Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Adam-ondi-Ahman: What does it mean, and do you believe it?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Today in out Stake Conference broadcast, Elder Renlund shared a story about a visit to Adam-ondi-Ahman (the Church-owned property in Missouri).  While visiting with a non-member there, he shared a brief outline of LDS beliefs regarding that area.  As he outlined these beliefs, it struck me as how anachronistic this belief could be to the worldview of some LDS.  With this belief, several key aspects of the conventional history of mankind's existence on this planet come into question.

Specifically:

Significant Events:

Three years before he died, Adam called his righteous posterity into this valley and bestowed on them his last blessing (D&C 107:53–56)

 

So what does this mean?

If Adam was living with his children in the land that is now Missouri three years before he died, does this indeed confirm that the Garden of Eden was in the general vicinity? 

What this mean for scientific models of ancient human dispersion?  Should LDS reject these theories (and their attendant evidences)?

660px-Spreading_homo_sapiens_la.svg.png

How do we reconcile this with the idea that Noah's flood was a local flood located in the area of the Middle East?

 

 

Edited by cinepro
Posted

 

I thought Missouri was where Adam and Eve went after they were evicted from the Garden of Eden. Doesn't it say that God planted a Garden eastward in Eden, maybe Missouri in in the west or north or south, depending on where the garden of Eden is located. Remember too, A & E were cast out of the garden, not necessarily the whole of Eden

Posted
35 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Today in out Stake Conference broadcast, Elder Renlund shared a story about a visit to Adam-ondi-Ahman (the Church-owned property in Missouri).  While visiting with a non-member there, he shared a brief outline of LDS beliefs regarding that area.  As he outlined these beliefs, it struck me as how anachronistic this belief could be to the worldview of some LDS.  With this belief, several key aspects of the conventional history of mankind's existence on this planet come into question.

Specifically:

Significant Events:

Three years before he died, Adam called his righteous posterity into this valley and bestowed on them his last blessing (D&C 107:53–56)

 

So what does this mean?

If Adam was living with his children in the land that is now Missouri three years before he died, does this indeed confirm that the Garden of Eden was in the general vicinity? 

What this mean for scientific models of ancient human dispersion?  Should LDS reject these theories (and their attendant evidences)?

660px-Spreading_homo_sapiens_la.svg.png

How do we reconcile this with the idea that Noah's flood was a local flood located in the area of the Middle East?

 

 

It means they are looking for Noah's ark in the wrong place? I guess, I don't really know what your map indicates, the migration of Homo sapiens? What do the numbers represent?

Posted
58 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Today in out Stake Conference broadcast, Elder Renlund shared a story about a visit to Adam-ondi-Ahman (the Church-owned property in Missouri).  While visiting with a non-member there, he shared a brief outline of LDS beliefs regarding that area.  As he outlined these beliefs, it struck me as how anachronistic this belief could be to the worldview of some LDS.  With this belief, several key aspects of the conventional history of mankind's existence on this planet come into question.

Specifically:

Significant Events:

Three years before he died, Adam called his righteous posterity into this valley and bestowed on them his last blessing (D&C 107:53–56)

 

So what does this mean?

If Adam was living with his children in the land that is now Missouri three years before he died, does this indeed confirm that the Garden of Eden was in the general vicinity? 

What this mean for scientific models of ancient human dispersion?  Should LDS reject these theories (and their attendant evidences)?

660px-Spreading_homo_sapiens_la.svg.png

How do we reconcile this with the idea that Noah's flood was a local flood located in the area of the Middle East?

 

 

The canonized D&C verses were simply a result of Joseph revealing scripture as a man.  I see no contention.  Move on. Next!

Posted
1 hour ago, cinepro said:

How do we reconcile this with the idea that Noah's flood was a local flood located in the area of the Middle East?

I think there can be more than one Adam-ondi-Ahman just as there is more than one Hill Cumorah (D&C 107:53 being the old one and 116:1 the new one); the various references in D&C don’t preclude this, even though they could just as well be referring to one place.

Eden could refer to a condition of the planet’s landmass as well as to the entire landmass or a more specific location upon it.

