Man's Dominion, or Subduing the Earth

Chapter 1

Man’s Dominion, or Subduing the Earth*

Ever since
the days of the Prophet Joseph, presidents of the Church have appealed to
the Saints to be magnanimous and forbearing toward all of God’s creatures.
But in the great West where everything was up for grabs it was more than human
nature could endure to be left out of the great grabbing game, especially
when one happened to get there first, as the Mormons often did.

One morning just a week after we had moved into our house on Seventh North,
as I was leaving for work, I found a group of shouting, arm-waving boys gathered
around the big fir tree in the front yard. They had sticks and stones
and in a state of high excitement were fiercely attacking the lowest branches
of the tree, which hung to the ground. Why? I asked. There was a
quail in the tree, they said in breathless zeal, a quail! Of course, said
I, what is wrong with that? But don’t you see, it is a live quail, a wild
one! So they just had to kill it. They were on their way
to the old Brigham Young High School and were Boy Scouts. Does this story surprise
you? What surprised me was when I later went to Chicago and saw squirrels
running around the city parks in broad daylight—they would not last a
day in Provo.

Like Varro’s patrician friends, we have taught our children by precept and
example that every living thing exists to be converted into cash, and that whatever
would not yield a return should be quickly exterminated to make way for creatures
that do. (We have referred to this elsewhere as the Mahan Principle—Moses
5:31.1) I have heard important Latter-day
Saint leaders express this philosophy, and have seen bishops and stake presidents
teaching their reluctant boys the delights of hunting for pleasure. The
earth is our enemy, I was taught—does it not bring forth noxious weeds
to afflict and torment man? And who cared if his allergies were the result
of the Fall, man’s own doing, and could be corrected only when he corrects himself?
But one thing worried me: If God were to despise all things beneath him, as
we do, where would that leave us? Inquiring about the issue today, one
discovers that many Latter-day Saints feel that the time has come to put an
end to the killing.

The contemporary reappraisal of man’s relationship to his environment now
confronts society at large with a question that has always been of major concern
to the leaders of Israel, namely, What is man’s dominion? The key scriptural
passage on the subject reads: "And God blessed them, and God said unto
them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue [kivshū]
it: and have dominion over [r∂dū b] . . .
every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (Genesis 1:28). The words
kivshū and r∂dū both have a basic root-meaning
of exerting pressure; that being, however, merely a point of departure for a
whole spectrum of derivatives, so that scholars have translated the words according
to individual taste and temperament to convey various ideas and types of dominion.
Thus the dictionaries tell us that radad, with the basic meaning of trampling
the earth, in Genesis 1:28, specifically means "to plow," while kavash,
with the original idea of squeezing or hugging, can mean everything from "violate"
to "cherish."2

In all
the interpretations we are confronted by two opposing concepts of dominion
that have always divided the human race. From the beginning men have
been asked to choose between them. Thus the Clementine Recognitions tell us that Abel’s claim to dominion was challenged
by Cain, that Noah was challenged by the giants (the "Watchers"
of Enoch’s day), Abraham by Pharaoh, Isaac by the Philistines, Jacob by Esau,
Moses by the magicians of Egypt, Christ by the adversary in person, Simon
Peter by Simon Magus, the apostles by the whole world, and finally, in the
last days, Christ by the anti-Christ again.3
In each case the challenger argued from a position of strength and promised
"all the kingdoms of the world" with all their power and glory to
those who would worship and follow him, while the other offered the kingdom
of heaven hereafter to those who worship the Lord and serve him only (Luke

Each of
the great leaders before entering upon his mission was allowed to make his
own choice between the two ways, the case for each being presented personally
to him by the highest authority on either side. Thus Adam, Enoch, Noah,
Abraham, Moses, and ancient apostles, Joseph Smith, and, of course, the Lord
himself were not only privileged to speak with God face to face, "even
as a man talketh one with another" (Moses 7:4), but were also exposed
to intimate and personal interviews, however harrowing and unsolicited, with
the prince of darkness as well. Their opponents in each of the dispensations
were also favored with direct ministrations from both sides, and each made
his choice between enjoying power and dominion here or hereafter.

