Mormon,Mormonism Two Creations of the Earth

From The Pearl of Great Price, Moses 3:5 we learn there were two creations of the earth, one spiritual and one physical.

And every plan of the field, before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. 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; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air.

Mormon,Mormonism: Raised from the Dead Not a Resurrection

The Bible tells of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. This was not a resurrection but just a return to mortality. In a way of thinking, this was a re-creation of the mortal Lazarus.

Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha.

(It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.)

These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.

Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.

And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
(John 11: 1-2, 11, 14, 43-44)

When Jesus called his apostles, he gave them the power of the Apostleship and told them to raise the dead.

Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give. (Matthew 10:8)

Scientists have succeeded in activating extinct viruses. Because a virus is a simple entity while a person is a complex organism, scientists still have a long way to go before they might be able to restore life to a dead person. But, activating an extinct virus is still an amazing feat!

I've been thinking about bringing a dead person back to life. I don't understand very well the differences between a living person and a dead person, but the scriptures do give a partial idea from the religious viewpoint of what would have to happen to have a dead person brought back to life. The Apostle Paul said we are the offspring of God

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. (Acts, 17:29)

and Latter-day Saints accept his statement literally. We believe we are spirit children of our Father in Heaven. This means that the difference between a person and an animal is that the person is a combination of a physical body and a spirit body, the spirit body being an offspring of God, while an animal has no spirit offspring of God. These two requirements would have to be met to have a person raised from the dead. This means that God would have to permit His spirit offspring to re-enter the physical body in such a way that the person became alive.

Will scientists ever be able to bring people back from the dead. This is just a guess, but I would say "probably", if God allows His spirit offspring to reenter the body. However, this would not be a resurrection.

Mormon,Mormonism Human Soul

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the human soul is quite different than the human souls that are envisioned by other Christians.

And the spirit and the body are the soul of man. (D&C 88:15)

That is, the soul is a combination of a spirit offspring of God and a physical body that acts as a tabernacle for the spirit. To understand the significance of our soul, we need to better understand spirit. Joseph Smith said spirit is matter that is more refined and more pure.

There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes. (D&C 131:7)

My interpretation of this scripture leads me to believe that spirit matter is governed by different laws than the mortal laws of nature. Let us get a better understanding of spirit matter. In the Book of Mormon, there is a clear and explicit account of a man, known as "the Brother of Jared", talking with Jesus Christ, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, who at that time was a spirit. From this experience, we learn that bodies of spirit matter look like bodies of flesh and bone. The brother of Jared saw the spirit body of Jesus prior to Jesus being born of Mary, and he thought the body was flesh and blood; Jesus corrected him and explained it was the body of his spirit. Then Jesus said

Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh. (Ether 3:16)

Spirits have mass that can be formed and shaped. Spirit mass can reside inside physical mass. Spirit mass is not visible to normal eyesight. Now, we have a little better idea of what Joseph Smith meant when he said spirit is matter but is more refined and pure than mortal matter. Because of this, I don't believe instruments used by scientists will detect the presence of spirit matter or spirit energy. However, I could be wrong about this.

Mormon,Mormonism: Time pertains to Mortality

This is a fascinating topic even though I don't understand it very well, and apparently scientists don't understand it very well either. The two aspects of time that I find interesting are that time seems to be unidirectional, and that time will disappear.

There are many uses of the word "time" in the scriptures, but those uses of the word "time" are in a different context. I searched the online scriptures at lds.org for phrases containing the word "time" in the context of earthly time and only found two scriptures.

Or have angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved? (Book of Mormon, Moroni 7:36)

That verse tells us that God will not withhold the Holy Ghost from the children of men as long as time shall last, implying that time will come to an end after the Savior has finished his work in redeeming the children of men. Time is a measure of the sequence of events that comprise mortality. Mortality is a temporary existence. People, animals, and plants come into existence and then disappear. Events pertaining to the earth, such as earthquakes and storms, occur and then cease. But in the domain of God all things are eternal. There is no end to eternal things. There is no time in eternity.

Another verse from Revelation declares that time will cease when the Redemption is finished.

And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: (Revelation 10:6)

John saw an angel come down from heaven. The angel declared "by him that liveth for ever and ever" that time would cease, referring to the eventual completion of the Lord's work when all things will become eternal.

I think the scriptures give a strong implication that time is unidirectional, always going forward. The scriptures have a strong focus on repentance, that we must change our behavior to become more in harmony with God's will. The context is always that we must repent, and then in the future become more like Christ. There is no implication that as we repent we can go back in time and relive our past.

Some scientists say backwards travel is impossible because it would violate the principle of causality and, in addition, would require unimaginable amounts of energy. This scientific view of negative time-travel being impossible is in agreement with the scriptural view of time. Other scientists, though, say that backwards travel is theoretically possible but is not practical.

Concerning the disappearance of time, as I pointed out in my previous posts, we believe that when this world is recreated as an immortal world via the Atonement of Jesus Christ, time will cease, for in eternity there is no time. Because some scientists speculate there is no time, there is a form of a parallel between the religious and scientific views, although the religious view of no time pertains to an immortal world and the scientific view of no time pertains to a mortal world.

If science does discover how to travel in time, since from the scientific viewpoint time is a dimension, it will be interesting to see if humans in that distant future are able to travel bidirectionally or just unidirectionally.

Mormon,Mormonism Aging

The Lord revealed that during the Millennium, people will live to an old age.

And he that liveth when the Lord shall come, and hath kept the faith, blessed is he; nevertheless, it is appointed to him to die at the age of man.

Wherefore, children shall grow up until they become old; old men shall die; but they shall not sleep in the dust, but they shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye. (D&C 63:50-51)

In that day an infant shall not die until he is old; and his life shall be as the age of a tree; (D&C 101:30)

The Lord did not reveal the number of years in the "age of a tree", although some LDS give a number such as 100 years.

The opposite of a long life is death. Two of the main causes of death are diseases and injuries. The prophecies that people will live to an old age imply that great advancements will be made in medical science. Scientists are researching the aging process to learn ways to extend the life of humans. They are gaining a better understanding of particular diseases, such as cancer and the genetic aspects of certain diseases, and this knowledge is helping them develop better recommendations for nutrition, and better vaccines and drugs to treat diseases. These advancements in science are giving us more time in mortality. According to Wikipedia, the average life expectancy in 1950 was approximately 53, and in 2002 it was approximately 65.

