Follow Him: A Come, Follow Me Podcast - Genesis 1-3, Moses 2-3, Abraham 4-5 -- Part 2 : Dr. Joshua M. Sears

Episode Date: January 2, 2022

Dr. Sears returns and teaches how God's naming pattern helps identify a creation's purpose and how God can organize and create meaning out of chaos, and how that applies to our individual lives and trials. You will come to understand the Creation, the grand vision of Moses 1, and God's love in powerful new ways in this episode.Show Notes (English, French, Spanish, Portuguese): https://followhim.co/episodesFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/followhimpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/followhimpodcastYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/FollowHimOfficialChannelThanks to the followHIM team:Steve & Shannon Sorensen: Executive ProducersDr. Hank Smith: Co-hostJohn Bytheway: Co-hostDavid Perry: ProducerKyle Nelson: MarketingLisa Spice: Client Relations, Show Notes/TranscriptsJamie Neilson: Social Media, Graphic DesignWill Stoughton: Rough Video EditorAriel Cuadra: Spanish TranscriptsKrystal Roberts: French TranscriptsIgor Willians: Portuguese Transcripts"Let Zion in Her Beauty Rise" by Marshall McDonaldhttps://www.marshallmcdonaldmusic.com/products/let-zion-in-her-beauty-rise-pianoPlease rate and review the podcast.

Welcome to part two of this week's podcast. So we just talked about, you know, what that phrase, the Lord and the capitals means, the name of the God of Israel, Jehovah. I want to go back and clarify too when I said that in chapter one, that term God comes from Hebrew Elohim. I don't make sure we understand what that means and what that doesn't mean as well. So the way we use the term Elohim as Latter-day Saints is different from how the Hebrew uses the term Elohim in the Old Testament. Here's the basics

of the story. So as Latter-day Saints, when we use Elohim, we're using it as a personal name for God the Father, right? John, Josh, right? Yeah. So we will say, oh, Jesus' pre-mortal name was Jehovah and that the father's name is Elohim And you know you'll hear in temple dedication like oh Elohim things like that addressing God the father That's fine, but that's a usage that we have somewhat by tradition and by deliberate decision, but it doesn't reflect biblical usage Okay, in Hebrew Elohim is on the word for God or God.

So it's not a name, it's a, that's just what it means. God are gods. And the reason I'm saying God or God is because there is a singular version of the word L that means God. And there's the plural form Elohim. And it can mean either gods in the plural or a God in the singular has both usages right there. And that's going to come up in the book of Abraham, right?

Yeah. Well, Joseph Smith is going to get thinking on that. That's going to be one thing he's going to use to get this idea of the remultiple divine beings involved in the creation for sure. It's a, but it can just mean God's generically in the plural. Like in the 10 commandments, when it says, thou shalt have no other gods before me. It says, don't have any other Elohim before me. That's the term it uses just the plural there. And by the way, since Hebrew is cognate with Arabic, you might also recognize it cognate with the word for God that they have, which is Allah. Right. It's from the same root. It's the same thing, right there, mean God. So in the Old Testament, Elohim is not a name. It is simply, you know, means God or God's right there. So what happened is in early church history,

Joseph Smith used kind of Elohim and Jehovah really interchangeably all the time. He wasn't making the hard and fast distinction between God the Father and God the Son. And it wasn't clear until 1916 when the first presidency released this doctrinal statement on the Father and the Son that they said, hey, devoid confusion, you know, and to keep our terms straight and make sure we all know what we're talking about, we are going to call refer to the Father as Elohim and the Son as Jehovah

right here. So that's something that we kind of decided and we have a convention. And I'm not complaining about that. Convention are fine. but we just want to be careful when we're looking at the Old Testament that we don't read that back into there and assume that, you know, our Latter-day St. Terminology is always going to match on to what they meant by it. Yeah. 1916, John, do you remember? Was there, do you remember the announcement? Well, I was only 25 years old back there.

There is on the on the religious study center website, there is an article going over all that Latter-day Saint history. It's called The Usage of the Title Elohim. It's by Paul Hoskinson and Ryan Davis. So you can just search for Elohim at rsc.biu.edu and it'll give you all the rundown and all this. My have to claim my claim to fame, Paul Hoskasin's my cousin. So that's my question. Is he really, I had him for Old Testament in my... Yeah, my mother is Cynthia Hoskasin. I didn't know that.

Oh, yeah. I love that guy. We had, I think it's, it's fun to tell our brothers and sisters that you do probably no more heber than you think you do and when you see I am that's that's plural and so yeah, hello He was plural, but how what's what's lights and perfections? Yerim and Thumbam there's that I am again that that makes it plural. I'm gonna put that on my resume. I speak a little Hebrew Yeah, the I am phrases related to the the name Jehovah that makes it plural. I'm gonna put that on my resume. I speak a little Hebrew. Yeah, the I Am phrase is related to the name Jehovah.

That Jehovah Yahweh name, it seems to be somehow related to the verb to be. So when he says I am that I am, it's kind of a word play off of that name right there. Okay. One of my favorite examples to point out is in the call of Isaiah in Isaiah 6 or 2nd, Ne516 and to notice in Isaiah 6,

how I think it says seraphims, and it put an S on seraphims, which is like saying geese's. And, but in the book of Mormon, it gets it right, it's seraphim. But seraphims, or maybe it says seraphs. Yeah, I gotta go back, but it's interesting to say,

oh, it's already plural if it has an I am at the end Yep, interesting Okay, well we we were talking about how the chapter two creation narrative has some differences with chapter one So we talked about the differences in the term it uses for God, right the Elohim versus Jehovah Some other thing that I think is kind of fun is in chapter one, you know, God creates by simply speaking, let there be and so forth and things just react. Chapter two, I think, is fun because in chapter two when God is working, he gets his hands dirty. He rolls up his sleeves. He does this. So like, here's some of the verbs that uses in chapter two. It says, the Lord God formed, breathed, planted, made, took, formed, brought, caused, took, closed up, made, brought, like he's very physically involved in this.

It's kind of fun, you know, that, that, that, see him doing these things, right? Like, he's down with the mud that's there forming people and it's kind of a fun description, I think. Uh, we've got that going on. And of course, the, uh, the Adam and Eve story is more fully developed in this one, right? And chapter one, it just says, he made male and female kind of altogether summative right there.

