Fall Of Adam 6000 Years Ago... Doctrine?

[CV75]

I can't quite figure what you're saying.  Aren't these two things in conflict with each other?

 

 

Are you saying "the time since" doesn't denote the start point?

 

If I said,  "This has been the best 10 years of my life!  The 10 years referring to the time since my wedding day, of course."  

 

Is there any other explanation than the fact that my wedding day was 10 years ago?  Are you saying that I could be saying that the last 10 years have been the best of my life, but that my wedding day was actually 30+ years ago?  Does anyone talk like that? 

No, most people don’t talk like that. But scripture doesn’t always talk like people, or “speak” to people like that.

 

So I see no conflict. The Fall of Adam and Eve can be said to have happened at point A in the Garden, and also at point B outside the Garden. Any amount of time could have elapsed between the two points of reference. I take the D&C 77 scriptures to refer to point B.

 

I also suspect Genesis is more figurative than D&C 77 is literal.

 

You could also not mention that you were first married in 1984, and only refer to renewing your vows in 2004 as your “real” wedding day, and still say the last ten years were the happiest.

[JLHPROF]

With all this Bill Nye vs Ham stuff going on I went back and read stuff on where the church stands on it all.  A lot of things are up for personal interpretation (evolution, etc).  But it seems that there are some points that are pretty solid.

 

D&C 77 being a big one that the temporal life of the earth (Fall of Adam to it's celestialization) is 7000 years.  So the Fall of Adam and the beginning of man/woman was at most 6000 years ago.   No real way around that, right?

 

Obviously this leads to other questions of death before the fall, length of time of creation, etc.  I'm not saying the age of the earth is 6000 according to lds doctrine, but it does seem like the age of mortal man is 6000 years according to LDS doctrine.

 

 

*  Edited to add "mortal" to last sentence.

 

I personally believe that mankind appeared on this earth with Adam around 6000 years ago.

I acknowledge that there are scientific discoveries that don't jive with that fact.  This to me means there is an explanation that science hasn't thought of and God has yet to reveal conclusively.

But God doesn't lie in his revelations, and I think trying to theorize about pre-Adamites gets us into murky waters not based in doctrine or science.  Mankind was placed on this earth by God 6000 years ago.  Period.  All other science, fossils, evolutionary stages etc do exist but are just waiting for God to explain where they came from.  Science argues for continuity.  I think there may not be.

[omni]

The verses say nothing about the Fall of Adam, so I just think it just means that the stopwatch on the 7,000 years started 6,000 years ago, which is only a subset of the total time since the Fall of Adam and Eve.

 

The seminary manual says “the time since,” but not when that time began. It says “continuance” and “temporal existence” from the point of view of the Biblical record, where the priority is a written preservation of the covenants over a 7,000 year period beginning when Adam and Eve left the garden, which could have taken place eons after the Fall (they need not have stepped out of the garden at that very moment, and may they have also been the last to leave). From the manual:

 

“Invite a student to read Doctrine and Covenants 77:6–7 aloud. Ask the class to follow along, looking for Joseph Smith’s questions about Revelation 5:1 as well as the Lord’s responses. It may be helpful to explain that the 7,000 years refers to the time since the Fall of Adam and Eve. It is not referring to the actual age of the earth including the periods of creation.

 

“Ask students to use their own words to summarize the questions and the answers. After completing this activity, point out how using the footnotes as we study the scriptures can help us discover what prophets have said about the scriptures we are reading.

 

“Point out that although only prophets have the authority to interpret the scriptures for the world, each of us should be searching for understanding and personal application as we study the scriptures individually.” https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-seminary-teacher-manual-2014/section-4/home-study-lesson-doctrine-and-covenants-76-81-119-77-83-unit-17?lang=eng

 

I think that last paragraph in the manual is what we are invited to do when the D&C answers begin with “We are to understand that…” – it is a starting point for deeper reflection for spiritual meaning.

 

So God decides to reveal his plain and precious truths through cryptic scripture forcing the student to read between lines to understand what he really means?  Why couldn't have God simply stated that he created the Earth 13.4 billion years ago and that there was death before the Fall?

