Holland doubles down on Adam and Eve... Hey BC!?

[_SteelHead]

Did he not say he didn't know what happened on Earth before the fall, except there was no human death?

Your pre-adamite theory just took an ecclesiastical hit.

[_DarkHelmet]

BC Space is the authority on official doctrine. If Holland contradicted BC Space, then Holland is wrong.

[_No_Hidden_Agenda]

Did he not say he didn't know what happened on Earth before the fall, except there was no human death?

Your pre-adamite theory just took an ecclesiastical hit.

Holland prefaces the "no human death or future family" statement with a note that Adam and Eve were living for a time in the Garden where there was not human death or future family.

Thus the escape clause Mormonism needs of death outside the Garden remains...

Not that it makes any sense to delineate no death in one Garden for a little while while death (including human) ran rampant everywhere else.

[_cinepro]

I think the explanation is that the humanoid pre-adamites weren't "human". They had animal spirits that looked "human", but they weren't spirit children of God. So Adam was the first "human" with a real human spirit.

It's simply wonderful and wonderfully simple.

[_KevinSim]

I think the explanation is that the humanoid pre-adamites weren't "human". They had animal spirits that looked "human", but they weren't spirit children of God. So Adam was the first "human" with a real human spirit.

It's simply wonderful and wonderfully simple.

There's so much emphasis in Genesis 2-3 about the knowledge of good and evil, that my personal opinion is that Adam and Eve were the first two humans who really understood the difference between good and evil; before them all humans (or near-humans) were innocent, in the same way that children younger than eight are innocent. So, yes, the humans before Adam and Eve would look human; in many ways they were human, but they hadn't advanced to the point of understanding the difference between good and evil.

So God finds two people who have the potential of understanding the difference between good and evil, and puts them in a garden, and gives them immortality until they partake of the fruit of the tree, at which point God takes their immortality away from them? That's a possibility, I guess. Although, unlike Holland, I don't really see the need for there to have been the immortality in the first place. I respect Holland, so if he tells me there was immortality I'll try to believe that, but like I said, I don't really see the need.

[_Craig Paxton]

BC Space is the authority on official doctrine. If Holland contradicted BC Space, then Holland is wrong.

^^^^^^^ Caused Audible Chuckle^^^^^^^

[_Craig Paxton]

Did he not say he didn't know what happened on Earth before the fall, except there was no human death?

Your pre-adamite theory just took an ecclesiastical hit.

It appears that the church to adopting the "Shrinking Eden Theory"...which is similar to the "Shrinking Book of Mormon Geography Theory". All of these events central to Mormonisms truth occured in a one square inch location known only to God... if reality keeps pushing...I'm sure that the next apologetic argument will be that both of these events took place within the same exact square inch location...that eliminates the need for that extra square inch...

[_suniluni2]

But I thought Adam and Eve were alone, both before and after the fall? Adam was alone, and that's why god create Eve in the first place.

[Guest]

Non human humans.... My head hurts. Any discernable archeological/anthropological evidence that would reflect in the existing cultures of the time (not having human souls) vs those that gained souls? Changes to art, religious rites, burial practices, etc, once they became real humans?

[_Maksutov]

Did he not say he didn't know what happened on Earth before the fall, except there was no human death?

Your pre-adamite theory just took an ecclesiastical hit.

This is one of the primary LDS anti-evolution arguments as well. Death before The Fall negates The Atonement, therefore if Jesus and the Church are true then science is wrong. If science is wrong and opposed to the Church it is because science is inspired by and a tool of the adversary.