Adam's Choice to Remain with Eve--The keeping of a commandment and blessing.

[ParkerD]

I wasn’t referring to Eve regarding the sin of presumption, but you. You were the one who said:

That says that you would deliberately choose sin because you want wisdom no matter the cost, no matter if it offends God, no matter that it breaks His commandment because you know that Christ has atoned for our sins. You are thus presuming on God’s mercy. That is called the “sin of presumption” and is wrong in God’s eyes.

Jay53,
Reading your comment here makes me puzzle over whether and how much you may have read the epistles in the New Testament. Does this comment mean that you think we should freeze in our tracks and do nothing in life because we are going to realize that we will “fall short of the glory of God” and will undoubtedly sin? If we were to do that (freeze in our tracks) does one not realize that “freezing in our tracks” and doing nothing in life would be committing sins of omission? I had already cited verses about grace and mercy. I do not like to be redundant, but if you would like more such verses, then you could let me know and I will provide a few more references to the concepts of mercy, grace, and accepting that this life is a condition where humankind are going to “fall short of the glory of God” and thus are going to sin.

Have a peaceful and beautiful day.

 

[Jay53]

Jay53,
Reading your comment here makes me puzzle over whether and how much you may have read the epistles in the New Testament. Does this comment mean that you think we should freeze in our tracks and do nothing in life because we are going to realize that we will “fall short of the glory of God” and will undoubtedly sin? If we were to do that (freeze in our tracks) does one not realize that “freezing in our tracks” and doing nothing in life would be committing sins of omission? I had already cited verses about grace and mercy. I do not like to be redundant, but if you would like more such verses, then you could let me know and I will provide a few more references to the concepts of mercy, grace, and accepting that this life is a condition where humankind are going to “fall short of the glory of God” and thus are going to sin.

Have a peaceful and beautiful day.

No, that is not at all what I mean. Perhaps you should research more the sin of presumption. It has to do with DELIBERATELY choosing sin because we are presuming on God’s mercy.

One example (other than your previous statements) from a Catholic perspective would be sterilization. If a Catholic man/couple decided to get a vasectomy KNOWING that it is wrong and against God, but just figured that they would go to confession and be absolved, then that is a “sin of presumption”. You seem to have described something similar with your statement about “choosing to fall” knowing that Christ has atoned for our sins.

 

[larkin31]

Larkin31,
May I first remark that I think you have asked profound questions and have shown sincere kindness and thoughtfulness in how you have asked them, which I have so much appreciated. I wish you much happiness and all the best in your life.

That is indeed LDS teaching, and is considered by LDS members and leaders to be a very important teaching that helps us understand the purposes of this life in a great opening up of insights into the condition of humankind, and how God loves us yet here we are in this condition where we are learning “wisdom” through experience, and that by choice.

thanks

I don’t go for the part about infusion of souls into bodies, but the other parts about knowledge as a central human quest do resonate with me

 

[TheQuestioner]

Questioner,
I suggest if you are reading in Job that you read Job 14, and realize that “Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble…But his flesh upon him shall have pain, and his soul within him shall mourn.” (v. 1, 22)

(I never wrote, by the way, that wisdom doesn’t “come from God”. The question to reasonably ask is “how does wisdom come from God to man and woman if man and woman want wisdom?”)

I have no idea what the verse in Job 14 has to do with anything being discussed. Yes, life is miserable…

You seem to have missed the point of my entire post. I’m glad you agree that wisdom comes from God, but the point I was trying to get across (the logical point that theologians and philosophers agree with) is that wisdom does not directly come from struggle, nor was it supposed to. Wisdom comes from God, and was supposed to be poured on us by God freely without struggle. However, due to the fall (eating the fruit) we turned away from God who is the source of wisdom and as such we became hardened to wisdom. So why do we struggle? Our struggles put us in a state of disposition to God. Wisdom makes us wise like heat is used to make a cake, however you cannot have a proper cake unless you beat the batter. In the same way, we will not accept wisdom as a grace unless we are put through a struggle, no matter how great or small. The struggle doesn’t create wisdom, but puts us in a state in which we will accept it from God. But again the reason why we are in a state where we usually do not accept wisdom is because of the fall. I bold letters not because I am angry, but to emphasize the main points. Remember again wisdom is a disposition of the spirit and a grace, and in order for God to be able to give it to you He needs you to say yes to it (as per free will).

