Adam and Eve

[DigitalShadow]

LoL. Or somewhere inbetween those 3, no?

Obviously, you can believe whatever you want, I was merely pointing out the three extremes that people gravitate toward.

Are you equating 'rationalize' with 'understand'? Otherwise I'd suppose your comment is irrefutable, and fairly meaningless, all at the same time. Now THAT's good mileage.

By 'rationalize' I mean try to figure out the mechanics of it. Religious concepts are meant to be taken on faith. If you accept that God exists and is all powerful, then He can do whatever He wants, however He wants, then that is the be all end all answer to everything. Trying to apply current scientific theory to something we are supposedly "not meant to know in this life" is a fruitless effort, other than for entertainment value.

If you want to talk about the science of our entire human population springing from 2 people in the relatively recent past (~10k years ago), I think any geneticist would have to try and refrain from laughing at the proposal. That is not to say it is impossible, but all the observable scientific evidence goes against that theory. So if you want to believe it, you are left with faith and the idea that God can do whatever He wants and if you're already taking something on faith, what is the point in tacking on more explainations?

[azazel420]

As to the original question, here's the facts as I see them.

Inbreeding generally increases the possibility of inheriting genetic defects which are recessive. It's more likely that children of the same parents will carry the same recessive traits and so they are more likely to be inherited through inbreeding.

I don't see an apparent conflict with the biblical account of Adam and here's why. It's unlikely that God would have created Adam and Eve with these recessive traits present. It's likely then that if things happened in this fashion such traits developed later as a result of genetic mutation. Given the rarity of these mutations in general it's unlikely that they would appear in any frequency for several generations. When they did appear it was very likely localized within specific gene pools and the offspring would very likely die before reproducing, thus eliminating those dangerous genes from the gene pool.

If such defects had developed prior to the flood you again face a problem with inbreeding, but this is only problematic if such defects occured within Noah's line. By the time they would reappear with any frequency it's likely that inbreeding was no longer a biological necessity (though there is significant evidence that inbreeding remained a not so uncommon practice long after Noah, especially within royal lines, this is only a small part of the world's population).

Any defects that resulted from inbreeding would simply die off but the world could be populated without much issue. In fact it must have since whether you believe evolution or the bible or both you ultimately face the conclusion that the earth became populated from a rather small initial human population. Inbreeding would of been common in early humans either way.

On a side note to the "yuk" factor.. incest aversion is a cultural phenomenon. If your sisters are the only viable mates it's unlikely it seems weird to you at all.

[HiJolly]

By 'rationalize' I mean try to figure out the mechanics of it. Religious concepts are meant to be taken on faith.

Hmm..., yes, that's true, but in the Mormon Church, they're not necessarily supposed to STAY at the 'faith' level. We DO believe in revelation, which brings us from faith to knowledge, assuming (!) we had the correct faith to begin with.

If you accept that God exists and is all powerful, then He can do whatever He wants, however He wants, then that is the be all end all answer to everything.

That is not the Mormon way. We do not believe that.

Trying to apply current scientific theory to something we are supposedly "not meant to know in this life" is a fruitless effort, other than for entertainment value.

I agree. Good thing that's not a part of my religion!

If you want to talk about the science of our entire human population springing from 2 people in the relatively recent past (~10k years ago), I think any geneticist would have to try and refrain from laughing at the proposal. That is not to say it is impossible, but all the observable scientific evidence goes against that theory.

Again, I agree.

So if you want to believe it, you are left with faith and the idea that God can do whatever He wants and if you're already taking something on faith, what is the point in tacking on more explainations?

No wonder you have trouble having faith. Yikes!

HiJolly

[MaidservantX]

DNA is a program. It has information that results in [fill in the blank]. I would think that it is a program that has been in existence endlessly, or its likely that it has been, in my mind anyway.

(BTW, I don't apply 'faith' properly to mental knowledge. I do accept certain statements/ postulates at face value that I think God has presented, and that guides my thinking and opens my thinking, in fact. But I don't call that faith. I am discovering things. Faith is what I do to transform my soul. It is obedience to principle. I become a new creature. Understanding where my body comes from and the roots of civiliation is just stuff I can find out one way or the other -- it isn't about faith at all to me, other than the faith in learning new things all the time!)

[Guest jlinn]

As some others have discussed the only physical problem with close relations breeding is the heightened possibility that they share and thus will pass on identical genetic defects.

Adam and Eve being genetically perfect individuals would not have had this problem for quite a few generations.

For instance it was not until the time of Abraham that god forbade close intermarriages.

“No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.”

He goes on to list what is forbidden (Mothers, Step mothers, Sisters, Step sisters etc, etc.)

As for the “Ick factor” I’m not sure it have would come into play much either mostly due to time.

Of the 9 individuals listed from Adam to Noah the median age for having a first kid was 163 years old after which they all “had other sons and daughters”.

(Youngest were Mahalalel and Enoch at 65 years the oldest was Noah at 500)

Now I’m guessing that since we are talking about an (by modern standards) absurdly healthy, active, and fertile population with no lights, TVs, or video games to distract themselves with who were given commands by God himself in the garden of Eden to have sex and fill the earth with progeny that the kids started showing up less then a year after the marriage.

Seth had his first kid at 105

which means he could have worked for his old man until he was 35 or so then set off to explore the totally unknown world to see what god had done and find/build a place of his own. I’m guessing that the urge to explore was strong since atop every ridge was a sight the no other human in history had ever seen before.

So he gets back into what’s now the town where his parents live meets the 36 year old “Judy” who was born 30 years after he wandered off and shortly there after starts having kids.

Even though she has the same parents she would probably be unknown enough to not trigger the “sister” vibe.

(Of course he might also have married the 20 year old “Judy” born to the 24 year old “Trisha” daughter of his 24 year old sister “Amber” who was born 2 yeas after he left on walkabout. ( his great great niece) :)

As for Adam and Eve having the same DNA due to God taking Adams rib to make her It would seem to me that at a minimum she would have 50% different DNA.

His chromosomes were XY and hers would need to be XX add to this the fact that we don’t know what the purpose was for him taking the rib it could have had symbolic or emotional/relational purposes as he did not actualy need the rib for DNA(he made Adams from scratch out of dust after all)

In any event since I believe that God lit the fuse for every star in the universe and watches and bends to his purposes every grain of sand, electron, and particle that has ever existed I have no problem believing that he knows to the finest decimal exactly what DNA was needed to produce every human who has or will ever live.

As for Digitalshadow’s coment

“If you want to talk about the science of our entire human population springing from 2 people in the relatively recent past (~10k years ago), I think any geneticist would have to try and refrain from laughing at the proposal.”

I half agree. Trying to populate a new planet with 2 modern humans which are the result of 1000’s of years of breeding various kinds of DNA out of our gene pool and introducing defects in (pollution, radiation, viral, etc.) would be like trying to populate a planet of canines starting with 2 great-danes.

In order to get a stable population of great-danes you have to remove all the genetic info that would give you boston-terriers, beagles, or poodles. One interesting thing this can tell us is that Adam and Eve were not both Black Africans, Caucasian, Asian, etc.

