No death before the fall

[_Nightlion]

My opinion is that Adam and Eve weren't in the garden very long. A few ten's of years max if not one or two. Could depend on how old they were when introduced to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO_W7cMWBMg

What? Brigham Young was not able to keep things straight from what Joseph told him. But he knew Adam and Eve were the parents of our spirit bodies and that they laid their exaltation by to enter the garden. That is why exaltation is called being gods because we continue to lay down our lives and take them again. That is how we continue seeds both in the world and out of the world.

Forming Adam from the clay was literal in a sense. God took the elements of this world and had Adam assimilate it into his exalted and glorified system to tether him upon this planet and cause his memory to erase. After Adam had assimilated the course elements somewhat refined elements were then given from him to Eve so she would not have to suffer the indignity of the metamorphoses as dramatically as Adam. So it is said God took a rib from Adam to form the woman euphemistically speaking. They were both still exalted beings who would continue to live forever although tethered to the Garden by the gross elements (clay) and unable to process their memories through the muddled trauma of it all.

This is one (not the only) reason for believing God is not a sexual being. Walking and talking with the naked Adam and Eve is not something a sexual being would do with any propriety. Perhaps that is why you think they might have been children. But even so. If they were growing up physically and maturing sexually in the Garden that is most problematic because as it was in the beginning when God created man both male and female and commanded them to multiply there was no marriage between them. They were already given to each other or in other worlds Adam and Eve were resurrected unto their exaltation and it is plainly recorded as much in creation scripture. Neither were they married in the Garden. If they were random children placed there where is the propriety of them being given one to another in marriage? Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh they twain were one flesh, already married. Not ashamed means that they were mature already and not pre-pubescent.

Genesis 2:21-25
21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

[_bcspace]

What? Brigham Young was not able to keep things straight from what Joseph told him. But he knew Adam and Eve were the parents of our spirit bodies and that they laid their exaltation by to enter the garden. That is why exaltation is called being gods because we continue to lay down our lives and take them again. That is how we continue seeds both in the world and out of the world.

Yes. This is the non doctrinal Adam Sr Adam Jr theory which some confuse for an Adam God theory. Bottom line, neither LDS doctrine.

Forming Adam from the clay was literal in a sense.

LDS doctrine is that we don't actually know how it was done. It COULD have been done like that, but there is nothing that says it couldn't be done another way and "out of clay" or "dust of the earth" is figurative. I think it's beautifully figurative of evolution seeing as how all the elements on the earth and that we are made of came from the stars.

So it is said God took a rib from Adam to form the woman euphemistically speaking.

Yes, the official doctrine is that the rib story is figurative.

If they were random children placed there where is the propriety of them being given one to another in marriage? Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh they twain were one flesh, already married. Not ashamed means that they were mature already and not pre-pubescent.

They could have easily been married when they grew up. Or perhaps they were married at a very young age. Doesn't matter as they were unable to have children.

*Idea*

Maybe that's the explanation. They couldn't have children because they were too young and unable to mature in the garden. Some problems with that, but it could be an interesting exploration.

Anyway, since I accept evolution, and since it's not in opposition to any doctrine, I tend to think in terms like this. It matches science (evolution) and doctrine if Adam and Eve are taken from the pre Adamites and placed in the garden.

Also, when you look at the generations of Adam in, If I recall correctly, Luke, it says Seth was a son and Adam and Adam was a son of God. This is where your theory get's it's scriptural support. Problem is, the JST changes it to Seth being a son of Adam and Adam being formed of God which differentiates Adam from Seth in the sexually reproduced sense. So God did not in fact sexually produce Adam's physical body though he certainly reproduced Adam's spirit.

[_Nightlion]

Also, when you look at the generations of Adam in, If I recall correctly, Luke, it says Seth was a son and Adam and Adam was a son of God. This is where your theory get's it's scriptural support. Problem is, the JST changes it to Seth being a son of Adam and Adam being formed of God which differentiates Adam from Seth in the sexually reproduced sense. So God did not in fact sexually produce Adam's physical body though he certainly reproduced Adam's spirit.

I do not believe God produced Adam by the continuation of the seeds. (sexually)
I believe God the Eternal Father and Christ and the HG are not sexual as they are without father and without mother having neither beginning of days nor end of years. And further it was the rejection of sexual differentiation that triggered Satan's rebellion for this required organized intelligence to half themselves to continue on in the plan subjected to Christ's purposes of making us seed bearers and matriculating to one sex. A fullness of light and truth is capable of either sex and God retains a fullness having not come by way of the seeds and is not sexually assigned. Also he does not have children through procreation. God conceived his children through the gospel and the power of redemption and resurrection.