So your treatise on Eve rejecting God in order to obtain wisdom is fundamentally wrong because you cannot reject the source of wisdom in order to obtain it. Its like looking for water in the desert because you don’t want to go to the stream right in front of you.

If you are reading in Proverbs, I suggest you read Proverbs 3:11-12 and realize that “My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction:
For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.”

Ok…don’t be worried if God corrects you, He still loves you…

How does a father correct a son, or how does the Lord correct humankind, if the father does not allow the son to make mistakes that need “correcting”, or if God does not allow for mistakes to be made that need “correcting” and by which they can learn that “Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding.” (v. 13)?

But there is no need for correction if we listen to God in the first place. You don’t always have to learn from experience and making mistakes. That is a western misconception created to legitimize wrong doing. It was only supposed to be applied in the sphere of physical issues, not moral issues. You can learn by dictation as well.

Of course “wisdom and power belong to God.” The question is, since wisdom does belong to God, how does God provide the opportunity for wisdom to be available to man? If you read Daniel 1 about Daniel and his companions (Hananiah or Shadrach and so forth), then it is clear that these “well favoured” children had already shown their “wisdom” by doing something in their lives that distinguished them, which means they already had demonstrated that they had learned from experiences of life–not from some sort of cocoon where they were protected from living life and making choices and gaining experience.

Again you are misinterpreting how wisdom comes about. God does not “provide an opportunity for wisdom to be available to man”, but more accurately “puts man in a state where he will or will not accept wisdom” depending on his free choice. Case and point, people who have gone through many struggles and who are none the wiser about life. They continue on in wrongfulness and fallacy, because though they were disposed to wisdom, they did not accept it. Maybe because it would make their lives harder or less fun. Who knows?

I agree that one wanting wisdom should ask God for help in getting that quality into their life, and that they should ask in “faith nothing wavering” but at the same time remember that “the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.” (James 1:3-4) Also remembering that “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.” (v. 12)

…

 

[TheQuestioner]

Questioner,
Which of the following people do you think lamented that “we go through struggles in life” without identifying that there was purpose in those struggles?

Christ?
Paul?
Peter?
Abraham?
Moses?
Hannah?
Ruth and Naomi?
Job?
Jeremiah?

Any Biblical writer or Biblical example, at all?

I don’t quite understand what you are getting at here. Yes there is a purpose for our struggles, but the reason why that purpose had to come through struggle in the first place was because of the fall of mankind.

 

[TheQuestioner]

Remember not to buy into the fallacy of a good thing coming without God. When Adam and Eve fell from grace it was because they denied God. If God is the source of wisdom then how is it that they could deny God in order to obtain wisdom? This makes no sense.

This is the lie that the devil brought to Adam and Eve, that they can deny God, the source of wisdom, and yet still gain wisdom, even more than they could have before. See that you too do not fall for this lie.

But in the end you may say that I am wrong because your whole idea of Adam choosing to remain with Eve being a good thing hangs on the idea that the choice Eve made was not wrong, but was an acceptable action that had consequences, the main goal being wisdom.

 

[larkin31]

Remember not to buy into the fallacy of a good thing coming without God. When Adam and Eve fell from grace it was because they denied God. If God is the source of wisdom then how is it that they could deny God in order to obtain wisdom? This makes no sense.

This is the lie that the devil brought to Adam and Eve, that they can deny God, the source of wisdom, and yet still gain wisdom, even more than they could have before. See that you too do not fall for this lie.