Concerning advancements in science about diseases and injuries, we must be patient, because scientific investigations take time. Scientists often test new procedures and drugs for short-term effects, because testing for long-term effects is difficult due to the long lifespans of humans. Testing of long-term effects is usually done with animals that have shorter lifespans. Fruit flies are often used because they have an extremely short lifespans. Scientists are concerned, as well they should be, that results of the animal tests may not apply to humans. To get around this problem, scientists use clinical tests on humans to test procedures and drugs that have favorable results on animals. But, as mentioned above, human tests are usually conducted for short-term effects. Even human tests that cover a decade or more are short-term tests since typical lifespans of humans are six or seven decades or more, and some long-term effects may go into the generations of the children, grandchildren, etc. of the persons being tested.

In addition, we must be careful in our use of medicine, because quality standards in the manufacturing of medicines and drugs, and medical procedures used by doctors, vary from country to country. Persons living in one country may be tempted to purchase medicines and to visit doctors in other countries, because particular prescriptions and procedures may cost less in the other countries or may not be available in the countries in which the people live.

Even though the scriptures say that even with all children living to an old age, they will still die and be resurrected, for they are still mortal. The resurrection comes through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and it is through the resurrection that people, animals, and plants will become immortal. The scriptures do not say exactly how the resurrection will happen, and I do not speculate on it except to say that I believe it is a state-change, a major change in our existence, a major change in the matter that makes up our bodies, and it is not just a lengthening of our time in mortality.

General health checks have been considered part of a wise health program. However, some scientists are finding that general health checks do not decrease deaths from major causes.

There is, however, a downside to a longer life-span. Scientific research is showing that not all people benefit from a longer life-span.

Mormon,Mormonism Book of Mormon Migrations

The Book of Mormon tells of two main migrations to the American continents.

And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto me, saying: Thou shalt construct a ship, after the manner which I shall show thee, that I may carry thy people across these waters. (1 Nephi 17:8)

And the Lord said: Go to work and build, after the manner of barges which ye have hitherto built. And it came to pass that the brother of Jared did go to work, and also his brethren, and built barges after the manner which they had built, according to the instructions of the Lord. And they were small, and they were light upon the water, even like unto the lightness of a fowl upon the water. (Ether 2: 16)

Here is a brief rundown on the people in the Book of Mormon migrations. The people in Lehi's migration were of the House of Israel and were living in Jerusalem. They left Jerusalem and traveled by ship to the Americas. The Jaredite migration began after the Lord confounded the language of the people at the Tower of Babel. Since the city of Babel was in what is now southern Iraq, the people in that migration were probably Semites (I don't remember if the Book of Mormon gives a specific lineage for Jared). The people in the Jaredite migration also came to the Americas by ship. There is a third migration, known as the Mulekites, that is mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not discussed in detail. The Mulekite people were absorbed into the Nephites, and I'm not discussing them as a separate people.

In this post, I discuss the dates of migration. Scientists are concerned about the original settlers of the Americas. For many years, the Clovis people were assumed to be the earliest to come to the Americas. They were in the Americas around 11,500 years ago. However, evidence is surfacing that other groups were here earlier than the Clovis people. In either case, scientists are looking at migrations over 11,000 years ago.

In contrast, the migrations described in the Book of Mormon happened much later. Lehi's migration began in 600 BC. The Jaredite migration began after the Lord confounded the language of the people. I don't have a date for the Tower of Babel, but the Babylonian Empire existed from approximately 2,000 to 323 BC. The Tower of Babel would have been somewhere in that time-range. Because of the vast difference in the dates of the original settlers of the Americas and the Book of Mormon migrations, I would not expect to find a correlation of the scientific and religious views of the dates of migration.

Mormon,Mormonism Travel by Book of Mormon People

A parallel between science and the Book of Mormon about the mode of travel used by Lehi is feasible, because we have scientific evidence about the use of ships in the 6th century BC. In Phoenicia I give evidence that the Phoenicians were well established in sailing long distances. Their cargo ships were as large as the ships used by Columbus, and they dominated trade in the Mideast, probably in Europe, and possibly around Africa up to India. The Phoenicians lived in what is Lebanon today, which isn't an awfully long distance from Jerusalem. It is feasible that the reputation and exploits of the Phoenicians were known by Lehi and his family. In fact, when Nephi announced to his brothers that he was going to build a ship, they expressed disbelief that Nephi could build a ship, but they didn't express concern about the idea of a ship.

And when my brethren saw that I was about to build a ship, they began to murmur against me, saying: Our brother is a fool, for he thinketh that he can build a ship; yea, and he also thinketh that he can cross these great waters. (1 Nephi 17:17)

When the Lord first commanded Nephi to build a ship, he said

Thou shalt construct a ship after the manner which I shall show thee, that I may carry thy people across these waters. (1 Nephi 17:8)

We don't know if the Lord told Nephi how to build a ship using the methods used by the Phoenicians (or possibly by other peoples), or if the Lord gave Nephi a completely different way of building a ship. However it happened, Nephi built a ship as instructed by the Lord, and the people came to the Americas.

One question that needs to be asked is, Why aren't there records of some kind that document this migration to the Americas? My answer is the following. When the Lord, in a dream, told Lehi to take his family and flee from Jerusalem, he told Lehi that people wanted to kill him because of the things he had said about their wickedness. Lehi's departure was not announced in the daily "newspaper", and farewell parties were not held. He left quietly. In addition, there were no embedded reporters with Lehi to report to the Jerusalem media about Lehi's progress. As far as records are concerned, most of the maritime records that might have been kept by the ancient people have been lost. If there was a record made of Lehi's departure, there is a very low probability that record would exist today and would be found by our scientists.

So, in summary, the voyage to the Americas by Lehi and his party in the 6th century BC is reasonably feasible as far as knowledge of long voyages and ship construction are concerned.

Unfortunately, a correlation between science and the Jaredite migration is not feasible. To begin with, I don't have a date for the migration. The migration probably occurred sometime in the 20th to the 10th century BC, but I haven't found any descriptions of ship building or maritime escapades during those centuries.

The ships used by the Jaredites were described as "barges" and were tight on top, bottom, and sides so they could be submerged by large waves, and no water would enter the barges. It sounds to me like the barges were not typical boats that we would expect ancient people to construct, and this would make a correlation with scientific evidence difficult.