In commanding
Adam to "be fruitful, and multiply," God also informed him that
he had given the identical command to all his other creatures, furthermore
that he was putting Adam in charge of things to see to it that his purposes
were fulfilled. Specifically, he was to "replenish the earth, and
subdue it, and to have dominion over" every living thing in the biosphere (Abraham 4:28). There
are two clearly marked departments—the earth itself as a storehouse and source
of life, which Adam is to keep replenished (filled
is the word), and the creatures that move about on and over the earth, over
which he is to have dominion. As Brigham Young explains it, while "subduing
the earth" we must be about "multiplying those organisms of plants
and animals God has designed shall dwell upon it,"4 namely "all forms
of life," each to multiply in its sphere and element and have joy therein.

As usual,
it is the Prophet Joseph who sets the record straight with an inspired translation:
"And it came to pass that after I, the Lord God, had driven them out,
that Adam began to till the earth, and to have dominion over all the beasts of the field, and to eat his bread
by the sweat of his brow" (Moses 5:1, emphasis added). Here, in
the place of the "subdue" of the King James version, we have explicitly
the word "till" applied to the earth alone, while "dominion"
is reserved for the animal kingdom. And what is dominion? After
commanding every form of life to multiply for the express purpose of having
joy, God gave the identical command to Adam, at the same time putting him
in charge of the whole operation, making him lord over the whole earth and giving him dominion over everything on the face of the earth. Lordship
and dominion are the same. The word lord is the usual English slurring of hlafweard, hlaford,
the loaf-ward or keeper of the bread, because according to the Oxford
English Dictionary
, "in its primary
sense the word (which is absent from the other Teut[onic] lang[uage]s) denotes
the head of a household in his relation to the servants and dependents who
‘eat his bread’ . . . the development of sense has been largely
influenced by the adoption of the word as the customary rendering of [the]
L[atin] dominus."

brings us in the dictionary to "dominion, . . . deriv[ative] of domini-um, property, ownership, f[rom] dominus, lord," specifically "the lord of the household,"
in his capacity of generous host, "pater familias
and owner of the house [domus]." The title of dominus designated the Roman
Emperor himself as the common benefactor of mankind inviting all the world
to feast at his board. In short, lordship and dominium are the same thing, the responsibility of the master
for the comfort and well-being of his dependents and guests; he is the generous
host, the kind pater familias to whom all look for support. He is the lord
who provides bread for all; but how? By tilling the earth that he may
"eat his bread by the sweat of his brow" (cf. Genesis 3:19)—he
is not a predator, a manipulator or an exploiter of other creatures, but one
who cooperates with nature as a diligent husbandman.

The ancients
taught that Adam’s dominion was nothing less than the priesthood, the power
to act for God and in his place. The idea is that God, while retaining
his unshakable throne in the heavens, extended his glory to a new world below
in the work of the Creation, "then as the culmination of that work he
created man to be in charge" (li-mshol)
of all the beings he had created5 with the understanding that "from
this time forth man must work to improve the earth and preserve and take care
of all that is in it, exactly as God had done before."6

Spirit of the Lord and the keys of the priesthood," said Brigham Young,
"hold power over all animated beings. . . . In this
dispensation the keys . . . will be restored."7
God is a god of the living (see Matthew 22:32) and gives Adam dominion over
every living thing, so that his rule ceases where life ceases. A king’s glory
and success are measured by the happiness, prosperity, and increase of his
subjects, even as the power and glory of God show forth, according to the
Sefer Yetzira, in the exuberance of living things upon the earth;8 his
"work and his glory" are to bestow the prerogatives of divinity
on those below him (Moses 1:39). "From the hour in which I created
the world it was my task to bless my creatures," the Lord tells Abraham
in making the covenant of the priesthood with him; "from now on, the
bestowal of blessings is turned over to thee."9 According to a
Jewish legend, as God put Adam and then Noah in charge of all his creatures,
he later put Abraham in charge, in order that he might bestow his blessing
on them.10