If Enoch could move mountains and the Lord could take up cities, I think Adam and/or the Lord could move Adam-ondi-Ahman, which is a mountain (D&C 117:8), a land (117:11), and a valley (107:53).

Adam’s righteous posterity gathered to him in the valley, so evidently a good portion had been living abroad.

Scientific models of human dispersion are as easily reconciled with the Gospel as human evolution, assuming the Fall initiated the chaos that eventually settled into the universe as we see it today. Eden was a terrestrial place on a terrestrial planet that fell with Adam, and like Adam had to be reconstituted as a telestial entity through natural means, which took billions of years with Adam eventually entering his mortal existence 7,000 years ago and naming his homes Eden and Adam-ondi-Ahman. The flood is at least universal in its application and for those accountable in Noah's dispensation.

I think any shorthand version or belief of this is just as workable as far as believing and teaching the Gospel are concerned.

Posted (edited)

Joseph Smith and others believed that Eden was in or near Jackson County Missouri, and that Adam dwelt near there after He was cast out of the Garden. But where he actually dwelt may have been far removed from the Garden of Eden. Also, at the time Adam lived there all the land was together in one spot on the earth.

See Pangea.

How does this relate to the dispersion model? Later the lands separated in the days of Peleg (Gen. 10:25). Assuming that is what this scripture means. The time frame doesn't really fit considering scientific evidence that says the lands separated millions of years ago.

Edited by JAHS
Posted
38 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Why do the Saints have to go to Missouri though? Why not Utah? Just look at Ferguson.

Not to worry, walking to Missouri in the last days is just a myth. 

Posted
2 hours ago, cinepro said:

SnoreToday in out Stake Conference broadcast, Elder Renlund shared a story about a visit to Adam-ondi-Ahman (the Church-owned property in Missouri).  While visiting with a non-member there, he shared a brief outline of LDS beliefs regarding that area.  As he outlined these beliefs, it struck me as how anachronistic this belief could be to the worldview of some LDS.  With this belief, several key aspects of the conventional history of mankind's existence on this planet come into question.

Specifically:

Significant Events:

Three years before he died, Adam called his righteous posterity into this valley and bestowed on them his last blessing (D&C 107:53–56)

 

So what does this mean?

If Adam was living with his children in the land that is now Missouri three years before he died, does this indeed confirm that the Garden of Eden was in the general vicinity? 

What this mean for scientific models of ancient human dispersion?  Should LDS reject these theories (and their attendant evidences)?

660px-Spreading_homo_sapiens_la.svg.png

How do we reconcile this with the idea that Noah's flood was a local flood located in the area of the Middle East?

 

 

Snore

The gospel is not about science.

Resume snoring. :lazy:

Posted

You DO understand that Genesis describes a temple play. right?

 

Sigh.

Posted

Missouri is the sight of the future "New Jerusalem", which to me would suggest some sort of gathering.  

I have no idea how this will all play out, and I also have no idea how it relates to Adam-ondi-Ahman.  Prophecy mixed with some folklore…sometimes it's hard to sort the two out, especially when our current leaders haven't said much about this.  Maybe it's not important right now???     

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/new-jerusalem

 

Posted
3 hours ago, cinepro said:

Today in out Stake Conference broadcast, Elder Renlund shared a story about a visit to Adam-ondi-Ahman (the Church-owned property in Missouri).  While visiting with a non-member there, he shared a brief outline of LDS beliefs regarding that area.  As he outlined these beliefs, it struck me as how anachronistic this belief could be to the worldview of some LDS.  With this belief, several key aspects of the conventional history of mankind's existence on this planet come into question.

Specifically:

Significant Events:

Three years before he died, Adam called his righteous posterity into this valley and bestowed on them his last blessing (D&C 107:53–56)

 

So what does this mean?

If Adam was living with his children in the land that is now Missouri three years before he died, does this indeed confirm that the Garden of Eden was in the general vicinity? 

What this mean for scientific models of ancient human dispersion?  Should LDS reject these theories (and their attendant evidences)?

660px-Spreading_homo_sapiens_la.svg.png

How do we reconcile this with the idea that Noah's flood was a local flood located in the area of the Middle East?