But in the end you may say that I am wrong because your whole idea of Adam choosing to remain with Eve being a good thing hangs on the idea that the choice Eve made was not wrong, but was an acceptable action that had consequences, the main goal being wisdom.

well, for an “unacceptable action,” God did not protect the tree much nor did he monitor behavior around it. In fact, many people argue that God fully knew that Adam and Eve would fail, since God knows all. Adam and Eve did not do anything that God did not give them the power and opportunity to do. No one had to go to great lengths to sneak this past God nor to persuade Adam and Eve–it was all very easy, almost inevitable and natural

 

[TheQuestioner]

well, for an “unacceptable action,” God did not protect the tree much nor did he monitor behavior around it. In fact, many people argue that God fully knew that Adam and Eve would fail, since God knows all. Adam and Eve did not do anything that God did not give them the power and opportunity to do. No one had to go to great lengths to sneak this past God nor to persuade Adam and Eve–it was all very easy, almost inevitable and natural

The story is allegorical. The affect of the tree did not come from the fruit. What the tree represented was the choice to disobey God. Thus, even if God had stopped them, because their final intent was to disobey God and they truly intended to do it they would have sinned in their hearts anyway and still have fallen. (this is all assuming the story is literal)

Mankind has free will, and thus is allowed to choose or reject God. There are consequences for rejecting God, these are natural. So God did not blame them for doing something they had the power to do, but for making a choice they should not have made (to turn away from Him). Because mankind was made to love God (has a mold in the heart which God perfectly fits into), to turn away from this means the natural consequence of evil and suffering.

 

[SteveVH]

I feel like I’m kinda barging in here as I’ve been away for several days. After reading through these posts, however, I must respond to at least one and this seems to be indicative of your general position.

Are you saying that Moses didn’t use the right words to describe Eve’s thoughts? That he should have used a word that had a strong negative connotation (lust), instead of the simple words “good for food”? Why does one do this–tell themselves that Moses wasn’t inspired enough to use the right word? That one needs to help Moses “get it right” by changing the words to fit one’s preconceived idea about the situation, to make it sound like a give-away negative response to the situation she faced?

Moses didn’t have to use the word “lust”. No one lusts after something if they don’t think it would be “good”. People that “lust” after drugs do so because they make them “feel good”. “Feeling good” is a good thing. Men who lust after women do so because of the promise of pleasure. Pleasure is a good thing, is it not? That is your argument. How can you blame the poor guy that commits adultery? We should be more understanding. She “looked good”, good for bringing him pleasure, which is a good thing, right?

What–so she was not allowed to think the fruit looked “pleasant”? Who made the fruit, in your mind–Satan? (Is it not pretty apparent that God made the fruit?) Should God have made the fruit look “unpleasant”? Or was it OK that God could make it look “pleasant” but Eve needed to think it looked “unpleasant” or she was sinning? Now there’s a tough situation–a fruit can look “pleasant” but don’t anyone dare think it looks “pleasant” or they’re in big trouble.

God made the woman after whom the adulterous man lusts. God made the plants from which the drugs sought by the addict were derived.

Which kind of “pride” was Eve showing that she had? Conceit? Arrogance? Insolence? Ostentation? Vanity? Self-love?

Conceit and ostentation for believing she could become equal to God. Arrogance and inslolence for believing she knew better than God. Vanity and self-love for choosing to disobey God for the sake of self-gain.

So are you saying that a person has to be perfectly good and perfectly obedient to God, or every single thing they do in life is “bad”? What sort of world would that be? Do you honestly and sincerely think that every person ever born was expected to be perfectly obedient to God or everything they might do in their life is “bad”? Especially in such a simple thing as what they choose to eat, if God made a fruit and made it look pleasant and tasty?

Yes, we are suppose to be “perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect”. The fact that we fail does not let us off the hook. “What kind of world would that be”? Are you kidding me? It would be heaven. The kingdom come. It would be the Garden before the fall. Are you worried that it may not be spicy enough if we didn’t do bad things? We should continue to progress in holiness during this life. There are those who accomplish this. We call them saints.