[David T]

Because the rocks, trees, and all forms of life are crying out with the revelation of this information, and nevertheless, some stop up their ears because God hasn't affirmed it with their expectation of a booming voice.

God wants us to use scriptures as catalysts to ask the right questions leading to our having our own experiences with Him. Just as Nephi wasn't satisfied with his Father's report of a vision, he wanted to experience that vision himself. His request was granted, and he saw things in a different way than his prophet Father did.

We are a Faith that prides itself on continual revelation, and yet there are so Many who want to remain stuck in the early 19TH century world.

Edited February 7, 2014 by David T

[Brian 2.0]

D&C 77 makes perfect sense in the context of the world Joseph envisioned. If he recieved his understanding in context of what he already understood, with a division of the world post-fall into 7 units, and with it already being a common belief that the world was that old, the context is clear.

 

Cosmology, biology, and many other sciences have had huge advances since Joseph Smith's views of the world. Basically, we just need a new scriptural text in the context of this new cosmological world.

 

Genesis spoke literally of 7 days, and the early Israelites likely took it literally.

Now, we don't take it literally, and add a new symbolic or interpretative (700! Seven Times! Seven Periods!) meaning to it to attempt to link it up with what we know of the world. We try to combine two worldpictures and paradigms and make one have reference to the other. This is unnecessary.

 

God speaks to us using our worldviews and paradigms until they are no longer sustainable. Once we have allowed them to shatter, he continues to speak and allow us to see him in the new world, patterned after the old one where we used to live. Joseph revised Genesis to make sense in his 19th Century doctrinal world. How awesome would it be if a modern prophet took Joseph's lead, and penned a new Genesis for a new world?

 

Wow, that would be exciting!

 

To me this is just trying to put God into something that is clearly man and their incorrect thoughts/assumptions/prejudices

 

Something is clearly wrong in ancient scripture with our modern understanding and instead of saying they were wrong, we say God just spoke in their laguage to their understanding.

 

I buy that to some extent but it'd be nice if God was ahead of the curve on things and was inspiring these men on truths that they, nor the world, didn't know about yet.  Imagine if instead of forbiding the boiling of a goat in it's mother's milk in the Old Testament, God commanded them to boil their water before drinking it.  Or better yet Joseph Smith got a revelation that they were to boil their water in Nauvoo before drinking when they got there.  Death rates drop, and it's later that germ theory gets introduced and we see that God really knew what he was talking about.  

 

The ills of tobacco is the closest thing I can think of that would qualify as that.  But a simple commanded to regularly wash our hands in the WoW would have provided probably more health benefits, and less fatalities, then the rest of the revelation combined.  

 

When I grew up I thought of God as a fount of knowledge of how things REALLY are, were, will be... not a storyteller who tells me things that I'm used to hearing and kind of make sense to my worldview and mean something symbolicly, but aren't actually true. 

[Closet Doubter]

Why do we have to guess as to what is and isn't doctrine.  I thought that was why we have a prophet, so when there are questions we are not wandering too and fro trying to figure out the answer.  At least, that is what I taught people on my mission.  If we are led by 15 prophets, seers, and revelators we shouldn't have to try and figure out the truth here.  If the prophets, seers, and revelators aren't at least going to clarify doctrine, what value are they?

[Flyonthewall]

I have always thought, or at least thought for a long time, that though Adam may have fallen roughly 6k years ago, the earth, or this rock we live on, has been around a lot longer.

This rock was a world that had life on it at least once before, and maybe more times, but had passed away.

After it had passed away, it was not turned into a celestial kingdom, but was left vacant for some period of time, then God set it up for Adam and Eve, which was the creative periods.

The age of the earth could be billions of years old, but for us, it began when we moved in.

Just think of a house that was built in say... oh... sometime in the 1700's(year doesn't matter, just a long time ago). Families move in and out, some live in it longer than others, and when one moves out they don't clean up their stuff. This means when a new family moves in there will still be stuff from a previous owner(s).

This works for me, though it may not work for others. I know there may be holes in my thinking but I am okay with not having all the answers.

