The Family of Adam

[This is part of a series of posts I initiated with Book of Mormon Scholarship as an Elias for Evolution.]

The phrase 'family of Adam' occurs in the scriptures exclusively in the Book of Mormon, where it is used twice as a reference to all people. For example:

Mormon 3:20

And for this cause I write unto you, that ye may know that ye must all stand before the judgment–seat of Christ, yea, every soul who belongs to the whole human family of Adam.

Before moving on, let's pause and consider the aboriginal inhabitants of the island of Tasmania. Archaeologists place the first inhabitants of the island at no later than 35,000 years ago. Except for back then it was not an island; it was a piece of Australia. Then around 10,000 years ago at the end of the last Ice Age, sea levels rose and cut off Tasmania from Australia. With no evidence of seafaring technology, it appears that the Tasmanian Aborigines were isolated from all other people until the arrival of European explorers. This scenario places some difficult constraints on the timing and placing of Adam if the Tasmanian Aborigines are literal descendants of Adam.

However, there is more than one way to become the family of a prophet. Two examples from scriptures should suffice to make the point.

D&C 84:33-34

For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies. They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.

Mosiah 5:7

And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.

Familial relationships in the scriptures clearly extend beyond literal lineal ancestor-descendant relationships, and in the early years of the Church it was not uncommon for otherwise unrelated people to be sealed to Church leaders in order to be linked in kinship. In the two scriptural examples above the relationship is established by covenant. However, when it comes to being the family of Adam and Eve, no covenants are needed since all people are their family by default. We might say that just as anybody who is redeemed from sin by Jesus becomes his seed, anybody who needs redeeming is considered the seed (or family) of Adam and Eve.

Of course all humans are ultimately related to each other anyway, making all of them the 'family of Adam.' Rather than viewing the whole human family as a tree descending from Adam and Eve, it might be better to think of it as a network or web of relationships that extends forward and backward in time, with Adam and Eve presiding over all. However, viewing the family of Adam in this way naturally raises the question of how far back this linking could extend. This concern was expressed by President Boyd K. Packer:

The sealing authority with its binding of the generations into eternal families cannot admit to ancestral blood lines to beasts. Let me repeat: An understanding of the sealing authority with its binding of the generations into eternal families cannot admit to ancestral blood lines to beasts.

This objection can be answered in at least two ways. The first is unsatisfying but true: There are many areas of life and religion where black and white rules are applied to gray situations. We ultimately trust God to determine where to draw the line. Second, on the other hand, perhaps God doesn't need to draw a line because it is a matter of self-selection. The binding of families together is associated with the making of covenants. As we look at humanity extending into the ancient past in a post-mortal context, it may be that there comes a point where people (or whatever) have no interest in entering such covenants and a natural (if fuzzy) line of demarcation emerges.

In this view, whether or not the pre-1800 Tasmanian Aborigines (or any of us) are literally descended from Adam and Eve makes no difference. By virtue of being human we are all the 'family of Adam,' and God's invitation is open to all who will accept it, either in this life or the next. The point here is not to claim that any of this represents a definitive answer to the issues raised. Rather, it is to suggest that the scriptures themselves provide some of the flexibility needed for an alternative interpretation of the place of Adam and Eve in history that is consistent with science.

---