We're here there. We get the kind of more detailed story. Yeah, and I noticed Josh, it's definitely out of order. We start with having an earth and then plants and man. Yeah, it doesn't seem to be assuming that we've read chapter one necessarily. And this doesn't mean that these can't bounce off each other in a really rich way. Again, even if you go with the theory that these were written by different people, you may or may not, but at least, even if you did, at some

point, an editor thought that these should be put side by side to be read together. And yeah, and they're not meant to contradict each other, they're meant to compliment each other. Exactly, right? The only reason you would have put them together, assuming they had been separate, was to compliment each other. And a really huge way. So whichever way you go, I want to go on who wrote this, like it's very clear that these are go together beautifully, and that the sum is greater than the, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, right?

Okay, so in this version, so in verse four, some people think that the first half of verse four would go with what came before, it's summarizing the first account, these are the generations of the heaven and the earth when they were created, and that the second account starts more properly in the second half of verse four. So in other words, in the day that the Lord God made the earth in the heavens, and it's once again doing that thing where it's kind of setting up the background before you get to the action. In the day that the Lord God made the earth in the heavens, and every plant in the field before it was in the earth and every herb in the field before it grew, you know, and give all that background.

But in verse 6, and then you get the action, there rose up this mist or this like stream, this flow, and watered the whole face of the ground. So that's the same idea as those water underneath this water underneath there. Yeah. We're here. We're kind of starting with this kind of desert kind of waste setting, but this water is flowing out from beneath and it's a controlled amount of water here. So this is nice life giving water.

You know, when it's when it's controlled and channeled properly, water is great. It's just they're afraid of when there's too much. So there's tohub at no bohub. Okay. So we get the watering of the ground there in verse seven, the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground. So the sense dust in English sound like it's dry stuff, but from the proceeding that in Hebrew dust doesn't have to mean that it seems that we're kind of imagining mud here from this water that's seeping up it's covering the ground here and you got this mud, this clay from which he is creating this guy and he breathes into his nostrils the breath of life and he became a living soul. So you got this divine power flowing into this combination of his divine breath with this physical matter that you got there. Chapter one was more like a big overview

kind of shot. Chapter two is now getting down in the trees on the ground in its worldview. Yeah. Why do we have, is it Joe began a dust thou art and unto dust, shalt thou return and this motif of humans coming out of the earth. In fact, it's even a pun in Hebrew. So Adam's name in Hebrew is a Dom and it means human. And there's a wordplay here with the ground,

which is Atama. So it sounds like the same thing. Right there. So this, this, even with a pun between his name and the word there is, is significant, right? It's making that link. The number eight, the Lord God planted a garden, he swore to an Eden, and there he put the man whom he had formed. And here you get this kind of sense, you know, it's like gradations of holiness as he get closer to the temple, it's more and more holy. You've got all the land, and then the most sacred part of that

is this place called Eden, and then the most sacred part of Eden is this garden that's somewhere in there. So we're kind of moving in to this spot here. So it does sound like the ancient tabernacle that we'll study later, this idea of removing outer courtyard, holy place, holy of holies.

Yeah. And I didn't, we haven't mentioned this yet, but both chapters one and chapter two are saturated with temple vocabulary and imagery and everything. So creation is really depicted as God making this giant universe temple, right, of which the temple in Jerusalem is going to be like a microcosm of creation right there. And you get eaten imagery in the temple there with the cherubim and everything right. So there's definitely going to be links all over the place with temple imagery to this stuff. Okay, so it's the garden in Eden, not necessarily the garden of Eden. Yeah, it seems that the garden is kind of a

smaller part of Eden, at least the way the grammar works. And then we've gotten verse nine, you know, the trees set up there. Versus 10 through 14 are interesting because it's kind of like a long parenthesis. Gramatically, it kind of sets it up like that, that it's a little bit of an aside. You get away from the guy and his story, and we'll get back to that in verse 15.

But you got this long side with this kind of theological geography going on here. About this river comes out of Eden to water the garden and then it splits into four different rivers right And the name that you've got it even names them all right. You've got this river the Pichon And then there's this river called Gehon another one Hitakel and the Euphrates Okay, right so people are often wondering why are we talking about rivers? Right. What's going on? And the why are they named? Yeah. The interesting thing is, two of these rivers correspond to rivers that

we know about, or at least that, and we have rivers with the same name. You've got through your frades, and the the hit a kill up there is talking about the Tigris. The Tigris and the Euphrates are these two main rivers that go through Mesopotamia. We have no other way to correlate the peace shown in the Guy Han, except the Guy Han is also the name of the water source and Jerusalem later. It's the same name. But this brings up a question about, well, I thought the Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri. Yeah, so Joseph Smith teaches at and I'm not going to contradict Joseph Smith, although I don't know if the ancient Israelite writers, yeah, that's what they're thinking, they seem to always relate the story to events in the ancient Near East, what they're familiar with.

Joseph can be totally right, but in their in their view, they're, I think they're connecting these to places they're familiar with, because look at this. So the Peshon, this river, it encompasses the whole land of Havala, and it talks about the gold there and stuff. Havala is on the way between Israel and Egypt. So they pass there on your way down to Egypt. Then you got the Gahon, right? It says that goes down to Ethiopia.

That's Kush, kind of south of Egypt. And then, of course, the Tigris and Euphrates, you know about from Mesopotamia. So they seem to be kind of linking these to their known world, which is Israel, and then it got kind of Egypt and Mesopotamia on either side of that right there. So why are we spending all this time talking about this? And there's different ideas people have. I think it's interesting that these rivers are flowing out of Eden and going to these places, kind of bringing that life and blessedness from Eden out into the world. And maybe it's not a coincidence that these are all places where the Israelites are going to end up enslaved

in captivity, right? Egypt and Babylon are right there. Okay. This is one of many links in these creation stories to the story of the House of Israel later. These four rivers are going out from Eden to the world. At this point, these rivers are carrying this life-giving water force out into the world, but isn't that exactly what Israel itself is supposed to be doing later? Through the, and in my siege, all the families and nations of the earth be blessed, it's Israel is supposed to go out later and bless these nations, and they go to Egypt, and they go to Mesopotamia, right, and they have these experiences there.

