Adam and Eve

[VisionOfLehi]

"Water and clay." ?

Tomk, how do you think spirits were created? They were FORMED, we know that, from intelligence and light which always existed.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that Heavenly Father FORMED (as scriptures teach us) Adam in Eve in a similar fashion.

WHAT exactly that fashion is, we don't know, and I don't think we should particularly speculate.

But there's physical laws, and spiritual laws. Physical laws can be broken, spiritual laws can not. If Heavenly Father used a spiritual law to create the first, He could have easily broken a physical law.

Christ walked on water. Moses parted the seas.

Yes, God operates by law.

Edit: I also believe that "dust" means that he made them from the same stuff the Earth is made of, not literally dust. It means they weren't angels, or beings of light, but physical, even before the fall. And that "formed them" means He didn't just pop them out of nowhere, Creatio Ex Nihilo style.

[gwozz]

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

My friend told me that his dad, who was friends with the prophet that He said one time that evolution is false... Second hand stories concerning opinions of the GA's is not really what I was looking for (nor would I ever base my personal beliefs on such stories). I've never read a first-hand statement by a general authority (even in private books or opinions) claiming a belief that evolution is true. Yes, some statements say "leave it alone" or "leave science to science," but never a statement of validation. These types of quotes are not reliable in my personal opinion. Do you have any first-hand statements by chance?

[Guest tomk]

"Water and clay." ?

We're composed of 70% water. The rest boils down to carbon and a few other elements, does it not? Sounds like water and clay to me.

Tomk, how do you think spirits were created? They were FORMED, we know that, from intelligence and light which always existed.

They were organized. And yes, they always existed.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that Heavenly Father FORMED (as scriptures teach us) Adam in Eve in a similar fashion.

Yes. But I think I define "similar fashion" differently than you and checkerboy.

WHAT exactly that fashion is, we don't know, and I don't think we should particularly speculate.

Well, then you need not participate in this thread any longer.

But there's physical laws, and spiritual laws. Physical laws can be broken, spiritual laws can not. If Heavenly Father used a spiritual law to create the first, He could have easily broken a physical law.

I disagree. Physical laws can't be broken. They never are broken. Heavenly Father simply operates at a level we don't (normally) have access to. But that is not the same thing as disregarding the law.

Christ walked on water. Moses parted the seas.

Yes - but those things were done by following physical and spirital laws, always.

Yes, God operates by law.

Atleast on this much, we agree. :)

Edit: I also believe that "dust" means that he made them from the same stuff the Earth is made of, not literally dust. It means they weren't angels, or beings of light, but physical, even before the fall. And that "formed them" means He didn't just pop them out of nowhere, Creatio Ex Nihilo style.

................

[gwozz]

................

You should read my Second to last post...

[Guest tomk]

You should read my Second to last post...

I read it.

And?

[gwozz]

I read it.

And?

You didn't think the now third to last post addressed the issue?

[Guest tomk]

You didn't think the now third to last post explained the issue? Very well.

I guess I didn't.

Listen - let's set aside the Creation Account for just a minute.

Let us remind ourselves of one simple, pure truth.

There IS a Heavenly Father AND a Heavenly Mother.

We have been given a command to multiply and replenish the earth. We are familiar with how our children are created. The union of man and woman.

I believe that our method of procreation, ordained unto us by Heavenly Parents - is not only the means by which spirits are provided with physical tabernacles -- but is also intended to be a TYPE and a SHADOW of how things will be in the eternities.

Everything in our experience points to the union of man and woman being THE method for bringing forth children. Period. We need not waste time considering alternate methods of creating physical bodies OR spiritual bodies. We have the method before us already.

So, you have billions of spirits, created by that method -- the method that spans all of eternity -- the method that is BUILT INTO mankind as THE WAY to create children. Here they are, waiting to come down to earth.

If you were God -- what would "make sense" ?????

If you can create the "Only Begotten" by taking an Infinite, Immortal Being and a Finite, Mortal woman -- why is it such a stretch to create Adam and Eve via the same ordained method. And it would make sense....the union of an Immortal Father and Immortal Mother would result in Immortal Offspring.

Nobody here needs to agree with me....but if you ask me...I am sitting on solid ground here. No huge leaps of faith or logic are required. Natual laws are followed. No deviation occurs from the eternal pattern of procreation.

I can keep repeating myself over and over, I guess.

