Thinking on Adam and the Nephites

[JohnsonJones]

Quote

[1] And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
[2] That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
[3] And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
[4] There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
[5] And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
[6] And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
[7] And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
[8] But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
[9] These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
[10] And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Looking at verse 2 it says that the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all they chose.

Quote

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the all of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

Here we see the verse that the natural man is an enemy to God. 

This is more of a thought exercise than anything else on my part.  I've been thinking about the Nephites when they came to this continent.  We know that at various times there have been MULTIPLE civilizations living on the continent at the same time without knowledge of the other one.  A prime example is that the Jaredites were probably around for much of the first few hundred years of the Nephites (either that or Coriantumr lived several hundred years or more).  In addition, at some point, the people of Zarahemla were a separate society living at the same time as the Nephites, together on the same continent but separate from each other.

Now eventually they all find each other, but for a while there were three separate societies living on the same continent, seemingly unknown from each other.  AT least one would be a VAST society that would eliminate itself.

Is it possible that there were even more civilizations living on this continent when the Lehi and Nephi first came?  That there was a intermixing of them eventually to create the Native Americans we have today?

Perhaps one of the things that caused the changes to the descendants of Laman and Lemuel were not just their actions, but perhaps they discovered a tribe of people that were darker skinned and mixed with them.  This could also explain the idea of wars with the Nephites early on (though I suppose you could call the battle of 7-9 families a war...if there were an even greater number of Lamanites that were from a mixed family and extended civilization trying to exterminate the Nephites, that would make even more sense.  That also explains why it APPEARS there were always more Lamanites than Nephites despite them having one less family on their side).

I'm just hypothesizing that perhaps Lehi's family had far more on this continent to contend with, but this isn't something we are told about in the Book of Mormon?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In that same light, as I ponder the ideas of modern history and archaeology as well as biological science we have the conundrum of Men having been on this earth for thousands of years beyond what it appears the Bible makes room for. 

Is it possible that there really WAS an creature called man, but it is an animal (much like other animals like wolves, elephants, sheep, cattle, etc) that existed on this earth?  That the difference is that Adam, though man, was a Son of God vs. the animal that was man that was already on the earth.

Animals do not act on the higher commands of a deity, but normally act upon baser needs, instincts, and emotions.  Acting this way as a man is normally contrary to the commandments that we have been given.

This is why I list the scriptures above. 

Genesis 6 is understood by many other Christian religions to refer to fallen angels or things to that matter.  That somehow, fallen angels had physical bodies and were able to interact with man and create offspring that were called Nephilim. 

We do not believe that (as far as I know, the fallen angels never received physical bodies for starters).  IN the scriptures it refers to this being a difference of marriage within the faith (and thus eternal marriage) vs. marriage outside of the faith (temporal marriage).

What if it is far more literal than that?  What if, there were actual animals which were able to interbreed with the Man that the Lord created and were the Sons of God.  That the Sons of God did not just marry their sisters, but actually married the daughters of these animals of the species man?

It would mean that all our ideas of evolution, or of the existence of the creature man, could be correct, but that there is a higher order of man who is NOT subject to the animal instincts that is created by a Deity and has a higher and more noble design than the base animals of this world.

This also would be a massive distinction between the two different types of creatures.  The Sons of God were the race of man created by God and who were physically his children.  The Daughters of men would be those who were the actual daughters of the creatures that evolved on this planet before Adam and Eve came and were placed here. 

As I said, this is just me playing games of thought in regards to the secular world and our understanding of it and trying to make sense of it in regards to what our scriptures say. 

The idea is that perhaps there were others in the places where we see singular individuals appear and that explains what seem to be population booms where, in theory, such populations should not be possible with the small number of families or individuals that we see placed in those areas.  It also can explain how science can be correct, and at the same time, our scriptures are also highly accurate. 

[laronius]

I have absolutely no problem with the existence of a species that falls somewhere between man and primate. Considering the differing levels of "intelligence" found all along the spectrum it would even make sense. Though the when and circumstances of their existence is a little more fuzzy. But if they were not sons and daughters of God I'm not sure they could mate with man. That would pose a problem with their premortal identity I would think.