Satan wanted to be like God and he could not if his intelligence was halved by sexual assignment. Every step in our progress requires a sacrifice. Yeah, not LDS doctrine NS. They are left behind in the dust of their own apostasy.

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

In this discussion, remember that doctrine is irrelevant. Only what prophets claimed god told them matters. If one asserts that there is no evolution, he is either right or wrong. A true prophet or a false one. DO NOT FALL IN THE DOCTRINE TRAP.

[_Rambo]

Creative Period with evolution and death ------>Garden State (no death) ------> Fall ------> Continuance of evolution and death

wow bcspace you really go to pretty big lengths to keep your faith in front of suck evidence.

I'm sure you were taught just as me that it was church doctrine that there was no death before the fall. Now to keep your faith you are saying there is no death just before the fall. I think you have moved those goal posts a bit more.

I don't remember this plan in sunday school. What I remember is this and this is what is still taught.

Creative Period (with no death) 7 God Days ----> Adam and Eve in the Garden ---> Fall

Do you think there was death outside the Garden during the time when Adam and Eve were in the garden. When God said there was no death before the fall don't you think he meant there was no death for the whole earth before the fall and not just the garden and not just the time period while Adam and Eve was in the Garden. You seem to be taking the word of God and changing the meaning. However; this keeps your faith so I can see why you would take it to mean this way.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Rambo

To add something to the mix (Very short version)

(I am not suggesting that I happen to agree, nor am I suggesting that I do not agree with what I am going to add here. This topic is, and has been for some time, a very hotly debated topic among believers of many flavors. It also has several layers to it)

Anyhow, some believe that the "no death before the fall" is rooted in the soul of the human being.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_bcspace]

wow bcspace you really go to pretty big lengths to keep your faith in front of suck evidence.

The doctrine is that there is no doctrine against pre Adamites so there are no lengths I have to go to.

I'm sure you were taught just as me that it was church doctrine that there was no death before the fall. Now to keep your faith you are saying there is no death just before the fall.

According to the number line, it is still true (a mathematical truth) that there is no death before the Fall.

I don't remember this plan in sunday school. What I remember is this and this is what is still taught.

Creative Period 7 God Days ----> Adam and Eve in the Garden ---> Fall

FIFY since the other way doesn't appear to be doctrine, ever.

Do you think there was death outside the Garden during the time when Adam and Eve were in the garden.

A good question. Depends on whether or not the garden state was local or global. I trend local but can roll either way.

When God said there was no death before the fall

When did God say that?

don't you think he meant there was no death for the whole earth before the fall and not just the garden and not just the time period while Adam and Eve was in the Garden.

Didn't I just get through saying that I agree that some apostles believe (d) this?

I do not believe God produced Adam by the continuation of the seeds. (sexually)

Good. Neither do I.

I believe God the Eternal Father and Christ and the HG are not sexual

Sine the Father and Son are resurrected beings, they must be sexual. There is no indication that functionality is lost in the resurrection. In fact, quite the opposite is implied.

as they are without father and without mother having neither beginning of days nor end of years.

That would be the Priesthood.

And further it was the rejection of sexual differentiation that triggered Satan's rebellion for this required organized intelligence to half themselves to continue on in the plan subjected to Christ's purposes of making us seed bearers and matriculating to one sex. A fullness of light and truth is capable of either sex and God retains a fullness having not come by way of the seeds and is not sexually assigned. Also he does not have children through procreation. God conceived his children through the gospel and the power of redemption and resurrection.

Definitely not doctrine.

Satan wanted to be like God and he could not if his intelligence was halved by sexual assignment. Every step in our progress requires a sacrifice. Yeah, not LDS doctrine NS. They are left behind in the dust of their own apostasy.

Good. You admit it's not doctrine.

[_Buffalo]

]

According to the number line, it is still true (a mathematical truth) that there is no death before the Fall.

You're confusing obfuscation with mathematics. They're two very different things.

[_just me]

This thread is funny.

[_SteelHead]

If from the moment of creation through and up until the point of the fall even one single death occured then the simple statement "there was no death before the fall" is negated.

Now if you want to qualify that statement with something more along the lines of "there was no death in the 2 decade sub period directly preceding the fall" then fine. Please produce an authoratative source for such a qualification.

The phrase also lacks a contextual framework. Is it safe to assume that no death before the fall only applies to this planet?

Also what was the official stance on what qualified as doctrine when JFS published his works, and not the guideline of today retroactively applied?