Sadly this means my wife and I both bieing Caucasians lack the genetic varibility nessasary to do the job.

I find the flood to be a more interesting genetic event.

9 or 10 generations of genetic selection and mutation accumulation 8 individuals on the ark the 4 of the males were father and sons and there seems to be evidence that their descendants experienced rapid genetic degradation possibly contributing to a drastic reduction in life spans.

18 The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 19 These were the three sons of Noah, and from them came the people who were scattered over the earth.

Something to think about anyway :)

Sorry this is so rough didn't have much time.

[Hemidakota]

Here is part of Elder Russell M. Nelson take on the human being: "THE MAGNIFICENCE OF MAN", Ch1

I invite you to ponder things magnificent. The word magnificent is derived from two Latin roots. The prefix, magni, comes from a term meaning "great." The suffix comes from the Latin facere, which means "to make" or "to do." A simple definition of magnificent, then, might be "great deed" or "greatly made."

Think, if you will, of the most magnificent sight you have ever seen. It could be a meadow in springtime filled with beautiful wildflowers. Or perhaps you have been awestruck, as have I, at the magnificence of a single rose with its special beauty and perfume. I have come to appreciate the magnificence of an orange, with each droplet of juice neatly packaged in an edible container, joined with many other packets, grouped in sections, and all neatly wrapped in a disposable, biodegradable peel.

Some would say that the most magnificent sight they have ever beheld is the heavens on a summer night, with stars beyond number dotting the sky. Those who have traveled in orbit through space say that their view of the planet earth has been one of the most magnificent sights ever observed by man.

Some might choose the view of the Grand Canyon at sunrise; others, the beauty of a mountain lake, river, waterfall, or desert.

Some might select a peacock with its tail in full fan, or a handsome horse. Others would nominate the beauty of butterfly wings, or a hummingbird seemingly suspended in midair while feeding.

These magnificent sights are wondrous beyond measure. They are all "great deeds" of our divine Creator.

Now ponder the magnificence of all that is portrayed when you look in the mirror. Ignore the freckles, unruly hair, or blemishes, and look beyond to see the real you—a child of God—created by him, in his image. Looking beyond the surface you see in the mirror, let us lift the lid on the treasure chest of understanding of the marvelous attributes of your body and discover, at least in part, the magnificence of man. Here are some of the glittering jewels of magnificence in this treasure chest.

THE HUMAN EMBRYO

In the first compartment of the treasure chest, we might look at the magnificence of our creation itself.

We don't know precisely how two germ cells unite to become a human embryo, but we do know that both the female cell and the male cell contain all of the new individual's hereditary material and information, stored in a space so small it cannot be seen by the naked eye. Twenty-three chromosomes from both the father and the mother unite in one new cell. These chromosomes contain thousands of genes. A marvelous process of genetic coding is established by which all the basic human characteristics of the unborn person are determined. A new DNA complex is thus formed. A continuum of growth is instituted, which results in a new human being.

Approximately twenty-two days after two germ cells have united, a little heart begins to beat. At twenty-six days the circulation of blood begins. Cells multiply, divide, and become differentiated. Some become eyes that see; others, ears that hear; while still others are destined to become fingers that feel the wonderful things about us. Yes, awareness of the magnificence of man begins with the miracles of conception and our creation.

SPECIFIC ORGANS

In our treasure chest of understanding, we can look to the compartment that contains the capability of selected organs. Each jewel merits admiration, appreciation, and awe.

Let us mention first the magnificence of the eyes with which we see. No doubt you have stood before the mirror, as have I, and watched the pupils of your eyes react to changes in the intensity of light, dilating to let in more light and constricting to reduce the light allowed to reach the sensitive retina of the eye. A self-focusing lens is at the front of each eye. Nerves and muscles synchronize the function of two separate eyes to produce one three-dimensional image. Eyes are connected to the brain, ready to record sights seen. No cords, no batteries, no external connections are needed; our visual apparatus is marvelous—infinitely more priceless than any camera that money can buy.

While we may admire good stereophonic equipment for sensing sound, ponder by comparison the magnificence of the human ear. It is truly remarkable. Compacted into an area about the size of a marble is all the equipment needed to perceive sound. A tiny tympanic membrane serves as the diaphragm. Minute ossicles amplify the signal, which is then transmitted along nerve lines to the brain, which registers the result of hearing. This marvelous sound system is also connected to the recording instrument of the brain.

A large portion of my life's study and research has been focused on the jewel of the human heart—a pump that is so magnificent that its power is almost beyond our comprehension. To control the direction of flow of blood within it, there are four important valves, pliable as a parachute and delicate as a silk scarf. They open and close more than 100,000 times a day—over 36 million times a year. Yet, unless altered by disease, they are so rugged that they stand this kind of wear seemingly indefinitely. No man-made material developed thus far can be flexed this frequently and for so long without breaking.

The amount of work done by the heart is truly amazing. Each day it pumps enough fluid to fill a 2,000-gallon tank car. The work it performs daily is equivalent to lifting a 150-pound man to the top of the Empire State Building, while consuming only about four watts of energy—less than that used by a small light bulb.

At the crest of the heart is an electrical generator that transmits energy down special lines, causing myriads of muscle fibers to beat in coordination and in rhythm. This synchrony would be the envy of the conductor of any orchestra.

All this power is condensed in this faithful pump—the human heart—about the size of one's fist, energized from within by an endowment from on high.

One of the most wondrous of all jewels in this treasure chest is the human brain with its intricate combination of power cells, recording, memory, storage, and retrieval systems. It serves as headquarters for the personality and character of each human being. As I observe the lives of great individuals, I sense that the capacity of the brain is seemingly infinite. Wise men can become even wiser as each experience builds upon previous experience. Indeed, continuing exercise of the intellect brings forth increased intellectual capacity.

While I marvel at a computer and admire the work it can do, I respect even more the mind of man, which developed the computer. The human brain is certainly a recording instrument that will participate in our judgment one day when we stand before the Lord. The Book of Mormon speaks of a "bright recollection" (Alma 11:43) and of a "perfect remembrance" (Alma 5:18) that will be with us at that time. Each one of us carries that recording instrument guarded within the vault of the human skull.

As we symbolically sift through the treasure chest of understanding, we could spend hours, even a lifetime, studying the incredible chemical capacity of the liver, the kidneys, and any or all of the endocrine and exocrine glands of the body. Each is a shimmering jewel, worthy of our study and our deepest gratitude.

[Hemidakota]

Part -2

OTHER JEWELS

Now let us turn our attention to jewels in another compartment in the treasure chest of understanding, as we consider some concepts that bridge beyond individual organ systems.

1. The first concept is that of reserve, or backup. In the theater, major actors often have understudies for backup. In electrical instruments, backup in the event of power failure may be provided by batteries. In the body, backup is provided by a number of organs that are paired, such as eyes, ears, lungs, adrenal glands, kidneys, and more. In the event of illness, injury, or loss of one of these organs, the other is ready to keep our bodily functions intact. In the event of loss of sight or hearing altogether, other sensory powers become augmented in a miraculous manner.

Some backup systems are not so apparent. For example, crucial single organs, such as the brain, the heart, and the liver, have a double blood supply. They are all nourished by two routes of circulation, which minimize damage in the event of loss of blood flow through any single blood vessel.