Finally, even though I don't know exactly when the Jaredites migrated to the Americas, it was early enough in the history of the earth to consider them a more primitive society than that of the Nephites who lived probably one to two millennia later. Scientists have believed that those primitive people didn't have the knowledge to construct sea-going ships. Because of this belief, scientists have believed the early migration to the Americas was via the Bering land bridge. In addition, migrations via the land bridge are believed to have occurred several thousand years before the Jaredite migration. There are some scientists who believe early migrations to the Americas occurred via ship, but the evidence for such migrations is mostly circumstantial and weak, and dates for those voyages are usually much earlier than the Jaredite voyage. Because of these reasons, I don't have a correlation between science and the Jaredite migration, and I'm leaving that issue an open question for the time being.

Mormon,Mormonism Book of Mormon Geography

The peoples of the Book of Mormon migrations were Semites and came from the Mediterranean area. After arriving in the Americas, they built cities and highways, and established commerce between the cities. The Book of Mormon does not say there were no other people in the Americas when the migrations occurred. In fact, the Book of Mormon does not identify where in the Americas the people landed and built their cities. Geographical references are vague, such as a "narrow neck of land", and do not allow us to identify actual places in the Americas that would be places referenced in the book.

The view of migrations to the Americas given by science is quite different than the view given by the Book of Mormon. According to science, the first migration to the Americas that resulted in permanent settlements that exist today was by Columbus in 1492. There is evidence that the Vikings visited North America prior to Columbus and did form settlements, but those settlements were not permanent.

Scientists have focused on identifying the first people to migrate to the Americas. Current belief of many scientists is that the early migrations to the Americas were via a land bridge between Siberia and Alaska. This happened during the ice age when the level of the oceans was much less than it is now, and there is good scientific evidence that people walked to Alaska. As the ice age came to an end and the ice melted, the land bridge was flooded, as it is today.

In additional to traditional scientific research into the early migrations to the Americas, recent studies of the DNA of Native Americans show that their ancestors did, in fact, come from Asia. However, the Ojibwa tribe, that lives near the Great Lakes, has a DNA line that goes into Europe not Asia. However, that line could not have come from Book of Mormon peoples, because it was dated to be 14,000 or more years ago. This difference of the Book of Mormon and scientific views about migrations to the Americas has existed for many years. There has been a strong belief among Latter-day Saints that the peoples of the Book of Mormon were the principle, if not the only, ancestors of Native Americans. I grew up with this view. I taught this view as a missionary in 1956-1958. Some LDS leaders have taught this view.

This view even became embedded in the bound volume of the Book of Mormon. In 1981, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints published a new version of the Book of Mormon, and an Introduction page was added to the book. It is believed that the Introduction was written by Elder Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve. That Introduction states, "After thousands of years, all [the Book of Mormon peoples] were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians." However, that statement is not supported by science.

But, an interesting thing has happened. It was just revealed by the Deseret Morning News and the Salt Lake Tribune that the LDS Church has changed the wording of that statement in the Introduction to be as follows. "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians." This change will be made in a special version of the Book of Mormon for non-LDS that is published by Doubleday, and a church spokesperson said it will be made in the next version of the Book of Mormon for LDS members. The text of the special version by Doubleday is the same as the text in the LDS version, but the special version doesn't have the cross references and chapter headings. This change in the Introduction is a needed and welcome change, because it brings the Introduction, and the thinking of LDS people, into closer agreement with scientific findings. It is one step toward the convergence of science and religion that I believe will eventually happen. As I said above, the Book of Mormon does not claim that the Book of Mormon peoples were the only people in the Americas. The belief among LDS that those people were the only peoples in America comes from custom and tradition and not from the book.

Let us now look more closely at speculation about the geography of the Book of Mormon.

Book of Mormon Geography

Some individuals have published about the Book of Mormon geography, but their ideas are nothing more than speculation. At the present time, the center of speculation seems to be the Yucatan Peninsula. That area has a number of geographical features that seem to fit Book of Mormon geography. In addition there are archaeological remains that fit the time-line of the Book of Mormon. However, those archaeological evidences are only parallel evidences of the Book of Mormon, and they do not prove the Book of Mormon history and geography to be true. For those interested, I have an essay in my LDS site that explains the differences between parallel and direct evidences. At the present time, we have no direct scientific evidences of the Book of Mormon.

Deciding precisely where the peoples of the Book of Mormon lived is a difficult if not an impossible task. The Book of Mormon gives geographic information about cities, rivers, mountains, relative distance between cities, etc., but the information is described in such general ways that it can not easily be correlated with the actual geography of the Americas. We are thus left to deciphering statements by Joseph Smith and other General Authorities of the Church, both before and after the exodus to the Great Basin, and to scholarly attempts to fit the Book of Mormon descriptions to actual geography.

Joseph Smith first learned about the Book of Mormon when he was visited by the Angel Moroni on September 21, 1823. We don't have the exact words used by Moroni to describe the peoples of the Book of Mormon, but we do have the words written by Joseph Smith about 16 years later to describe the visit of Moroni.

He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants; (Pearl of Great Price, History of Joseph Smith, 34)

A Hemispheric View of the Book of Mormon Geography

Joseph wrote that the peoples of the Book of Mormon were the "former inhabitants of this continent". That statement is ambiguous and doesn't say anything about how numerous the people were or where they lived, but the statement was interpreted to mean that the peoples of the Book of Mormon were the only former inhabitants of this land. It's obvious from sermons given by Joseph Smith and by other General Authorities of the Church, both before and after the exodus to the Great Basin, that they believed the peoples of the Book of Mormon were so numerous that they had scattered over North, Central, and South America, and that all American Indians were descended from those peoples. This view of the Book of Mormon geography is explained by Michael R. Ash in an article published by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR).

The Lord has never revealed the specific location of Book of Mormon events. Instead, we are left to our own speculations concerning Book of Mormon geography. Since the days of Joseph Smith most Saints believed that the Book of Mormon took place across the entire expanse of North and South America. This theory—referred to as the Hemispheric Geography Theory (HGT) posits that North America is the “land northward,” that South America is the “land southward,” and that present-day Panama is the “narrow neck” of land. This is a natural interpretation of Book of Mormon geography based on a cursory reading and superficial understanding to the Book of Mormon text.

I grew up with this understanding of the peoples of the Book of Mormon. This belief was apparently accepted by the members of the committee that approved the text of the Introduction to the 1981 version of the Book of Mormon. That Introduction refers to the Lamanites as the principal ancestors of the American Indians.

After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.

