{"id":42141,"date":"2021-10-15T21:09:16","date_gmt":"2021-10-16T02:09:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.timesandseasons.org\/?p=42141"},"modified":"2021-10-15T21:09:16","modified_gmt":"2021-10-16T02:09:16","slug":"adam-shall-come-to-visit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/2021\/10\/adam-shall-come-to-visit\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cAdam shall come to visit\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

Charles Darwin\u2019s niece once told her son (the famed British composer Ralph Vaughan Williams) that: \u201cThe Bible says that God made the world in six days, Great Uncle Charles thinks it took longer: but we need not worry about it, for it is equally wonderful either way.\u201d[1]<\/a>\u00a0 While it is wonderful either way, since the early 20th<\/sup> century, what scientists have come to understand through their studies of evolution has become increasingly important to people to discuss in terms of understanding religion and creation.\u00a0 Literal readings of the Bible and the histories presented in Genesis underly the idea that organic evolution is not compatible with Judeo-Christianity.\u00a0 And, for better or worse, a literal understanding of Biblical narratives is a part of the Latter-day Saint tradition, influencing the translations and revelations that Joseph Smith produced.\u00a0 Yet, as the best understanding of the process by which life as we know it was created based on the evidence found in the world around us, evolution is difficult to dismiss.\u00a0 The doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has both features that help with the acceptance of evolution and concepts that make it difficult to embrace the scientific theory\u2014perhaps most notably the concept of a literal Adam.<\/p>\n

In an 1838 editorial written as a series of questions and answers with Joseph Smith, the Prophet remarked that: \u201cWe are the only people under heaven\u201d that believe the Bible, adding that Latter-day Saints \u201cbelieve the bible, and\u00a0all other sects profess to believe their interpretations of the bible, and their creeds.\u201d[2]<\/a>\u00a0 These statements reflect a belief that Joseph Smith intended to read the Bible literally and to take it at its word.\u00a0 Other influential early Church leaders were known to take similar approaches.\u00a0 For example, Elder Parley P. Pratt frequently derided the \u201cdoctrine of spiritualizing\u201d passages in the Bible such that all passages of scripture seemed to not \u201chave any literal meaning.\u201d[3]<\/a>\u00a0 While in reality, Biblical literalism in early Mormonism could be quite selective, it was a concept that was important to Church leaders.<\/p>\n

The desire for Biblical literalism and taking the Bible at its word shows up in the translations and revelations of Joseph Smith that have been canonized.\u00a0 For example, the story of the Tower of Babel is treated as literal in the Book of Ether, where a group of people (the Jaredites) flee from the events surrounding that story in Genesis.[4]<\/a>\u00a0 The Book of Abraham describes the history of Egypt in the context of the Flood and Noah\u2019s family settling the world afterwards.[5]<\/a>\u00a0 The New Translation of the Bible that is presented in the Book of Moses reinforces the stories of the early chapters in Genesis.\u00a0 Most relevant to the current discussion, however, is the insistence on a literal Adam.<\/p>\n

The revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith reference the idea that Adam was a historic person and indicated that he has a significant role in the history of God\u2019s people.\u00a0 A September 1830 revelation (now Doctrine and Covenants, Section 29) was received in response to disagreements in the Church about \u201cthe death of Adam\u00a0(that is his transgression),\u201d[6]<\/a> and discussed the narrative of \u201cAdam being tempted\u00a0of the Devil.\u201d[7]<\/a>\u00a0 As part of the New Translation of the Bible project, Joseph Smith revised Genesis and included expanded narratives about the life of Adam, both affirming the belief that he was a person and Christianizing Adam through those narratives.\u00a0 An 1835 revision of an earlier revelation (Section 27) described a future event where the Lord \u201cwill drink of the fruit of the vine with you\u00a0on the earth,\u00a0and with\u201d a variety of significant figures from scriptural narratives, including \u201cwith Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the\u00a0prince of all, the ancient of days.\u201d[8]<\/a>\u00a0 This prophesy was referenced in a September 1838 Joseph Smith journal entry, documenting a visit to Lyman Wight in Daviess County, Missouri (a portion of which would become Section 116).\u00a0 While visiting the settlement, Joseph Smith stated that Spring Hill was \u201cnamed by the mouth of [the] Lord and was called\u00a0Adam Ondi Awmen [Adam-ondi-Ahman], because said he it is the place where Adam shall come to visit\u00a0his people, or the Ancient of days shall sit\u00a0as spoken of by Daniel the Prophet.\u201d[9]<\/a>\u00a0 These documents affirm that Adam is a significant individual with both a past and a future in the salvific history of the Lord\u2019s people.<\/p>\n

Joseph Smith carried this role for Adam even further in his sermons and discussions.\u00a0 He stated that:<\/p>\n