[erichazelle]

Allrighty, let's see if I can't throw a bit of gasoline on this fire. This is just for fun, folks; but sometimes we need to think of outside-the-box alternatives to come at the truth. (Though I like the Endowment interpretations from Tomk and others; that's got me thinking, too.) Anyway: Hugh Nibley in "Old Testament and Related Studies" writes, "The latter-day Saints are the only Bible-oriented people who have always been taught that things were happening long, long before Adam appeared on the scene." (Page 49.) "Do not begrudge existence to creatures that looked like men long, long ago, nor deny them a place in God's affection or even a right to exaltation . . . God assigned them their proper times and functions, as he has given me mine . . . " (Page 82.) Adam and Eve were told to . . . "replenish the earth." You don't replenish something unless something was already there, and depleted. (Perhaps an extinction of evolved humanoids? The scriptures also refer to the "Sons of God marrying the daughters of men." (Gen. 6: 2.) Did the sons of Adam intermarry with leftover daughters of the evolved, nearly extinct race? (And thus exacerbate the effects of the fall?)

A common mistake we L.D.S. make is to assume that there is only one set of people: Adam and the patriarchs, or Lehi and his family in the Book of Mormon, when oblique evidence in those scriptures gives us much reason to think these people existed in a milieu of many others who, for some reason, aren't directly referred to.

Well, that's my third post for this day; I've caused enough trouble, I'm going to bed.

[gwozz]

Well, my personal opinion: You are on rock solid ground TomK. It is the central tennet of our religion to declare that Jesus is the Son of God--as hopefully everyone's sunday school lesson will teach this week (I just read through the lesson chapters). There are varying opinions as to what that means, but Abinidi was killed for teaching it, and so was Jesus. Personally, I believe is impossible to understand the creation story without standing upon the firm ground that Jesus is the Son. All things grow from it, and the resurrection is the irrefutable proof that Jesus is the Son of not Joseph, but literally the Son of God. We are agreed, but I'm sure many will disagree with us.

[gwozz]

Allrighty, let's see if I can't throw a bit of gasoline on this fire. This is just for fun, folks; but sometimes we need to think of outside-the-box alternatives to come at the truth. (Though I like the Endowment interpretations from Tomk and others; that's got me thinking, too.) Anyway: Hugh Nibley in "Old Testament and Related Studies" writes, "The latter-day Saints are the only Bible-oriented people who have always been taught that things were happening long, long before Adam appeared on the scene." (Page 49.) "Do not begrudge existence to creatures that looked like men long, long ago, nor deny them a place in God's affection or even a right to exaltation . . . God assigned them their proper times and functions, as he has given me mine . . . " (Page 82.) Adam and Eve were told to . . . "replenish the earth." You don't replenish something unless something was already there, and depleted. (Perhaps an extinction of evolved humanoids? The scriptures also refer to the "Sons of God marrying the daughters of men." (Gen. 6: 2.) Did the sons of Adam intermarry with leftover daughters of the evolved, nearly extinct race? (And thus exacerbate the effects of the fall?)

A common mistake we L.D.S. make is to assume that there is only one set of people: Adam and the patriarchs, or Lehi and his family in the Book of Mormon, when oblique evidence in those scriptures gives us much reason to think these people existed in a milieu of many others who, for some reason, aren't directly referred to.

Well, that's my third post for this day; I've caused enough trouble, I'm going to bed.

To each his own. Hugh Nibley's opinion... If I were to pick opinions upon which to base my beleifs, I'd at least choose a general authority. Like Boyd K. Packer's--if you haven't read it, entitled "the law and the light," you really should. Incredible document on this issue found here:

http://moleff.com/church/TheLawandtheLight.pdf

My favorite quote: "And I am sorry to say, the so-called theistic evolution, the theory that God used an evolutionary process to prepare a physical body for the spirit of man, is equally false. I say I am sorry because I know it is a view commonly held by good and thoughtful people who search for an acceptable resolution to an apparent conflict between the theory of evolution and the doctrines of the gospel."

This is followed by six reasons for his conviction. Check it out.

[rameumptom]

I'd like to note Pres Packer's most recent General Conference talk, where he says that he isn't any more special than any other member that does his/her best to follow God.