A Limited View of the Book of Mormon Geography

I don't know when the movement by scholars for a more restricted geography of the Book of Mormon began, but by the 1980s, the movement had a good foothold in the literature about the Book of Mormon. Michael R. Ash explains the restricted view as follows.

Currently, most LDS scholars (and some LDS leaders) reject the HGT in favor of a Limited Geography Theory (LGT) for the Book of Mormon. This theory posits that the Lehites arrived to a New World already inhabited. (I discuss this in a brochure entitled “Were the Lehites Alone in the Americas?”) According to this view, the Lehites would have not only engaged these natives, but they would have also become part of their society and culture. The LGT claims that Book of Mormon events would have taken place in a relatively small area of land and that this section of land is that of Mesoamerica (Central America) with the Isthmus of Teuhuantepec as the “narrow neck” of land.

Please refer to Ash's article for more information about the two views of Book of Mormon geography, including his explanation why Joseph Smith and subsequent Prophets accepted a Hemispheric Geography of the Book of Mormon. The link I had to Ash's article no longer works, and I've removed the link from this post. I assume the article is still online; I just need to locate it and create a new link.

My first exposure to the Limited Geography Theory was the book, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, published in 1985 by Dr. John L. Sorenson. Dr. Sorenson attempted to model the Book of Mormon geography by converting the Book of Mormon descriptions into miles. For example, if people traveled three days to reach a neighboring city, Dr. Sorenson would estimate how far those people might travel in a day and thus determine the approximate distance in miles to the adjacent city. His model of the Book of Mormon geography indicated that the people lived in a relatively small area, and the area of Mesoamerica provides a good fit to Sorenson's model. As I read the book, I realized that his approach to Book of Mormon geography made more sense than the ideas I had as a youth.

There are actually other LGT theories, including the Great Lakes area and Baja Mexico. I'm not familiar with these theories and have not included them in this post. Persons familiar with these theories are invited to explain the theories in comments to this post.

LDS Beliefs About Book of Mormon Geography are Folklore

In other posts to this blog,  I discuss folklore vs. the scriptures as sources of religious information. Since the Book of Mormon does not identify in terms of modern geography the locations of places in the book, and as far as we know the Lord hasn't revealed the precise location of those places, we must classify all statements about Book of Mormon geography and the size and locations of the Nephite and Lamanite civilizations as folklore. This includes statements by LDS Presidents, LDS Apostles, and scholars such as Sorenson. In recognizing that such statements are folklore, we also recognize that the statements might be true or they might be false.

Some Latter-day Saints object to the classification of statements by Joseph Smith and more recent living prophets as being folklore. I respect their views and sensitivity about statements made by living prophets, and I kindly remind them that I'm only referring to statements about Book of Mormon geography and the Nephite and Lamanite civilizations, not to statements about doctrine and scriptural interpretation.

The Parallel between Science and the Book of Mormon about MigrationAs we look for parallels between the scientific view of migrations to the Americas and the Book of Mormon view of the migrations, let us realize that we are looking for parallels to the Book of Mormon view, not parallels to LDS folklore about the Book of Mormon. In order for the scientific and religious views of those migrations to converge, we will likely need changes to both views. We have recently seen a change to the religious view that brings the two views closer to reconciliation. I am anxiously awaiting future changes in both views that will eventually bring the two views together.

Summary

Currently, there is no scientific evidence to prove Book of Mormon claims of migrations to the Americas. Does this prove the Book of Mormon is false? Many people say, "Yes". I say, "No". I believe that lack of evidence does not prove that the object being investigated does not exist. Lack of evidence only proves there is a lack of evidence. For example, scientific evidence exists that there are planets orbiting distant stars. However, that evidence did not exist 20 years ago. If a scientist were asked 20 years ago if there were planets in other solar systems, he or she would have to answer, "I don't know". So it is today with migrations to the Americas. Lack of evidence of the Book of Mormon migrations does not imply those migrations did not occur.

I am a religious person, and I believe the Book of Mormon is true. I believe the Jaredite and Lehite migrations did occur. I believe that eventually scientific evidence will be found to support those migrations, although my belief is that evidence probably won't be found until we are in the Millennium. I believe the Book of Mormon is true, because I accept it on faith. I accept the book because it adds value to my life. To me, it is a book of faith not of science. The Bible has a similar problem. The history in the Bible supported to an extent by archaeological findings, but there is no scientific evidence for the spiritual parts of the Bible. There is no scientific evidence for the miracles performed by Christ, for his resurrection, for his providing salvation through the Atonement. I accept the Bible on faith. I accept the Bible because it adds value to my life.

I believe people who insist on scientific evidence or philosophical logic for the existence of God are treading on thin ice. I believe that God is not part of this mortal world. I believe that science can not observe God. There is no scientific evidence for or against the existence of God. People who require science to validate God will never find that validation and will likely conclude there is no God. In doing this, they are being dishonest with themselves, because they are forming a conclusion with no evidence to support that conclusion.

I am content to keep the questions of scientific evidence for the Book of Mormon, the Bible, and the existence of God as open questions.

Mormon,Mormonism DNA that Disappeared

Previous posts have concerned migrations to the American continents. In this part I discuss the DNA analysis of a migration to Europe and its parallel with the migration of the Lehites to the Americas as described in the Book of Mormon.

As explained in Earliest European Farmers Left Little Genetic Mark On Modern Europe, the first settlers in Europe are believed to have been Paleolithic hunter-gatherers who arrived about 40,000 years ago. About 7,500 years ago people migrated to Europe and brought farming to that area. The question thus arises, are modern Europeans descended from the hunter-gatherers, the farmers, or both?

DNA was obtained from skeletons of early farmers, and the DNA contained "genetic signatures that are extremely rare in modern European populations. Based on this discovery, the researchers conclude that early farmers did not leave much of a genetic mark on modern European populations." In fact, '"Our paper suggests that there is a good possibility that the contribution of early farmers could be close to zero," said Science author Peter Forster from the University of Cambridge in Cambridge, UK.'

The situation given in the Science article is that of two migrations to an area, and the DNA of the later migration not occurring in the people presently living in that area. Since Europe, today, is an agricultural society, the early farmers in the later migration had a significant impact on the culture of Europe, even though they left basically no lasting genetic evidence of their existence. "It's interesting that a potentially minor migration of people into Central Europe had such a huge cultural impact," said Forster."

