Moses, Genesis and the Temple

[Drpepper]

Im not sure if this is the right place for this question but here it is anyway.

I've noticed the book of Moses, genesis and the temple version of Adam and Eve are a little different. Which one am I suppose to believe?

[Anddenex]

I have wondered the same question and why they are minutely different. I have no good conclusion save it be that the different wording, or difference, may provide a different thought provoking experience to learn different knowledge.

[Drpepper]

Sometimes it's not just the wording but also the timing. In the temple Adam calls his wife Eve almost straight away but in Moses he does it after the transgression. Which to me would make more sense if she is the mother of all living...

[skippy740]

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are similar... which of these should you believe?

Can additional testimonies, while having minute differences actually help us with various perspectives?

Does the minute difference really have an effect on your understanding of the doctrines they are trying to teach us?

Edited December 30, 2012 by skippy740

[Drpepper]

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are similar... which of these should you believe?

Can additional testimonies, while having minute differences actually help us with various perspectives?

Does the minute difference really have an effect on your understanding of the doctrines they are trying to teach us?

No it dosen't have a major impact on my understanding of the doctrine.

I think down deep inside I probably struggle with the temple a little in general. I hear members bear their testimonies and share these wonderful experiences and those thing just don't really happen for me. I still go out of obedience and participate in youth baptism nights etc. I've been endowed for over 15 years now, you think something would have twigged but it hasn't.

[rayhale]

I’m with you Drpepper, I always come out of the temple thinking, “What is everyone talking about? Where is all the learning coming from?” For me, when I heard what little my parents told me about the temple, that it is a place to pray, learn, and things like that, I was envisioning dedicated places to pray, like alters, or classroom like settings, similar to The School of the Prophets. So when I first went in, I was wondering, “Is that all?”

[skalenfehl]

Study them out in your mind and pray for the Spirit to guide you. The minutia is not as significant as events themselves, meaning the Fall, covenants made, etc. More scriptures and events can be picked apart in this fashion otherwise, i.e. Nephi's Isaiah chapters in the BoM vs. Isaiah in the OT, the four gospels, etc.

[Drpepper]

I’m with you Drpepper,

Thanks for that, but its really not a great place to be. I have a strong testimony in other areas of the gospel. BOM, Joseph Smith etc but just cant get the temple. Its almost like going to a whole different church for me rather than an extension of the one im at.

I really feel like i go with an open mind too and the last time i went through someone suggested i take a close ancestor through and do the work for them it makes all the difference. So i took my great grandfathers name through. Nothing different.

Ill still go cause i do find it helps me escape the world for a time and i want to be a good example for my children, perhaps their experience will be a lot different to mine.

[skalenfehl]

The temple endows you, by a process, with power to prepare you for the real thing--real further light and knowledge, real conversations with true messengers, a real veil, a real conversation with our Savior through said veil, etc. This is the pattern. It has been from the days of Adam to Isaiah to the brother of Jared, to Moses, to Joseph Smith to us, if we enter in at the way (2 Nephi).

[skalenfehl]

We tend to read the beginning of the Old Testament as a story or piece of history. It is, although, Moses wrote it with the intention of providing the Israelites with their own endowment. They rejected the opportunity, and so the higher priesthood and Moses himself was ultimately taken from them until Jesus Christ's mortal ministry and organization of His church. In the interim, throughout the generations, the Aaronic priesthood was what they operated with.

A new dispensation, the final dispensation, this opportunity was restored through Joseph Smith. While the saints failed in their attempt to receive the Savior, their efforts were not in vain. We kept the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood, which is the power necessary to obtain the fullness of the gospel through the same temple ordinances that the Israelites rejected.

But soon, as more and more saints labor to achieve a Zion stature, and after a series of prophesied events, the call will be given and the Lord's elect (a "self selecting" people as alluded to in the parable of the wise virgins) will gather to build New Jerusalem where the Savior will return to finish the work in person for a period of a thousand years.

Edited December 31, 2012 by skalenfehl

[Drpepper]

We tend to read the beginning of the Old Testament as a story or piece of history. It is, although, Moses wrote it with the intention of providing the Israelites with their own endowment. They rejected the opportunity, and so the higher priesthood and Moses himself was ultimately taken from them until Jesus Christ's mortal ministry and organization of His church. In the interim, throughout the generations, the Aaronic priesthood was what they operated with.

A new dispensation, the final dispensation, this opportunity was restored through Joseph Smith. While the saints failed in their attempt to receive the Savior, their efforts were not in vain. We kept the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood, which is the power necessary to obtain the fullness of the gospel through the same temple ordinances that the Israelites rejected.

But soon, as more and more saints labor to achieve a Zion stature, and after a series of prophesied events, the call will be given and the Lord's elect (a "self selecting" people as alluded to in the parable of the wise virgins) will gather to build New Jerusalem where the Savior will return to finish the work in person for a period of a thousand years.

Ok i need a little time to digest all that:confused:

[skalenfehl]

It's alright. This is something I've spent my whole life learning. I compressed it into a few paragraphs so it's probably not very fair to you. But it gives you something to ponder. And it's nothing new, but is found throughout scripture, discourses, lectures, etc. I'd be happy to explain in more detail or point you to resources, etc.

[rameumptom]

The scriptures are not history books, but religious books. Do not confuse the two. Religious books may contain symbolism, things that may have occurred or not, or may have occurred but are now explained in a symbolic way.

Believe all the stories in the scriptures, even when they are different. Why? Because then you can get past the differences, and seek the things you need to learn from them.

[skalenfehl]

Nephi gave strict command for two records to be written--one of history and one of ministry (religion, doctrine, etc). Strictly speaking, Ram is correct, although they are historical from a religious perspective. Scripture cannot be written without revealing its history. The temple endowment illustrates this precisely.

[rameumptom]

Even loosely speaking I'm correct. The ancient writers were not historians. They did not use or view history as we view it today. For them, there was nothing wrong with viewing traditional stories that mixed symbolism with actual event. They were more interested in man's relation with God through a historical/symbolic device, rather than telling a history.

[skalenfehl]

...although they are historical from a religious perspective. Scripture cannot be written without revealing its history...

...They were more interested in man's relation with God through a historical/symbolic device...

...

[Vort]

Believe them all. Genesis is not a mechanistic account of Creation; it is a story, part literal and part allegorical, that explains our relationship to God.