Another dimension of backup I shall describe as collateral pathways. For example, if your nasal passageways are obstructed by a "stuffy nose," you may breathe through your mouth. Similarly, collateral pathways may grow if blood vessels or nerves are obstructed or severed.

2. Consider another concept, that of self-defense of the body. One day I watched some three-year-old children lapping water from the sidewalk after it had overflowed through a neighbor's garden. I suppose the germs they ingested were incalculable in number, but not one of those children became ill. They were defended by their bodies. As soon as that dirty drink reached their stomachs, hydrochloric acid went to work to purify the water and protect the lives of those innocent children.

Think of the protection provided by the skin. Could you make, or even conjure in your mind how to create, a cloak that would protect you and, at the same time, would warn against injuries from excessive heat or cold? That is what the skin does. It even gives signals indicating that another part of the body is ailing. The skin can flush and sweat with fever. When a person is frightened or ill, the skin pales. When one is embarrassed, the skin blushes. And it is replete with nerve fibers that communicate and often limit possible harm through perception of pain.

Pain itself is part of the body's defense mechanism. For example, sensory areas of the mouth guard and protect the esophagus, which is very delicate and has few nerve fibers. Like a sentinel, the mouth receives warnings if drinks are too hot and protects the esophagus from becoming burned.

The body's defenses include chemical antibodies that are manufactured in response to infections. Each time a person is exposed to a bacterial or viral infection, the body produces antibodies that not only combat that infection but also persist with memory to strengthen resistance in days to come. When military conscription was required in World War II, soldiers who had come from isolated rural areas had much less immunity and were more prone to infections than were those who had come from more highly populated urban areas and whose resistance was subsequently better developed.

3. Closely related to the concept of self-defense is that of self-repair. Consider the fact that broken bones mend and become strong once again. If we were to break one of the legs of a chair, how long would we have to wait for that chair leg to heal itself? It would never happen. Yet many people today walk on legs that once were broken. Lacerations in the skin heal themselves. A leak in the circulation will seal itself, a power that circulatory systems outside the body do not have. I gained appreciation for this fact early in my research career while working in the laboratory to create an artificial heart-lung machine. Whenever tubing in that machine would spring a leak, I could count on spending long hours cleaning up the lab and coming home late for dinner. Never did a leak in the artificial heart-lung machine ever seal itself.

4. Another remarkable concept is that of self-renewal. Each cell in the body is created and then regenerated from elements of the earth according to the recipe or formula contained within genes unique to the individual. The average red blood corpuscle, for example, lives about 120 days, then dies and is replaced by another. Each time we bathe, thousands of dead and dying cells are scrubbed away, to be replaced by a younger crop. I believe that this process of self-renewal prefigures the process of resurrection.

5. Also in our treasure chest is the concept of auto-regulation. Have you ever wondered why you can't swim under water very long? Auto-regulation limits the time you can hold your breath. As breath is held, carbon dioxide accumulates. Partial pressure of carbon dioxide is monitored continuously by two carotid bodies in the neck, which transmit signals up nerves to the brain. The brain then sends stimuli to muscles of respiration, causing them to work, so that we might inhale a new refreshment of oxygen and eliminate retained carbon dioxide.

And have you ever wondered why you can tolerate extremes of hot and cold weather? In spite of wide fluctuations in the temperature of man's environment, the temperature of each person's body is carefully controlled within certain very narrow bounds.

These are but two of many, many servo-mechanisms that auto-regulate individual ingredients in our bodies. The number of these systems exceeds our ability to enumerate them. Sodium, potassium, water, glucose, protein, nitrogen are but a few of the many constituents continuously monitored by chemical regulators within our bodies.

6. Consider now the concept of adaptation. People on the earth dwell amidst climatic and dietary differences of vast scope. Eskimos in the Arctic Circle consume a diet with a large component of fat, which is acceptable and even necessary to sustain life in a very cold climate. Polynesians, on the other hand, eat a diet provided by a tropical environment. Yet these different groups work and adapt to varying conditions and diet available to them.

7. The concept of identity in reproduction is marvelous to contemplate. Each of us possesses seeds that carry our unique chromosomes, and genes that help determine specific cellular identity for our children. For this reason, tissues surgically transplanted from one person to another can survive only by suppressing the host's immune response, which clearly recognizes tissues foreign to one's own inherited genetic formula. Truly we are blessed with power to have children born in the likeness of parents.

[Hemidakota]

Part -3

AN INTERESTING PARADOX

As we consider self-defense, self-repair, and self-renewal, an interesting paradox emerges. Limitless life could result if these marvelous qualities of the body continued in perpetuity. If we could create anything that could defend itself, repair itself, and renew itself without limit, we could create perpetual life. That is what our Creator did with the bodies he created for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Had they continued to be nourished from the tree of life, they would have lived forever. According to the Lord, as revealed through his prophets, the fall of Adam instituted the aging process, which results ultimately in physical death. Of course, we do not understand all the chemistry, but we are witnesses of the consequences of growing old. This and other pathways of release assure that there is a limit to the length of life upon the earth.

Yes, troubles do develop in bodies that do not repair themselves with time. To the skilled physician, this profound question is posed by each sick patient seen: Will this illness get better, or will it get worse, with the passage of time? The former needs only supportive care. The latter requires significant help to convert the process of progressive deterioration to one that might improve with time.

When death comes, it generally seems to the mortal mind to be untimely. At such times we need to have the larger view that death is part of life. Alma tells us, "It was not expedient that man should be reclaimed from this temporal death, for that would destroy the great plan of happiness." (Alma 42:8; see also D&C 29:43.)

When severe illness or tragic injuries claim an individual in the flowering prime of life, we can take comfort in this fact: the very laws that could not allow life to persist here are the same eternal laws that will be implemented at the time of the resurrection, when that body "shall be restored to [its] proper and perfect frame." (Alma 40:23.)

OUR DIVINE CREATION

Thoughts of life, death, and resurrection bring us to face crucial questions. How were we made? By whom? And why?

Through the ages, some persons without scriptural understanding have tried to explain our existence by pretentious words such as ex nihilo (out of nothing). Others have deduced that, because of certain similarities between different forms of life, there has been a natural selection of the species, or organic evolution from one form to another. Still others have concluded that man came as a consequence of a "big bang," which resulted in the creation of our planet and life upon it.

To me, such theories are unbelievable. Could an explosion in a printing shop produce a dictionary? It's unthinkable! One might argue that it is within a remote realm of possibility, but even if that could happen, such a dictionary could certainly not heal its own torn pages, renew its own worn corners, or reproduce its own subsequent editions.

We are children of God, created by him and formed in his image. Recently I studied the scriptures simply to find how many times they testify of the divine creation of man. Looking up references that referred to either create or form (or their derivatives) with man (or such derivatives as men, male, woman, or female) in the same verse, I found that at least fifty-five verses of scripture attest to our divine creation. I have selected one to represent all those verses that convey the same conclusion: "The Gods took counsel among themselves and said: Let us go down and form man in our image, after our likeness. . . . So the Gods went down to organize man in their own image, in the image of the Gods to form they him, male and female to form they them." (Abraham 4:26-27.)

