The Default of Adam and Eve

75:8.1Adam and Eve did fall from their high es­tate of ma­te­rial son­ship down to the lowly sta­tus of mor­tal man. But that was not the fall of man. The hu­man race has been up­lifted de­spite the im­me­di­ate con­se­quences of the Adamic de­fault. Al­though the di­vine plan of giv­ing the vi­o­let race to the Uran­tia peo­ples mis­car­ried, the mor­tal races have prof­ited enor­mously from the lim­ited con­tri­bu­tion which Adam and his de­scen­dants made to the Uran­tia races.

75:8.2There has been no “fall of man.” The his­tory of the hu­man race is one of pro­gres­sive evo­lu­tion, and the Adamic be­stowal left the world peo­ples greatly im­proved over their pre­vi­ous bi­o­logic con­di­tion. The more su­pe­rior stocks of Uran­tia now con­tain in­her­i­tance fac­tors de­rived from as many as four sep­a­rate sources: An­don­ite, San­gik, Nod­ite, and Adamic.

75:8.3Adam should not be re­garded as the cause of a curse on the hu­man race. While he did fail in car­ry­ing for­ward the di­vine plan, while he did transgress his covenant with De­ity, while he and his mate were most cer­tainly de­graded in crea­ture sta­tus, not­with­stand­ing all this, their con­tri­bu­tion to the hu­man race did much to ad­vance civ­i­liza­tion on Uran­tia.

75:8.4In es­ti­mat­ing the re­sults of the Adamic mis­sion on your world, jus­tice de­mands the rec­og­ni­tion of the con­di­tion of the planet. Adam was con­fronted with a well-nigh hope­less task when, with his beau­ti­ful mate, he was trans­ported from Je­ru­sem to this dark and con­fused planet. But had they been guided by the coun­sel of the Mel­chiz­e­deks and their as­so­ciates, and had they been more pa­tient, they would have even­tu­ally met with suc­cess. But Eve lis­tened to the in­sid­i­ous pro­pa­ganda of per­sonal lib­erty and plan­e­tary free­dom of ac­tion. She was led to ex­per­i­ment with the life plasm of the ma­te­rial or­der of son­ship in that she al­lowed this life trust to be­come pre­ma­turely com­min­gled with that of the then mixed or­der of the orig­i­nal de­sign of the Life Car­ri­ers which had been pre­vi­ously com­bined with that of the re­pro­duc­ing be­ings once at­tached to the staff of the Plan­e­tary Prince.

75:8.5Never, in all your as­cent to Par­a­dise, will you gain any­thing by im­pa­tiently at­tempt­ing to cir­cum­vent the es­tab­lished and di­vine plan by short cuts, per­sonal in­ven­tions, or other de­vices for im­prov­ing on the way of per­fec­tion, to per­fec­tion, and for eter­nal per­fec­tion.

75:8.6All in all, there prob­a­bly never was a more dis­heart­en­ing mis­car­riage of wis­dom on any planet in all Neb­a­don. But it is not sur­pris­ing that these mis­steps oc­cur in the af­fairs of the evo­lu­tion­ary uni­verses. We are a part of a gi­gan­tic cre­ation, and it is not strange that ev­ery­thing does not work in per­fec­tion; our uni­verse was not cre­ated in per­fec­tion. Per­fec­tion is our eter­nal goal, not our ori­gin.

75:8.7If this were a mech­a­nis­tic uni­verse, if the First Great Source and Cen­ter were only a force and not also a per­son­al­ity, if all cre­ation were a vast ag­gre­ga­tion of phys­i­cal mat­ter dom­i­nated by pre­cise laws char­ac­ter­ized by un­vary­ing en­ergy ac­tions, then might per­fec­tion ob­tain, even de­spite the in­com­plete­ness of uni­verse sta­tus. There would be no dis­agree­ment; there would be no fric­tion. But in our evolv­ing uni­verse of rel­a­tive per­fec­tion and im­per­fec­tion we re­joice that dis­agree­ment and mis­un­der­stand­ing are pos­si­ble, for thereby is ev­i­denced the fact and the act of per­son­al­ity in the uni­verse. And if our cre­ation is an ex­is­tence dom­i­nated by per­son­al­ity, then can you be as­sured of the pos­si­bil­i­ties of per­son­al­ity sur­vival, ad­vance­ment, and achieve­ment; we can be con­fi­dent of per­son­al­ity growth, ex­pe­ri­ence, and ad­ven­ture. What a glo­ri­ous uni­verse, in that it is per­sonal and pro­gres­sive, not merely me­chan­i­cal or even pas­sively per­fect!

75:8.8[Pre­sented by Solo­nia, the se­raphic “voice in the Gar­den.”]