Comments on: Pre-Existence is False

By: Jamie Trwth

Jamie Trwth — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:53:10 +0000

To me Pre-Historic is a misnomer. It implies that before we could record history there was pre-history. So the term we are all looking for is . . . . Pre-Terrestrial. Well, maybe that states we were born before the earth was here. Do we really believe that or am I wrong.

So that would characterize my ancestors (and me as well), as having a small amount nobility in the Pre-Terrestrial.

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:00:18 +0000

Click on the link, Bill.

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:36:59 +0000

What is T&S?

By: annegb

annegb — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:01:43 +0000

nitpicking.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 01:23:53 +0000

Neal Maxwell deliberately avoided the term “pre-existence” for the reason you give—that it connotes (or even denotes) a state prior to existence, which seems to be a logical impossibility. On the other hand, when James E. Talmage used the term, he was simply using it to mean “prior existence” or “existence before this one.” So perhaps Talmage should have resorted to a different term, but I don’t think he wrought any real harm.