So maybe that's got something to do with the significance of this. There's other explanations to, of course, like anything in these chapters. But water for them is life giving. Is that what you said? It's the river is life. It's, yeah, we talked about before about water being chaos and stuff, right? But when it is controlled, when it has a purpose and a function, and God has now ordained it for a purpose, yeah, in small quantities, now it's a life giving metaphor, right? And this possible link to the story of Israel is an important point to mention here, just kind of in passing, we'll read it. It's interesting to note that the creation stories here, whether you're talking about the chapter one version or the chapter

two, three version, they're not mentioned directly a lot throughout the rest of the Old Testament. You don't find discussions of Adam and Eve or the creation as described in chapter one, it's just not discussed very much in the Old Testament. You do get it in the New Testament, the book of Mormon for sure, but not the rest there. For the authors of Genesis, these stories are really written as kind of a prologue to the main story, the one they're really interested in, which is the story of Israel. That's where they're excited to get to. That's right. You know, so many chapters on Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca and Jacob and Rachel Leia, Bill and Zipler, right? That's the real story

is Israel. So all this stuff here for all the attention and the interest that we in the modern world have with these early chapters, they're not spending a lot of time here, nor that they go back and talk about it a lot because a lot of this for them in terms of the overall structure of Genesis really is prologue to the story of Israel, which is what gets them really excited. Wow. Very interesting. Yeah. That is that's awesome. They're setting us up to learn about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Yeah, a lot of the stuff here's preparing the way. This is how we got here, but here's the real story. Yeah, Israel's job is to renovate the world to save it, you know, to save us from the violence and the wickedness that's all there. And that's an important story. That's how God saves humanity's through the house of Israel. So all this is kind of setting up the environment

where we're going to get that story. So at this point, you know, the rest of chapter two is basically the setup for chapter three with Adam and Eve and getting ready for the tree, the different trees that are there and everything. And that's next week's lesson. So maybe we can kind of pause on Genesis there. And this might be a good point to jump to the book of Moses and the book of Abraham and the Pearl of Great Price and see how that builds on this foundation of Genesis. Okay. And Josh, could you give us... there's no fear in repetition here. We had Kerry last

week tell us a little of the history of Moses and Abraham, but if you want to give us a review, that would not be a bad thing. Where did these books come from and how did they get at the end of my triple combination? Okay. So let's take a look at the end of my triple combination. Okay, so let's take a look at the book of Moses first. And just by way of review here then, what is the book of Moses? Where does this come from here? The book of Moses is basically the excerpt from the first six chapters of Joseph Smith's new translation of the Bible, the JST.

So most of the JST, right? So most of the JST didn't end up canonized. We have a lot of it in our footnotes, right? But for various historical reasons, these opening six chapters, since they were so awesome, basically it's how this happened. They end up in the Pearl of Great Price. So we have this JST chunk right here that we got.

This was the project he started right after the organization of the church, right? Yeah, June 1830 is when he dives into that. It's very early and a significant part of his ministry. And so since we've been talking about Genesis 1 and 2, we want to note that some Moses chapter 1 has no parallel in Genesis. You know, it's our great story of Moses talking with God and then confronting with Satan and all that. So that's kind of

prologue. And then starting in chapter two of Moses is where you get the direct parallel to Genesis one and then Moses chapter three would be the direct parallel to Genesis chapter two. Now it's worth maybe talking about what's the relationship between these texts like they read differently, right? But they're also much the same. So what's the relationship? Why are they different? How are they different? When Joseph Smith was working on his new translation of the Bible, basically what he did, he didn't have it like an ancient document in front of him like he did with the gold plates of the Book of Mormon. Instead, he gets a new, he has all of her calorie buy, new copy of a

King James version of the Bible in English. He sits down with it, he reads it, and he just lets that revelation start flowing, and he's pondering it in his mind, and he will just start talking and making changes, and he's got to scribe there. It's usually Sydney Rigden, and he writes down stuff. And recent scholarship on the Joseph Smith translation has been stressing that the Joseph Smith translation represents different things in different places. In some places, it's like that pure revelation with a capital R, right? When Joseph gets like a whole chapter or two that's not in the Bible at all, he's just got these words coming to him, it's revelation, it's, you know, just new stuff and the scribes are writing it down. So that's like a big R, capital R, revelation right there. So some parts of the JST are writing it down. So that's like a big R, capital R, revelation right there.

So some parts of the JST are like that. Then other parts of the Joseph Smith translation look like they're more like a process of Joseph wrestling with the English text, applying his logic and his reasoning and his deep thinking to it. And you can see him wrestling with the text and playing with the words

and trying to render it more clearly at his own insights to it. So it's not necessarily like every single word of every single change is all dictated from heaven. Sometimes it's doing one thing, sometimes it's doing a different thing. The reason that the book of Moses is special is because it's often this big capital R, right? You get lots of new information here in Moses. Yeah. And we actually have some places where Joseph translated the same chapter twice because he forgot that he ready to

do it. And what you see there, so sometimes make the thrust of the differences there is that he'll often make the same basic kinds of changes, but he'll use different words to do it. So it's not like every word is precisely exactly revealed from God and it has to only be this way. He's trying to teach and he's trying to put ideas out there, but it's not always, you know, it's word for word, some of it, it's up to him how to do that. Yeah, and I think we need to have this, we need to have some flexibility with him

because that's how it works with all of us, right? Receiving revelation, sometimes you feel like you're getting just pure inspiration. Other times you're kind of in my figuring this out is the Lord helping me. I just feel like that's very I don't know that's Natural to my experience. I don't know about you guys, but to me and Our our classic major scholar on the Joseph Smith translation was Robert J. Matthews who has now passed away And one thing that he was really great for articulating was that the Joseph's path translation, again, it's doing different things in different places. So in some places, he talked about it, it might be restoring text that was once

in the Bible, but was lost, bringing that back, right? In other places, it might be that what we have in the Bible really is the original version, but Joseph is revealing additional details that were never written down, but that he's adding them now so we can get some added cool bonus insight on stuff that happened back then. In other cases, he's adding like Latter-day commentary, and in other places, he's simply modernizing the English, making it easier to read, stuff like that, so different things in different places. So as I, when we're comparing Genesis 1 and 2 with Moses 2 and 3, I don't know that the best way to read it is to understand that Moses 2 and 3 is the original version. Um, and that Genesis 1 and 2 is like a degraded version that got all messed up. Now there are Latter-day St. Scholars who see it that way, and I'm totally fine with that position. I'm just kind of outlining options here. But I don't think it's required that we see the changes in Moses, chapter 2, and 3 to have been original and that Genesis 1 and 2 is then to like the messed up version.