Remember, The apostolic calling is not to determine things like evolution, but doctrine. As it is, Nibley doesn't state that evolution has occurred. He is stating that there were animals and human-like beings prior to Adam. The LDS scriptures and the dirt tell us that there have been many Creation/Destruction cycles throughout the Earth's history. 250M years ago, over 90% of all animals were destroyed, allowing for dinosaurs to replace them. Then 65M years ago, the dinosaurs were wiped out, allowing mammals to take over the earth. Finally, 10,000 years ago was an Ice Age that wiped out many species, including several human-like species, such as Neanderthals.

This would open the door for God to create a special man and woman, Adam and Eve, who would be the ones chosen to bear the priesthood gift to all the world, and through whose loins would be born Jesus Christ.

[WillowTheWhisp]

This leaves me with an interesting question - was the earth made for man or was man made for the earth?

[Hemidakota]

Earth for man...every element beside him[her] adopts to GOD's progeny; including animals.

[Hemidakota]

I'd like to note Pres Packer's most recent General Conference talk, where he says that he isn't any more special than any other member that does his/her best to follow God.

Remember, The apostolic calling is not to determine things like evolution, but doctrine. As it is, Nibley doesn't state that evolution has occurred. He is stating that there were animals and human-like beings prior to Adam. The LDS scriptures and the dirt tell us that there have been many Creation/Destruction cycles throughout the Earth's history. 250M years ago, over 90% of all animals were destroyed, allowing for dinosaurs to replace them. Then 65M years ago, the dinosaurs were wiped out, allowing mammals to take over the earth. Finally, 10,000 years ago was an Ice Age that wiped out many species, including several human-like species, such as Neanderthals.

This would open the door for God to create a special man and woman, Adam and Eve, who would be the ones chosen to bear the priesthood gift to all the world, and through whose loins would be born Jesus Christ.

I would disagree with anything that is not human that was before since there is no skeleton complete. Not only that, remember the resurrection. However, there still off since we cannot account too how many layers of different earths were used.

Anything that is found is either bit and pieces, claiming some resemblance or other unknown animals that were not part of the latest creation...now, let me remind everyone, one who is called and chosen by the Lord, who is and will be entitled to the knowledge of the Earth beneath, Earth above, and 'what was' and 'what shall be'. This is not just imaginary pure fiction but comes with the election principle. One who is called to be an Apostle, they are bound "witnesses" of the Savior and to preach the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Never discount that they are not blessed to receive such.

[Hemidakota]

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

Tom, you are displaying a two-edge sword - either it is or it isn't.

I too have room for change.

[Hemidakota]

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.

Good thought...one of the question I raised that a few are willing to take a stab at, that is what is a child birth from two immortal Celestial Beings?

As Apostle B.H. Roberts stated, "...there is underlying hidden message with Adam's rib dealing with the procreation."

[Justice]

It doesn't really matter what life looked like before Adam, we know Adam was the first offspring of Heavenly Father to live on this planet. Maybe other animals resembled man to a large degree, but they were not His offspring.

Tom, we think alike. Those are all questions I have asked others, almost word for word.

I believe we look too far, sometimes, for answers that are given right in front of us. Just because we don't see how or why God procreates by a method, namely the same way we do, doesn't mean He doesn't. Remember, God views things totally different than we do. He is pure and perfected.

Aren't things physical made to teach us of things spiritual?

We say, well, then Mary couldn't have been a virgin if... well you know. But, remember the child she carried was of an immortal, perfected being. I say virgin still.

It doesn't make sense why sexual immorality would be second only to murder itself on the chain of worse commandments to break, unless there was more to it than we can see through mortal eyes.

The answer to the question whether or not Adam's physical body had a belly button or not is an emphatic YES. It can not be any other way... so the Spirit says.

[Hemidakota]

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;).

Can we today, grow life in a test tube?

[Guest tomk]

Tom, you are displaying a two-edge sword - either it is or it isn't.

I too have room for change.

It is only a two-edged sword if you are unwilling to see that there was no violation of the Son's "only begottenness" when Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother created Adam and Eve.

You say yes, it would have been.

I say no, it wouldn't have.

[Hemidakota]

"Water and clay." ?

Tomk, how do you think spirits were created? They were FORMED, we know that, from intelligence and light which always existed.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that Heavenly Father FORMED (as scriptures teach us) Adam in Eve in a similar fashion.

WHAT exactly that fashion is, we don't know, and I don't think we should particularly speculate.

But there's physical laws, and spiritual laws. Physical laws can be broken, spiritual laws can not. If Heavenly Father used a spiritual law to create the first, He could have easily broken a physical law.