This is an interesting parallel with the Book of Mormon. Science tells us of early migrations to the Americas from Asia via the Bering Strait. The Book of Mormon tells of a later migration (the Lehites) from the Mediterranean area. However, DNA studies of modern Native Americans show that the Native Americans who were studied have no DNA markers from the Mediterranean area. Apologists for the Book of Mormon have explained that DNA markers from a group of people could die out and thus not be found in modern people (see, for example, Addressing Questions). However, their comments seemed like rationalizations since they could not offer examples from science of DNA markers "dieing out". We now have from science, as explained in the article from Science magazine, a knowledge of two migrations to Europe and a knowledge that the second migration had a great influence in the culture of Europe but the DNA from this later migration does not occur among modern people currently living in Europe. That is, the DNA markers from the second migration have "died" out. This does not "prove" the Book of Mormon to be true. It is merely a parallel between science and the Book of Mormon. One importance to Latter-day Saints of this parallel is an understanding that the DNA of the American Indians is not necessarily a complete map of the migrations to the Americas.

Because they are in different paradigms, the Book of Mormon and science present different views of the migrations to the Americas. The Book of Mormon claims there were two migrations from the Mediterranean area to the Americas. The Jaredite migration occurred somewhere around 1500 BC, and the Lehite migration occurred in 600 BC. If (I say "if" not because of disbelief but for sake of discussion) the Book of Mormon claims are true, there should be scientific evidence of those migrations. Scientists believe the original migrations to the Americas occurred approximately 20,000 - 10,000 years ago. The Vikings made settlements in North America before Columbus, but those settlements were not permanent. In addition to these dates, DNA testing of Native Americans indicates their ancestors came from Asia not from the Mid-East. I have not discussed whether any of the archaeological sites in North, Central, or South America could be Book of Mormon sites, and my comments should not be applied to that question.

Phoenicia

The Phoenicians were Semites who lived on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, in what is now Lebanon in the centuries before Christ.

By 1250 B.C. the Phoenicians were well established as the navigators and traders of the Mediterranean world, enjoying the commerce that had once been in the hands of the Aegeans....Phoenician seamen came to dominate the Mediterranean. They went to the edges of the known world, trading from the Iberian Peninsula to the Dardanelles. Some authorities believe they went as far as Cornwall, seeking tin. There is evidence that in Egyptian service they may have sailed down the western coast of Africa, and possibly their ships even rounded Africa and reached the East Indies. The Phoenician carrying trade was enormous, and their wares were varied. They had an important monopoly on the great cedars of Lebanon from their homeland.

For hundreds of years, the Phoenicians flourished as a civilization, but

The individuality of the Phoenicians was dwindling, and with the rise of Greek naval and maritime power the importance of the Phoenicians disappeared. They were, however, able in the 4th cent. B.C. to offer serious resistance to Alexander the Great, who took Tyre only after a long and hard siege (333–332 B.C.). In Roman times the cities continued to exist, but Hellenistic culture had absorbed the last traces of Phoenician civilization.

Historians are learning about the ship building skills of the Phoenicians through the study of Phoenician shipwrecks.

These ocean-going ships were built for huge loads and long hauls. They made the extended trips from Mediterranean ports out to Cadiz, Lixis and other destinations on the Atlantic Ocean coasts of Spain and Morocco, and had to make each trip count. People have remarked that those cargo ships which sailed the seas for many hundreds of years B.C. were comparable in size to the ones Columbus sailed to America in 1492 A.D. Thor Heyerdahl, the modern-day explorer, noted that the Phoenicians could have sailed to Central America themselves. I don't know if they did or not, but well-informed people see it as being within the capabilities of Phoenician ships and navigators. That is quite a compliment to these early people of the sea and what they were able to accomplish.

Mormon,Mormonism States of Existence

Before we look at the three states of existence, let us look at the religious concept of matter, the "stuff" of which bodies are made. The Doctrine and Covenants states that

There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes. (D&C 131:7)

It isn't clear what Joseph Smith meant in that verse, but one thing is clear: spirit matter is different from the physical matter in our universe. It is different, being "more fine or pure", and it is different in that it can only be discerned or viewed by "purer eyes". I will give my interpretation of those phrases. I believe that spirit matter is matter, in that it has mass and is controlled by laws, but I believe those laws are different than the laws that govern our mortal world. How are those laws different? I don't know. Because spirit matter can only be discerned by purer eyes, that is, eyes that have been enlightened by the Spirit of the Lord. I believe that scientific investigations, as we currently conduct them, can not detect energy that is given off by spirit matter.

Let us get a better understanding of spirit matter. I've discussed the experience of the Brother of Jared in which he saw the spirit body of Jesus before Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Jesus' spirit body looked like a physical body except it wasn't flesh and bone. Clearly, Jesus as Jehovah, was in a different state of existence, another universe, than the Brother of Jared.

Next, let us look at an example of the third state of existence, resurrected matter. As described in Luke 24, after his resurrection, Jesus appeared with his resurrected body to the apostles in the upper room. He didn't walk in through a door. Nor did he climb in through a window. He just appeared in the midst of them. He showed them his hands and feet, and he ate food to demonstrate that his resurrected body was real. Resurrected bodies are also matter, but the matter is different than spirit matter and different than mortal matter. Resurrected matter is glorified and perfect. It is not subject to disease, injury, or death.

The resurrection is not just a transformation of a mortal body to a resurrected body, since, in general, mortal bodies that are dead will have decomposed or been destroyed in some other way such that the atoms are scattered and have been used in the creation of other mortal bodies of plants and animals. The resurrection is, I believe, the recreation of a new body from resurrected matter but using the plan (DNA?) of the old body.

As evidence that resurrected bodies are different from mortal bodies, we have the story already related from Luke of the resurrected Christ appearing to his apostles without entering through a door or window; he just appeared in the room. In a similar fashion, when Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith in his bedroom, he (Moroni) "suddenly appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor." And, the climax of all of Joseph's visions was the First Vision in the grove, where the Father and the Son stood before Joseph "standing above me in the air".

As I write this, there are spirit personages, mortal people, and resurrected personages existing in their own state of existence or universe. For the most part, these universes exist without a lot of physical contact with the mortal universe, but there may be times when spirit personages or resurrected personages appear in vision to mortal people. Of course, a lot of spiritual contact occurs via prayer and the promptings of the Holy Ghost.

State-Changes

I've been thinking that *states* and *state-change* are technical terms that may not have the same meaning to persons with a liberal arts background that they have to persons with a technical background. So, I thought I'd try to explain those terms in a non-technical way. Sometimes expressing a concept in a different way helps to clarify the concept.