[strappinglad]

That " Flys" for me and connects with the idea that this earth was made for several purposes.

[omni]

Because the rocks, trees, and all forms of life are crying out with the revelation of this information, and nevertheless, some stop up their ears because God hasn't affirmed it with their expectation of a booming voice.

God wants us to use scriptures as catalysts to ask the right questions leading to our having our own experiences with Him. Just as Nephi wasn't satisfied with his Father's report of a vision, he wanted to experience that vision himself. His request was granted, and he saw things in a different way than his prophet Father did.

We are a Faith that prides itself on continual revelation, and yet there are so Many who want to remain stuck in the early 19TH century world.

The many in your example apparently includes every prophet to have lived, even modern ones who should know better. If they can't understand it, how does God expect the rest of us to?

[Thinking]

Death

 

Latter-day revelation teaches that there was no death on this earth before the Fall of Adam. Indeed, death entered the world as a direct result of the Fall.

[JAHS]

Brigham Young said:

"Here let me state to all philosophers of every class upon the earth. when you tell me that father Adam was made as we make adobies from the earth. You tell me what I deem an idle tale when you tell me that the beasts of the field were produced in that manner. You are speaking idle words devoid of meaning. There is no such thing in all the eternities. Where the gods dwell mankind are here because they are the offspring of parents who were first brought here from another planet and power was given them to propagate their species and they were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth." (Journal of Discourses 7:285-286)

Joseph Smith is quoted as saying:

"Now regarding Adam: He came here from another planet, an immortalized Being, and brought his wife Eve with him, and by eating of the fruit of this earth, became subject to death and decay. . . was made mortal and subject to death." - (Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., as recorded by Anson Call and copied by Patriarch John Whitmer)

 

We only know that it has been 6000 years since Adam left the Garden. If he and Eve were brought from another planet, and we are their offspring, there could have been other forms of humanoid life that had been living on this planet for thousands of years before that which suffered a simple soulless biological death rather than a death described as separation of body and spirit as with Adam and his offspring.

[JLHPROF]

Brigham Young said:

"Here let me state to all philosophers of every class upon the earth. when you tell me that father Adam was made as we make adobies from the earth. You tell me what I deem an idle tale when you tell me that the beasts of the field were produced in that manner. You are speaking idle words devoid of meaning. There is no such thing in all the eternities. Where the gods dwell mankind are here because they are the offspring of parents who were first brought here from another planet and power was given them to propagate their species and they were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth." (Journal of Discourses 7:285-286)

Joseph Smith is quoted as saying:

"Now regarding Adam: He came here from another planet, an immortalized Being, and brought his wife Eve with him, and by eating of the fruit of this earth, became subject to death and decay. . . was made mortal and subject to death." - (Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., as recorded by Anson Call and copied by Patriarch John Whitmer)

 

We only know that it has been 6000 years since Adam left the Garden. If he and Eve were brought from another planet, and we are their offspring, there could have been other forms of humanoid life that had been living on this planet for thousands of years before that which suffered a simple soulless biological death rather than a death described as separation of body and spirit as with Adam and his offspring.

 

I was with you until the last paragraph...(love the Joseph quote BTW - yeah, Brigham made up Adam-God, right).

[Robert F. Smith]

i would like to say so as well.  And it'd take the few keystrokes it took you to type it to include it in the manuals, etc.  Yet those words are absent in the seminary manuals where it is discussing it as "1000 years of history" 

 

Even the questions it proposes the teacher to ask in the seminary teaching manuals:

 

• •

  How long will the earth exist in a temporal state? (see vv. 6–7).

• •

  What thousand-year period do you think we are in now? (The sixth.)

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-seminary-teacher-resource-manual/ohio-and-missouri-period/doctrine-and-covenants-77?lang=eng

 

Just throw the figurative word in there somewhere if that's really what the stance is.

Like blind men trying to describe an elephant after touching only one appendage, raising current or past church manuals to status of Scripture or doctrine seems absurd.  I always like to give the example of Hugh Nibley's 1957 Melchizedek Priesthood Manual (An Approach to the Book of Mormon).  Does it constitute official LDS doctrine?  Or is it merely the work of one author who is trying to be helpful?  One could very easily strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!!  One must be very gullible indeed to believe that every successive LDS Church manual is congruent with every other manual and that all are sacred and holy sources of Scriptural knowledge.