All creatures are duly overawed by the presence of God’s representatives and
image: "Even the fierce beasts of prey fear man," says the Zohar,
"as long as he keeps his covenant, his kingly dignity, and his eye fixed
on God in whose image he is."11
For "God formed man in his own heavenly form and made him to be Lord over
them. Whenever man stands upright and lifts his eyes toward heaven, then all
the animals raise their heads too, and look to man, fearing and trembling in
his presence." Throughout history an indispensable fixture of royalty has
everywhere been the great animal park, paradise, or royal forest in which majesty
could display itself in the role of God on earth, parent of the human race,
and patron and protector of all lesser beings. In a word, the concept of man’s
dominion as a holy calling and high responsibility has been the common heritage
of the human race throughout history.12
God’s rule is before all a rule of love: "I love my creatures far more
than you ever could!" the Lord tells Esdras in a vision.13
There is a tradition that Melchizedek, instructing Abraham in the things of
the priesthood, explained to him that Noah earned his blessings by his charity
to the animals, recalling how in the ark, "We did not sleep because all
night we were setting food before this one and before that one." Taking
this lesson to heart, Abraham himself made a sort of Garden of Eden near Hebron,
and there practiced charity toward all creatures that thus he might "become
possessor of heaven and earth."14
Adam, according to many accounts, was the great friend and companion of all
the animals when they lived together in perfect peace and happiness, and they
continued true to him even after the Fall.15
Indeed, "Adam was intimately acquainted with all the angels, all the seraphim
[the spirits in heaven], and also with all the holy beasts, . . .
before he came to this earth" so that he was peculiarly fitted in his priestly
office to serve as mediator between the worlds as well as between higher and
lower forms of life.16

The teaching
of Israel laid the heaviest emphasis on responsibility. Since man is
quite capable of exercising the awesome powers that have been entrusted to
him as the very image of God, he must needs be an example to all, and if he
fails in his trust, he can only bring upon himself the condemnation of God
and the contempt of all creatures.17 "When men
lose their viscious dispositions," said the Prophet Joseph,
"the lion and the lamb can dwell together."18

A favorite
theme of Brigham Young was that the dominion God gives man is designed to
test him, to enable him to show to himself, his fellows, and all the heavens
just how he would act if entrusted with God’s own power; if he does not act
in a godlike manner, he will never be entrusted with a creation of his own
worlds without end. So there is risk involved: "The rule
over the world is in the hands of God," says Ben Sirach, "and at
the right time He setteth over it one that is worthy"; but if that rule
is ever exercised in an arbitrary or arrogant manner, it is quickly taken
away and given to someone else.19
God tells Adam, "The beasts, over whom thou didst rule, shall rise up
in rebellion against thee, for thou hast not kept my commandment";20 all
creatures are quick to recognize the hand of the oppressor and impostor.

Some of
the profoundest human commentary is contained in the vast and ancient corpus
literature of the animal fables, a protest literature in which the beasts
bring accusation against the human race for their shabby performance in the
days of their probation.21 They are, moreover,
responsible for more than their own survival, for by God’s rule for the animals,
"if humanity perishes, then all perish; but if man lives, then all may
live."22 What kills men destroys other
forms of life as well, and having dragged them down with us in the Fall ("On
account of thee," they say, "our natures have been transformed"23), we are answerable for them:
"The Lord will not judge a single animal for its treatment of man, but
He will adjudge the souls of men towards their beasts in this world, for men
have a special place."24
A familiar early Jewish and Christian teaching was that the animals will appear
at the bar of God’s judgment to accuse those humans who have wronged them.25 "Happy is he who glorifies all the works of the Lord,
but cursed is he who offends the creation of the Lord; for nothing will go
unnoticed and unrecorded."26 Jesus referred to God’s intimate concern for all when he
said of the sparrows, "not one of them is forgotten before God"
(Luke 12:6), and has declared in these last days: "I, the Lord
. . . make every man accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings,
which I have made and prepared for my creatures" (D&C 104:13).

