When Adam and Eve Were Created, Were "Others" in the Land?

[_antishock8]

I think Frodo ultimately kept the ring.

You do the math.

[_Black Moclips]

I posit that homo sapiens evolved just as one would suspect and when the time was right, two were born with spirit sons and daughters within rather than some other "animal" spirit.

The church clearly teaches that Adam and Eve had physical, immortal bodies not subject to death. So Bcspace, you are saying that two, fallen and subject to death pre-Adamite homosapiens gave birth and raised two immortal children who eventually found themselves together as adults (que Saturday's Warrior music "I've seen that smile somewhere before, I've heard that voice before, it seems we've talked like this before....) and realized they were different (they just hated wearing clothes and didn't understand what all the fuss was about) and then God plucks them up and puts them in a Garden, etc etc.

Really? This is your idea? You honestly believe this?

[_Sethbag]

Yes he does. There's no other way to square the evidence with the theology. So he'll believe whatever it takes, no matter how stupid it is, and no matter if he's the only Latter Day Saint who believes it, excluding even every Prophet and Apostle the church has ever produced.

There are a lot of threads were BC stands up and points to 2 Nephi 2:22 as containing some magic phrase that gets him out of literally any trouble at all with LDS theology and science, then he proclaims himself the winner of any debate you try to have, and will trot out the same crap the next time it comes out, and the next time, etc. etc.

[_cinepro]

The church clearly teaches that Adam and Eve had physical, immortal bodies not subject to death. So Bcspace, you are saying that two, fallen and subject to death pre-Adamite homosapiens gave birth and raised two immortal children who eventually found themselves together as adults (que Saturday's Warrior music "I've seen that smile somewhere before, I've heard that voice before, it seems we've talked like this before....) and realized they were different (they just hated wearing clothes and didn't understand what all the fuss was about) and then God plucks them up and puts them in a Garden, etc etc.

Really? This is your idea? You honestly believe this?

I kind of imagined it as two "non-spirit" homo-sapiens (or Spirit version .9) having children who grew to maturity, and then were "called" by God to become Adam and Eve when they were teenagers or adults. It would be at that time that their spirits were upgraded from version .9 to version 1.0, and they would be placed in the Garden and God would explain everything to them. I suppose their memories would have to be erased so they wouldn't long for their parents and friends outside the Garden. Unless I'm mistaken, this was all shown in the old Temple movie, but was removed for time constraints.

Of course, all those .9 spirit people would continue living and dying outside the Garden, so I'm not sure what would happen to them after the fall. Maybe God exterminated them as "works-in-progress" to give Adam and Eve a clean slate. But then we might expect to see some evidence of that in the fossil record, and we have created more logistical problems.

[_bcspace]

Is BC the only one interested in defending Nibley's "Before Adam"?

Very telling.

I've never read Nibley's opinion on this.

[_bcspace]

I believe their parents had spirits as I stated above. Just not the same spirits we have.

What are you basing this belief in a different level of "spirit" on? Is it in the scriptures? Did you just make it up out of thin air? What is your source?

LDS doctrine.

"That part of a living being which exists before mortal birth, which dwells in the physical body during mortality, and which exists after death as a separate being until the resurrection. All living things—mankind, animals, and plants—were spirits before any form of life existed upon the earth "
LDS Guide to the Scriptures - Spirit

[_bcspace]

I said rise of civilizations. However, I think I can include Sumer in this. Even if I have to push back the fall date from the Uruk period to the Ubaid period.

The Ubaid period looks like it started around 5,300BC, which is over 1,000 years earlier than the Biblical chronology.

Is there anything in LDS doctrine that holds us to "Biblical" chronology?

So you are making a hash of Biblical chronology,

The traditional view of it yes. Such a view does not take many things into account that would cause us to think 4000 B.C. is the date when in fact it is not.

and D&C 77:7.

No, apples and oranges.

But that ultimately begs the question: What did we need the fall for, and how would the world be different if Adam and Eve had never taken the fruit?

That is answered in our favorite lynchpin verse on this topic, 2 Nephi 2:22(22-23)

[_bcspace]

I posit that homo sapiens evolved just as one would suspect and when the time was right, two were born with spirit sons and daughters within rather than some other "animal" spirit.

The church clearly teaches that Adam and Eve had physical, immortal bodies not subject to death.

Agreed. My theory is not in conflict with this doctrine.

So Bcspace, you are saying that two, fallen and subject to death pre-Adamite homosapiens gave birth and raised two immortal children who eventually found themselves together as adults (que Saturday's Warrior music "I've seen that smile somewhere before, I've heard that voice before, it seems we've talked like this before....) and realized they were different (they just hated wearing clothes and didn't understand what all the fuss was about) and then God plucks them up and puts them in a Garden, etc etc.

I don't know about them being "raised", but I do know that according to 2 Nephi 2:22, they were placed into this state of no death. This implies a previous state of which we have no details so mortality, death, and consequently evolution can swim easily in this prior state.

[_bcspace]

Yes he does. There's no other way to square the evidence with the theology. So he'll believe whatever it takes, no matter how stupid it is, and no matter if he's the only Latter Day Saint who believes it, excluding even every Prophet and Apostle the church has ever produced.

Notice how well m theory dovetails with LDS doctrine and science. Considering the claims of the LDS Church, this is expected especially when it comes to details not revealed to us.

There are a lot of threads were BC stands up and points to 2 Nephi 2:22 as containing some magic phrase that gets him out of literally any trouble at all with LDS theology and science,

Yes, I believe 2 Nephi 2:22 is the key and over looked lynchpin to allowing evolution to co-exist peacefully with LDS doctrine.

then he proclaims himself the winner of any debate you try to have, and will trot out the same crap the next time it comes out, and the next time, etc. etc.

I'm simply looking for flaws in my theory so I can make it better or discard it if needs be. Haven't found any catastrophic ones yet.

[_Ray A]

I've never read Nibley's opinion on this.

Well it's what the OP was all about. And since you didn't read it, it's pretty much the same as yours.