The Priesthood was first given to Adam: he obtained the first Presidency & held the Keys of it, from generation to Generation. \u2026 His Michael, the Archangel, spoken of in the Scriptures. \u2026 Dan VII Speaks of the Ancient of days, he means the oldest man, our Father Adam, Michael. \u2026 He, (Adam) is the Father of the human family & presides over the Spirits of all men, & all that have had the Keys must stand before him in this great Council.[10]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Adam held a preeminent place in Joseph Smith\u2019s teachings as a patriarchal figure and priesthood leader over all humankind.\u00a0 Smith would reiterate this and other similar ideas on other occasions.\u00a0 For example, in 1840, he stated that Adam was:<\/p>\n

the \u2018Antient of days\u2019 or in other words the first and oldest of all, the great grand progenitor of whom it is said in another place he is Michael because he was the first and father of all, not only by progeny, but he was the first to hold the spiritual blessings, \u2026 and to whom Christ was first revealed, and through whom Christ has been revealed from heaven and will continue to be revealed from henceforth. \u2026 He [Christ] set the ordinances to be the same for Ever and ever and set Adam to watch over them to reveal them from heaven to man or to send Angels to reveal them.[11]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In these sermons, Joseph Smith attributed to Adam roles in the history of humankind that very much affirm a view of Adam being an actual person who has been involved in God\u2019s work throughout the history of the world.<\/p>\n

This concept of a literal Adam who is the father and patriarch of all humankind is something that does not reconcile very well with the concept of organic evolution.\u00a0 Evolution is a gradual process of change, survival, and a passing on of genetics.\u00a0 Through a variety of natural processes, mutations in the genetic code of organisms occur, changing traits of groups of organisms.\u00a0 Most of the time, these mutations are harmful, but once in a while, the mutations lead to traits that improve the odds of an organism surviving.\u00a0 One biotechnology professor I studied under compared these mutations to trying to cut cables or take components out of an engine\u2014most of the time it results in the engine not working, but there is a small possibility that removal of the component will lead to the engine working better.\u00a0 (Whether or not that\u2019s an accurate analogy is debatable, but it gets the basic idea across.)\u00a0 In any case, by virtue of surviving and reproducing, those traits are passed on to descendants of the organism with the original mutation.\u00a0 If that mutation continues to give that organism\u2019s line a significant advantage, it can eventually become a trait shared by a larger population.<\/p>\n

While occasionally some genetics changes are very abrupt and cause rapid divergence, the emergence of new species generally follows a gradual process.\u00a0 This happens as a series of mutations accumulate in a population over long time periods until that population is different enough from their ancestors and relatives to be considered a new species.\u00a0 There is still much to learn about the development of our species, but it is likely that this was the process by which we evolved from earlier humans.\u00a0 Since it was likely a population that developed into the species rather than an individual, it is highly unlikely that a single individual could be considered the definitive first Homo sapiens<\/em>.\u00a0 Even the concepts of a \u201cmitochondrial Eve<\/a>\u201d and a \u201cY-chromosomal Adam<\/a>\u201d do not align with the Biblical idea of all of humankind originating and descending from two humans.\u00a0 Instead, these concepts represent the theoretical most recent shared ancestors from which pieces of DNA that are consistently passed from parents of each specific sex to their children (Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA) originated.\u00a0 While that is an indication of shared ancestry, it doesn\u2019t mean that they were the only humans living at the time or even that the respective \u201cEve\u201d and \u201cAdam\u201d lived at the same time or place.\u00a0 Our current best scientific understanding of the origins of the human species doesn\u2019t align well with the story of Adam and Eve presented in the Bible or related texts and liturgy used in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.<\/p>\n

Now, I personally believe that the scientific understanding of organic evolution is our best understanding of the mechanisms by which we came to be.\u00a0 I am a biological engineer with a background in molecular biology, so that\u2019s probably not too surprising, but based on the evidence I have studied, I do not see a way to dismiss the concept of evolution.\u00a0 This does present me with a dilemma, though\u2014how do I simultaneously hold onto belief in evolution and the Church, with its emphasis on a literal Adam? \u00a0(Even the strongest statement of the First Presidency that supports not having a definitive stance on evolution declares that: \u201cUpon one thing we should all be able to agree, namely \u2026 Adam is the primal parent of our race.\u201d)[12]<\/a><\/p>\n

One way I have approached this dilemma is to view both religion and science as quests for truth using different approaches.\u00a0 While they currently do not align, as both approach truth through revelation from heaven or investigation of the world, they will eventually converge.\u00a0 This could be viewed as a form of double-think or na\u00efve optimism, but to me it is really about being patient and accepting that we don\u2019t know as much as we like to think we do in either realm (science or religion).\u00a0 I hope that they will align some day, though I do not see it happening any time soon.<\/p>\n