It's also possible that Genesis 1 and 2 is pretty much the way that it came from the original ancient authors and that Moses 2 and 3, what Joseph is doing, is giving a Latter-day expansion, commentary, adding cool new insights and everything. So I just want to point out that there's two options there and we don't need to assume one or the other dogmatically. I'm open to kind of both. I like that Josh. Thank you. I really appreciate that too that description of the JST. I think that's very helpful. It's not. In fact, sometimes I wish we called it the Joseph Smith clarification or the Joseph Smith illumination or something because it's not translated the way we

normally think of it. Yeah, and I love the JST. That's kind of what got me into scripture studying the first place was just got really interested in the JST somehow. So I love going through this stuff. Okay, so Josh, should I read him side by side? Should I get my genesis open or should I just go, hey, jump into Moses too and just see what's here on its own? Given that Joseph is doing different things in different places and that not all of the changes represent a restoration of, you know, pristine original text. My recommendation, when you study the Joseph's translation, is to always study it side by side with the King James version. That's the base text that Joseph is starting with, right? He's looking

at a King James Bible, and he's responding to the King James Bible. So when you look at the JST on the side, often the only way to kind of get in Joseph's head and see why he made a change is to compare it with the King James version and ask yourself What did Joseph notice here? Was there something that sounded off to him? Was there something that didn't make sense? Was there a problem to be solved or figured out here? And it's often with the comparison that you appreciate the significance of the change he made if you just read the JST all by itself

Without the comparison you're often going to miss, you know, getting into his head a little bit and figuring out the significance of the change in wording. Okay, so I've got my scriptures on my phone. I've got my paper scriptures so I can look at them side by side here. So here, rather than go through reverse by verse, because we kind of already did that in Genesis, it might be worth our time just to kind of summarize, what are the awesome things that the Joseph Smith's, you know, expanded translation here? What does it add? What is it clarify? What does it contribute to this? And you know, you guys know this just as well as I do. So let's all jump in here. Just have fun pointing stuff out.

Show us, Josh. I'm ready. Well, I'll just pick us up. I think one of the the great contributions of the book of Moses is how much it makes us understand how what involved Jesus Christ was in creation. In a way that's more clear than Genesis because you don't have to do the Yahweh or Jehovah or this and that kind of stuff there, the Book of Moses says like chapter 1, verse 33, to go back a little bit, and worlds without number have I created, and I also created them

for my own purpose, and by the sun I created them which is my normally begotten It's very clear. It's much more clear in the Moses version here than Genesis that this is a Christ-centered text and that Jesus was the creator acting under the direction of his father And that you know this is part of his divine role as Jehovah was to be involved in creation So I think that's a wonderful contribution here. They'll help us appreciate the Savior in an additional role. Yeah. And Josh, you talked about how Genesis 1 is elevating human kind, right? Look, then you had that verse 39 of chapter 1, this is my work and my glory to bring to pass

the mortality eternal life of men. Even once again, elevate the role of men and women. Well, one of the big changes that Moses does is it frames the story from Genesis differently. Genesis is told from the perspective of a third person narrator describing God created this, God did this, whereas Moses chapter 1 sets up the stage where God is going to tell Moses about how he created the earth. And then in Moses 2 and 3 he says, and I God did this and I God did this. So it's a very different framing for the story where God himself is telling the story, which is really cool. That is really cool. And again, that doesn't necessarily mean that originally, you know,

thousands of years ago it read and I God and that some mischievous scribes, scribe went through and changed it all to third person God. It doesn't necessarily mean that but Joseph is definitely in the version he's receiving by revelation here. It's reframing it in a powerful way that really makes it more personal. Yeah. Right there. So we don't have to see the Genesis version is a bad version and this is a good. We could say this this is an addition. This is Genesis is inspired. Moses inspired. It's more. Yeah, they're all in our can in a scripture, right? So I think, you know, there certainly can be places where Genesis did get messed up somehow. Moses is restoring the original version. I'm

totally fine with that. But we don't have to see every single change that way. Okay. Do you teach your students anything about the significance of the first person idea that God is getting up close and personal maybe here? Yeah, that's chapter 1 verse 40 and now Moses my son. I will speak unto thee concerning this earth upon which thou standeth and thou shalt write the things which I shall speak. So it is framing this with a prologue that you don't get in Genesis as you know this is the story told by God to Moses. Okay, here's another way that Moses chapter two kind of adds to the Genesis experience. So in verse 26 and 27, so this is the classic, you know, let us create man in our image back from Genesis 1. So it's famously a thing in Genesis 1, 26 that God speaks in the plural here. Let us create man in our image. Bible scholars looking at that will probably correctly see this as an illusion to the Israelite

idea that there's a divine council where God is ruling with other divine beings and angels and things there and that he often speaks with them as he makes his plans. But I love the even more specific clarification you get here in the book of Moses Where verse 26 and I God said unto my only begotten so the Father speaking to the Son Which was with me from the beginning let us make man our image and that kind of reframes it So you specifically see God the Father and Jesus Christ working as a creative team here and that I think that's just beautiful Modern scholars will call this the divine council or the divine assembly. And you see this again, this is an idea

that's in other cultures around Israel. They'll have this idea that there's a council of deities that are kind of ruling and deciding things together. And these relights have the same thing. They imagine that you've got God, but he's not all lonely and lo and some up there in heaven that he has other divine beings that he comm

with and works with. So you see this in different prophetic places, this is a prophet's talk about this. The famous scripture we have Amos 37, the Lord God will do nothing, and you know, but he revealed his secret to his servants of the prophet. That word secret there is so it means like this council. God is going to reveal these council decisions and plans to the prophets. And in fact, you get a lot of places in the Old Testament where you see that, you know, all these divine beings that are on the council deciding things, you get a moral representative. And that's the prophet. The prophet is the human seat on the council who kind of gets to represent the human point of view on there. So for example, later in the book of Amos in chapter 7,

Israel's wicked and they're discussing, well, we ought to destroy them because they're wicked and they propose sending down this fire to destroy them and Amos speaks up and he's like, I object, please no, don't do that. How shall Israel stand? He is so small. And they go, okay, and they scrap that idea. And then they propose sending Locus, I think, his next. he again abjects and then they move on to another plan. So you see them see profits

They they're not just passive listeners. They get to speak up and have a role and Responding to things here. There's there's deliberation going on and it's very interesting That's a Jacob five Jacob five. Let's just tear down the vineyard and the servant says, Oh, let's wait. No, no, no, let's wait. Exactly. Yeah. And there's this great point where Jeremiah accuses the false prophets saying that they're not on the divine council, like, so they're not really speaking for the Lord.