 

The Brethren constantly indicate the figurative nature of much in Scripture, along with a history of Earth in the millions of years.  One ought to at least consider the words of David O. McKay (1956):

"...without fear of anyone's objecting, and the teacher can be free to express his honest conviction regarding it, whether the subject be in geology, the history of the world, the millions of years that it took to prepare the physical world..."

 

Or of Elder James E. Talmage (1931):

"According to the conception of geologists the earth passes through ages of preparation, to us unmeasured and immeasurable, during which countless generations of plants and animals existed in great variety and profusion and gave in part the very substance of their bodies to help form certain strata which are still existent as such..." 

 

Pres. Spencer W. Kimball, "The story of the rib, of course, is figurative."

 

Elder Bruce R. McConkie, re Gen 2-3, "the account is speaking figuratively. What is meant by partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is that our first parents complied with whatever laws were involved so that their bodies would change from their state of paradisiacal immortality to a state of natural mortality."

B. R. McConkie, "We do not know how the fall was accomplished any more than we know how the Lord caused the earth to come into being and to spin through the heavens in its paradisiacal state."

 

Pres. Brigham Young, “Though we have it in history that our Father Adam was made of the dust of this earth and that he knew nothing about his God previous to being made here, yet it is not so; and when we learn the truth we shall see and understand that he helped to make this world and was the chief manager in that operation.

“He was the person who brought the animals and the seeds from other planets to this world and brought a wife with him and stayed here. You may read and believe what you please as to what is found written in the Bible. Adam was made from the dust of an earth, but not from the dust of this earth. He was made as you and I are made, and no person was ever made upon any other principle.” 

 

Hugh Nibley, "The Mormon endowment… is frankly a model, a presentation in figurative terms. As such, it is flexible and adjustable; for example, it may be presented in more languages than one, and in more than one medium of communication. . . .  it does not attempt to be a picture of reality, but only a model or analogue "

[Robert F. Smith]

I believe that the Earth is 6000 years old....at least.

I believe Joseph when he said that ,were he to tell all he knew, the folks would rise up and kill him.

I also believe Joseph when he said that the Earth was created for more than one reason.

As a youth ,science told me that man was about 25,000 years old and the universe was about 10 billion years old.

Now we have the beginnings of man about 1.5 million years ago and the universe heading toward 20 billion.

I have a bag of salt in my pantry for those that might need a grain or two.

At least somebody on this board is sane.  That deserves a rep point.

[Robert F. Smith]

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

My post is not about age of the earth, but time passed since the Fall of Adam.  

But are you taking that period of time literally?  From the D&C Student Manual:

 

D&C 77:6–7 . Why Was the Book Sealed That John Saw?

 

“‘The book which John saw’ represented the real history of the world—what the eye of God has seen, what the recording angel has written; and the seven thousand years, corresponding to the seven seals of the Apocalyptic volume, are as seven great days during which Mother Earth will fulfill her mortal mission, laboring six days and resting upon the seventh, her period of sanctification. These seven days do not include the period of our planet’s creation and preparation as a dwelling place for man. They are limited to Earth’s ‘temporal existence,’ that is, to Time, considered as distinct from Eternity.”  http://institute.lds.org/manuals/doctrine-and-covenants-institute-student-manual/dc-in-071-77.asp .

 

"Seven great days"?  We already know that Hebrew 'elef "thousand," has a very broad semantic range, and may be taken as "a myriad, a lot."

Likewise the thousand thousands in Daniel 7:10 "are not meant to be taken as mathematically precise.  Rather they suggest extremely large or incalculable numbers." (R. Peter-Contesse and J. Ellington, A Handbook on The Book of Daniel [uBS, 1993], 188)

Edited February 7, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

That's why I predict it will happen only after it becomes woefully obvious that the 6,000 year timeline is off. 