I believe all of those scriptures pertaining to the creation of man. But the decision to believe is a spiritual one, not born solely by an understanding of things physical: "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14.)

It is incumbent upon each informed and spiritually attuned person to help overcome such foolishness of those who would deny divine creation or think that mankind simply evolved. By the spirit, we perceive the truer and more believable wisdom of God.

With great conviction I add my testimony to that of my fellow apostle Paul, who said: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are." (1 Corinthians 3:16-17.)

The Lord said that "the spirit and the body are the soul of man." (D&C 88:15.) Each of us, therefore, is a dual being—a biological (physical) entity and an intellectual (spiritual) entity. The combination of both is intimate throughout mortality.

In the beginning, man, as that intellectual entity, was with God. Our intelligence was not created or made, nor can it be. (See D&C 93:29.)

That spirit, joined with a physical body of such remarkable qualities, becomes a living soul of supernal worth. The psalmist so expressed this thought: "When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what is man, that thou art mindful of him? . . . For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour." (Psalm 8:3-5.)

Why were we created? Why are we here? Why are we upon the earth?

God has made it plain over and over again that the world was made for mankind to exist. We are here to work out our divine destiny, according to an eternal plan presented to us in the great council of heaven. Our bodies have been created to accommodate our spirits, to allow us to experience the challenges of mortality.

With this understanding, it is pure sacrilege to let anything enter the body that might defile this physical temple of God. It is irreverent to let even the gaze of our precious eyesight, or the sensors of our touch or hearing, supply the brain with memories that are unclean or unworthy.

Could any of us lightly regard precious seeds of reproduction—specifically and uniquely ours—or disregard the moral laws of God, who gave divine rules governing their sacred use?

Knowing we are created as children of God, and that he has given us agency to choose, we must also know that we are accountable to him. He has defined the truth and has prescribed commandments. Obedience to his law brings us joy. Disobedience of those commandments is defined as sin. While we live in a world that seems increasingly reluctant to designate dishonorable deeds as sinful, a scripture warns us: "Fools make a mock at sin: but among the righteous there is favour." (Proverbs 14:9.)

No one is perfect. Some may have sinned grievously in transgressing God's laws. Mercifully, we can repent. That is an important part of life's opportunity, as well.

Repentance requires spiritual dominion over appetites of the flesh. Every physical system has appetite. Our desires to eat, drink, see, hear, and feel respond to those appetites. But all appetites must be controlled by the intellect in order for us to attain true joy. On the other hand, whenever we allow uncontrolled appetites of the body to determine behavior opposed to nobler promptings of the Spirit, the stage is set for misery and grief.

Such substances as alcohol, tobacco, and harmful drugs are forbidden by the Lord. We have similarly been warned about the evils of pornography and unclean thoughts. Appetites for these degrading forces can become addictive. Physical or mental addictions become doubly serious because, in time, they enslave both the body and the spirit. Full repentance from these shackles, or any other yokes to sin, must be accomplished in this life, while we still have the aid of a mortal body to help us develop self-mastery.

When we truly know our divine nature, our thoughts and behavior will be more appropriate. Then we will control our appetites. We will focus our eyes on sights, our ears on sounds, and our minds on thoughts that are a credit to our physical creation as a temple of our Father in heaven.

In daily prayer, we may gratefully acknowledge God as our Creator, thank him for the magnificence of our physical temple, and then heed his counsel.

[Hemidakota]

Part - 4 final

MORE YET TO LEARN

Though we cannot fully comprehend the magnificence of man, in faith we can continue our reverent quest. We may join with Jacob in this marvelous declaration: "Behold, great and marvelous are the works of the Lord. How unsearchable are the depths of the mysteries of him; and it is impossible that man should find out all his ways. . . . For behold, by the power of his word man came upon the face of the earth, which earth was created by the power of his word. . . . Therefore, brethren, seek not to counsel the Lord, but to take counsel from his hand." (Jacob 4:8-10.)

For years I have attended scientific meetings of learned societies. Medical scientists and practitioners by the thousands participate in such assemblies annually from all over the world. The quest for knowledge is endless. It seems that the more we know, the more there is yet to learn. It is impossible that any of us may learn all the ways of God. But as we are faithful and are deeply rooted in scriptural accounts of God's magnificent creations, we will be well prepared for future discoveries. All truth is compatible because it all emanates from God.

Of course, we know that "there is an opposition in all things." (2 Nephi 2:11.) In the world even many so-called "educators" teach contrary to divine truth. Be mindful of this prophetic counsel: "O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish. But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God." (2 Nephi 9:28-29.)

We need not be reminded that the work and glory of the Lord are opposed by forces of Satan, who is the master of deceit. Many follow his teachings. Remember, "Man may deceive his fellow-men, deception may follow deception, and the children of the wicked one may have power to seduce the foolish and untaught, till naught but fiction feeds the many, and the fruit of falsehood carries in its current the giddy to the grave." (JS-History 1:71, footnote.)

Be wise and keep away from temptations and snares. Cautiously avoid "foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. . . . Flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life." (1 Timothy 6:9, 11-12.)

OUR ETERNAL SPIRIT

The magnificence of man is matchless. Remember, glorious as this physical tabernacle is, the body is designed to support something even more glorious—the eternal spirit that dwells in the mortal frame of each of us. The great accomplishments of this life are rarely physical. Those attributes by which we shall be judged one day are spiritual. With the blessing of our bodies to assist us, we may develop spiritual qualities of honesty, integrity, compassion, and love. Only with the development of the spirit may we acquire "faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, brotherly kindness, godliness, charity, humility, [and] diligence." (D&C 4:6.)

May we pattern our lives after our great Exemplar, even Jesus the Christ, whose parting words among mankind included this eternal challenge: "What manner of men ought ye to be? . . . even as I am." (3 Nephi 27:27.) We are sons and daughters of God. He is our Father; we are his children. Our divine inheritance is the magnificence of man.

[Hemidakota]

In the Book of Jubilee: Cain marries the younger sister versus the older sister due to her beauty.

[lilered]

We gain a lot of knowledge from the book of Moses:

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, acreated all things, of which I have spoken, bspiritually, before they were cnaturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had dcreated all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the eground; for in fheaven gcreated I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air;

2 And aAdam knew his wife, and she bare unto him bsons and cdaughters, and they began to dmultiply and to replenish the earth.

3 And from that time forth, the sons and adaughters of Adam began to divide two and two in the land, and to till the land, and to tend flocks, and they also begat sons and daughters.

We learn that God created all things somewhere else first spiritually, then brought it to this earth.

Isn't that simply awesome?

[gwozz]

As the the initial question: genetic problems occur due to mutations, and genetic problems with inbreeding happen only when 2 people have the same genetic mutation.

That said, what makes any of you think Adam and Eve had any detrimental genetic mutation? They were perfect--perfect, and as such their children would have no mutations. Man started perfect, and has devolved ever since the fall. Thats why the lifespan is shorter, diseases are more prevalen, and genetic mutation we have now are more than any other time--6000 years after the fall, our genome is more unstable, replication errors occur more frequently, and man is thus devolving.

