cinepro Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 (edited) Well, we continue to disagree, but I think we're repeating ourselves. A few questions:1. Do you think the majority of active recommend holders leaving a temple session (including GAs) would believe that the snake/serpent from Genesis 3 is a literal snake that talks or an actual personage (that is not literally a snake)?2. Are there differences between the Genesis account and the temple presentation? If so, does this mean that that Genesis account is corrupt or that the temple additions are not literal but principle-based (figurative or symbolic)? Or is it something else?I have more, but we can start there. So the question is whether or not Eve (who was an actual, real woman) was talking with something that appeared as a human man, or a snake? I suspect Moses 4 has the best description of what happened. From the scriptural account there, do you think Satan has literally taken the form of a "serpent" (i.e. possessed a snake-like animal), or is "serpent" more of a figurative word for Satan's cunning? 4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice. 5 And now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which I, the Lord God, had made. 6 And Satan put it into the heart of the serpent, (for he had drawn away many after him,) and he sought also to beguile Eve, for he knew not the mind of God, wherefore he sought to destroy the world. 7 And he said unto the woman: Yea, hath God said—Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (And he spake by the mouth of the serpent.) 8 And the woman said unto the serpent: We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; 9 But of the fruit of the tree which thou beholdest in the midst of the garden, God hath said—Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 10 And the serpent said unto the woman: Ye shall not surely die; 11 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. 12 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it became pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make her wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and also gave unto her husband with her, and he did eat. 13 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they had been naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons. 14 And they heard the voice of the Lord God, as they were walking in the garden, in the cool of the day; and Adam and his wife went to hide themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden. 15 And I, the Lord God, called unto Adam, and said unto him: Where goest thou? 16 And he said: I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I beheld that I was naked, and I hid myself. 17 And I, the Lord God, said unto Adam: Who told thee thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, if so thou shouldst surely die? 18 And the man said: The woman thou gavest me, and commandest that she should remain with me, she gave me of the fruit of the tree and I did eat. 19 And I, the Lord God, said unto the woman: What is this thing which thou hast done? And the woman said: The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 20 And I, the Lord God, said unto the serpent: Because thou hast done this thou shalt be cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life; 21 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, between thy seed and her seed; and he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/4(emphasis added) I would have to say that this account is pretty clear that it was an actual, physical serpent that had been possessed by Satan, and that the Temple movie is not actually representative of what LDS scripture indicates to have occurred. I suspect the Temple doesn't represent Satan as a Serpent because of the origin of the ceremony in its "live action" form, which would have required the use of some sort of puppet or costume, and the movies have been created to be more of a filmed representation of the "live" ceremony. Perhaps in a future version we'll have a CGI serpent that more accurately reflects the scriptural/literal teaching on this subject. Edited October 4, 2013 by cinepro
J Green Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 Interesting. Do you read it this way because you of yourself think that this is what happened or do you read it that way because you think that we must because President Kimball didn't expound on it like he did with the rib?What about the other differences between the temple presentation and what we find in Genesis? Corruption of scripture? Figurative nature of temple presentation for didactic purposes? Or something else?
thesometimesaint Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 So the question is whether or not Eve (who was an actual, real woman) was talking with something that appeared as a human man, or a snake? I suspect Moses 4 has the best description of what happened. From the scriptural account there, do you think Satan has literally taken the form of a "serpent" (i.e. possessed a snake-like animal), or is "serpent" more of a figurative word for Satan's cunning? I would have to say that this account is pretty clear that it was an actual, physical serpent that had been possessed by Satan, and that the Temple movie is not actually representative of what LDS scripture indicates to have occurred. I suspect the Temple doesn't represent Satan as a Serpent because of the origin of the ceremony in its "live action" form, which would have required the use of some sort of puppet or costume, and the movies have been created to be more of a filmed representation of the "live" ceremony. Perhaps in a future version we'll have a CGI serpent that more accurately reflects the scriptural/literal teaching on this subject. If we really are going with a literal talking snake. Then we're into the realm of the supernatural, for which there is no physical evidence for. Snakes don't have vocal cords.