Houston, do we have a problem?  Not really.  Unless you insist on reading Scripture as a science text, with mathematically precise data.  Your assumptions are off, cinepro.  Way off, by a very large and figurative factor.

[Robert F. Smith]

In my mind, there is TRUE doctrine, and there is LDS CHURCH doctrine.  And they aren't always in line with each other.

 

There were church doctrines regarding blacks and the priesthood that have turned out to not be true doctrines.

 

Currently there appears to be church doctrine regarding the time span from the Fall of Adam... and it's around 6000 years.

 

Whether that piece of church doctrine is true doctrine is up to the individual I guess.  

You are misusing the word "doctrine" to include any sort of folklore or offhand belief or opinion expressed by a General Authority at any time. Pres, David O. McKay (and others) spent a lot of time trying to find a doctrinal basis for denying priesthood to blacks, and could find none.  Today we know that there was in fact no such doctrinal basis.  It was a practice, plain and simple, based on racism.  It did not take proper notice of Joseph Smith's practice of ordaining black men.  Indeed, Pres. McKay wanted to begin immediate ordaining of black men and the opening of a mission to black Africa (he even called a mission president for that).  He was stymied by the demand from the Pres. of the Twelve that there be a revelation first, something that would not come for another decade.

[Robert F. Smith]

I think the number of years since the fall of Adam has as much eternal significance as whether the Garden of Eden was in Missouri or if Adam will really come back to Adam Ondi Ahman.  

 

Section 77 does not purport to be God speaking directly and audibly and Joseph recording the dictation.  It was prepared while the JST was being prepared.  http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/answers-to-questions-between-circa-4-and-circa-20-march-1832-dc-77?dm=image-and-text&zm=zoom-inner&tm=expanded&p=1&s=undefined&sm=none  I think it is of the same nature as the JST itself, or even the drafts of the Doctrine & Covenants, inspired, but not inerrant.  As Grant Underwood said, "the Word of God in the Words of Men"  (quoting the title of a book about the Bible). http://devotional.byuh.edu/node/327

Well said.  Sanity is the gift that keeps on giving.

[Robert F. Smith]

I was about to type the same response as cinepro.

 

And daz, you realize that you can dismiss almost every single piece of doctrine or prophetic teaching you want with your statement.

I think, Brian, that what daz2 and Grant Underwood are saying is that, unlike the evangelicals, we do not assume scripture to be inerrant.  It comes via human vehicles, and is even altered by humans (Joseph edited the revelations more than once).  When we set up an evangelical sola scriptura standard we are pretty much ignoring one of the major facets of Mormonism: open canon (continuing revelation) interpreted not by human logic alone (which is the evangelical standard) but by the Holy Spirit.  That is the true source of unity in the authentic Body of Christ.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

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

Genesis spoke literally of 7 days, and the early Israelites likely took it literally.

Now, we don't take it literally, and add a new symbolic or interpretative (700! Seven Times! Seven Periods!) meaning to it to attempt to link it up with what we know of the world. We try to combine two worldpictures and paradigms and make one have reference to the other. This is unnecessary.

 

God speaks to us using our worldviews and paradigms until they are no longer sustainable. Once we have allowed them to shatter, he continues to speak and allow us to see him in the new world, patterned after the old one where we used to live. Joseph revised Genesis to make sense in his 19th Century doctrinal world. How awesome would it be if a modern prophet took Joseph's lead, and penned a new Genesis for a new world?

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

You are on the right track.

However, in any case, Gen 1 was not intended to be a science textbook.  It is liturgy for an annual temple celebration, as for the annual Akitu Festival in Babylon, in which the Creation Story was read (as part of Enuma elish).  It is for that reason that Anglican Bishop Tom Wright regards Gen 1-3 as "a temple story."

The "days" of Creation were never intended to be taken as literal, and I don't believe that the early Israelites were so gullible.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

So God decides to reveal his plain and precious truths through cryptic scripture forcing the student to read between lines to understand what he really means?  Why couldn't have God simply stated that he created the Earth 13.4 billion years ago and that there was death before the Fall?

Because He is dealing with yokels who flunked their high school science courses?

Or was the text in question written as liturgy, rather than as a science text?

