Before us...

[bytebear]

Originally Posted by bmy-

To be clear.. word for word we do not subscribe to the Adam/Eve story as true. We do not believe Eve came from his rib for example.

We don't? I think many Mormons do, and that Adam was created literally from the dust of the Earth. But, Mormonism also believes in continuing revelation, and Mormons embrace science. But, most Mormons are open to new spiritual revelation as well as new science suplanting the ideas and beliefs of the past. Scientific understanding will expand and spiritual understanding will expand, and eventually, they will converge into a pure knowlege of all things.

To understand further the LDS view of Adam and Eve and the creation, I would read the Book of Moses found in the Pearl of Great Price (see scriptures.lds.org)

[Aesa]

There are members who are not comfortable with evolution.

I'd say it's probably because the Bible makes clear that man was created as that - man.
Evolutionary theory does not agree with such a thesis at all.

[bmy-]

Originally Posted by bytebear

We don't? I think many Mormons do, and that Adam was created literally from the dust of the Earth. But, Mormonism also believes in continuing revelation, and Mormons embrace science. But, most Mormons are open to new spiritual revelation as well as new science suplanting the ideas and beliefs of the past. Scientific understanding will expand and spiritual understanding will expand, and eventually, they will converge into a pure knowlege of all things.

To understand further the LDS view of Adam and Eve and the creation, I would read the Book of Moses found in the Pearl of Great Price (see scriptures.lds.org)

I've read it. There's a few issues though.. the main one being that the creation story in the temple and the one in our holy books take place in a different order. That would point to it not being a factual record of events. Or perhaps one could say that one of the two is the 'spiritual creation' and the other is 'physical'.. but my point still stands (that one ignores science and the other goes with current theory).

The largest (imo) is that Adam is Michael the Archangel. He is the Ancient of Days. He was there at the organization of the world.. and he was not there in 'spirit'.. he was there in flesh and bone. He was Michael before he was Adam.. and he was Michael after also.

In summary:
1) Creation story in holy books is not speaking of a physical creation.
2) Adam is Michael the Archangel and the "Ancient of Days". He was at the organization of this world with a very real body of flesh and bone.
3) If Michael existed during (and consequently before) the creation of the world.. he could not have been created from dust.

[rameumptom]

While we believe in Adam and Eve, we also realize that parts of the Bible are based upon myths and legends that were passed down orally from generation to generation.

We believe in an ancient earth and universe. And while we do not necessarily know how evolution fully enters into the picture, or how Adam and Eve figure fully into it, we know that the Lord will someday reveal the full story to us.

Joseph Smith taught the earth was created from former earths/creations. He believed there were creation/destruction cycles that naturally occurred, which God uses to bring about his work. Brigham Young speculated that Adam and Eve were brought here from another creation. Other LDS have taken such concepts and suggested that our world has gone through several Creation/Destruction cycles (250M years ago, 65M years ago, 10,000 years ago with the last Ice Age). In each event, massive destruction opened the way for new lifeforms to govern the earth. It may very well be that the last Ice Age opened the way for modern humans (and Adam and Eve).

While some LDS believe that Adam and Eve were literally the first man and woman on earth, more and more are considering the concept that they were the adoptive head of the mortal family, just as through Abraham later generations would be blessed in his seed, and as Paul talked of the adoption into Israel. LDS focus much on spiritual adoptions, as we believe we are adopted into specific tribes of Israel, and through the priesthood can become the "sons of Aaron and of Moses, and the seed of Abraham" (D&C 84:33-34).

Whether God used evolution to create mankind or not, we do not know. For me, it is rather immaterial at this point. The important issue has to do with core doctrines of salvation.

[Misshalfway]

I am trying to decide exactly what you were told about our beliefs. I wonder if it might be that we believe that every human who will ever walk this planet are the literal children of God and that we were created as spirits in a pre-earth realm before the earth was created. We believe that a veil is drawn over our memories concerning that life. But we believe that we lived in the presence of God and that we were taught and prepared to come to earth and get a physical body and then enjoy an experience here. After death, we return to that God who gave us life - spiritual life and physical. Such a belief is consistent with the bible and its references to a war in heaven and the celebrations of those who were there to witness it. But as you probably know, this isn't something that most of the Christian world understands to be true. I believe some think that we are only creations of God (not literally children) and that birth was the beginning of our existence.

