Created From The Dust Of The Earth?

[Snow]

<div class='quotemain'>

Interesting concept and idea about Adam - I am under the impression that Adam was the first man. If there were other "first" then I can understand your concept.

I personally believe that every planet has its own "Adam," or first man to live upon it. In that sense, Adam could have been born from a woman in another place, and then placed on our planet and still be "the first man." I'm not even saying I believe Adam was born, versus being created "from scratch," but either theory makes more sense to me than God using evolution to create man in His image.

Just one problem with that thought...

...science.

[CrimsonKairos]

I didn't say I don't believe in evolution. In fact, in an earlier post in this thread I said I do believe God used a form of evolution during the six "days" of earth's physical creation. I simply don't find science's theories and interpretations of data to be compelling as regards man's "evolution" from other life forms.

[pushka]

Can anyone give me any explanation as to why our embryos develop with gills and a tail for any other reason that that these are throw-backs to the origin of our species in the very first place...Ie. as amoeba/sea creatures?

[CrimsonKairos]

Ever tried breathing amniotic fluid through your nose? Gills are the only way to go. j/k

[Traveler]

I just thought I would add a thought for those interested in the science of evolution.

There are two ways science has been able to prove evolutionary changes.

The first is in altering DNA. This is when the DNA becomes altered or damaged (this includes replication error). Most often we think of these alterations as defects. We can track DNA alterations in various species in large populations over just a few generations. We know this happens in all life forms - and yes that includes humans - which leaves me to wonder based on some previous post if the image of G-d is really to be considered in human DNA.

The second process of evolution comes from abnormalities in reading the DNA or when the process of reading the DNA within a cell - hick ups and the replication process develops a new DNA code.

One theory concerning evolution is that such changes are most usually random. The other is that there are factors (perhaps unknown) that are direct causes of such changes. I personally think the random theory is nuts - just because one cannot pin point a cause in the first few attempts does not mean that a direct cause does not exist - the whole history of science if full of new discovery of causes.

The Traveler

[Gwen]

first i'll admit that i have not read this topic in entirety, so if my thoughts don't fully fit sorry. lol

i personally beleive in eveloution within a species, and i think there is more than enough science to support that.

i do not beleive in eveloution between species, monkeys (or lizards, or anything else) to humans theory.

yes i know that science has shown some similarities between the species that is very interestig. i personally see it as proof of a creator, a God who is creator of us.

how many of you can look at a painting and guess with accuracy who the painter was, or listen to a song and know the artist, or look at a house and know who the architect is? all intelegences, ppl, spirit, souls, (whatever you want to call it) have a personality that is unique to them. if there is one god, one creator, and this world is his creation, or art so to speak, would there not be similarities? maybe the similarities are just a reflection upon the personality of our creator?

just my thoughts on eveloution.

[Traveler]

first i'll admit that i have not read this topic in entirety, so if my thoughts don't fully fit sorry. lol

i personally beleive in eveloution within a species, and i think there is more than enough science to support that.

i do not beleive in eveloution between species, monkeys (or lizards, or anything else) to humans theory.

yes i know that science has shown some similarities between the species that is very interestig. i personally see it as proof of a creator, a God who is creator of us.

how many of you can look at a painting and guess with accuracy who the painter was, or listen to a song and know the artist, or look at a house and know who the architect is? all intelegences, ppl, spirit, souls, (whatever you want to call it) have a personality that is unique to them. if there is one god, one creator, and this world is his creation, or art so to speak, would there not be similarities? maybe the similarities are just a reflection upon the personality of our creator?

just my thoughts on eveloution.

You know that when you say you do not believe in evolution between species you imply that G-d would not or could not do such a thing. Why do you not believe he would or could cause evolution between species?

The Traveler

[CrimsonKairos]

Why would He?

[Gwen]

i never said he could not. but i beleive he would not. and i know that is my opinion and i base this off of the command to multiply and reproduce after own kind. a command given to every living thing capable of reproducing even the plants. an apple tree will never produce peaches or grapes. a monkey will never produce a human. a pig will never produce an elephant. that is just the way he set it up. that's how i see it anyway.

[prisonchaplain]

Why would He?