cinepro Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 Interesting. Do you read it this way because you of yourself think that this is what happened or do you read it that way because you think that we must because President Kimball didn't expound on it like he did with the rib?What about the other differences between the temple presentation and what we find in Genesis? Corruption of scripture? Figurative nature of temple presentation for didactic purposes? Or something else? I've never heard of the Temple movies being used as a reference for LDS teachings or doctrine. They have the same problems all LDS "art" does in reflecting the assumptions and limitations of their creators more than the "reality" of the events or situations they depict.
cinepro Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 If we really are going with a literal talking snake. Then we're into the realm of the supernatural, for which there is no physical evidence for. Snakes don't have vocal cords. Well, not after God got mad at them and cursed them. Obviously.
thesometimesaint Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 There is absolutely no physical evidence that snakes ever had vocal cords. Or that a$$es talk.
Stone holm Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 There is absolutely no physical evidence that snakes ever had vocal cords. Or that a$$es talk. Hm....I know some who seem to be able to use the keyboard pretty well, does that count? 1
thesometimesaint Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 Hm....I know some who seem to be able to use the keyboard pretty well, does that count?Dat true.
J Green Posted October 4, 2013 Posted October 4, 2013 I've never heard of the Temple movies being used as a reference for LDS teachings or doctrine. They have the same problems all LDS "art" does in reflecting the assumptions and limitations of their creators more than the "reality" of the events or situations they depict.And if the creation stories found in Genesis, etc. were written for a temple ritual presentation to set the context for covenant making and the promise of redemption? 1
cursor Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 But science is fickle. In my lifetime, science has changed what it perceives as truth on more than one topic. We cannot know whether our current scientific understanding is actual truth, therefore we should not be challenging faith on the basis of what the present knowledge of science is.. The same holds true of religion, in any number of cases ... does it not?
Stone holm Posted October 5, 2013 Posted October 5, 2013 The same holds true of religion, in any number of cases ... does it not?Religion tends to hold onto traditions until they are completely worn out like the lyrics of the Cat Stevens song, "Patches".
cinepro Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 If we really are going with a literal talking snake. Then we're into the realm of the supernatural, for which there is no physical evidence for. Snakes don't have vocal cords. Well not now!
strappinglad Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 It is my understanding that several species of snake have vestigial limbs. I also recall from Nibley's " Joseph's Papyrus translation" that there was an Egyptian temple connected hieroglyph of a snake walking on its hind legs like several types of lizard do currently. As for a snake talking, there is always ventriloquism .
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 I was having a conversation with my wife after some show about archaeology that featured 10,000 year old humanoid fossils. This discussion led to 6,000 year old Biblical history and how to rationalize the scripture with science. I did my best to offer my views that reconcile apparent contradictions. A bit surprisingly to me, my wife was not bothered by the doctrinal explanations, but by the fact that many of the manuals, institute teachers, church culture, etc. seem to perpetuate young earth concepts and interpretation that mislead the youth (and adults) into falsehoods and faith crises. "If this is the true church", she asked "then why does the Lord permit the continual teaching of untruths?" The word "true" is among the most used words in the LDS vocabulary and her concern was that the word had no validity, or that we could not rightly claim to be "true" if there is no attempt to correct or at least stop perpetuating teachings that weren't ... well... true. If we don't see some guidance or direction in these types of things, then what prevents our eventual apostasy? What makes us any more true than any other church? These are the types of questions that came up. I am working through my thoughts on answering them, but I would welcome some insights.In answer to your thread title...God nor anyone else can change what is true or false.
JLHPROF Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 In answer to your thread title...God nor anyone else can change what is true or false. Amen, and how quickly we forget it! It doesn't matter if one GA said the sky is green and another GA said the sky is yellow. In the end the sky is still blue and they were both wrong. Only the truth actually matters.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Amen, and how quickly we forget it! It doesn't matter if one GA said the sky is green and another GA said the sky is yellow. In the end the sky is still blue and they were both wrong. Only the truth actually matters.We also know it sky is blue to God if he recognizes color as we do...now that is the mystery.
Stone holm Posted October 10, 2013 Posted October 10, 2013 It is my understanding that several species of snake have vestigial limbs. I also recall from Nibley's " Joseph's Papyrus translation" that there was an Egyptian temple connected hieroglyph of a snake walking on its hind legs like several types of lizard do currently. As for a snake talking, there is always ventriloquism .What was that tongue that Harry Potter used? Passel tongue?
Recommended Posts