And it's kind of funny because the subtext is like, I go to the divine council meetings, I don't see you there. Yeah. You've faced. Yeah. So there's several places where you see God kind of discussing with angels or with others, you know, he'll say things like, shall I, you know, talk to Abraham about what I'm going to do?

And it sounds like a rhetorical question, but he is talking to people and they have these discussions about what they're going to do in earth or who should we send to do with his mission, like with Isaiah chapter six, whom shall go before us and whom shall we send? And Isaiah volunteers because he's on the council now, right? Here am I, send me, I'll go and do the job. So this motif appears a lot of times. I have another question for you. It sounds to me and Kerry talked about this last week and I'm sure some of our listeners are going to think this sounds a lot like God the Father speaking because he's talking to his only begotten. I said to my own begotten, but yet you would say, what would you tell your students that

this is still Jehovah speaking to Moses? There's different ways to look at that. I think one thing with Joseph Smith and the way he's getting the revelation, Joseph Smith lives at an era now where we're really distinguishing between the Father and the Son. So that language is much more prominent that's going to be in the Old Testament. The Old Testament does not make a big deal about the Father versus and the Son. So that language is much more prominent that's gonna be in the Old Testament. The Old Testament does not make a big deal about the Father versus God the Son, right? That's just not a concept that a lot of the Israelites

seem to have had. They worship Jehovah and that's their main deal. They have an ideal often that there are other deities and that even that Jehovah can have a Father, but they're not really making a big deal about that. Whereas here, that's theologically more significant to us now post-new testament. You can also bring in ideas of like right, like divine, investor-chair of authority that Jehovah can often speak as if he is the father and he has the

authority to do that. He's an authorized representative of the father. I think Kerry talked about that last week, didn't he, John? Yeah, and I think it's a really good point because we want it to be so clear cut, but even in the doctrine of covenants in the dedicatory prayer, in one place, they say, Jehovah addressing Jehovah in another place, is it Elohim, they say, or is it Holy Father? He didn't use the word Elohim, he is his father, right?

And this is because this is pre 1916, right? Joseph Smith used those titles that he knew from the Bible interchangeably. So you have to figure out from context to he's talking about. And the confusion that that can potentially create is why the first presidency eventually decided, let's just keep our terminology consistent. So in 1916, was it Joseph F. Smith, a disposition, a doctrinal disposition on the, what was that document called? It's called like the father and the son, a doctrinal exposition or something.

It was reprinted in the end sign in 2002. So it is on the church website, you can find that. Okay. And we can put a link to it in our show notes on our website. Sure. Yeah. So the book of Abraham, of course, now this is all coming from that Egyptian papyri that Joseph Smith got access to.

And so a lot of the stuff in Abraham is new stuff that's not found in Genesis, but then you get chunks of it that do parallel Genesis and Abraham four and five are now based again off Genesis one and two, but told in a different way. And this version is different from Genesis and it's different from Moses. Okay. So I can anticipate our listeners. Why do we want or need or what do I do with three different kind of creation stories? How might we answer that?

Yeah, I think what we don't want to do is assume that there's one right original text that these on these all have to match it or they're not inspired. I don't think that's really what's going on here. I think it's totally fine to have parallel versions of the same story where the prophet and working with God gives different emphasis, teaches different things, uses a text to teach different points, and you have different versions. It's like, you know, the joy of having Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and John, rather than just one story of Jesus. They're different.

They stress different details. They emphasize different things. Occasionally, they may contradict a little bit, but the fact that we got four stories of the life of Jesus is a blessing, not a problem, right? Ultimately, it's good we have this. And Latter day Saints, we have Genesis 1 and 2, Moses 2 and 3, Abraham 4 and 5, and the version of this that's presented in the temple endowment, which is different in some ways from all of these again.

So Joseph is giving lots of versions of this. And I think we're meant to learn different things from all of them without having to rack our brains and think it's a big problem. Oh, this doesn't match this or the days of creation or different order here than they are here. If we're trying to teach different things in different places, then those problems kind of go away. That's a great answer. That is, yeah, that right there, Josh, is going to be that right there. That is great. How do I say that? That is that right there. That is just that right there, Josh, is gonna be that right there. That is great. How do I say, Neil? That is, that right there. That is just that right there.

John, it reminds me of that verse that we get so many different ways. He shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children and the hearts of the fathers. And then a different prophet says it differently. And then Jesus says it differently. And the maronaise is made to the fathers, right. And every time it's different,

but every time it's inspired. That's again, that idea is scripture, statikers, dynamic, another prophet can come along and say, hey, let me give you some more insight on that or teach something different, as Josh just said. I like that. Learn something different from these different accounts. And let me add, you brought up Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

One of my favorite JST changes is, it's not the gospel according to Matthew, the gospel according to Mark, because you'd think the gospel would be the same. It's the testimony of Matthew and the testimony of Mark and the testimony of Luke and that, oh, okay, well, no two testimony sound exactly the same and that's beautiful.

That's what we want. Yeah, that would be funny. In testimony meeting, someone tells you testimony, someone else comes up and we're like what we want. Yeah, that would be funny. In testimony meeting someone, there's testimony, someone else comes up. We're like, we already heard that. We already, we already, we already want that. We don't need more testimony. We already got one.