Evolution is similar to dyslexia, bipolar disorder, A.D.D., etc.--everyone seems to have their own definition, and the terms are muddied and probably overused. Macro-Evolution, if I'm not mistaken, means that species can evolve into other species. I've been led to believe the evidence for this is not concrete. If such was true, it would not counter the creation accounts of Genesis, but it is a less obvious pattern than God simply creating the species, and letting them adapt (micro-evolution) to their surroundings.

[Traveler]

Why would He?

i never said he could not. but i beleive he would not. and i know that is my opinion and i base this off of the command to multiply and reproduce after own kind. a command given to every living thing capable of reproducing even the plants. an apple tree will never produce peaches or grapes. a monkey will never produce a human. a pig will never produce an elephant. that is just the way he set it up. that's how i see it anyway.

My friends, please understand that I am not trying to find fault in your post or criticize your thinking. I do, however, wonder if there is basis for your reasoning. I am concerned because much of the basis and reason you have provided, I have also considered but have reached almost an opposite conclusion.

Considering the question - is it possible that G-d utilized the natural laws and principles of evolution to create and establish the vast variety of species of living things.

Point 1. G-d utilizes natural principles and laws to accomplish his purposes. His is a realm is a realm of light, knowledge, intelligence and discipline. Not a realm of magic, secrets, hidden and unknowable things or chance (things that occur outside of knowable principles).

Point 2. G-d expects man (that was created in the image of G-d) to think, act and accomplish the things that G-d has provided as example.

Consider the following: (I have included all of chapter 19)

Psalms 19:

1 ¶ TO the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.

3 [There is] no speech nor language, [where] their voice is not heard.

4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,

5 Which [is] as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, [and] rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.

6 His going forth [is] from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

7 ¶ The law of the LORD [is] perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD [is] sure, making wise the simple.

8 The statutes of the LORD [are] right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD [is] pure, enlightening the eyes.

9 The fear of the LORD [is] clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD [are] true [and] righteous altogether.

10 More to be desired [are they] than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: [and] in keeping of them [there is] great reward.

12 Who can understand [his] errors? cleanse thou me from secret [faults].

13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous [sins]; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.

One of the interesting concepts is that G-d commanded all things to reproduce after their own kind. This command is given in verse 28 of Genesis chapter 1 after the creation was accomplished. Now I ask - Why did he do that? Because, previously, it was possible for things to reproduce beyond their own kind? If it was not possible or somehow able to take place; Why would he utter a commandment to bring about a change?

I do not know for sure how G-d established the vast species, therefore I cannot with conviction or presumption say how G-d did or did not do his work. But knowing that the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork; I personally have not found any evidence (other than opinion) that would suggest a different method other than evolution.

If you know of a more observable, demonstrable or reasonable means from the nature around us - I would very much be interested in considering what you have found.

BTW: The last time I checked evolution was the only possible method taught at Brigham Young University as the scientific solution to life in all it varieties.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

Why would He?

Evolution is similar to dyslexia, bipolar disorder, A.D.D., etc.--everyone seems to have their own definition, and the terms are muddied and probably overused. Macro-Evolution, if I'm not mistaken, means that species can evolve into other species. I've been led to believe the evidence for this is not concrete. If such was true, it would not counter the creation accounts of Genesis, but it is a less obvious pattern than God simply creating the species, and letting them adapt (micro-evolution) to their surroundings.

As far as scientific evidence I thing we could say the evidence of evolution is not complete - It is my opinion that saying not concrete is a little misleading. Of all possibilities - evolution is the most concrete.

I think it is quite possible that G-d genetically engineered DNA to create a new species. There are several scientist that currently believe that genetic engineering of DNA is advanced now to the point that new species are possible. Most likely we will see this done within the next 10 years if not sooner.

I am not saying this is the only possible way G-d created the variety of species - I just do not understand why so many are so willing to discount completely this possibility. Especially in light of the evidence available to us - This concept does not in any way mean there is no G-d.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

As far as scientific evidence I thing we could say the evidence of evolution is not complete - It is my opinion that saying not concrete is a little misleading. Of all possibilities - evolution is the most concrete.

Now I am confused. I thought you had discounted macro-evolution, prefering the notion that God created the species. I'm no expert, but again, is there solid evidence of macro-evolution?

