You came in in the middle of a debate the question was originally “Was Adam flesh and blood prior to sinning?”
I said no there was no flesh and blood at that time Adam had flesh and bone.
Gen 2:23
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.
The Garden of Eden is a different kingdom, or dimension from earth which is temporal where in order to live one needs blood.
it was endless denial that they are two different dimensions.
I know it is a waste of breath but I feel it is important for those who still have logic will know what I am talking about I don’t expect the Traditionalist to get it!
anyway my next request was
When you fine blood in Adam, when Adam was in the Garden of Eden show me?
This is the reply I got which makes sense for one living in a temporal state, but the Garden of Eden there is no need for blood and no atonements are made in that Kingdom.
Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
are not rational.
From the marrow comes the blood, in part, at the least.
Adam and Eve had earthly children, also. There is no mention of them being in some other "state" of being, as to the flesh (other than death having not yet entered) which barring any indication otherwise, would include them being living, air breathing creatures which were being spoken about.
But this is an interesting spiritualizing of Adam's existence, coming from one a Mormon. The lengths one will go to, in trying to make it fit within their own imagination --- that's human nature, and found throughout the world, with all this Mormon-thought stuff engaged in to try to justify Joseph Smith's own fevered imaginings.
By that I mean, there is otherwise, Mormon talk of God the Father having once been a flesh & blood man, but having attained some plateau of exaltation by living sinlessly, rather than Him being immortal God -- the One true God, Himself the Creator of the Heavens and earth, from even before the beginnings of "all that there is" which we can grasp with our senses.
Those sort of ideas introduced by Joseph Smith as "a big secret" are quite jarring. The rest of Smith's claims to have "recovered" or restored some secret knowledge --- are a bunch of hooey. Why continue attempt to justify it?
The book of Abraham? That's the last coffin-nail, babe. Nothing on that scroll translates as Joey claimed, which makes Joseph Smith proved no prophet --- but a liar and a religious fraud.
You may speak to me as if I am unable to grasp what you are speaking of, for myself being "traditionalist" if you like, but I must tell you that would be a vain conceit on your own part.
There is a difference between understanding how gauzy descriptions of existence (in Mormonism -- it's "pre-existence" right?) can be turned on and off to fit the theology --- and accepting the same stuff.
This argument you bring --- what is it based upon? That there is no "blood" of Adam, explicitly mentioned in Genesis?
Do you not know what Adam's very name means? According to Strongs, it can mean "ruddy". Expanding upon that we should consider ruddy as in blushing red, flush with blood of life.
Now going back to the Genesis account, how again is it there related that man was created?
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Continuing on from there, where do we see evidence for there being these "two different dimensions" when Adam was formed from the dust itself, followed by the Lord Himself planting a garden, where "there He put the man whom He had formed", etc.?
A couple of chapters later we have the first recorded murder, with the blood crying out from the ground, unto God. Would that not be evidence of "two dimensions" you speak of?
There is some overlap of these two dimensions --- but those sort of things can be grasped through what you referred to as traditionalist thought, without needing rely upon an early 19th century religious huckster named Joseph Smith, to lead us all to "the way".
Genesis 2:7
“The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being”
I might be dense; but to ME, simple LOGIC says there HAD to be 'blood' in ADAM or else he would have been a DEAD being: not a LIVING one.