Right. So Josh is saying, maybe we should see this as like a testimony meeting of Moses, Moses, Joseph Smith, Abraham, Temple, right? Same testimony. Just, what can you learn from this one? What can you learn from this one? What is being taught? What's being, yeah, Temple, right? Same testimony. Just what can you learn from this one? What can you learn from this one? What is being taught? What's being yeah? Love it. And it's not just one prophet giving a different take on it from an earlier prophet. The same

prophet can give different meanings. So to compare to, so Joseph Smith is doing that here in one lifetime, right? But another example might be Jesus in 3 Nephi. You'll see him quote Isaiah, put another example might be Jesus in 3 Nephi, you'll see him quote Isaiah and then he'll quote the same Isaiah passage a chapter two later and he'll change the words and use the same passage to make a different point, right? And he's not afraid to do that, right? He's willing to change the words, didn't order to change the message and he interprets it differently. And the fact that he's willing to do that, you know, within a couple chapters of each other, I think, really he's saying scriptures flexible, you know, you're not just trying to bind it to one single meaning. It's meant to teach different things. And so just being open to the same phrase,

being used different ways in different places, I think he's modeling that really well there. Great thing to draw from that. That's great. Josh, you reminded me of my friend Anthony Sweat wrote a book, Seekers Wanted, page 70. He says, written revelations, scriptures, are not the revelations themselves, but rather records captured in limiting human language. He says, the purpose of scripture is not to be a perfect record of God's dialect or diction, but to act as a personal year-min thumbam, a launch pad for revelation, to connect us to the same divine source that revealed the truths in the first place. He said earlier, just a couple of pages before that, let me find it. He says, we see the task of Scripture study in fresh light. Our job

is to get in tune with the same spirit that revealed the concept. So I like what you're saying here. It's not the idea that we want to get the correct creation story, but we have four different creation stories to get us in tune with the Creator. Yep, that's great. Okay. All right. What do you want to do with Abraham then? Well, we don't have time to go in detail over every little thing. So just some overview kind of notes here. So we noted that in Genesis 1, it talks in the third person about God creating, right?

And God said, let there be light. In the book of Moses, the framing is different. Words, and I, God said said let there be light, right? Abraham has a third framing, a third way to tell the story here, where it is they, the gods, said let there be light. So now you've got a group of them doing it together, right? God acting in with these other divine beings that are helping with this here. So again, I don't think you have to say that one's right and the other's are wrong. I think these are all ways of looking at it that are each kind of bringing different

aspects of this to the forefront. Okay. Which is really helpful. The gods. What do you think Joseph Smith had in mind there? Well, one thing that might explain some of the differences between Moses and Abraham, you know, in addition to inspiration, I'll just make sure I say that too. Joseph Smith is totally in tune with the spirit here But one thing that also might be driving some of his thinking is that he has studied Hebrew in between Moses and Abraham The books of Moses in the book of Abraham He has studied Hebrew So now he's aware for example that the term Elohim is plural and that gets his gears thinking and opens up whole new

Questions to ask and insights to get. So that might be one thing driving the fact that he's so willing to go this route here. And there's other places where some of his expressions that he uses, like look at Abraham 4 verse 2, and the earth, after it was formed, was empty and desolate. And that's a really great description of our Tohuvahu there. And he's a really great description of, you know, our Tovah-Vohu there. And he, you know, he knows what that means now from his study of Hebrew. We know he studied Genesis 1 with his Hebrew teacher. So there's places like that now where he's kind of utilizing that and harnessing that here. And there's some places where a change

was made in Moses. So he changed the King James Version to something, but he kind of changed it away from the meaning of what the Hebrew means. to something, but he kind of changed it away from the meaning of what the Hebrew means, and maybe now that he's figured out, oh, I didn't under, you know, in the King James Version, that looked like a problem, but now I get what it's doing in Hebrew, he actually reverts back to the original King James reading here in the Book of Abraham. So he's going all sorts of directions with this, and you can see it kind of as a later stage in his his understanding of doctrinal ideas and his mastery of the original languages and how he's trying to put it all together. And it's really great.

Yeah, Josh, I like what you're doing here. I often tell my students, when we're reading the Book of Mormon, try to get into Mormon's head as the author. Well, you're doing this with these Joseph Smith writings. Let's try to get into his head here and see what he's experiencing. I just noticed a different word choice in Abraham 4.2 instead of God moving above the waters or what does it say in Genesis? He was brooding upon the face of the waters. That's a brooding is a what is that is a thinking pondering? No, this is him kind of hovering. Yeah, which is a, which is a good sense of the Hebrew there too. Yeah, the spirits is kind of flying there over the waters.

You know entering this chaos and darkness there getting ready to do its thing. And then you notice, um, Joseph Smith is big here on this. He really taps into this idea of organizing and structuring and, um, really taps into this idea of organizing and structuring and that you get there in that Hebrew sense there. So like in verse seven, the gods ordered the expanse there. In verse 15, he organized them. So the organizational thing that we talked a lot about back in Genesis one and two, Joseph's really bringing that to the four here, right there. You see the gods counseling together, they're planning things.

They prepare things before they're planning things. They prepare things before they actually do it. So it just adds all this kind of nuance and richness here. With this idea that there was a council working in harmony and kind of deciding things. And it highlights that in ways you don't get any other versions. Yeah, you've got the gods organized in verse 14. These were words you were using in Genesis, You were saying that the Hebrew was kind of highlighting this idea. Josh, when you were in your Hebrew studies, did you want to raise your hand in class and

say, Hey, I've got an interesting version of Genesis from Joseph Smith. I would time to time share stuff. You know, we'd be talking about the temple in Jerusalem. And I'd be, you know, and they always talk about as a past tense thing, right? Because most of my colleagues and fellow students were Jews or Christians. And for them, temple is a past thing. And I would bring up that we still have temples today that we see a connection with. And it was always a very opening welcome kind of environment. People were really interested in things like that. Grad school and biblical studies, I know sometimes there's this kind of idea out there that it's, you know, these atheists trying to knock your faith out constantly.

For me, it was always a very ecumenical environment. Everyone was really fascinated by what I had to share about my own faith tradition and I love learning from there. So yeah, we actually felt pretty free to share this stuff and people always thought it was really interesting. And this was a University of Texas at Austin when the... Yeah. And the Ohio State University.

