How Was Eve Formed?

[orion88]

Several places in the Book of Mormon and the Bible indicate that Eve was

formed from the rib of Adam.

Chapter 7 (page 18) of the Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student

Manual says, "speaking of the creation of Adam and Eve, the story of the rib,

of course, is figurative".

http://www.ldsces.org/inst_manuals/doc-gos...osp-01-10.htm#7

What is your opinion? Was it a literal rib or a figurative one?

Tony

[bluebell]

Figurative.

[cdowis]

Just like anyone else, according to BY. She was born to a mother, as was Adam.

[Phinehas]

Adam brought Eve here with him.

[BCSpace]

Figurative. To me, it may refer to the fact that Eve was created out of the same materials/processes as Adam. Evolution in other words.....

[PacMan]

Literal. A stem-cell was taken from the rib and from it, God formed the body of woman.

Either that or dust. Which makes more sense?

[cdowis]

Figurative. To me, it may refer to the fact that Eve was created out of the same materials/processes as Adam. Evolution in other words.....

OK, and it was evolution that brought both Adam, the first man, and Eve,the first woman together at the same time and place?

Evolution does not seem to be able to answer that question, but perhaps you can take a shot at it.

[charity's child]

I heard somewhere once that the best cells for duplication come from the area of the ribs. Might just be a FPR, though.

[BCSpace]

Figurative. To me, it may refer to the fact that Eve was created out of the same materials/processes as Adam. Evolution in other words.....

OK, and it was evolution that brought both Adam, the first man, and Eve,the first woman together at the same time and place?

Sure. Why not? Modern homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years or more. I postulate that prior to Adam and Eve, the spirits (lesser) that inhabited homo sapiens were not literal spirit children of God. Adam and Eve were the first homo sapiens to have such spirits placed within them and then they were placed in the Garden.

[hagoth7]

What is your opinion? Was it a literal rib or a figurative one?

Figurative. Symbolism.

[changed]

What is your opinion? Was it a literal rib or a figurative one?

Tony

figurative...

Here is another account... if anyone is interested...

The revelation which Adam taught his son Seth in the seven hundredth year, saying, Listen to my words, my son Seth. When God had created me out of the earth along with Eve, your mother, I went about with her in a glory which she had seen in the Aeon from which we had come forth. She taught me a word of knowledge of the eternal God. And we resembled the great angels, for we were higher than the God who had created us and the powers with him, whom we did not know.

Then God, the ruler of the Aeons and the powers, divided us in wrath. Then we became two Aeons. And the glory in our hearts left us , me and your mother Eve, along with the first knowledge that breathed within us.And glory fled from us; not from this Aeon from which we had come forth, I and Eve your mother.But knowledge entered into the seed of great Aeons.For this reason I myself have called you by the name of that man who is the seed of the great generation or from whom it comes.After those days the eternal knowledge of the God of truth withdrew from me and your mother Eve.Since that time we learned about dead things, like men.Then we recognized the God who had created us. For we were not strangers to his powers.And we served him in fear and slavery.And after these events we became darkened in our hearts. Now I slept in the thought of my heart.

http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/pseudepigrapha/adam.htm

make of it what you will...

some more interesting ancient texts for anyone interested...

http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/

[Hoops22]

Figurative. To me, it may refer to the fact that Eve was created out of the same materials/processes as Adam. Evolution in other words.....

I question your "fact". Eve was not formed from evolution.

Sure. Why not? Modern homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years or more. I postulate that prior to Adam and Eve, the spirits (lesser) that inhabited homo sapiens were not literal spirit children of God. Adam and Eve were the first homo sapiens to have such spirits placed within them and then they were placed in the Garden.

Actually, no, it's been about 6 thousand years - plus six days

[JAHS]

Several places in the Book of Mormon and the Bible indicate that Eve was

formed from the rib of Adam.

Chapter 7 (page 18) of the Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student

Manual says, "speaking of the creation of Adam and Eve, the story of the rib,

of course, is figurative".

http://www.ldsces.org/inst_manuals/doc-gos...osp-01-10.htm#7

What is your opinion? Was it a literal rib or a figurative one?

Tony

In other words...did Eve have a belly button?

The scriptures tell us that God made Adam's body from dust of this earth(Morm. 9: 17, D&C 77: 12, Moses 3: 7), and placed Adam in the Garden as an immortal being with flesh and bone.

The book of Moses states that Adam's children were also created from the dust of the earth (see Moses 6:59). The same expression used to describe the bodily creation of Adam's children was used to describe the creation of Adam's body. Does this not suggest the same natural process was used? Adam is also spoken of as being the "son of God" (Moses 6:22). So it is possible that Adam's immortal body was formed by immortal heavenly parents in a similar fashion that Adam and Eve created their own children. If this is true then Eve was probably created the same way as Adam.

[BCSpace]

Figurative. To me, it may refer to the fact that Eve was created out of the same materials/processes as Adam. Evolution in other words.....

I question your "fact". Eve was not formed from evolution.

Feel free. To me, as I said, it is a fact.

Sure. Why not? Modern homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years or more. I postulate that prior to Adam and Eve, the spirits (lesser) that inhabited homo sapiens were not literal spirit children of God. Adam and Eve were the first homo sapiens to have such spirits placed within them and then they were placed in the Garden.