G. R.
Driver has recently called attention to an important but forgotten teaching:
"Few, if any, readers of the Old Testament seem to have noticed that,
as our text stands and as it can only be read without violating normal standards
of interpretation, they are committed to the strange doctrine of the resurrection
not only of man and of birds and beasts but also of . . . ‘gliding
things innumerable’ which swim in the sea." 27 Modern revelation confirms this: "For I, the
Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before
they were naturally upon the face of the earth; . . . in heaven
created I them" (Moses 3:5). "Every tree . . . that
is pleasant to the sight of man . . . became also a living soul.
For it was spiritual in the day that I created it" (Moses 3:9).

keep in view," Brigham Young exhorts us, "that the animal,
vegetable, and mineral kingdoms—the earth and its fulness—will all, except
the children of men, abide their creation—the law by which they were made,
and will receive their exaltation."28 We are all going
to move together into the eternities, and even now look forward to "heaven,
the paradise of God, the happiness of man, and of beasts, and of creeping
things, and of the fowls of the air; that which is spiritual being in the
likeness of that which is temporal; . . . the spirit of man in the
likeness of his person, as also the spirit of the beast, and every other creature
which God has created" (D&C 77:2). What an admonition to proceed
with reverence and care! It is only because the Latter-day Saints are
ignorant of these things, according to President Young, that God has not already
cursed them for their brutal and callous treatment of God’s other creatures.29

Normative Judaism and Christianity, following the lead of Aristotle and the
Doctors of Alexandria, have always rejected and resented the idea that animals
might in any degree be classed with men, who alone, according to the perennial
doctrine of the schools, enjoy the powers of speech and reason, the mark of
divinity that sets them uniquely and absolutely apart. "Man is bound to
treat dumb animals kindly and to abstain from unnecessary cruelty," an
eminent churchman has recently written, "not because these animals possess
any real rights (for only intelligent beings can have real rights) but because
they are creatures of God."30 The
"Latter-day Saints," on the other hand, "do not take the view
that animals have no reason, and cannot think. We have divine knowledge that
each possesses a spirit in the likeness of its body, and that each was created
spiritually before it was . . . given a body on the earth. Naturally,
then, there is some measure of intelligence in members of the animal kingdom."31
Animals do possess real rights, "for all things have an equal right
to live[!]" as President Joseph F. Smith would say.32
We are told that early Christian groups avoided the eating of meat, not as the
flesh of irrational beasts, but as belonging to creatures having rational souls.
Schopenhauer observed that the two most serious defects of Christian teaching
are (1) the denial of spirits to all creatures but man, and (2) of life to all
worlds but this one. These closely related doctrines have formed the common
ground on which fundamentalism and scientism have joined hands, the former horrified
at the thought of being related to lower creatures than man, the latter scorning
any suggestion that we might be related to higher ones.33

God and
Satan both presented plans of dominion to Adam and then to his son Cain.
The father chose one plan, the son the other. It must be admitted that
the second proposition was a very tempting offer and very skillfully presented—"Satan
tempted me" is the stock excuse for giving in. But we must go back
to Adam to see how clever the thing really is.

The story
is told not only of Adam but of the other great patriarchs as well. Noah
was confronted by the same party with the same proposition while he was working
in his garden after the flood.34 Abraham too had an Eden and
an altar, and while he was once calling upon God in prayer, Satan suddenly
showed up with an insolent "Here I am!" and proceeded with his sales
pitch.35 Moses like Christ was tempted
on a mountain, by the same person and with the same proposal: "If
thou . . . wilt worship me, all shall be thine" (Moses 1:12—19,
Luke 4:7). Adam is thus only the first; the elements of the story that
follow are found in various combinations among the many texts of the growing
Adam literature that is coming to light in our generation. The texts
often take dramatic form, indicative of ritual origin.36