Read Doctrines of Salvation book 1 about what JFS says about this.

Also, reread "the origin of man" as to where Adam and their DNA came from.

[rameumptom]

As much as I revere the prophets, I take some portions of Doctrines of Salvation with the same grain of salt I take with Mormon Doctrine. Neither book is scripture, and both contain doctrine mingled with lots of personal opinion.

The Church's official view on evolution is that it has no official view. There have been apostles that have spoken in favor of evolution, and there are prophets that have taught about "pre-Adamites." All we have to know concerning Adam is that he is the first man chosen of God to hold the priesthood keys on earth. Through him all people are blessed with a chance for the gospel, whether they are biologically descended from him or not. In this same way, Noah and Abraham also become the fathers of all nations.

Adam and Eve may not have had genetic mutations, but then perhaps they did. We just do not know how the Fall affected them. At the same time, perhaps they had no mutations or genetic deformities, but others that belonged to Pre-Adamites may have had them. Once again, we just do not know.

Me? I keep an open mind, because none of this affects the doctrines of the Church.

[Guest HEthePrimate]

Hmm... Good question, TomK! Hate to say it, but my honest answer is "I don't know." One could speculate that since Adam and Eve were created directly by God, their DNA was perfect and their children's DNA was close enough to perfect that they didn't have problems with inbreeding.

About the phrase "replenish the earth," I've taken to reading that differently than I used to. God commanded Adam and Eve to "multiply, and replenish the earth." I think that yes, God was telling them to have kids and thereby become the earthly parents of the human race, but I think He may have given "replenish the earth" a double meaning. Perhaps in addition to telling Adam and Eve to make babies, He was instructing them to take care of the earth they were living on by replenishing it, so it wouldn't get used up. The word "replenish" conjures images in my mind of applying fertilizer to farm fields so that they will be, well, replenished with nutrients to make the plants grow.

Just a thought.

DH

[gwozz]

As much as I revere the prophets, I take some portions of Doctrines of Salvation with the same grain of salt I take with Mormon Doctrine. Neither book is scripture, and both contain doctrine mingled with lots of personal opinion.

The Church's official view on evolution is that it has no official view. There have been apostles that have spoken in favor of evolution, and there are prophets that have taught about "pre-Adamites." All we have to know concerning Adam is that he is the first man chosen of God to hold the priesthood keys on earth. Through him all people are blessed with a chance for the gospel, whether they are biologically descended from him or not. In this same way, Noah and Abraham also become the fathers of all nations.

Adam and Eve may not have had genetic mutations, but then perhaps they did. We just do not know how the Fall affected them. At the same time, perhaps they had no mutations or genetic deformities, but others that belonged to Pre-Adamites may have had them. Once again, we just do not know.

Me? I keep an open mind, because none of this affects the doctrines of the Church.

I'm just curious, what are the pro-evolution quotes you have of GA's endorsing evolution? I've never read any that say they believe or support it, so I'd like to read them. Back in the day, BH Roberts and James Talmage both said they thought there was death before the fall, but neither of them believed in a continuation of life between that life, and the life on the earth at the time of the creation. it was a dual creationism theory that BH Roberts wrote about, and the church never endorsed. Following the debates, (largely btwn JFS and BHR), the church told the authorities to not teach whether there was death before the fall or not. But this had nothing to do with evolution. This is exemplified by JFS, who following this policy, wrote a whole book on evolution, entitled "man, his origin and destiny," wherein he details out why macroevolution doesn't fit in the gospel. No where in the book does he speak of death before the fall, just about evolution. BHR and JET had no argument, because neither of them believed in evolution either (as exemplified by their own writings when they speak of death before the fall).

sorry for being long winded, but I've never read a GA quotation supporting the claims of evolution. usually its BHR or JET who said "death before the fall," but neither of them supported evolution to account for Adam's body.

If there is anything that the debate shows, is that Christ hasn't declared to the world through his prophets the full truth concerning these things. We'll get it someday though. But that doesn't mean that God can't reveal to you a knowledge concerning the mysteries of the kingdom either...(D&C 42:65;63:23;Alma 12:9;Mni10:5 any many many more).

[HiJolly]

I'm just curious, what are the pro-evolution quotes you have of GA's endorsing evolution? I've never read any that say they believe or support it, so I'd like to read them. (snip)

Courtesy of the HiJolly new-clipping service:

Subject: (SB) Newell interviews McMurrin

[This is a transcript, lovingly typed in from tape by Arta Johnson <[email protected]>, of an interview with Sterling McMurrin at the August 1993 SLC Sunstone Symposium.]

Sterling: Well, I guess I will have to tell you that. A couple of days later, it may have been 3 or 4 days, President MacKay called me up. I was going for lunch with one of my colleges who was not a member. He called me on the telephone and he said, "Somebody has been calling who says he is David O MacKay. I guess it's just a joke."

And I thought, "This may not be such a joke." And I had no sooner put up the phone ... (He had said, "I gave him your home phone number.") .... And I had no sooner put up the phone than ... I shouldn't tell these things ... but President MacKay said, "I want to come and see you." And I said, "President MacKay, you can't come and see me. I'll come and see you." He said, "No sir, I'm coming to see you." Well, he lived on South Temple in those days. Some of you will remember the old Union Building was still the Union Building. And I said to President McKay ... I shouldn't have even used this language, but I said, "Well now, President MacKay. What do you say, we meet on neutral ground." He thought that was a good idea. So I said, "Well, I will meet you in the Union Building. Give me a little time to get there ahead of you." I had a key to the Aurbach Room, a very beautiful room there that they usually had locked. And we had a long talk.

President McKay started by saying, "What is it that a man is not ... " (Sterling interrupts his own story to say to Jack), "These are his exact words." "...What is it that a man is not allowed to believe? or be asked out of this church? Is it evolution?" Now nothing had been said in connection with my case about evolution, but he brought it up. (Jack murmurs with an understanding nod of the head to Sterling.) He said, "Is it evolution? I hope not, because I believe in evolution." Then he went to two or three other things. He said, "Is it something else? I hope not, because I believe in that."

-----

Salt Lake Tribune Article Last Updated: 7/23/2005 11:16 AM

Early Mormons accepted Darwinian thought

Ed Firmage

Salt Lake Tribune I read in The Salt Lake Tribune July 15 that evolution is "not yet extinct in schools," and that upsets Sen. Chris Buttars, who then instinctively lapses into the language of Mormon ecclesiastical punishment: that any teacher propounding evolution "will be dealt with."

Then the good senator gave those of us who are teachers one legislative session's time "to get the people who are out of line into line." I do believe that we are headed for a Scopes trial right here in Deseret.

If I were lucky enough to take the part of Clarence Darrow for the defense, my one fear would be that William Jennings Bryan would offer Buttars up as absolute evidence of anti-Darwinian thought: Politically, we seem to be faced with the survival of the least fit.

And this is not necessary. One can believe, as I do, in a creator God and also believe in Darwinian thought. This big tent has always existed in Mormon thought, from Joseph Smith through Brigham H. Roberts, James E. Talmage, John A. Widtsoe, David O. McKay, my grandfather Hugh B. Brown and a host of others.

