About the hypothesis of bcspace

[_Fence Sitter]

I wonder what movies they watched?

(Pity about Etta)

No movies back then but they did have plays. Eve's favorite was the one with the talking snake who gave away free fruit.

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

Eve's fruit:

[_Buffalo]

Eve's fruit:

[_Quasimodo]

Eve looks to be a happy girl. Not how I envisioned Eve, though.

[_ludwigm]

image

Eve looks to be a happy girl. Not how I envisioned Eve, though.

She is Eve's grandmother, Elohim's (or whoever) 19th wife.
She was chosen in a dark tent, as Leah a little later...

20. And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her.
21. And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.
22. And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.
23. And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her.
25. And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah

[_tapirrider]

If by civilization you mean domesticated plants and animals it might surprise you to know that the cause of agriculture was climate change. It had nothing to do with spirits from children of God coming to earth and into the family of Adam and Eve.

That's quite all right. I was merely comparing my hypothesis to Spurven's who was well before (some 29,000 years ago) the Neolithic era, making the degree of complexity (and level of conversation) unscientific. Plus my hypothesis includes a creative period before the garden state; that God waited until all was ready before placing man into the garden state.

In other words, it doesn't matter if there was a direct uplift or not and domestication may or may not have come with the Fall. But my hypothesis, if true, places the Fall at the latest around the time of the first civilizations which is within one order of magnitude of the traditional Christian date. Whatever, you think civilization to be, I'm merely going with the general science that the first civilization is Sumer.

The key aspect of my hypothesis is an undefined state before the garden state in which it is not stated there there is no death. That is why evolution can swim with LDS doctrine because LDS doctrine and scripture supports such a state. Everything else is a broad as you need to fit within science or doctrine.

The anti Mormons used to attack the notion of death before the garden, but this has been solved doctrinally and science doesn't preclude it. So being defeated on that front, perhaps partly because of my hypothesis, they have shifted to science alone but it can't work because we have to assume that God can do things we know He already has done such as create different kinds of spirits or bring men to different areas of the world etc. All the usual critics have to argue with is a Deus ex machina which is merely the common debate between atheists and believers in God. So to make it easy for them, as I said, all I have done is use what it is written that God has already done. I haven't made up any leaps that we have not yet seen God do. To argue against that is not the point which remain an hypothesis compatible with science AND LDS doctrine. Therefore, God is in the machine whether they like it or not.

I am a critic of the preadamite doctrine. Your hypothesis is not your invention and is nothing new.

The Book of Mormon is an alleged history of people migrating to America from the Middle East, beginning about 2,200 BC. Mormons that allow for science and do not believe in a universal flood present the obscene possiblility that ancestors of living American Indians had animal souls until the imaginary events of the Book of Mormon happened. This proposes the fictional idea that people from the Middle East began interbreeding with animal souled people already in America (descended from preadamites) and God began putting his spirit children into the bodies being born from these matings.

Mormons that play with the preadamite doctrine are subtle and very cautious to not directly say all of these implications. This subject of becoming god's children and when it occurred is far too serious and consequential to be left up to individual Mormons to speculate about. Where is the revelation from LDS prophets on this? They are silent.

Here is a good article that you should read.
http://www.jehsmith.com/files/smithpreadamism.pdf