As Adam
was praying one day, runs the story, a distinguished gentleman appeared on
the scene and engaged him in conversation. There was nothing of the
hippy or tramp about the stranger; he was well-dressed and came to Adam with
cunning and smooth talk, as a true friend genuinely concerned for his welfare.37 He began with some harmless generalities—the weather and
the scenery: it was, he observed, a most glorious and beautiful world.
This was, however, by way of leading up to his next point, which was that
he happened to be the owner and proprietor of it all. Yes sir, as far
as the eye could see it was all his, and he tolerated no nonsense in it:
nobody dared make trouble where he was in charge. This was all hokum,
of course; "Satan never owned the earth; he never made a particle of
it," said Brigham Young; "his labor is not to create, but to destroy."38 But to demonstrate
his authority, when three strangers (usually described as angels)39 appeared on the scene at this moment, he at once challenged them
as trespassers, asking them if they had any money. He explained to Adam
that everything in his world could be had for money,40 and then got down to
business. For the fellow was all business, a person of integrity, ready
to keep his part of an agreement (the agreement always turns out to be a trap
for the other party), pious and God-fearing,41 dedicated
to hard work—he works, in fact, "like a demon." He was there
to offer Adam the chance of a lifetime to buy in on a scheme that would give
him anything he wanted in this world. It was an ingenious and simple
self-financing operation in which one would buy power with wealth and then
more wealth with the power, until one might end up owning and controlling
everything. The initial capital? It was right under their feet!
You begin by taking the treasures of the earth, and by converting them to
cash, gold, and silver, and exchanging them for the services of important
people in key positions you end up running everything your way. What
if your rule is one of blood and terror? "Better to reign in Hell,"
as Milton’s Satan puts it, "than serve in Heaven."42

tempting proposition has been the theme of much popular legend and great literature.
A transitional figure between the ritual and the literary is Pluto of Hades,
the god of wealth: "All the riches of gems and precious metals hidden
beneath the earth are his, but he owns no property above ground."43 So he brutally kidnaps the fair Proserpine, who represents
all the beauty and harmony of nature, to establish his claim over the earth;44 but
the marriage is barren—Pluto can intimidate and coerce, but like his Egyptian
counterpart Seth he can neither beget nor create; what he buys with the treasures
of the earth is nothing but a rule of blood and horror.45 But Greek comedy and Roman satire
depict with agonizing frankness the irresistible success of Pluto’s program
in a decadent world. In Aristophanes’ last play, The Pluto,
Hermes the messenger of Zeus comes to earth as a prophet to denounce mankind
for having turned from the worship of heaven to the worship of wealth or Pluto:
"You have all committed a great sin," he says, "and must be
destroyed." But seeing how well the people are living, he soon
decides to change sides and asks for a job with the establishment. Next,
the high priest of Zeus, finding himself unemployed, is forced to apply to
Pluto for a job; what is his surprise when he finds none other than Zeus himself
now working in the front office of Pluto, Inc.46 The cynical conclusion is that no one can resist Satan’s
bargain, and in the history of the world very few people have. The first
to accept was Cain, who "loved Satan more than God," though at Satan’s
advice he continued to make offerings to the Lord (Moses 5:18, 21).
The "great secret" of success that he learned from his new teacher
was that he could get anything in this world by the calculated use of force,
with no need to be ashamed, since it could all be done in the sacred name
of freedom; instead of being appalled at the blood on his hands, Cain "gloried
in that which he had done, saying: I am free; surely the flocks [wealth,
pecus, Vieh] of my brother falleth into my hands" (Moses 5:31—33).
Cain slew Abel not, as we like to think, in a fit of passion but with cold
calculation, "for the sake of getting gain" (Moses 5:50, 38).
He was all business. As for the victim, he was quite able to take care
of himself, and if he failed, that, by the rules of the new game, was his
hard luck: "Am I my brother’s keeper?" Significantly
enough, when this forthright, no-nonsense economy, unencumbered by enervating
sentimentality, worked against Cain, he straightway became a "bleeding-heart"
in his own behalf, and appealed for the mercy he would not give. "My
punishment is greater than I can bear!" (Genesis 4:13). In making
an example of Cain, God absolutely forbade the use of Cain’s own methods against
him: "Whoever slayeth thee, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold"
(Moses 5:40; Genesis 4:15).