As I began this response, I opened a book written by Grandfather, a collection of his broadcasts over KSL radio from September through December 1947 and published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the same year, with the telling title, Rational Faith.

----

HiJolly

[Justice]

And, as far as the yuk factor...

Aren't we ALL brothers and sisters?

Hmmmmm?

Joseph Smith said we could learn more about man and God by gazing into heaven for one second than we could in a lifetime of learning on earth. There's no telling what this applies to or how far it extends. But, he made other comments about the "sociality" that exists among people in the spirit world that was very different than how it is here on earth. It's possible he meant the brother and sister thing, in part at least.

Adam and Eve?

It is my belief that they were born the same way every other man and woman were born on this earth. They were created from the same substance we are made of, the dust of the earth. However, they were born of an immortal mother. Obviously, since they fell from an immortal state to a mortal state, they had to be born immortal. Is this not how children will be born during the Millennium? But, for Christ to be born and shed His blood (mortal to immortal), reversing the effects of the fall (immortal to mortal), He had to be born of a mortal mother... meaning He had to be born after the Fall, but before the Millennium. Why not right in the middle?

It's really a miraculous plan, even the little bit we have been told about it.

[Guest tomk]

And, as far as the yuk factor...

Aren't we ALL brothers and sisters?

Hmmmmm?

Joseph Smith said we could learn more about man and God by gazing into heaven for one second than we could in a lifetime of learning on earth. There's no telling what this applies to or how far it extends. But, he made other comments about the "sociality" that exists among people in the spirit world that was very different than how it is here on earth. It's possible he meant the brother and sister thing, in part at least.

Adam and Eve?

It is my belief that they were born the same way every other man and woman were born on this earth. They were created from the same substance we are made of, the dust of the earth. However, they were born of an immortal mother. Obviously, since they fell from an immortal state to a mortal state, they had to be born immortal. Is this not how children will be born during the Millennium? But, for Christ to be born and shed His blood (mortal to immortal), reversing the effects of the fall (immortal to mortal), He had to be born of a mortal mother... meaning He had to be born after the Fall, but before the Millennium. Why not right in the middle?

It's really a miraculous plan, even the little bit we have been told about it.

I tried-out your theory of "Adam and Eve were literally born of Heavenly Father and Mother" here in these forums. Don't expect a warm reception to that, LOL. :)

Makes perfect sense to me. When you remove all else, it is the simplest and most logical answer to how Adam and Eve got here. I find the idea that we literally came from the dust a bit strange. God works by natural law, and I cannot think of anything more logical or natural than for He and Mother to have conceived Adam and Eve. To each His own, I guess.

[Guest tomk]

And why couldn't there have been HUNDREDS of "Adams and Eves" put on the earth at the same time as the Adam and Eve we know from Genesis?

That would also be a simpler, more logical answer to how the gene pool was "kept clean" and how brother was not required to marry sister. Yes, I am aware we are all "brother and sister" but that does not mean I can go marry my sister. I find that a bit repugnant, and I think so does Father.

I say the "Adam and Eve' we know from Genesis are a TYPE. But I am not sure that the family of "all the earth" came from JUST 2 parents, given our reality NOW and the way things work NOW genetically. Look at the Amish and the FLDS. You cannot work from such a small gene pool without having problems. Why would this have been any different when man and woman first came upon the earth?

[Hemidakota]

And, as far as the yuk factor...

Aren't we ALL brothers and sisters?

Hmmmmm?

Joseph Smith said we could learn more about man and God by gazing into heaven for one second than we could in a lifetime of learning on earth. There's no telling what this applies to or how far it extends. But, he made other comments about the "sociality" that exists among people in the spirit world that was very different than how it is here on earth. It's possible he meant the brother and sister thing, in part at least.

I concur on Joseph Smith comment as did Hugh B. Nibley who had ten-minutes to view and learn [from the Celestial Library] upon his short death experience.

Some Saints will have that opporunity and live to tell about it. Swallowing the pride on what they will see, they cannot express it openly and then give it to others or the Saints. I for one, have noted that among the faithless ones on this board when something is revealed.

Adam and Eve?

It is my belief that they were born the same way every other man and woman were born on this earth. They were created from the same substance we are made of, the dust of the earth. However, they were born of an immortal mother. Obviously, since they fell from an immortal state to a mortal state, they had to be born immortal. Is this not how children will be born during the Millennium? But, for Christ to be born and shed His blood (mortal to immortal), reversing the effects of the fall (immortal to mortal), He had to be born of a mortal mother... meaning He had to be born after the Fall, but before the Millennium. Why not right in the middle?

It's really a miraculous plan, even the little bit we have been told about it.

If one would use 'Patternization' as a analytical tool, that would be the conclusionary response. However, I would state, neither they were born under our Heavenly parents as birth from the womb. Let me show you why; the expression, 'The Only Begotten’ would be voided. Christ would not be the only begotten of the flesh if both Adam and Eve had immortal parents. See what I am referring too? God Himself lied. Now, I highly doubt that was the case in lying to His children.

No offense to my other brothers of the faith, namely President Young, Elder Olsen Pratt, my dearest friend President Spencer W. Kimball; Abraham, Moses, and Joseph Smith were all Seers and could view the past as it was. Yes, I do know the term Seer is given to all prophets but I can state, they were not privy to the past. Why? I do not know why God does not allow it. Now, we have the writings of the two [Abraham & Moses] and Joseph Smith during his mortal probation never agreed or stated that this was a metaphor. We still have one more that will be coming soon, Brother of Jared. He was a seer also and may of wrote the creational period in detail from his observation.

When we view the creation, there are some metaphors used and yet, there are some figurate accountings. We need to be careful how we approach this, for I do believe there is hidden truths that reveal far more than the beginning of man but the beginning of the Gods. The rib is place to note on what I am referring too. Even those who remote view this will add to this claim on what I saying.

[Guest tomk]

In my "world" -- the "Only Begottenness" of the Son is not actually threatened or impacted by the possibility that Adam and Eve were born of Heavenly Parents. It's apples and oranges.

My interpretation of "Only Begotten" refers to Infinite Immortal Man and Finite Mortal woman partnering to bring about a truly unique individual. One that could voluntarily BOTH live forever AND voluntarily die. Adam and Eve never could do this. The power was not within them.

Adam and Eve, the product of an Infinite Immortal Man, and an Infinite Immortal Woman, both physcially and spiritually -- NEVER possessed these attributes. When created, they had no power to DIE. Once mortal, they no longer possessed the ability to LIVE FOREVER.

Adam and Eve were nothing like the Only Begotten of the Father!!!!

Christ is and always will be the ONLY BEGOTTEN IN THE FLESH.

I can't explain it any better than that.

There is room in my faith and mind to have BOTH be true. One does not have to automatically NEGATE the other. Both can exist.

Spoken with Love,

Tom

[Justice]

Yes, Only Begotten in the flesh. I view "flesh" to mean mortal. Of course we know Adam was not born mortal. Eve would be a different discussion, since she was "taken" from Adam's rib, and not necessarily parented by Heavenly Father. It makes the distinction that Christ would come through the women's seed a little more plain.