 

 

Since those LDS who embrace world views believe in evolution making Adam a monkey's uncle, it's obvious Adam and Eve flew from Africa to Missouri on the backs of flying monkeys on their way to Kansas. It's only a short walk from The (make-believe) Land of OZ.

And their little dog, too.

 

 

image.jpeg

Posted
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Snore

The gospel is not about science.

Resume snoring. :lazy:

I agree.   If we were to give credence to scientific evidence then we would have to reject most of what JS taught us.

Posted
3 hours ago, cinepro said:

While visiting with a non-member there, he shared a brief outline of LDS beliefs regarding that area.

After his wife told him to explain it.  ;-)

Posted
3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Snore

The gospel is not about science.

Resume snoring. :lazy:

That's what I found odd.  Leaders have gotten pretty good about tip-toeing around any scientific mind-fields, so it was odd to hear Elder Renlund teach that Adam had a gathering of his family in the land now known as Missouri a few years before he died.

Posted
6 minutes ago, cinepro said:

That's what I found odd.  Leaders have gotten pretty good about tip-toeing around any scientific mind-fields, so it was odd to hear Elder Renlund teach that Adam had a gathering of his family in the land now known as Missouri a few years before he died.

No he did not teach that was a scientific "fact".  What he said in no way conflicts with science.

He said that that was a revealed belief which we accept, and of course we do.

He did not say if it was symbolic, if it was allegorical, when Adam lived, what "Adam"'s identity was or anything else.  He said it was our religious belief and to explain it as something we believe was revealed.  And indeed it is.

It seems you tend to take everything literally but there are many other possibilities.  We have had this discussion so many times I am tired of it.

Posted

I rather like Joseph Fielding Smith's explanation. " that time there will be a transfer of authority from the usurper and imposter, Lucifer, to the rightful King, Jesus Christ.  Judgment will be set and all who have held keys will make their reports and deliver their stewardships, as they shall be required.  Adam will direct this judgment, and then he will make his report, as the one holding the keys for this earth, to his Superior Officer, Jesus Christ.  Our Lord will then assume the reins of government; directions will be given to the Priesthood; and He, whose right it is to rule, will be installed officially by the voice of the Priesthood there assembled.  This grand council of Priesthood will be composed, not only of those who are faithful who now dwell on this earth, but also of the prophets and apostles of old, who have had directing authority.  Others may also be there, but if so they will be there by appointment, for this is to be an official council called to attend to the most momentous matters concerning the destiny of this earth."

Posted (edited)

To answer your OP, I, for one, believe in a global flood, that Adam and Eve were real historical people, that the Garden of Eden was in what is now Missouri, and that the valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman ("Adam in the presence of God" in Adamic) was the site of Adam's blessing and prophecy of his posterity and that it will be the future site of the meeting described in the scriptures. 

For those that this view embarrasses: tough stuff.

Good for Elder Renlund for not tiptoeing around the minefield of traditional LDS views vs. modern scientific/PC claims (e.g., global flood, historical Genesis, etc.). How refreshing in our modern PR/Edelman-driven church!

Edited by rongo
Posted

http://www.ldschurchtemples.com/adamondiahman/

 

Adam-ondi-Ahman is the site of a future grand council where Jesus Christ will meet with His stewards of all dispensations and receive back the keys of the kingdom in preparation for His Second Coming. Only those called to the meeting will know of its occurrence.

I wonder when the "myth" or belief started that all members would be asked to "walk back to Missouri" or at least gather in Missouri?  I remember that my parents believed this.  Does anyone know how it originated?

Posted

My family's 2015 summer vacation took us through A-O-A. It actually was a bit of "Zion" for us considering that an hour earlier our van had almost gotten stuck in the mud trying to visit Haun's Mill. I admit that, more than any other historical site on the trip (we visited most everything in Missouri and Nauvoo), A-O-A didn't really resonate with my kids. It doesn't get much mention at all in current curriculum.

As to the historical accuracy of the place, my personal belief is that Joseph's ideas were skewed by a belief in an ante-dilluvial pangea of sorts. Yes, science conflicts. But no more so than with the Hill Cumorah. Since many members embrace a "two-Cumorah" theory, why not also a "two-A-O-A" theory?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...