In technology, a *state* is a set of significant conditions. Changes from one state to another state are significant changes. For example, a computer that is turned off is in a different state than a computer that is turned on. In my posts, I'm using *state* to refer to a condition of existence, including the type of matter used in bodies and the laws that govern that matter.

In the spirit world before birth, we were spirits and had bodies composed of spirit matter. There were laws that governed spirit matter. We were in a spirit state of existence. Now, we are in mortality and are in a different state. Our bodies are composed of different matter, and there are, I assume, different laws that govern mortal matter. After the resurrection, we will, I believe, be in a third state. Our bodies will be composed of resurrected or immortal matter, and there will be laws that govern that matter. We began in the spirit state. Then we went into the mortal state. At death, we return to the spirit state. Then at some time, we will go to the resurrected state, and we will stay in that state forever. Because each state has its own set of laws, I don't believe the changing from one state to another is just a matter of biological, technological, and ethical evolution. There is more involved, but I don't understand it very well. The scriptures teach that the Atonement of Jesus Christ is the key to the changing of these states.

States of existence are a parallel to the scientific concept of multiple universes.

Mormon,Mormonism State-Changes

In another post I explain that the final destination of this earth is to become a celestial home for those of God's children who inherit that degree of glory. The concept behind this is that the Lord creates worlds with his long range goal in mind: eternal homes for his children. This mortal state of existence that we are in now is a temporary state to provide a home for us as we experience mortality as part of our eternal progression.

In another post I explain that the Lord has created "worlds without number"as homes for his children. I am not saying that all of those worlds will become celestial, but the verses from Section 88 do tell us that this world will become celestial. Section 76 of the Doctrine & Covenants says there will be three kingdoms for God's children: Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial. I assume that the "worlds without number" will become the final homes for persons in all three kingdoms. As a side note, there is no reason to believe that all of the worlds created by God are habitable. Since God does his work via natural laws, I would expect that most of the worlds created would be inhabitable.

I've explained that there were two creations of the earth, one spiritual in Heaven and one mortal. This means our earth has already experienced one change of state.

This view of the earth changing state from a spirit state to a mortal state to a celestial (no death) state is quite different from the scientific view of the earth. We should not expect our scientists to have a view that is different from the view they currently have, because the domain of their research is the mortal world. They have no way of getting information from worlds in other states. They currently have, I believe, no instruments that can detect energy from spirit matter or resurrected matter.

Mormon,Mormonism The Flood

The Bible describes a great flood that occurred during the time of Noah. The Lord declared that

And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven: and every thing that is in the earth shall die (Genesis 6:17).

Noah was commanded to build an ark that was approximately 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high (Genesis 6:15). Noah was told to bring into the ark all animals and fowls (Genesis 6:19-20, 7:2-3).

And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.

And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth: and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven were covered.

Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:

All in whose nostrils was the breath of life , of all that was in the dry land, died.

And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven: and they were destroyed from the earth and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

And the waters prevailed upon the earth and hundred and fifty days. (Genesis 7:17, 19-24)

The story of Noah and the flood is a basic part of Christianity and thus of Mormonism. It is an interesting story, but a confusing story, and not all Latter-day Saints have the same interpretation of it. Most LDS that I have talked with take the story literally, that the whole planet was covered with a flood, and that Noah literally took mating pairs of all the animals and birds on the planet into the ark. Some LDS accept the story as being real but think the flood was a regional flood and didn't cover the whole earth, and that Noah took mating pairs of the animals and birds that were common to his area. Other LDS think the story is an allegory to teach the moral principles of faith and obedience to God.

The Lord through latter-day revelation, as recorded in the Doctrine & Covenants, refers to Noah as a real person, and I accept him as such. However, I have a problem with accepting the story of the flood as a global flood. My personal belief is that the flood was either a great miracle or was a local flood.

The scriptures do not teach a planet-wide flood

The verses in Genesis do not say the flood covered the whole planet. It is the destruction that is described as being planet-wide. For example, consider the following.

And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and everything that is in the earth shall die. (Genesis 6:17)

That verse states that (a) God would create a flood, and (b) all flesh on the earth would die. Some people, who believe in a world-wide flood, say the flood caused the destruction of all life. Other people, who believe in a local flood, say the flood didn't cause the destruction, but the process used by God to cause the flood caused the destruction. I'm in this latter group. As explained below, I'm posting information about the impact of large asteroids, because scientists say that such impacts could cause a local flood and also destroy all life in the region of the flood.

Genesis 7:19 does state that "the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.", but I believe that verse does not imply a planet-wide flood, only that the hills in the vicinity of the flood were covered. The phrase "that were under the whole heaven" is like the phrase in the scriptures about "the four corners of the earth". Both phrases are not accurate descriptions of the physical world. They are symbolic phrases. The phrase about all the high hills, that were "under the whole heaven" refers, I think, to all the hills that were in the area of the flood. There are a few other verses of scripture that refer to the flood, but those verses just refer to a flood with nothing implied about the extent of the flood.

In the Book of Mormon, there is a reference to the flood that needs explanation. Ether 13:2 states "that after the waters had receded from off the face of this land it became a choice land above all other lands". To understand that verse, we need to understand that traditional Latter-day Saints believe that Adam and Eve lived on the North American continent not in the Mediterranean area. This implies that Noah also lived in the American continents. The phrase in Ether 13:2 "after the waters had receded from off the face of this land" refers to the American continents, the same land where Noah lived. Thus, the statement in Ether 13:2 does not, I believe, imply a planet-wide flood that reached from the Mediterranean area to the American continent.

An awfully lot of water would be needed to cover the whole planet

A simple model of the amount of water needed to cover the planet can be obtained if we assume the earth is a sphere with a radius of 4,000 miles. We can calculate the volume of that sphere. Then we can calculate the volume of a new sphere with a radius of 4,00x miles, where x is the elevation of the ark after it came to rest. The difference of the two volumes will give us the amount of water needed. The highest peak on the earth is Mt. Everest at an elevation of 29,035 feet. That elevation is not quite 6 miles. To simplify my calculations I assumed the water was 6 miles deep.