One of
the best-known teachings of the Jews is that when man (Israel in particular)
falls away from God, all nature becomes his enemy.47 Modern revelation confirms this:
when all the people became wicked in Enoch’s day, "the earth trembled,
and the mountains fled; . . . and the rivers of water were turned
out of their course; and the roar of the lions was heard out of the wilderness"
(Moses 7:13). Just so, in the last days "all the growing things
will be blighted by the . . . great lawlessness, and plagues will
come over all creatures of all the earth."48 Where people refuse the gospel,
according to Brigham Young, "that land eventually . . . will
become desolate, forlorn, and forsaken," as nature refuses her bounties.49

The explanation
of this all-out hostility is simple. "The animal, vegetable, and
mineral kingdoms abide the law of their Creator; the whole earth and all things
pertaining to it, except man, abide the law of their creation," while
"man, who is the offspring of the Gods, will not become subject to the
most reasonable and self-exalting principles."50
With all things going in one direction, men, stubbornly going in the opposite
direction, naturally find themselves in the position of one going the wrong
way on the freeway during rush hour; the struggle to live becomes a fight
against nature. Having made himself
allergic to almost everything by the Fall, man is given the choice of changing
his nature so that the animal and vegetable creation will
cease to afflict and torment him,51 or else of waging a truceless war of extermination against all
that annoys him until he renders the earth completely uninhabitable.

This second
course is Cain’s dominion. Satan, spitefully determined to destroy everything
that God has commanded to live and multiply, began his earthly career by making
war on the birds and fishes and systematically destroying the animals and
trees. This, we are told, was because he was envious of the beautiful
rapport that existed between Adam and the animals.52 Next, under the administration
of his pupil Cain, all the forests of the earth rapidly disappeared, while
that hero wandered through the earth with his bow for 130 years, looking for
anything to kill—"a human angel of death."53 While Noah refused Satan’s plan to divide up the world and
rule with an iron hand,54 his sons accepted it, each driving out from his property all the
animals as trespassers, so that the beasts that had loved Noah began to fear
and hate man.55 In particular, Ham organized
secret combinations "to work iniquity and to shed much blood . . .
and after this, they sinned against the beasts and birds, and all that moves
and walks on the earth."56
Next Ham’s son Nimrod, the mighty hunter who boasted that no animal could
escape his bow, turned that bow against men as well as animals and so subdued
all things to his will, ruling all the earth with his inspired violence.
He was the mortal enemy and rival of Abraham, and whereas Abraham gave Adam’s
blessing to the beasts, "Nimrod ordered thousands of . . .
cattle brought, . . . and sacrificed them."57 This he was able to do through
possession of the garment of the priesthood that had once belonged to Adam
and that Ham had stolen from Noah. Seeing him in this garment, all creatures
willingly came and submitted to him, mistaking the dominion of Cain for the
dominion of Adam.58 From Nimrod, Esau, another hunter,
inherited the garment but lost it to Jacob, from whom it passed down to Moses,
who when it wore out replaced it with a garment of cotton or hair rather than
skins to avoid the shedding of animal blood.59

interesting old stories might be dismissed as literary oddities were it not
that annals and chronicles of real history, "a continual scene of wickedness
and abominations" (Mormon 2:18), are completely dominated by the Nimrod
type. "The greatest acts of the mighty men" proclaim the nature
of their dominion. "Before them the earth was a paradise,"
said Joseph Smith, "and behind them a desolate wilderness."
There is another plan: "The designs of God, on the other hand,"
are that "the earth shall yield its increase, resume its paradisean glory,
and become as the garden of the Lord."60 Meanwhile, when "we see
all the world trying to lord it over God’s heritage," we can be sure
that "it is in the spirit that the evil principle and power is trying
to overcome and rule over the divine principle planted there. This constantly
leads the children of men astray."61 To render its appeal irresistible,
the program is pushed by a clever rhetoric and high ethical tone; Babylon
has never wanted for dedicated and highly paid apologists to justify the ways
of those who "seek for power, and authority, and riches" (3 Nephi
6:15; Hebrews 13:26—28).

dominion is a call to service, not a license to exterminate. It is precisely
because men now prey upon each other and shed the blood and waste the flesh
of other creatures without need that "the world lieth in sin" (D&C
49:19—21). Such, at least, is the teaching of the ancient Jews and of
modern revelation.