I don't have state just great great people. Josh, where did you highlight that they're doing things before? So for example, look at look at Abraham 4 verse 18, though gods watch these things which they had ordered until they obeyed. So there's the sense that time is going on in this takes a while, not just instantaneous, like you might assume from Genesis, right? Right. This, this, this, that made me laugh, by the way. I'm, I'm going to share that with my wife. And the parents watched the children, which they had ordered until they, I can relate to that. Yeah. We're going to be watching a long time. Verse 31, the gods said, we will do everything we have said and organize them and behold,

they shall be very obedient. That's also what parents want to see. Yeah, they will be very obedient. Josh, I mean, I wanted to mention something just because you said that. I think it was Elder Bednar. You guys can both probably remember who said when the Lord says, okay, we're gonna create something spiritually before we create it physically. He said, that's kind of what we should do as well with our morning prayer and our evening prayer. The morning prayer, we spiritually create our day and our evening prayer is we return and report. And so we're praying always in that way

because we have that spiritual creation of our day in our minds. To me, that was, that impacted my life. My morning prayers became a spiritual creation of my day and my evening prayers became a return and report on the creation. The bad part is whenever they return and report in the scriptures or the temple

It's we did everything exactly as we said and my return and report doesn't Doesn't sound like that. I said I got maybe one or two percent of it. Yeah, I remember that changing my morning prayers too because You know, otherwise you're thinking why am I praying here in the morning like the last thing I remember Five right it seems like five minutes ago. I said my night prayer like the last thing I remember five, it seems like five minutes ago, I said my night prayer, right? But yeah, when you see it as looking forward to the day and spiritually creating before it happens, that's a powerful insight. It's almost like to me, a patriarch of blessing can be like, here's your capacities, your

talents, your gifts. Here's a blueprint. Now go, go strive to make it happen with the Lord's help. John, I like that a lot. There was a time for me in the temple where I thought of all the scripture stories. This one is the one we're going to review over and over and over. And for a while, I thought, you know, why? Why? And I think part of that has to be what we're talking about where the Lord says, look, you're the child of a creator. I want you to create. You're going to create a happy

marriage, you're going to create a happy family, you're going to create a career, you're going to create whatever, create the way I create, deliberate, planned, careful, ordered, keep your eye on the goal, don't rush to day seven, all of a sudden, don't rush to the end. Don't try to get it all at once. Do it. Be aware that in any goal, any creation, there's a day one. And there's a day two, and there's a day three.

And don't worry, that helps me go, well, John is on day six spiritually. I'm still back on day two, but I'm creating. One day I'll get there, So it helps me not compare. I don't know. Is there anything else that you guys have felt or seen from these from just this story of the creation in any of the accounts we have? Genesis, Moses, Abraham, the temple that has helped you live? Well, just what you said, Hank, the temple section 88, prepare a house of order, a house of faith, a house of prayer. house of faith the house of prayer and he's

he's telling him start your plan start your spiritual creation of this. Josh what do you get out of the creation stories? Well I love how in Moses and Abraham it has a setup before the creation story that impacts how you read it. So we talked about in Moses one, God's talking to Moses, and that's the setup, right? And he says, this is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. That makes you read creation with a very different framework. And same thing here in Abraham. So chapter four is our parallel account of Genesis one, but right before that starts at the end of chapter three, you get this description of those spirits, right, that Abraham sees the noble and great ones

that are in the presence of God. These I will make my rulers, you were chosen before you were born. And it talks about here, verse 24, there stood a one among them that was likened to God. I'm assuming this is Jesus Christ. And he said unto those who were with him, we will go down for there is space there. We will take of these materials and we

will make a north where on these all the spirits made well and we will prove them here with deceitably do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them and those who keep their first estate shall be added upon and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who shall keep their first estate and those who shall keep their second estate shall have glory glory in the same kingdom with those who shall keep their first estate. And those who shall keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads forever and ever. And it's just this amazing expansive view of this is why we're here.

And it's not meaningless. It's not random. We're here for a reason. We have a creator. And even if these accounts aren't giving us the physical, scientific kind of formation, a structure of how the earth was created, like, big deal. I'd much rather know this stuff, right? I want to know who my creator is, why I'm here.

So even if I don't know the details of how creation happened, I know who my creator is and I know how I can get back to him. That's, I think that's really empowering. I love it. It's a purposeful creation, not, I think Elder Maxwell said once, not an accidental arrangement of atoms. So it's not exactly how I did it, but here's why I did it. So one thing we can take away from the story of Adam and even Genesis, that the story seems

designed to do is to really for readers to see their story as in a lot of ways our story, that their story is an archetype for the story that we go through. So for example, one way that the story does this is by the names it gives these characters. So Adam, his name, Adam, and Hebrew means human being. That's about as generic as you can get when you want to name a human being. Eve's name means like living or alive, life, something like that, living one. So it's also kind of a generic thing. And by having names that are these kind of big categories, it kind of invites us to put ourselves into that category with them. And even in the endowment,

in the temple, it invites us, you know, that's the reason that it reviews their stories so that we can see ourselves as part of the same story, put ourselves in their place, where Adam and Eve start off in the presence of God and they have to leave his presence and then they're trying to figure out how do we get back to his presence and that's through the temple, that's through covenants, that's through the atonement. And our story is basically the same, right? We start off in God's presence, we come here this earth and we're trying to figure out how we can get back there and reclaim that That paradise and their presence of God there and it's the same journey that they took through temples through covenants through the atonement, right? And I think that's a great contribution

So in addition to whatever the story is trying to say about the historical figures of Adam and Eve It is Eglise trying to do this as set up this archetypal story. That's all of our story Josh We've had a fantastic day with you today walking through these creation accounts. Honestly, this has changed a lot for me. I'm just so, so grateful. I think our listeners would be interested in your, you become a biblical scholar. Yet here you are a believing faithful, latter-day saint.

I think they'd be interested in that journey. I guess I would say first off that the foundation for my testimony is the witness of the Holy Ghost. And you know, I've been experiencing that long before I went to college. It's been 13 years in college. It was a long time. But, and that comes from the Book of Mormon, honestly.

I think the Old Testament has enriched my testimony, but the Book of Mormon is the foundation of it. And it's actually my favorite book. I could have done 13 years of college on the Book of Mormon. Would have done that. There's just no programs for it, right? But the Book of Mormon and the spiritual experiences I've had, feeling God's love, and understanding His plan for me while reading the Book of Mormon has really been foundational to my entire life. So and honestly, one of the reasons I got into the Old Testament was to understand the Book of Mormon has really been foundational to my entire life. So, and honestly, one of the reasons I got into the Old Testament was to understand the Book of Mormon better. The Book of Mormon is so full of Old Testament things.