I think it is quite possible that G-d genetically engineered DNA to create a new species. There are several scientist that currently believe that genetic engineering of DNA is advanced now to the point that new species are possible. Most likely we will see this done within the next 10 years if not sooner.

I am not saying this is the only possible way G-d created the variety of species - I just do not understand why so many are so willing to discount completely this possibility. Especially in light of the evidence available to us - This concept does not in any way mean there is no G-d.

The Traveler

It's interesting that you added that last sentence. Your suggestion does hint at God creating us in the same way we might create a new species. We're close to the same ground of treading with Serg on another string. God, here, is starting to look like a very advanced species, rather than the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent and eternally existent God I've worshiped for most of my life.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

As far as scientific evidence I thing we could say the evidence of evolution is not complete - It is my opinion that saying not concrete is a little misleading. Of all possibilities - evolution is the most concrete.

Now I am confused. I thought you had discounted macro-evolution, prefering the notion that God created the species. I'm no expert, but again, is there solid evidence of macro-evolution?

I think it is quite possible that G-d genetically engineered DNA to create a new species. There are several scientist that currently believe that genetic engineering of DNA is advanced now to the point that new species are possible. Most likely we will see this done within the next 10 years if not sooner.

I am not saying this is the only possible way G-d created the variety of species - I just do not understand why so many are so willing to discount completely this possibility. Especially in light of the evidence available to us - This concept does not in any way mean there is no G-d.

The Traveler

It's interesting that you added that last sentence. Your suggestion does hint at God creating us in the same way we might create a new species. We're close to the same ground of treading with Serg on another string. God, here, is starting to look like a very advanced species, rather than the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent and eternally existent God I've worshiped for most of my life.

Perhaps you have me mixed up with most other LDS. In general I have found resistance in the religious community (especially those weak in scientific experience) to what is termed macro-evolution. I do not possess something from G-d beyond what is available to everyone else that allows me to say with conviction that evolution is the very method G-d used to generate (genesis) all the variety of life. What I have said that as I consider all the evidence - evolution looks to be to be, by far, the best candidate. I would point out that to me the scriptures do not give strong indication as to how G-d generated the various species beyond the statement that he did it.

There is an interesting scripture in John 8:31-32. One of the notions I have gleaned from this scripture is that if we had the truth of what G-d has done and apply the correct principles (as he did/or does) that we could accomplish the same result. This is in part what I understand of man being created in the "image" of G-d. I do not see how this diminishes the greatness or glory of G-d, in fact, I believe it gives greater reason and purpose to have faith in him and to trust in his gift of “eternal life”.

Something else I find interesting in this kind of discussion is that often when I am debating the existence of G-d with atheist - I begin by asking the question: “Is it possible that there exist an intelligence or intelligences operating within the universe that are calculable greater than man’s and able to modify the environment more intelligently than man?” I then proceed to add the thought that as long as the possibility of greater intelligence than man’s exist there are two important notions. First - that we should not discount the possibility of G-d (such action could prove to be foolish without contrary evidence) and Second - that we should seek to advance ourselves and our society. Finely I add the idea that once these notions are conceded we have formulated the essence (beginning if you will) of a belief and faith in G-d.

Also from my discussions with atheist I often encounter the concept that G-d is defined as the only being capable of certain things or possessing certain knowledge. Then when it has been established that such things and knowledge is obtainable by man through science or other methods, then they think that G-d is disproved - And this is why they do not believe in G-d. To which I add - Strange as it may seem this is one of the very reasons I believe there really is a G-d.

The Traveler

[Gwen]

My friends, please understand that I am not trying to find fault in your post or criticize your thinking. I do, however, wonder if there is basis for your reasoning. I am concerned because much of the basis and reason you have provided, I have also considered but have reached almost an opposite conclusion.

Considering the question - is it possible that G-d utilized the natural laws and principles of evolution to create and establish the vast variety of species of living things.

Point 1. G-d utilizes natural principles and laws to accomplish his purposes. His is a realm is a realm of light, knowledge, intelligence and discipline. Not a realm of magic, secrets, hidden and unknowable things or chance (things that occur outside of knowable principles).

Point 2. G-d expects man (that was created in the image of G-d) to think, act and accomplish the things that G-d has provided as example.