After performing the calculations described above, I learned that over a billion cubic miles of water would be needed to cover the planet to a depth of 6 miles. Because Everest is slightly less than 6 miles high, I'm using a figure of one billion cubic miles of water, a simple number that is easy to use in discussions. That is a lot of water. That is a lot more water than is contained in all the earth's oceans. It is hard for me to believe that that amount of water could accumulate in a storm lasting only 40 days. That accumulation of water would have to average 725 feet per day over the 40 days. That is 725 feet per day everywhere, not just in a canyon where runoff might accumulate. In addition, Genesis 8:3 states that the water was abated after 150 days, and that about 5 or 6 months later, Noah and his family left the ark. It is hard for me to believe that water almost 6 miles deep could evaporate or soak into the earth that fast. To me, the story of a literal flood covering the whole earth is very implausible. Because of that, I believe the flood was a local flood.

If the flood were planet-wide, the flood would have left great scars all over the planet. Some people say the Grand Canyon was caused by the flood. However, scientific dating of the Grand Canyon places the erosion that caused the canyon at a much earlier time than the time of Noah. In addition, if the flood were responsible for the erosion, there should be Grand Canyons all over the planet. The fact that there is only one Grand Canyon indicates that the forces that caused the erosion were not planet-wide.

The ark was too small to hold mating pairs of all the animals and birds

Now, let's look at size of the ark. To the people living in Noah's time, the ark probably seemed very large, but to us the ark was a small ship. For example, the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier is 1,092 feet long compared to the ark's length of approximately 450 feet. Unless God performed a great miracle, there is no way that a small ship such as the ark could hold mating pairs of all the animals and birds that were alive on the planet at the time of Noah. In addition, the ark would have to hold all of the food needed by Noah's family and the animals and birds.

I believe that God could perform a miracle, such as miniaturizing the animals and birds and putting them all in a state of hibernation for almost a year, but the Bible gives no hint that such a miracle was part of the flood-story, and I know of no pronouncement by a LDS Church President that the flood was a miracle that superseded natural laws. I believe a regional flood is a better interpretation of the flood story. Until the President of the Church declares that the flood was a miracle, I will continue to believe the flood was local and the destruction was universal.

The impact of a large asteroid could satisfy the requirements for the flood

Some scientists say that an impact by an asteroid 3 miles across could cause sufficient damage to destroy most of humanity. If that impact were in water, a large flood, albeit a local flood, would be created. Thus, such an impact would satisfy the requirements of the story of the flood: a flood and destruction of the people.

How about our General Authorities who teach a planet-wide flood?

Some people will say, in response to my view, "What about our LDS leaders, whom we believe are apostles and prophets of the Lord. Why would these inspired men continue to propagate an incorrect view of the story of the flood?" My response is that the Lord doesn't reveal all knowledge to his prophets. He reveals that which we need to know for our salvation. As one of our General Authorities said (I don't remember who said it), "We focus on salvation and leave science to the scientists" (my wording). Our General Authorities do not claim to be infallible in their knowledge of how God deals with mankind, and I don't believe they are infallible. There are many things about our physical world that our General Authorities do not understand, and they are leaving that paradigm to the scientists. They enter their ministry as apostles and prophets with biases and misconceptions given them by society, and I believe the concept of a universal flood is such a bias.

The real importance of the story of the flood

The important thing about the story of the flood is its message of faith and of obedience to God. It is not important for us to know exactly how the flood occurred. I've brought it up in this blog, since there are parallels between the scriptures and science on this matter. Someday we'll know exactly what happened during the time of Noah, but for now we need to focus on our relationship to God and His Son, Jesus Christ, on having the Holy Ghost with us daily, on keeping God's commandments, and on service to others.

Natural Events in Creation

Most members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe in God. We not only believe in God, but we believe we are literally the spirit offspring of God. We believe that God created life and placed it on this earth. The scriptures, though, don't tell us how God created the earth.

Scientists are trying to understand how physical life began on this planet. Some scientists say that life began spontaneously as certain elements and energy came together. Other scientists say that simple life forms came to this planet via asteroids. Some people speculate that intelligent people migrated to this earth as aliens. However it happened, evolution and natural disasters have drastically changed the earth.

Most scientists believe that world-wide disasters occurred that had drastic effects on the plants and animals that populated the earth. About 252 million years ago, most of the ocean organisms were destroyed. About 65 million years ago, the earth was believed to have been struck by a large asteroid. The results of this impact were that many if not most species of plants and animals were destroyed. The crater that is believed to have resulted from the impact has been located underneath the ocean near Guatemala.

Scientific Attempts at Creation

The creation of life can be considered from two viewpoints: the creation of human life and the creation of plant and animal life. From the LDS view, a living person is the combination of a physical body and a spirit-offspring of God. This combination is the human soul. The scriptures don't say when the spirit enters the body, that is, when life begins. Our living prophets haven't answered that question, either. And, science hasn't defined when life begins. Even if science were to define the beginning of human life, that definition would have no meaning in the religious view of life, since scientists have no knowledge or recognition of a "spirit" inhabiting our bodies. Any scientific definition of when human life begins may or may not be when the spirit actually enters a body such that the combination becomes a living soul.

Some scientists are researching life, how it began, how it can be created. They disregard (as well they should) the religious concept of human life being the combination of a spirit and a mortal body. Instead, they are attempting to determine if new life could be created as the result of natural laws. This post reviews some of their work.

Cloning

Cloning has been a successful technique to change the nature of organisms. The history of cloning history goes back to 1952 and continues to the present. The list of animals that have been cloned is long and includes sheep, monkeys, cats, dogs, cattle, deer, goats, horses, rats, mice, and water buffalo.

Cloning raises the question, "Is cloning the creation of life?" I expect that people will probably have differing answers to that question. My view is no. Cloning is only the creation of new life-forms, not of new life itself. Current cloning techniques involve changing the genetic material in an egg such that an embryo from that egg will have the new attributes. No new life has been created through cloning. The egg already had the "spark of life" (what ever that means), and cloning only changes the characteristics of the living organism that results from cloning.

New DNA/Genes

Of interest is the work of Craig Venter and his group. They created artificial DNA and plan to introduce that DNA into the bacterium Mycoplasma genitalium with the hope that the chromosome will take over the bacterium. I agree that they have created an artificial DNA and if successful will have created new forms life that didn't exist before. In effect they will have bypassed the eons of time involved with evolution to create new forms of life. I do not agree that they will have created new life itself since the bacterium to be used in the experiment will already be alive. In 2010 Dr. Venter announced his team has produced new genes from basic chemicals.

