Tuesday, April 23, 2024

Richard D. Gardner on Moses 3:7 and Death and Reproduction Before the Fall

  

The Bible Dictionary article on flesh and other sources list several scriptures that equate flesh to mortality. This interpretation makes sense in most cases. Furthermore, Adam was not the first physical creature; all the animals were created first . . . So, Moses 3:7 likely does not mean that Adam was the first physical creature, and therefore, Adam could really be the first mortal creature. “Flesh” as “mortal” was the [sic] also interpretation of a committee of apostles who reviewed Elder B. H. Roberts’ 1930’s era manuscript, The Truth, The Way, the Life, which was not published in his lifetime, but is now available.

 

The committee, chaired by George Albert Smith, also included David O. McKay, Joseph Fielding Smith, Stephen L. Richards, and Melvin J. Ballard. They were concerned about strange ideas in the book such as pre-Adamites, and Roberts’ understanding of the word replenish to mean repopulate—he thought the earth had been populated before Adam, but the population was wiped out by some cataclysm. (B. H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, The Life [Smith Research Associates], 332-333) Of relevance here, the committee also expressed their view of the term flesh and of Adam being the “first flesh”:

 

As we understand it the phrase “first flesh also,” does not have a reference to Adam as being the first living creature of the creation on the earth, but that he, through the “fall” because the first “flesh,” or mortal soul. The term “flesh” in reference to mortal existence is of common usage. We find it so used in the scriptures. Adam having partaken of the fruit became mortal and subject to death, which was not the condition until that time. We are taught in the Temple as well as in the scriptures that man was the last creation placed upon the earth, before death was introduced. Adam was the first to partake of the change and to become subject to the flesh. This is the view expressed by President Joseph F. Smith and President Anthon H. Lund.” [They then presented several scriptures in which flesh means mortal.] (B. H. Roberts, The Truth, The Way, The Life [Smith Research Associates], 664)

 

However, God’s body, as well as our future resurrected bodies, are also described as “flesh and bone” (Luke 24:39; D&C 129:1-2; 130:22). So not all uses of flesh mean mortality. Flesh can mean mortal, but it can also just mean physical. While acknowledging this, Robert J. Matthews . . . reasons that flesh in Moses 3:7 must mean mortal because most flesh scriptures use it that way. (Robert J. Matthews, “The Fall of Man,” in Joseph Fielding McConkie and Robert L. Millet eds., The Man Adam, p. 48)

 

The context of Moses 3:5-7 is clearly Adam’s initial physical creation, contrasted with his earlier spirit creation. Look at verse 5: “And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them.” To me, that means our pre-earth existence. Continuing, “and there was not yet flesh upon the earth . . .” SO here flesh would mean physical bodies, as opposed to our pre-earth existence. Furthermore, as the Lord had been talking about the “children of men” and “man,” one might suppose that by flesh, he means physical humans, as opposed to all life forms. The word could apply to animals as well, but this scripture references humans. And then, in verse 7, Adam’s physical creation is described. Whereas others have interpreted “the first flesh upon the earth” To mean the first mortal, verse 7 doesn’t reference the fall, but rather, Adam’s physical creation. If we keep the interpretation of flesh in verse 7 that we saw in verse 5—physical humans—then Adam is the first physical human, and the first man also; he is male. This interpretation, then, says nothing about if there were other mortal animals (or plants) on the planet. I’m not necessarily arguing that there were; I’m only saying that this interpretation, which is reasonable and internally consistent, does not rule them out. I agree that most of the uses of flesh in the scriptures means mortal, but the context here may make it an exception. Context matters.

 

I admit that the rain issue in verses 5-6 is enigmatic to me. Elder McConkie argued that rain was necessary for mortal life, and that therefore this scripture is about entering mortality. It seems, however, that there must have been rain before any rivers or streams existed, so perhaps these verses about rain are out of order; we’ve already seen that the order of events in Moses and Abraham differs slightly. (As a precedent for incorrect scriptural chronology, the story about the saints resurrecting just after Christ’s resurrection is placed non-chronologically in our New Testament record).

 

To be fair, if we admit that some scriptures are written out of chronological order, then perhaps calling Adam the “first flesh” in Moses 3:7 might still refer to his fall to mortality, even though it is placed in the context of his initial physical creation rather than his fall.

 

One other scripture is used to show that Adam was the first mortal—not just the first mortal man, but the first mortal among all of God’s creatures, both animals and plants:

 

And he said unto them: Because that Adam fell, we are; and by his fall came death; and we are made partakers of misery and woe . . . That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death. (Moses 6:48, 59, italics mine).

 

But this scripture doesn’t specify if death means all death, or only human death, or whether it applies to life outside of the garden. Alma 42:9, which often comes up in discussion of the fall and its effects, applies to mankind only. (“The fall had brought upon all mankind a spiritual death as well as a temporal.” Italics mine.) In conclusion, a case can be made that “first flesh” means “first mortal,” but the context may favor interpreting “first flesh” as “first physical human.” If so, this removes the major argument against death and reproduction before Adam’s fall. (Richard D. Gardner, “Who is the Holy Ghost? The Adam/Michael Hypothesis Compared with the Conventional Stance,” in Who is the Holy Ghost? [Eborn Books, 2024], 112-14)