[Traveler]

Greetings @JohnsonJones:

I have come to many of your same conclusions through different processes of thinking.  I will not pretend that I am more right but here are some of my thoughts.  All life as we know it – including both the plant and animal kingdoms operate upon the same principles of DNA and replicate themselves in the same manner beginning at the cellar level.  I have apotheosized the possibility that in the creation of life, G-d used his own DNA and genetically engineered all living things.  I am not going into much detail but by genetically engineering various life forms from a common type, it would seem that evolution of life to be quite feasible.

Scripture tells us that Adam was the first man.  We see this as a singular possible interpretation.  However, anciently the first or first born did not mean the oldest but rather the best or most noble.   This can correlate with two concepts.  The first is in line with your hypothesis that modern man could have been created through a process of genetically engineering and evolution and once a species in the image and likeness of G-d had been established a spirit that was a spirit son or daughter of G-d would be given to an existing species.   This would also fulfill the definition that Adam being the first man was indeed the first or most noble modern man to obtain the spirit offspring of G-d.  This would also explain how modern man today has the genetic links (DNA) of previous species.

The term “Sons of G-d” designates a specific covenant with G-d – we see this in D&C 84 in the explanation of the priesthood covenant.  The term “daughters of men” likewise could designate a covenant made of a more worldly type.  So, the scripture reference could designate a wavering of covenant or as you have suggested – a mingling with another species of humans or mingling with less devoted.

Your concepts concerning the Nephites – I believe has application.  However, I speculate that the intermingling with others may have occurred before the Lehites arrived in the Americas.  Anciently the Arabians were seaworthy and capable of ship building.  The legend of Sinbad does have application.  A study of ancient Aribia correlates with Nephi building a ship in the land of Bountiful where there was fruit and wild honey harvested.  Locals could have been utilized and brought along as servants.  We know that Lehi was wealthy so it is quite likely that they were use to servants.  Also such servants were not considered important enough (among the Egyptians) to make note of them in official records.  Also note that Jacob was quite upset with concubines.  Anciently a concubine was a wife (including plural wives) that did not come into marriage with a dowery.   As a side not here – I do not recommend that this information be given to one’s spouse with the question of – if they are your wife or concubine.

There is a lot of fuss that the Lamanites (native Americans as identified by Joseph Smith or other native Americans) do not have Jewish DNA markers.  But the primary markers used are mitochondria which follows the female line.

 

The Traveler

[CV75]

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Looking at verse 2 it says that the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all they chose.

Here we see the verse that the natural man is an enemy to God. 

This is more of a thought exercise than anything else on my part.  I've been thinking about the Nephites when they came to this continent.  We know that at various times there have been MULTIPLE civilizations living on the continent at the same time without knowledge of the other one.  A prime example is that the Jaredites were probably around for much of the first few hundred years of the Nephites (either that or Coriantumr lived several hundred years or more).  In addition, at some point, the people of Zarahemla were a separate society living at the same time as the Nephites, together on the same continent but separate from each other.

Now eventually they all find each other, but for a while there were three separate societies living on the same continent, seemingly unknown from each other.  AT least one would be a VAST society that would eliminate itself.

Is it possible that there were even more civilizations living on this continent when the Lehi and Nephi first came?  That there was a intermixing of them eventually to create the Native Americans we have today?

Perhaps one of the things that caused the changes to the descendants of Laman and Lemuel were not just their actions, but perhaps they discovered a tribe of people that were darker skinned and mixed with them.  This could also explain the idea of wars with the Nephites early on (though I suppose you could call the battle of 7-9 families a war...if there were an even greater number of Lamanites that were from a mixed family and extended civilization trying to exterminate the Nephites, that would make even more sense.  That also explains why it APPEARS there were always more Lamanites than Nephites despite them having one less family on their side).

I'm just hypothesizing that perhaps Lehi's family had far more on this continent to contend with, but this isn't something we are told about in the Book of Mormon?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In that same light, as I ponder the ideas of modern history and archaeology as well as biological science we have the conundrum of Men having been on this earth for thousands of years beyond what it appears the Bible makes room for. 

Is it possible that there really WAS an creature called man, but it is an animal (much like other animals like wolves, elephants, sheep, cattle, etc) that existed on this earth?  That the difference is that Adam, though man, was a Son of God vs. the animal that was man that was already on the earth.