Actually, no, it's been about 6 thousand years - plus six days

Not according to science, which does not conflict with the scriptures or LDS doctrine. Actually, it is also LDS doctrine that anyone who says the Church has a doctrine on the age of the earth is wrong and that after positing that the earth is likely far older than 6000 years.

[kamenraider]

Sure. Why not? Modern homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years or more. I postulate that prior to Adam and Eve, the spirits (lesser) that inhabited homo sapiens were not literal spirit children of God. Adam and Eve were the first homo sapiens to have such spirits placed within them and then they were placed in the Garden.

So were Adam and Eve procreated directly by God then? I thought you believed Elden Watson's idea that God and Mrs. God were also called Adam and Eve.

[BCSpace]

Sure. Why not? Modern homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years or more. I postulate that prior to Adam and Eve, the spirits (lesser) that inhabited homo sapiens were not literal spirit children of God. Adam and Eve were the first homo sapiens to have such spirits placed within them and then they were placed in the Garden.

So were Adam and Eve procreated directly by God then?

Not their physical bodies no.

I thought you believed Elden Watson's idea that God and Mrs. God were also called Adam and Eve.

I personally don't believe that at all. I do believe that is the correct interpretation of BY's opinion as opposed to the Adam-God theory.

[Hoops22]

Not according to science,

Which dating method are you using? Because they range from 4,000 years to 4.5 billion.

To me, as I said, it is a fact.

You believing it does not make it a fact.

[BCSpace]

Not according to science,

Which dating method are you using?

Isochron Radiometric Dating on uranium-lead isotopes or lead-gelana and helioseismic verification. Actually, there are about 40 or so different ways to do it. The precision seems to be within about 1%. 4.55 or 4.54 billion years.

To me, as I said, it is a fact.

You believing it does not make it a fact.

Did I say it did?

[Ron Beron]

Several places in the Book of Mormon and the Bible indicate that Eve was

formed from the rib of Adam.

Chapter 7 (page 18) of the Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student

Manual says, "speaking of the creation of Adam and Eve, the story of the rib,

of course, is figurative".

http://www.ldsces.org/inst_manuals/doc-gos...osp-01-10.htm#7

What is your opinion? Was it a literal rib or a figurative one?

Tony

From all indications it is actually a play on words. In Sumerian mythology the gods persuade Ninhursag (their Eve) to cure Enki (Sumerian for EA or YHWH), "My brother Enki, what hurts you? My rib hurts me. To the goddess Ninti I (Ninhursag) have given birth for you."

The word for rib in Sumerian, ti, is the same for the word "to make live". Therefore, a pun is intended by Hebrew transcriber who formed the first Hebrew Bible to equate the "Lady of the Rib" with the "Lady who Gives Life", a pun that was lost in translation by whichever scribe that incorporated Babylonian writings into the Bible.

[Connolly]

I question your "fact". Eve was not formed from evolution.Actually, no, it's been about 6 thousand years - plus six days

If you are a one of the "six thousand year" -ers then you should learn which year it is. It hasn't been 6,000 years. You have a couple of centuries yet to go. Your grandchildren's grandchildren's children may see the 6K year mark if they live long enough.

(Personally, I believe that homo-sapiens have been around for about 200,000 years.)

[Hoops22]

Isochron Radiometric Dating on uranium-lead isotopes or lead-gelana and helioseismic verification. Actually, there are about 40 or so different ways to do it. The precision seems to be within about 1%. 4.55 or 4.54 billion years.Did I say it did?

Your dating method makes some assumptions that have not been validated, and some which are suspect at best.

If you are a one of the "six thousand year" -ers then you should learn which year it is. It hasn't been 6,000 years. You have a couple of centuries yet to go. Your grandchildren's grandchildren's children may see the 6K year mark if they live long enough.(Personally, I believe that homo-sapiens have been around for about 200,000 years.)

I'm willing to be within a century or two.

[Hoops22]

Isochron Radiometric Dating on uranium-lead isotopes or lead-gelana and helioseismic verification. Actually, there are about 40 or so different ways to do it. The precision seems to be within about 1%. 4.55 or 4.54 billion years.

Did I say it did?

Then it's not a fact. It's your opinion.

So should I assume that you reject the biblical account of creation in Genesis?

[kawikadave]

Figurative.

My best guess is that Adam and Eve were born like everyone else of parents who lived elsewhere. I also believe that the term "formed from the dust" is figurative. I don't believe God created Adam by moving molecules around, but I absolutely could be wrong.

It seems clear that God isn't really interested in telling us exactly how and when the Creation occurred or how and when other earths have existed. That's okay with me.

[Hoops22]

Figurative.

My best guess is that Adam and Eve were born like everyone else of parents who lived elsewhere. I also believe that the term "formed from the dust" is figurative. I don't believe God created Adam by moving molecules around, but I absolutely could be wrong.

It seems clear that God isn't really interested in telling us exactly how and when the Creation occurred or how and when other earths have existed. That's okay with me.

But He did. Gen 1. In fact, He's pretty well specific.

[kawikadave]

But He did. Gen 1. In fact, He's pretty well specific.

Gen 1 also said that a snake spoke to Adam and Eve and that God cursed the snake so that it would crawl on its belly and eat dust.

That sounds pretty specific. How did the serpent get around before God cursed it? Do snakes eat dust or small mammals?

I'm not trying to give you a hard time. I believe the account in Genesis, but I believe that some of what is described there is figurative. I'll agree that it's a bit tough at times to decipher what is figurative and what is literal.

Wouldn't you agree?