Sure will be interesting to know all these things one day.

[checkerboy]

I find it interesting that no one has brought up what we learn in the temple yet. If you can go to the temple I suggest you do and pay attention. It answers all these questions.

No there weren't any other Adams or Eves.

Someone previously asked if Adam was called Adam before Eve was created. The answer is no he was called Michael.

We know that each earth that is created has its own Adam and Eve and each one was given the same test.

We know that every person on the earth is a direct descendent of Adam and Eve.

I know all these things because I learned them in the temple. I don't have to speculate wildly.

[gwozz]

I concur on Joseph Smith comment as did Hugh B. Nibley who had ten-minutes to view and learn [from the Celestial Library] upon his short death experience.

Some Saints will have that opporunity and live to tell about it. Swallowing the pride on what they will see, they cannot express it openly and then give it to others or the Saints. I for one, have noted that among the faithless ones on this board when something is revealed.

If one would use 'Patternization' as a analytical tool, that would be the conclusionary response. However, I would state, neither they were born under our Heavenly parents as birth from the womb. Let me show you why; the expression, 'The Only Begotten’ would be voided. Christ would not be the only begotten of the flesh if both Adam and Eve had immortal parents. See what I am referring too? God Himself lied. Now, I highly doubt that was the case in lying to His children.

No offense to my other brothers of the faith, namely President Young, Elder Olsen Pratt, my dearest friend President Spencer W. Kimball; Abraham, Moses, and Joseph Smith were all Seers and could view the past as it was. Yes, I do know the term Seer is given to all prophets but I can state, they were not privy to the past. Why? I do not know why God does not allow it. Now, we have the writings of the two [Abraham & Moses] and Joseph Smith during his mortal probation never agreed or stated that this was a metaphor. We still have one more that will be coming soon, Brother of Jared. He was a seer also and may of wrote the creational period in detail from his observation.

When we view the creation, there are some metaphors used and yet, there are some figurate accountings. We need to be careful how we approach this, for I do believe there is hidden truths that reveal far more than the beginning of man but the beginning of the Gods. The rib is place to note on what I am referring too. Even those who remote view this will add to this claim on what I saying.

The following expresses my personal opinion, and give the rational for the matter. Its lengthy, but address the answers I believe to have found to the issues you're all discussing. I wrote it to myself, trying to discover the truth on the matter (thus "we" should be just "me"):

We have been taught in the “Origin of Man” that Adam’s body started out as a “tiny germ embryo, which becomes an infant.” We can conclude from this that he was conceived, organized, and born just like our children continue to be today. That he had a father and mother, and was born after his own kind as an infant from the womb of his mother in the image of the Father. The great question that must follow is, does this teaching accord with gospel truths? Let us look further at what the scriptures teach on the matter.

Perhaps the first doctrinal point concerning the creation that we should address is that all things were organized, or created, by Jesus Christ as directed by the Father. In the words of King Benjamin: “And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary.” (Mosiah 3:8, italics added for emphasis) How extensively does the phrase “all things” extend? “Worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.” (Moses 1:33; see also D&C 14:9; 38:1-4; 76:22-24; Moses 7:39-30; John 1:1-3; Col. 1:16-17; Heb 1:1-3; Moses 1;2;3; MD 170)

While Jesus Christ is the chief executor under the direction of the Father (see Moses 2:1, Mosiah 3:8), we know that some of God’s other children were involved in the creation with Him. Abraham was shown the “intelligences” from before the world was, which are to be understood as the “personal spirits” of God’s children (see “The Father and the Son: a doctrinal exposition by the First Presidency and the Twelve” June 30, 1916, D&C 93:29). Among these spirit children “were many of the noble and great ones,” to whom Christ spoke when he said: “We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell.” (Abraham 3:22-24) Abraham was one of these individuals, as well as Michael, Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and I would imagine that all the prophets of God that have lived, or will live on this earth, were among that group (D&C 138:53-55, Abraham 3:23). Recognizing this, Abraham 4 makes much more sense, when it says that “the Gods” came down to organize the earth.

It was this group of individuals, with Christ at the head, who organized and “prepared the earth” and “waters” so that grass, herbs, fishes, fowls and every living creature could come forth “after its own kind” and have a place to dwell (see Moses 2:12, 20-24, Abraham 4:12, 21, 24, Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25). When it comes to the creation of man, however, there is more scripture given. Moses 2: 26-27 says:

26 And I, God, said unto mine Only Begotten, which was with me from the beginning: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and it was so. And I, God, said: Let them have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 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.

In these verses, God the Father is speaking to the Son, declaring that it was He who created man, male and female. The Father created man in his own image, which is the same image as His Only Begotten Son. If like creates like, and we are of the same kind as our brother Jesus Christ, who is literally God’s son in the flesh, could it be that Adam came from the same origin? If so, then the lineage of the race of men can be traced back to “Man of holiness,” whose “Only Begotten is the Son of Man.” (Moses 6:57, see also TPJS king follet)).

Mosiah 7:27 gives us some further insight into this teaching. It says: “Christ [is] the God, the Father of all things, and…he [shall] take upon him the image of man, and it should be the image after which man was created in the beginning; or in other words,…man was created after the image of God, and that God should come down among the children of men, and take upon him flesh and blood, and go forth upon the face of the earth.” Jesus Christ came to earth in “the image after which man was created in the beginning.” Therefore, if we know how Jesus came to the earth, we can also gain insight as to how Adam came to this earth. As all things grow out of the seed of the Son, understanding our origins is no different (see Alma 32-33).

Jesus is the Son of God the Father, the only begotten in the flesh. The next logical question would be, “if Christ is the ‘only begotten’, how then could Adam also claim to have the same father?” In order to answer this question, we’ll need a clear definition of what Christ’s title as the “only begotten” means. The bible dictionary gives us great insight into this point. It says: “Since flesh often means mortality, Adam is spoken of as the ‘first flesh’ upon the earth, meaning he was the first mortal on the earth, all things being created in a nonmortal condition, and becoming mortal through the fall of Adam. Jesus is the ‘Only Begotten of the Father’ in the flesh, meaning he is the only one begotten of the Father into mortality (Moses 3:7).”

Described another way, “Before the fall, Adam and Eve had physical bodies but no blood. There was no sin, no death, and no children among any of the earthly creations. With the eating of the ‘forbidden fruit,’ Adam and Eve became mortal, sin entered, blood formed in their bodies, and death became a part of life. Adam became the ‘first flesh’ upon the earth (Moses 3: 7), meaning that he and Eve were the first to become mortal. After Adam fell, the whole creation fell and became mortal. Adam’s fall brought both physical and spiritual death into the world upon all mankind (Hel. 14: 16-17).” (BD “Fall of Adam”)

“Flesh,” as used here, is synonymous with the death and disease which comes from having blood in our veins (see Gen 9:2-6; Lev 17:10-15; MD 268). Adam and Eve did not have blood running in their veins until they fell, and as they were the first to fall, there was no blood, death or disease among any of God’s creations before them. They were the “first flesh” of all the creations, meaning they were the first to fall and have blood. Adam’s parents were both immortal beings who did not have blood. Therefore, when Adam was born, he inherited immortality from his parents and would have lived forever in their presence were it not for the fall (see 2 Nephi 2:22-26). Thus Adam was not begotten of the flesh because he did not have blood in his veins at birth.