Animals do not act on the higher commands of a deity, but normally act upon baser needs, instincts, and emotions.  Acting this way as a man is normally contrary to the commandments that we have been given.

This is why I list the scriptures above. 

Genesis 6 is understood by many other Christian religions to refer to fallen angels or things to that matter.  That somehow, fallen angels had physical bodies and were able to interact with man and create offspring that were called Nephilim. 

We do not believe that (as far as I know, the fallen angels never received physical bodies for starters).  IN the scriptures it refers to this being a difference of marriage within the faith (and thus eternal marriage) vs. marriage outside of the faith (temporal marriage).

What if it is far more literal than that?  What if, there were actual animals which were able to interbreed with the Man that the Lord created and were the Sons of God.  That the Sons of God did not just marry their sisters, but actually married the daughters of these animals of the species man?

It would mean that all our ideas of evolution, or of the existence of the creature man, could be correct, but that there is a higher order of man who is NOT subject to the animal instincts that is created by a Deity and has a higher and more noble design than the base animals of this world.

This also would be a massive distinction between the two different types of creatures.  The Sons of God were the race of man created by God and who were physically his children.  The Daughters of men would be those who were the actual daughters of the creatures that evolved on this planet before Adam and Eve came and were placed here. 

As I said, this is just me playing games of thought in regards to the secular world and our understanding of it and trying to make sense of it in regards to what our scriptures say. 

The idea is that perhaps there were others in the places where we see singular individuals appear and that explains what seem to be population booms where, in theory, such populations should not be possible with the small number of families or individuals that we see placed in those areas.  It also can explain how science can be correct, and at the same time, our scriptures are also highly accurate. 

The idea of two classes of human being, one being the spirit children of God (some obedient and some apostate) and the other an animal without moral accountability, recognizes that apostate, erstwhile covenant children of God may practice bestiality with primate animals in violation of the eternal principle to multiply after their own kind. The accountable offspring, when repentant, would have been adopted into the covenant as opportunity arose, and by the time of Noah, this form of bestiality ended, if nothing else by virtue of how genealogies ended at the Flood and proceeded after the Flood.

Some believe that the animal in these abominable human-beast couplings was dark or black-skinned, and this animal-like, natural-man tendency or trait of instinctive behavior and non-accountability was carried through the Flood through Ham’s wife. I think Abraham 1:26 dispels that notion since Pharaoh was a righteous man and not a human-animal hybrid; his father Ham was not a hybrid (neither his mother nor Noah being animals or hybrids); otherwise, Noah and his family would not be qualified for admission into the ark (i.e., the covenant), much less build it.

This of course is an oversimplification and there is as much figurative language as there is literal (since our science was not available in those days, and a temple rite is not based in science anyway), as reflected in my remark below.

I do not think any child of God was ever born that did not have their origins in a covenant established for them at the start of their genealogy. Apostate civilizations once had a covenant-abiding ancestor, whether one sees that as an Adam (in the case of multiple men of God, an interpretation of the Biblical text that renders it a temple drama) or the Adam (as in the case of a literal interpretation of the Biblical text). So, I think any people on the American continent or anywhere else), no matter how degraded and depraved they may have become, had an originating ancestor within a dispensation of the covenant, whether “our” Adam’s or a subsequent restoring prophet and dispensation following an apostasy. Sexually abused animals, whatever their skin color, would have been removed from the equation long before the floods receded.

[rcthompson88]

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Animals do not act on the higher commands of a deity, but normally act upon baser needs, instincts, and emotions.  Acting this way as a man is normally contrary to the commandments that we have been given.

I don't know, based on other discussions going on within the forum today, maybe our own actions aren't as far removed from the animals as we would like to think 😉.

I think it is a given that there must have been other civilizations that the people of the Book of Mormon mingled with to achieve their expanse and their numbers. I also do not have a problem with the ideas some have suggested that Adam and Eve may have been an entirely new species similar to other pre-Adamite beings, or that they simply represented the human race finally evolving to the point where they could be considered "children of God."

[Traveler]

17 hours ago, rcthompson88 said:

I don't know, based on other discussions going on within the forum today, maybe our own actions aren't as far removed from the animals as we would like to think 😉.

......

Only mankind are in need of covenant (solemnized in morality) for their eternal salvation.

 

The Traveler