Venter and his team at the not-for-profit J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI), which has facilities in Rockville, Maryland, and San Diego, announced in 2010 that they had constructed the world's first completely synthetic bacterial cell. Using computer-designed genes made on synthesizer machines from four bottles of chemicals, the scientists arranged those genes into a package, a synthetic chromosome. When inserted into a bacterial cell, the chromosome booted up the cell and was capable of dividing and reproducing.

Creation of New Life

In 2002, scientists duplicated the polio virus using laboratory chemicals. They injected the virus into mice to demonstrate the virus was active. The mice became paralyzed and then died. Scientists are divided over the question of viruses being alive. If viruses are alive, the duplication of the polio virus would be a laboratory creation of an existing life-form but would not be new life, i.e. life that didn't already exist.

In order to create new life rather than to just modify or duplicate life, scientists would have to create new life from elementary elements in which the "spark of life" (what ever that means) did not already exist. Scientists at Harvard University announced in 2003 that they had created from basic elements a crude form of a cell. At that time, they did not claim to have created life, only to have created a primitive form of something, a "container", that is necessary for life to exist. Those scientists are now claiming to be on the verge of creating advanced or workable "containers" for new cells. ScienceDaily reported that scientists are trying to create new life-forms through the creation of re-programmable cells.

"We are talking about a highly ambitious goal leading to a fundamental breakthrough that will, -- ultimately, allow us to rapidly prototype, implement and deploy living entities that are completely new and do not appear in nature, adapting them so they perform new useful functions."

Is the creation of new genes the creation of life? I say "no", because the bacterial cell used by Venter already had the "spark of life". Venter and his group did create new genes, thus changing the characteristics of the cell, but they did not give the "spark of life" to the cell. I think the creation of new life would be the taking of chemicals and creating an artificial cell. Then artificial DNA and artificial genes would be inserted into the cell, and the cell would become alive and would replicate itself. My personal opinion is that this will happen at some time in the future. I think it is likely that science will progress to the point where scientists are able to create new embryos and the embryos will grow into living animals. If this is accomplished, will this "prove" there is no god? I say "no", because God works through natural laws, the same laws that scientists are discovering. In addition (from the religious viewpoint), in order to have new human life, a spirit-child would have to be placed into the body that was created via science, and that is something scientists can not do since their work only involves mortal matter while a creation of a spirit-child involves spirit matter.

Stem Cells

The recent announcement that scientists have successfully turned skin cells into stem cells has created a lot of attention and interest from the scientific and religious communities. The use of skin cells instead of human embryos for the generation of stem cells will bypass the touchy question whether the use of embryonic stem cells, which results in the killing of the embryos, is murder. In another blog, I have a page devoted to research on stem cells.

Now for a little speculation. I've been wondering if stem cells obtained from skin could be used to create human embryos and thus human life. In a technical sense, those embryos wouldn't be new life, since the stem cells were living and brought the "spark of life" from a living person. But, from the LDS viewpoint, the embryos would be new persons (or life-forms) if God allowed His spirit offspring to enter the bodies such that they became new souls.

Mormon,Mormonism One World Follows Another

While reading in the book of Moses this afternoon, I discovered another parallel between an Ekpyrotic Universe and the scriptures. This parallel is related to the parallel for many worlds, but it concerns the sequence of the worlds being created rather than there being many worlds.

The book of Moses states that as one world passes away another world will take its place.

And the Lord God spake unto Moses, saying: The heavens they are many, and they cannot be numbered unto man; but they are numbered unto me, for they are mine.
And as one earth shall pass away, and the heavens thereof even so shall another come; and there is no end to my works, neither to my words. (Moses 1:37-38)

I don't know if those verses should be taken literally, such that only one world would be in existence at a time, or if the verses should be generalized to allow many worlds to be in existence at any given time. The important thing, I think, is that those verses teach that the Lord creates an unending series of worlds being created.

In a previous post, I introduced the idea of an Ekpyrotic Universe, a concept developed from the mathematics of string theory. According to that concept, there is an unending series of universes. Each universe ends in a fiery explosion, an explosion that ends one universe and creates another universe. The name "Ekpyrotic Universe" was given to that concept by scientists because Ekpyrotic is a Greek word denoting a large destructive fire. Ekpyrotic refers to an ancient Stoic concept of the universe having an unending series of hot, destructive births, coolings, and rebirths.

Creation Started with Nothing but Energy

Some of the most interesting parallels between science and religion are the parallels between a scientific theory known as an Ekpyrotic Universe and the Mormon view of creation. Very briefly, an Ekpyrotic Universe is a theory of creation. According to an Ekpyrotic Universe, there are many dimensions and the cosmos that we see is only one of those dimensions. Nearby our universe is another universe. We don't see that universe because it is in a different dimension. Our universe is on a collision course with the other universe, and in about a trillion years, the two universes will collide, resulting in a terrific explosion. That explosion, or big bang, ends the two universes and starts two new universes. Thus, if this concept is true, we have a neighboring universe that we can't see but that will eventually collide with our universe. Our universe began in a big bang, and it will end in another big bang when our universe collides with its neighbor universe.

After a trillion years of expansion, the matter in our universe will be distributed throughout the universe, but the density of that distribution will be so small that the universe will be essentially empty of matter. The universe, however, will have high energy and great gravity, and it is that gravity that will bring the two universes together. The significant thing to remember from this overview is that at the time a big bang occurs, the universe will be empty of matter but full of energy. That is, the creation of a new universe, via a big bang, will be the result of energy. The Ekpyrotic Universe was derived from string theory, and the basic concept in string theory is that all matter is composed of oscillating strings of pure energy.

So, we have a scientific theory that correlate creation with pure energy. How does this discussion relate to religion, you might ask? To answer that, let's turn to Genesis and read how God began his creation of the earth.

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. (Genesis 1:2-3)

Notice that the earth was without form and was void or empty. Darkness was upon the earth. "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light". Light is pure energy. So, let's re-read those verses from Genesis and substitute "energy" for "light" and "no energy" for "darkness". Let us also substitute "empty" for "without form, and void".

And the earth was empty and no energy was upon the face of the deep (on what would become the earth). And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be energy: and there was energy.

Do you see the parallel? The heart of string theory is vibrating strings of pure energy. An Ekpyrotic Universe begins with pure energy. God began his creation by introducing energy into the creation-process. I expect that the people in the time of Moses didn't understand the concept of energy as we do. It was appropriate for Moses to phrase his revelation from God with the words "light" and "darkness", because the people could understand that.