This article was printed as “Subduing the Earth” in Nibley on the Timely and Timeless (Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1978), 85—89; it also appeared as “Man’s Dominion,” New Era 2 (October 1972): 24—31, and New Era 11 (January—February 1981): 46—53.

Hugh W. Nibley, Approaching Zion (Salt
Lake City: Deseret Book and F.A.R.M.S., 1989), CWHN 9:166,
276, 436.

2.   The Septuagint renders the two
words "rule throughout" (katakyrieusate) and "be first"
or "govern" (archete). Both the Hebrew words have the two
main ideas of (1) bringing pressure to bear, and (2) treading the earth and
walking about on it. Very ancient parallels suggest that the original
idea was that of the new master of the earth going about on his royal rounds
of inspection and discovery, as we read in the Egyptian Coffin Texts,
Spells 80, 132, 136. See also Adriaan de Buck, The Egyptian Coffin
, 7 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938), 2:27—43,
152—57, 160—65.

3.   Clementine Recognitions
III, 61, in PG 1:1308. Each usurper claimed to be a "cosmocrator,"
or Ruler of the Universe.

JD 9:168.

5.   Nicolas Sed, "Une cosmologie
juive du haut moyen âge. La Bĕraytā di Maʿaseh Berēšīt,"
Revue des etudes juives 124 (1965): 48—51.

Micha Josef bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden,
5 vols. (Frankfurt: Rütten and Loening, 1913), 1:83, 354.

7.   Elden J. Watson, Manuscript
History of Brigham Young 1846—1847
(Salt Lake City: Watson, 1971),
142—43 (26 April 1846).

Gérard Encausse, The Qabalah (Great
Britain: Thorsons, 1977), 224—25.

9.   Rabbi Nehemiah, in William G. Braude,
The Midrash on Psalms, 2 vols. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959),
Psalm 1:5 (cf. 1:8).

Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden, 2:137,
424, citing a number of sources.

Cf. Zohar 13b.

Discussed by Hugh W. Nibley, "The Hierocentric State," in Western
Political Quarterly
4 (1951): 235—44;
reprinted in CWHN 10:110—23.

4 Ezra 8:47, in R. H. Charles,
Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament,
2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964), 2:597.

Braude, The Midrash on Psalms, 37:1
(1:422—23); Midrash Proverbs
23:17a; Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden,
2:268—69, 428.

Book of Adam and Eve 8:3, in Charles,
Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament,
2:135; Genesis 2:19—20.

Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden, 2:288.

17.   According to the Pure Brethren
of Basra, ever since Cain slew Abel, the animals have followed the example
of man; see the Arabic text in Fredrich Dieterici, Thier und Mensch vor
dem König der Genien
(Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1881), 36; cf. A. Vaillant,
Livre des Secrets d’Henoch (Paris: Institut d’Etudes Slaves, 1952),
57—59, chap. 15 of the text. The teaching is attested to in very
early times:  L. Kákosy, "Ideas about the Fallen State of the World
in Egyptian Religion: Decline of the Golden Age," Acta Orientalia
17 (1964): 205—16.

TPJS, 71.

Ben Sirach 10:4.

Book of Adam and Eve, 24:4, in Charles,
Apocrypha and Pseudipigrapha of the Old Testament,

Perhaps the most impressive treatment of the theme is the entire volume of
Dieterici, Thier und Mensch.

Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden, 1:198.

Apocalypse of Moses 11:2; Jubilees III, 28, in Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
of the Old Testament
, 2:16—17.