[Koizito]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

I am trying to decide exactly what you were told about our beliefs. I wonder if it might be that we believe that every human who will ever walk this planet are the literal children of God and that we were created as spirits in a pre-earth realm before the earth was created. We believe that a veil is drawn over our memories concerning that life. But we believe that we lived in the presence of God and that we were taught and prepared to come to earth and get a physical body and then enjoy an experience here. After death, we return to that God who gave us life - spiritual life and physical. Such a belief is consistent with the bible and its references to a war in heaven and the celebrations of those who were there to witness it. But as you probably know, this isn't something that most of the Christian world understands to be true. I believe some think that we are only creations of God (not literally children) and that birth was the beginning of our existence.

Even I don't know that... I just remember it was quite diferent from the christian doctrine...

Also, I see many of you have diferent views about the creation of the universe, the world, mankind, etc. That is one aspect of religion in general that doesn't fit in my head: shouldn't you be in diferent religious groups since your views about god and its relation to the universe are diferent?

I am sorry about so many questions, and thank you for your patience once again...

[bmy-]

Originally Posted by Koizito

Even I don't know that... I just remember it was quite diferent from the christian doctrine...

Also, I see many of you have diferent views about the creation of the universe, the world, mankind, etc. That is one aspect of religion in general that doesn't fit in my head: shouldn't you be in diferent religious groups since your views about god and its relation to the universe are diferent?

I am sorry about so many questions, and thank you for your patience once again...

We have different views.. but that's largely due to people not wanting to dig. Some are perfectly content taking what is given to them. We teach 'milk before meat' and some never truly get to the meatier doctrines.

The 'core' of our religion specifically is centered around eternal progression. That's what seperates us from the monotheistic Christianity. We're henotheists. I doubt the majority of the Church realizes that.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Koizito

Even I don't know that... I just remember it was quite diferent from the christian doctrine...

Also, I see many of you have diferent views about the creation of the universe, the world, mankind, etc. That is one aspect of religion in general that doesn't fit in my head: shouldn't you be in diferent religious groups since your views about god and its relation to the universe are diferent?

I am sorry about so many questions, and thank you for your patience once again...

The doctrine is one and clear. PEOPLE develop ideas about and interpretations of it that vary when they do not listen to the prophets.

But by the same token, that are some Christians that are pro-abortion and others pro-life. Some favor the death penalty and some don't. Some cohabit before marriage but some don't. They all fit inside the Catholic church, for example.

[the Ogre]

Originally Posted by Koizito

Even I don't know that... I just remember it was quite diferent from the christian doctrine...

Also, I see many of you have diferent views about the creation of the universe, the world, mankind, etc. That is one aspect of religion in general that doesn't fit in my head: shouldn't you be in diferent religious groups since your views about god and its relation to the universe are diferent?

I am sorry about so many questions, and thank you for your patience once again...

For me, it is not all that important. The creation of the earth, the Adam and Eve story/mythology, and the creation methodology for either are not important. I do not speculate on it and avoid those who do like the plague.

Creation has nothing to do with salvation as interesting as it is and as such is not a much discussed doctrinal issue by the church leadership. Because the leadership does not discuss it (because it is not that important), many members feel free to form their own theories and methodology-matrixes.

I prefer to allow science to work it out. I think they are more than likely on the right track anyway.

[Koizito]

@ 3 previous posters: But religion is about trying to explain how the universe works, how it came to existence, etc. If various people have diferent points of views, and therefore diferent explanations, they should belong to diferent lobbies, like people who are pro-gay marriage belong to one group of people and the others to another group... I think that at least they should belong to diferent sub-groups...

And also this would make most beliefs incorrect...