One of the interesting concepts is that G-d commanded all things to reproduce after their own kind. This command is given in verse 28 of Genesis chapter 1 after the creation was accomplished. Now I ask - Why did he do that? Because, previously, it was possible for things to reproduce beyond their own kind? If it was not possible or somehow able to take place; Why would he utter a commandment to bring about a change?

The Traveler

no hard feelings of fault finding from me. this topic is a realm of majority opinion on everyones part. :) i too find it interesting how so many can ponder the same scriputres and same scientific evidence and have so many different views to it all.

your point 1 i too agree with and beleive. that is why i think he did not change species to species. i can't give you any more reason than i already have as to why i see it this way, but i do.

point 2 i aslo agree with which is why i beleive scientist have no business messing arround in labs trying to clone and change one thing into another. there is a purpose for science and it has done wonders, but we can go to far. we were given a method of creating life and it wasn't in a test tube.

your take on the command to reproduce after thier own kind. that i find a very interesting perspecitve. it will give me something to ponder, however, doesn't change my opinions. :) again, it may be possible but not what was intended for this earth. part of my perspective on that command was to reinforce we were to reproduce. given the cost, the long term responsibility, and the difficulty in raising offspring, and just bringing them into this world we probably would have ended the species long ago. the command alone wasn't enough to ensure our contiunation so we were also give a very strong desire and payoff to ensure we took the risk to begin with. but that is the other thread. lol

but thank you for your perspective, it will be fun to ponder. i guess we'll all get our answers when we return home.

[prisonchaplain]

Your thoughts in #64 are fascinating, Traveler. Interesting approach to the atheist. They may be more amenable we traditionalists. :-) I'm going to think on them.

[mdb]

I've had this question for quite awhile now, any insight would be greatly appreciated...

Was Adam really created from the dust of the earth? I've read several times from differnet LDS prophets and scholars that a man can not be created in any other way than that of which we know now, which is by procreation. If this is the case, who are adams parents? who begot adam?

And wine cannot be made in any other way than that of which we know, and that from grapes - except for when our Lord makes it from water because He is all powerful and able. And how can a tree whither under rebuke, a sea part in two, a wooden staff be made a snake, a storm calmed, and Jesus walk on water but by some way men can understand - except for by the power of God?

All creation came into existence by God's powerful word and even light was created when He spoke into darkness and said it should be so. I would contend that (as it says in the Scriptures) nothing is impossible for God. As He made you from a sperm and egg so small you need a microscope to see it, He can make Adam out of dust and Eve from a rib.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

I've had this question for quite awhile now, any insight would be greatly appreciated...

Was Adam really created from the dust of the earth? I've read several times from differnet LDS prophets and scholars that a man can not be created in any other way than that of which we know now, which is by procreation. If this is the case, who are adams parents? who begot adam?

And wine cannot be made in any other way than that of which we know, and that from grapes - except for when our Lord makes it from water because He is all powerful and able. And how can a tree whither under rebuke, a sea part in two, a wooden staff be made a snake, a storm calmed, and Jesus walk on water but by some way men can understand - except for by the power of God?

All creation came into existence by God's powerful word and even light was created when He spoke into darkness and said it should be so. I would contend that (as it says in the Scriptures) nothing is impossible for God. As He made you from a sperm and egg so small you need a microscope to see it, He can make Adam out of dust and Eve from a rib.

Then I assume that your position on this matter is that G-d has not been consistent in his creation of man?

The Traveler

[Maureen]

And wine cannot be made in any other way than that of which we know, and that from grapes - except for when our Lord makes it from water because He is all powerful and able. And how can a tree whither under rebuke, a sea part in two, a wooden staff be made a snake, a storm calmed, and Jesus walk on water but by some way men can understand - except for by the power of God?

All creation came into existence by God's powerful word and even light was created when He spoke into darkness and said it should be so. I would contend that (as it says in the Scriptures) nothing is impossible for God. As He made you from a sperm and egg so small you need a microscope to see it, He can make Adam out of dust and Eve from a rib.

Got to agree that God is all powerful, but the dust and rib I don't take as literal; mankind is older than Adam and Eve.

M.

[Guest MrsS]

And wine cannot be made in any other way than that of which we know, and that from grapes -

Um, wine can be made from any fruit not just grapes!

Just my nit-picking worth!

[Dr T]

MrsS is right