Jesus Christ, however, was born of the flesh. Gospel Principles gives a clear definition of what this means exactly. It states: “Jesus is the only person on earth to be born of a mortal mother and an immortal father. That is why he is called the Only Begotten Son” (pg 64). In the glossary of the same book, it defines “Jesus Christ” as “The Only Begotten Son of the Father in the flesh and the Firstborn Son in the spirit; our Redeemer and Savior” (pg 379).

Jesus Christ is the only begotten son of the Father of the flesh because he was born in blood. This is so because his literal mother was mortal while his father immortal. It is this dual inheritance that enabled him to pass through all the trials of mortality, allowing him to die, while at the same time possessing the power to break the bands of death and resurrect from the grave. It is only by realizing and believing that Jesus really is the Son of God, that we can understand all of the truths of the gospel which grow out of it.

As Adam was born without blood, neither of his parents possessed it either. It was not until Adam’s transgression that he fell, had blood form in his veins, thus becoming mortal. Adam was therefore not born of blood, or of the flesh. Jesus on the other hand, was born of a mortal mother and immortal father. As such, he was born of blood, or of the flesh. There is no doctrinal conflict between Adam as a "son of God", and Jesus as the "only begotten of the Father" (see Moses 6:22, Abraham 1:3, Luke 3:38 JST Luke 3:35).

If indeed Adam’s parents were immortal and exalted beings, they would have been from another sphere. Yet Adam’s physical body was “formed from the dust of the ground” (Moses 3:7, Abr 5:7). Being created from the dust of the ground is a common metaphor used in scripture to refer to the natural birthing process (See Moses 6:59, Jacob 2:21, Mosiah 2:25, MD “dust”). The underlying truth upon which this metaphor is based is the concept that nothing is created out of nothing. “The elements are eternal” and cannot be created or made (see D&C 93:33, 29). All is created from unorganized matter, both spiritual creations and physical creations alike (D&C 131:7-8; 93:33-34; JD 13:248; TPJS 354). As “that which is spiritual [is] in the likeness of that which is temporal,” let us detail out the physical and we can infer that the spiritual is like unto it (D&C 77:2).

In order for a physical body to be prepared, a woman has to eat food, which gets completely broken down to the building blocks of life in our digestive tracts. All of the meat, fruit, vegetables, and other food types are completely broken down into amino acids, sugars, fatty acids, and other nutrients before it gets absorbed into our blood stream. In other words, the previously organized matter gets degraded into its unorganized form. These unorganized building blocks are essentially nothing more than dust, or the “dust of the earth.” The miracle of creation is manifest as this matter unorganized becomes organized into a body which is in the image of the God of the heavens. Little by little, step by step, unorganized matter organizes itself in the womb of the mother through the miracle of life.

Perhaps thinking in this way will help us better understand what is being taught when the “Origin of Man” says: “True it is that the body of man enters upon its career as a tiny germ embryo, which becomes an infant, quickened at a certain stage by the spirit whose tabernacle it is, and the child, after being born, develops into a man. There is nothing in this, however, to indicate that the original man, the first of our race, began life as anything less than a man, or less than the human germ or embryo that becomes a man.”

We are taught that those who inherit the celestial kingdom and come forth in the first resurrection will receive a celestial body, even “the same body which was a natural body” (D&C 88:28, 1 Cor 15:40-42). Only in the highest of the celestial will a man and a woman continue to be married, and have the promise of eternal lives and the continuation of seed (see D&C 131:1-4, 132:20-24). We know that “as man is, God once was; as God is, man may be” (see Articles of Faith, 430; TPJS, 345). We know that like come from like, and God is a holy man of our same race (see King Follet Discourse). We know that scripture declares Adam to be a “son of God,” referred to as the “firstborn.” (Moses 6:22; Abr. 1:33) We also know that “the original man, the first of our race, began life as…the human germ or embryo that becomes a man.” (Origin of Man) Linking all these truths together into one, simple, explanation, would cause us to believe that “Adam, our earthly parent, was also born of woman, the same as Jesus and you and I.” (Joseph F. Smith, from a speech given December 7, 1913, and reprinted in Deseret News, December 27, 1913, Section III, p.7.; see also JD 7:285; JD 3:319;)

Man is the “child of God,” the “direct and lineal offspring of Diety.” (Origin of Man) We know that God is literally the father of our spirits, but what we may not contemplate is that as Adam’s physical father, He would then be our physical ancestor as well. That would mean that in a literal sense, we have the seeds of divinity within us—the capacity to grow up and become like God our Father. In the words of Paul: “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.” (Romans 8:16-17)

I believe that we do have both the spiritual and physical seeds of divinity within us—that all the tools we need to become like Father are within us; and through the atonement of the Son, we have the potential to grow up to be like Father someday. That the reason and purpose behind the sealing of generations together in one unbreakable chain back to our father Adam is so that we have a rightful claim to the same covenant of heirship that Adam received because of his birthright (see Mal 4:5-6). For this purpose came Jesus Christ into the world, that through his atoning sacrifice, the fallen offspring of God can become reinstated and worthy to inherit their divine birthright jointly with Him (see Romans 8:16-17; D&C 76:53-70, 94-96; 131:1-4; 132:20-24; 84:32-40;).

[Guest tomk]

I find it interesting that no one has brought up what we learn in the temple yet. If you can go to the temple I suggest you do and pay attention. It answers all these questions.

No there weren't any other Adams or Eves.

Someone previously asked if Adam was called Adam before Eve was created. The answer is no he was called Michael.

We know that each earth that is created has its own Adam and Eve and each one was given the same test.

We know that every person on the earth is a direct descendent of Adam and Eve.

I know all these things because I learned them in the temple. I don't have to speculate wildly.

Well, I have tried, in the past, to reference the Temple ceremony, and I got zapped by the Moderators. So an appeal to the Temple ceremony as the source for these "clear answers" is not something I will be able to get into with you here, lest I make the same mistake again.

No offense, but lots of people I know make authoritative statements about how things are or aren't. If you spend any time on FAIR or FARMS you'll see that such statements ARE up for discussion, and are NOT clear to everybody.

I am not trying to do this. I am simply presenting a hypothesis, and trying to see if anyone can shed some light on it. Telling me "I went to the temple and paid attention, so I know the answer" does not help me a whole lot.

My ideas make sense to me. They seem, to me, to be the simplest and most logical explanation for the origins of Adam and Eve as well as how the human family was able to be brought forth without encountering serious genetic defects in the resultant offspring. What is true today was probably true with Adam and Eve. Man is Man is Man, and the same blood and DNA that ran through Adam's bloodstream runs through mine.

God operates by law. He operates by cause and effect.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy into "Hey, I made the universe. I hold planets in their orbit. But when it came to man, my children, I resorted to water and clay. My eternal companion did not figure-in. I have billions of spirit children (I believe by the same processes as we use to create our own children) but man -- I made him from some dust."

It just does not make sense. To me.