Secrets of Enoch 58:4—5, in ibid.,
2:464; cf. Vaillant, Livre des Secrets d’Henoch,

Vaillant, Livre des Secrets d’Henoch,


G. R. Driver, "The Resurrection of Marine and Terrestrial Creatures,"
Journal of Semitic Studies 7 (1962):

JD 8:191.

JD 15:227.

Francis J. Connell, "What about the Animals?" American Ecclesiastical
146 (1962): 270.

Joseph Fielding Smith, Man, His Origin and Destiny
(Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1954), 194.

32.   Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine
(1970—71 Melchizedek Priesthood Manual), 2 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret
Book, 1939), 1:372 (emphasis added).

33.   On the problem of preserving
man’s uniqueness and dignity, cf. A. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964), 121—23. Synesius, in
PG 66:1289, 1292, recognizes both upward and downward relationships.

Midrash Rabbah Noah 36:3; Bin Gorion,
Die Sagen der Juden, 1:228.

Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews,
6 vols. (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1967), 1:270—72;
Testament of Abraham 16:6—10;
K. Kohler, "The Pre-Talmudic Haggada," Jewish Quarterly
7 (1895): 589.

36.   Some of the old sources describing
the confrontation of Adam and Satan are the Testament of Adam; various
"Adam Books"; The Lives of Adam and Eve; The Cave of Treasures;
The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan; sources in Bin Gorion, Die
Sagen der Juden
, 1:92—94, 254—56; Manichaean Hymn
; Thaʿlabī, Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyā; Testament
of Abraham
; Apocalypse of Moses; Slavic Adam and Eve; Secrets
of Enoch
; Theodosius, Abbatôn; The Precious Jewel; Midrash,

Kohler, "Pre-Talmudic Haggada," 589.

JD 10:320.

They are the "Sent Ones" who come to instruct Adam.

40.   The theme is dramatically treated
in the Testament of Job 6—7, 22—23, where Satan says, "pay
the price and take what you like!"

To Moses he even claims to be the son of God (Moses 1:19); he speaks only
with reverence of the Father as his father.

42.   John Milton, Paradise Lost

Robert Graves, The Greek Myths, 2d
ed. (Edinburgh: Penguin, 1955), 31e (1:122).

Homer, Hymn to Demeter, lines 16—21.

45.   Graves, The Greek Myths,
31d—f (1:121—22); on Seth, Erik Hornung, review of J. Gwyn Griffiths,
The Origins of Osiris, and H. Velde, Seth, God of Confusion,
in Orientaliche Literaturzeitung 65 (1970): 19; Siegfried Schott, Sieg
über Seth
(Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1929), 18.

Gilbert Murray, Aristophanes (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1933), 206.

Discussed by Oscar Holtzmann, "Die Schafe werden sich in Wölfe verwandeln,"
Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
11 (1910): 231, 226—27.

Apocalypse of Abraham 29:16, in Charles,
Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament,

MS 38:344.

JD 9:246.

See JD 1:203: When man changes
his nature, "every animal and creeping thing will be filled with peace;
the soil of the earth will bring forth in its strength."

Psalms of Thomas I, 25—37, in C. R.
C. Allberry, ed., A Manichaean Song Book
(Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1938), 203—4; Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der
, 1:151, on the destruction of the forest; ibid., on
Satan’s jealousy of the animals.

Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden, 1:148—49,

Midrash Rabbah Noah 36:3.

Bin Gorion, Die Sagen der Juden, 1:226.

Jubilees 8:23—24, in Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
of the Old Testament
, 2:22.

Jewish Encyclopedia, 12 vols. (New
York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1905), 9:310.

Pirkê de Rabbi Eleazer, Gerald Friedlander, tr. (New York: Hermon, 1965),
175, chap. XXIV; Sperling and Simon, Zohar,
1:249—251, Noah 73b.

59.   Robert Eisler, Iēsous Basileus
ou Basileusas
, 2 vols. (Heidelberg: Winters, 1929), 2:34.

60.   TPJS, 248—49.

JD 9:107.