gen. 1:5, 8, 13) but “the second time,” “the third time” (Abr. 4:8, 13; emphasis added), and so forth. We therefore learn that periods of time for the Creation may have lasted 24 hours each, 1,000 years, or even millions of years. 3 The periods of time are indeterminate in length; as one phase of the creation was finished, the next began. Therefore the age of the earth before Adam and Eve could have been great indeed. 4

These figurative components invite us to think through those events and bring to our reading what we know from other sources. We may not be able to comprehend everything now, but the Lord Jesus Christ revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith that he will make all things related to these events known when he comes again (see D&C 101:32–34). Thus faith is introduced into our study; if we have faith in God and trust his word, all of the unanswered questions about the forepart of Genesis are of no great concern."

“All things not only are not known but must not be so convincingly clear as to eliminate the need for faith. That would nullify agency and defeat the purpose of the plan of salvation,” President Boyd K. Packer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why did GOD use the term – brought? Was she created elsewhere? Or was it done in the garden itself? Remember, Adam was not created in the garden but 'brought' to the garden.

MOSES 3:23 And Adam said: This I know now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.

How did he know? We are missing account of instruction here after the removal of such bone or did Adam through experience learned for himself the ‘why’?

YES!

I'm so glad you said this and are asking these questions here. Had I asked them I would be called a know-it-all.

There are answers to your questions, But, I suspect you know that. :)

I'll offer (I'll be careful) an opinion on the first question...

Perhaps Eve was born and brought to Adam when she was old enough? Adam references this by:

Genesis 2:

24 Therefore shall a man [or woman] leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: [or husband] and they shall be one flesh.

How did Adam know anything about a father and mother, and that kids should leave their parents at some point in time to become fathers or mothers themselves? If God created Adam and Eve how most people think He did, out of dust like clay, then how did Adam know anything about a mother?

This is the greatest evidence for Heavely Mother in the Bible IMO.

Many treasures to be found in the creation story.

Edited by Justice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

YES!

How did Adam know anything about a father and mother, and that kids should leave their parents at some point in time to become fathers or mothers themselves? If God created Adam and Eve how most people think He did, out of dust like clay, then how did Adam know anything about a mother?

This is the greatest evidence for Heavely Mother in the Bible IMO.

Many treasures to be found in the creation story.

Adam didn't write Genesis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam didn't write Genesis.

Is that your entire argument for not believing Adam and Eve were born?

Did you read Genesis 2?

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

It doesn't make any difference who wrote it. The fact is Moses was speaking about what Adam knew and about what Adam said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that your entire argument for not believing Adam and Eve were born?

Did you read Genesis 2?

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

It doesn't make any difference who wrote it. The fact is Moses was speaking about what Adam knew and about what Adam said.

Of course not. I was just saying that because you don't know how much is commentary by Moses, related to his earthly experience when he says "Therefore shall a man [or woman] leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: [or husband] and they shall be one flesh."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share