So I just love the Book of Mormon and I know from the Holy Ghost that it is true. Also, I would say it had a lot of experiences in my life with God's miracles. And I used to just assume that everybody has these. I've talked to a lot of people. Apparently, that's not everybody's experience,. I've talked to a lot of people. Apparently that's not everybody's experience, but I've just had a lot of experiences with immediate miraculous answers to prayer, wonderful direction from my Heavenly Father,

people who are healed in miraculous, instant ways. So that's not everybody's experience and it doesn't have to be, but I've had those. So when I read the scriptures about revelation and about miracles and about healing and all these things, it does not sound like a foreign kind of, you know, old-timey concept to me. It's something I've experienced in that I've seen. God's hand in the life, in my life, and those that I've served with, and people that I love. As far as the academic study goes, this is only strengthened my belief in the restoration

of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I think the Old Testament is a great way to wrestle with some of the deep hard issues that we have with faith and testimony. Again, the Old Testament is not the foundation of my testimony, but it sure has helped me wrestle with things. I'll just give some examples here. I've met with people who really struggle when they find examples of modern profits who either didn't know something or got something wrong or made a mistake. They

have this idea that profits are perfect and that they know everything and they would never mess up and when they see Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or somebody doing that, it can be totally damaged and they, well, they can't be a profit. Well, I'm spending all my time going through the Old Testament. And it's just full of stories of these imperfect prophets. So I mean, some examples, like think of Joseph in Egypt, right? Amazing revelations. He can interpret the dreams of the butler in the baker. He knows what's going to happen with Egypt for all these years. But then when his brothers come and he reveals himself to them, what's the first thing he asked them? Is my father

alive? He's so desperately wants to know if his dad's alive. Apparently, I imagine he must have asked that in prayer many times and he never got that answered. So he just desperately wants to know that. So knowing all the amazing things he had revealed him didn't mean he knew everything. Even something he wanted to know so much. So God reveals things to prophets, that's the miracle, but it doesn't mean they know everything, right? And so when I see prophets today or in other places that have some blind spots or things they don't know, that doesn't surprise me because the Old Testament's kind of primed me for that. Another thing that I love about the Old Testament is I'll put it this way, the Book of Mormon has fantastic characters, but Nephi

Mormon tend to paint them as black or white. They're all good or all bad. You don't find a lot of morally gray characters in the Book of Mormon, right? You have good people, bad people. It's really easy to separate them into the heroes and villains, and you have some people that are really bad, and then they become really good, right? But there's not a lot of people who are like in that gray zone where most of the rest of us feel like we live, right? Where we're sometimes we're the villain, sometimes we're the hero. But the Old Testament is just full of gray characters and moral ambiguity and choices where there's not one right or wrong way to do this and things are hard and complex.

And the reason I think that's so nice, I'm not trying to put down the book of Mormon there, it's great for what it does in giving us those models and the ideal to follow. But the Old Testament shows people who sometimes feel a lot more like me in the world that I live in where things are complicated. There's trauma people go through. You have just these really gut-wrenching choices and priorities you have to make. And the Old Testament is full of people like that. You ask yourself, is David a hero or a villain? You can't really do that. It's hard. And there's people like that all over the place. So I think it's really good for just wrestling in that ambiguous area where you're trying to do your best. And it sometimes doesn't work out very well. And people who are doing that and it's just story after story of just wrestling with that ambiguity right there. So I

think it's really good for just learning from these people. What did they do? How did that turn out for them? The Old Testament forces us to ask all sorts of hard questions. It brings up genocide. It brings up sexual assault. It brings up poverty, right? And it's use of class and ethnocentrism. The Old Testament brings up family structures and family conflict. And what happens when the family is just full of all this stuff.

So as we wrestle with all these problems in the modern world, I think this is just such a fantastic resource. And it's, I think for me, trained me to really embrace that wrestle. And that's only strengthened my face to recognize there's not always an easy clear-cutting answer to everything. And that's okay. That's the way God works with us. And the Old Testament is great for just practicing that kind of exploration and the wrestle. Hmm. Great. Yeah. I'm like putting up, where's my 10, my number 10? Yeah, I need an emoji right now. Not, it's really great because I think you're right and I think the Old Testament will bless a lot of people because of that. I think we talked about this a little that I can't remember who it was, Hank.

It was kind of like, I kind of identify more with Martin Harris than because I did some good things. I made some mistakes too. And I feel like that's more like me than always doing every, and the Book of Mormon does. It's a very this or that type of a book. And I've glad you brought up, and I was thinking of Samson, even Moses.

Moses kills a guy and then he's not allowed to go in the promised land. Yeah, he did not even allowed to go in. Oh my goodness. So that beautifully said, thank you so much. I've had people tell me, you know, I love the book of Mormon, but why would I want to go through the extra effort to go in the bowl testament? But I do think not that it's better or anything, but that there are some unique things it does and that it's really good at doing that are worthwhile. If you embrace the weirdness, embrace the complexity, roll with it, don't expect everything to line up and be great. And it's a foreign world to jump into, but my experience is that if you're willing to pay

that price of studying a little and wrestling with the text, it's fascinating and just ultimately enriching. Even the parts that are hard and gut-redging and and all that, it just helps you wrestle with the messy reality of life. Yeah, beautifully said. We want to thank Dr. Josh Sears. Wow, wow, wow, what a great day. Josh, we hope to have you back on the podcast. We want to thank our executive producers, Steve and Shannon Sornson, our sponsors, David and Verla Sornson, and our production crew, Lisa Spice, Jamie Nielsen, David Perry, Kyle Nelson, Will Stoten and Scott Houston. We hope that all of you will join us on our next episode of Follow Him. Make sure to find us on social media. You can find us on Facebook, on Instagram.

We would love it if you would subscribe to Ray and review the podcast that would help us quite a bit. Come to follow him.co follow him.co for transcripts, show notes, anything Josh, any references, Josh or John or I made today. You can find them on the on the website as well as transcriptions in French, Portuguese and Spanish. And of course if you want to see our faces, you can go find us on YouTube. you