A few other approaches are also worth consideration.\u00a0 Of course, one approach is treating the entire story of Adam and Eve as a myth and not a historical reality.\u00a0 This aligns well with higher criticism of the Bible, but also includes rejecting both the official teachings of the Church on the subject and the Biblical record, i.e., the \u201cspiritualizing\u201d that Parley P. Pratt dreaded.\u00a0 Another concept that I have considered is that Adam and Eve may not have been the first humans to exist but may have been the first family to which God revealed the Gospel.\u00a0 In other words, they were the first people through whom God opened a dispensation.\u00a0 This leaves the possibility that God worked through evolution to create humans and then waited until a specific point in their development to reveal Himself to them.\u00a0 While this still means not taking narratives about Adam and Eve at face value, Adam as first prophet rather than first human serves as a meeting point in the middle of lockstep acceptance of the story and complete spiritualization of the story.<\/p>\n

In any case, I still agree with the rhetorical questions of the Lord in the 8 July 1838 revelation that is now Section 117:\u00a0 \u201cHave I not the fowls of\u00a0Heaven, and also the fish of the sea, and the beasts of the mountains. Have I not made the earth?\u201d[13]<\/a>\u00a0 Whether He made the world in six days, or whether it took Him longer, through eons of evolution and development, it is equally wonderful either way.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Footnotes:<\/strong><\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Ursula Vaughan Williams, R.V.W.: A Biography of Ralph Vaughan Williams <\/em>(Oxford, 1964), 13.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> “Elders\u2019 Journal, July 1838,” p. 42, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed October 12, 2021, https:\/\/www.josephsmithpapers.org\/paper-summary\/elders-journal-july-1838\/10<\/a><\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> The Essential Parley P. Pratt, Ch.20, p.234<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> See Ether 1:33-42.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> See Abraham 1:11, 21-27.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> “Revelation, September 1830\u2013A [D&C 29],” p. 36, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed October 13, 2021, https:\/\/www.josephsmithpapers.org\/paper-summary\/revelation-september-1830-a-dc-29\/1<\/a><\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> “Revelation, September 1830\u2013A [D&C 29],” p. 39, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed October 13, 2021, https:\/\/www.josephsmithpapers.org\/paper-summary\/revelation-september-1830-a-dc-29\/4<\/a><\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> “Revelation, circa August 1835 [D&C 27],” p. 180, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed October 13, 2021, https:\/\/www.josephsmithpapers.org\/paper-summary\/revelation-circa-august-1835-dc-27\/2<\/a><\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> “Journal, March\u2013September 1838,” p. 44, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed October 13, 2021, https:\/\/www.josephsmithpapers.org\/paper-summary\/journal-march-september-1838\/30<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a>Joseph Smith sermon, 8 August 1839, recorded by Willard Richards.\u00a0 Quoted in Cook, Lyndon W.. The Words of Joseph Smith (Kindle Locations 511-512). Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition.<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> Sermon 5 October 1840, recorded by Robert B. Thompson, cited in Cook, Lyndon W.. The Words of Joseph Smith (Kindle Locations 1122-1126). Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition.<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a> First Presidency Minutes, Apr. 7, 1931.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> “Revelation, 8 July 1838\u2013E [D&C 117],” p. [1], The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed October 15, 2021, https:\/\/www.josephsmithpapers.org\/paper-summary\/revelation-8-july-1838-e-dc-117\/1<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Charles Darwin\u2019s niece once told her son (the famed British composer Ralph Vaughan Williams) that: \u201cThe Bible says that God made the world in six days, Great Uncle Charles thinks it took longer: but we need not worry about it, for it is equally wonderful either way.\u201d[1]\u00a0 While it is wonderful either way, since the early 20th century, what scientists have come to understand through their studies of evolution has become increasingly important to people to discuss in terms of understanding religion and creation.\u00a0 Literal readings of the Bible and the histories presented in Genesis underly the idea that organic evolution is not compatible with Judeo-Christianity.\u00a0 And, for better or worse, a literal understanding of Biblical narratives is a part of the Latter-day Saint tradition, influencing the translations and revelations that Joseph Smith produced.\u00a0 Yet, as the best understanding of the process by which life as we know it was created based on the evidence found in the world around us, evolution is difficult to dismiss.\u00a0 The doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has both features that help with the acceptance of evolution and concepts that make it difficult to embrace the scientific theory\u2014perhaps most notably […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10397,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2895,18,43,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42141","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-come-follow-me-currculum","category-general-doctrine","category-science","category-scriptures"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42141","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10397"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42141"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42141\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42142,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42141\/revisions\/42142"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42141"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42141"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42141"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}