[Robert F. Smith]

Why do we have to guess as to what is and isn't doctrine.  I thought that was why we have a prophet, so when there are questions we are not wandering too and fro trying to figure out the answer.  At least, that is what I taught people on my mission.  If we are led by 15 prophets, seers, and revelators we shouldn't have to try and figure out the truth here.  If the prophets, seers, and revelators aren't at least going to clarify doctrine, what value are they?

A reasonable enough assumption, if and only if our probationary state here is not a test and we are to be spoon-fed everything like children.  If we have no responsibility except to live on borrowed light and to ignore the mysteries (which are not essential to salvation anyhow).

 

Brother Brigham expressed grave concern about Saints who just took whatever he said as Gospel truth, without ever bothering to pray about it and to know for themselves whether the doctrines were true.  Did you teach investigators on your mission to be complacent and to subsist in a vegetative state?  If so, you did them no favor at all.  They should have been told to stand on their own hind legs and to test all claims made to the uttermost.

[Kevin Christensen]

I think the number of years since the fall of Adam has as much eternal significance as whether the Garden of Eden was in Missouri or if Adam will really come back to Adam Ondi Ahman.  

 

Section 77 does not purport to be God speaking directly and audibly and Joseph recording the dictation.  It was prepared while the JST was being prepared.  http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/answers-to-questions-between-circa-4-and-circa-20-march-1832-dc-77?dm=image-and-text&zm=zoom-inner&tm=expanded&p=1&s=undefined&sm=none  I think it is of the same nature as the JST itself, or even the drafts of the Doctrine & Covenants, inspired, but not inerrant.  As Grant Underwood said, "the Word of God in the Words of Men"  (quoting the title of a book about the Bible). http://devotional.byuh.edu/node/327

Looking at this section in the JSP site actually re-enforces my long held suspicion that it never was a formal, direct revelation., but just some notes that came out of the JST project.  It has an odd Q&A format that is not like anything else in the D&C.  Plus, if you compare the one discourse on the Book of Revelation that Joseph Smith offered, see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 287-294, you'll see that it does not refer to D&C 77 at all, which would be odd if it were as important, direct, authoritative and binding, as all that.  I also find it interesting that D&C 77 is inconsistent with Barker's detailed commentary on Revelation, the discourse in TPJS actually fits quite nicely with it. 

 

Creeds, as Joseph Smith says. set up stakes and bounds to the work of the Almighty, saying Hitherto thou shalt come and no further.  I want the liberty of believing as I please.   How about defending that principle with the same fervor that has been given towards whatever offhand comment some opinionated authority, or conservative bureaucrat puts in a manual?

 

FWIW

 

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

Edited February 9, 2014 by Kevin Christensen

[savedbygrace]

It was very early in my life as LDS that I was told the the world was 6000 years old. Not that it was 6000 since the creation of man. I think this was one of the first seeds of my disbelief in the church, because to me it was totally impossible.

[CV75]

So God decides to reveal his plain and precious truths through cryptic scripture forcing the student to read between lines to understand what he really means?  Why couldn't have God simply stated that he created the Earth 13.4 billion years ago and that there was death before the Fall?

The post does say, “…each of us should be searching for understanding and personal application as we study the scriptures individually.” For me, the age of the Earth is not a precious truth because (right now anyway), it has no bearing on my living by faith(not that its age isn’t interesting). But pondering what happened in the last 6,000 years as laid out in the scriptural record, especially in terms of the covenants, does apply:

“Behold, my sons, I desire that ye should remember to keep the commandments of God; and I would that ye should declare unto the people these words. Behold, I have given unto you the names of our first parents who came out of the land of Jerusalem; and this I have done that when you remember your names ye may remember them; and when ye remember them ye may remember their works; and when ye remember their works ye may know how that it is said, and also written, that they were good. (Helaman 5:6)”

“Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts. (Moroni 10:3)”

And it’s not so much the contents of seals but that the Lord has given us that which has been consistent throughout the contents of the seals, and that He watches over all the works of all His children, and yet has one purpose and one covenant that applies to each of us and relates to every work we can do.