Christ walked on water. Moses parted the seas.

Yes, God operates by law.

Edit: I also believe that "dust" means that he made them from the same stuff the Earth is made of, not literally dust. It means they weren't angels, or beings of light, but physical, even before the fall. And that "formed them" means He didn't just pop them out of nowhere, Creatio Ex Nihilo style.

God's is bound through the Celestial Laws. The Lord is not bound under the Telestial Laws and easier for Him and others are caught up to be those called Chosen, to do what we call miracles but really it isn't.

[Hemidakota]

It is only a two-edged sword if you are unwilling to see that there was no violation of the Son's "only begottenness" when Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother created Adam and Eve.

You say yes, it would have been.

I say no, it wouldn't have.

This is going to be 'a long fasting and prayer' in seeking the answer. Forums like this opens the doors to other closed doors that most would not dare to venture. I am grateful for many here. Though, we may have disagreement, we question, we ponder, we reanalysis, and then proposed that answer to see if we are right.

Thanks

Do you think the Savior was part immortal?

[Guest tomk]

This is going to be 'a long fasting and prayer' in seeking the answer. Forums like this opens the doors to other closed doors that most would not dare to venture. I am grateful for many here. Though, we may have disagreement, we question, we ponder, we reanalysis, and then proposed that answer to see if we are right.

Thanks

Do you think the Savior was part immortal?

I think I am done trying to explain this anymore.

[Hemidakota]

I do apologize Tom...but sincerely thank you for insight.

[Justice]

I wasn't going to do this because it was a profound spiritual moment the day I was taught this, and I don't want to ruin it for any of you who may discover this in the future. But, I feel moved to post this anyway.

Genesis 2:

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

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Now, Adam had no knowledge of good or evil at this point, and no knowledge of procreation. In fact, I can show you scriptures where God used fruit to teach Adam about how procreation works. Think of the first plant life created...

Genesis 1:

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

What kind of trees did God place in the garden to represent the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and more importantly, the tree of life?

Hmmmm, the Tree of Life is a fruit tree with seed within itself that bears fruit after it's kind. I can promise you that a course of study along this line will lead you to amazing places, taking you to the sacrament and eating flesh. Is not Christ the "firstfruits" of those that rose from the earth? Is He not the Word of God made flesh? Aren't seeds used to portray the word of God in several stories and parables? Are we not supposed to feast on the word of God?

I know this seems off topic, but trust me, it isn't. We were taken from the "dust of the earth," or mother earth. You break the surface and place a seed inside. If you tend to the planted seed then a remarkable thing happens. It brings forth a tree of it's kind with more fruit with seeds of it's kind. It doesn't matter what kind of seed you plant in the earth, it will yield it's own kind once planted. I know that seems insignificant, because it seems so elementary to us. But, it's pretty amazing as a teaching tool if you think about it. God was teaching Adam that he was seed after His kind.

Adam was speaking about his Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother in Genesis 2: 24. He knew he and Eve would have seed at some point, because he was commanded to multiply and replenish the earth.

and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth

If you gain nothing else from this discussion, you can at least take God's word for what a fruit is, then you will know of a surety that a tomato is a fruit. :)

Finally, look at what Eve said very closely:

Moses 5:

11 And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.

Seed=fruit to eat to live mortally (which also led to making a choice)

Seed=children which brings the greatest happiness

Seed=word of God to inherit eternal life

Christ literally is the Bread of Life, or the Flesh of Life.

What really happened to Him in Gethsemane and on Golgotha (shedding His blood) is really the cause for all eternal life. He shed His blood, not like you and I, but shed it completely. Just as Adam fell from immortality to mortality, Christ shed His blood and changed His mortal body to an immortal one.

It's all about life and seeds and procreation. I just hit the very few highlights, maybe you can fill in the blanks while reading and studying the scriptures.

[Guest tomk]

Hemi:

No apology is sought in this matter at all.

My exploration of these things is FAITH FILLED.

I love the Lord. If I am wrong about my "theory" -- He will instruct me.

I can quite easily live my life without ever having the Creation Account answered to my full satisfaction, if such ends up being the case.

My rock, my rod and my staff, is the Living Christ. Faith, Repentance, Baptism, the Gift of the Holy Ghost. That is enough for me, from moment to moment, dear brother.

Love,

Tom