We are talking about one single commandment here, which had a specific consequence that was known about. What if Eve decided the consequence was worth the disobedience to that one commandment? Does that really mean she is such a terribly “bad” person that now she needs to be described as being “prideful” and having “avarice” and having “lust” in her heart?

“What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, but loose his soul” There is no consequence that is worth disobeying God. I’m shaking my head here. Its like "what’s the big deal anyway, its only one little commandment. Besides, it’ll be fun, we can experience the knowledge of evil (they had already experienced “good”) and gain wisdom and understanding along the way. When you think about it, it would almost be stupid to not disobey God? I mean, He’ll save us anyway, right? Parker, I think that you are in danger. This position reflects the voice of the serpent and it seems you have fallen for it. You are defending evil and disobedience to the point of implying that what Adam and Eve did was no big deal. No, not all that important. It just resulted in sin, suffering and death entering into our lives and affecting all of creation. I don’t particularly care what Eve thought of the consequences, she made a selfish decision that affects my life and the lives of all of us. Apparently, God thought it was a big deal.

 

[ParkerD]

SteveVH,
I read your recent post. It is typical, and is exactly an example of what I meant. It is a waste of my time to respond to what you wrote.

 

[ParkerD]

I have no idea what the verse in Job 14 has to do with anything being discussed. Yes, life is miserable…

You seem to have missed the point of my entire post. I’m glad you agree that wisdom comes from God, but the point I was trying to get across (the logical point that theologians and philosophers agree with) is that wisdom does not directly come from struggle, nor was it supposed to. Wisdom comes from God, and was supposed to be poured on us by God freely without struggle. However, due to the fall (eating the fruit) we turned away from God who is the source of wisdom and as such we became hardened to wisdom. So why do we struggle? Our struggles put us in a state of disposition to God. Wisdom makes us wise like heat is used to make a cake, however you cannot have a proper cake unless you beat the batter. In the same way, we will not accept wisdom as a grace unless we are put through a struggle, no matter how great or small. The struggle doesn’t create wisdom, but puts us in a state in which we will accept it from God. But again the reason why we are in a state where we usually do not accept wisdom is because of the fall. I bold letters not because I am angry, but to emphasize the main points. Remember again wisdom is a disposition of the spirit and a grace, and in order for God to be able to give it to you He needs you to say yes to it (as per free will).

So your treatise on Eve rejecting God in order to obtain wisdom is fundamentally wrong because you cannot reject the source of wisdom in order to obtain it. Its like looking for water in the desert because you don’t want to go to the stream right in front of you.

Ok…don’t be worried if God corrects you, He still loves you…

But there is no need for correction if we listen to God in the first place. You don’t always have to learn from experience and making mistakes. That is a western misconception created to legitimize wrong doing. It was only supposed to be applied in the sphere of physical issues, not moral issues. You can learn by dictation as well.

Again you are misinterpreting how wisdom comes about. God does not “provide an opportunity for wisdom to be available to man”, but more accurately “puts man in a state where he will or will not accept wisdom” depending on his free choice. Case and point, people who have gone through many struggles and who are none the wiser about life. They continue on in wrongfulness and fallacy, because though they were disposed to wisdom, they did not accept it. Maybe because it would make their lives harder or less fun. Who knows?

…

Questioner,
I suppose that you will want to provide several Biblical examples of how wisdom descended from God to people when they merely asked for it and had had no life experiences (including some kind of suffering or hardship or tests of faith) to provide context for their “wisdom”.

 

[ParkerD]

I wasn’t referring to Eve regarding the sin of presumption, but you. You were the one who said:

Quote:
I freely choose to fall, to “partake of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil” knowing all the while that by doing that I will be able to experience making choices in life that will lead to gaining wisdom that I didn’t have before, and will experience pain and discomfort in the process and thus learn qualities of patience, love, compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, and so forth while all the while knowing that Christ has atoned for my sins that I am sure to commit along the way.

Jay53,
My point was and is that I deliberately choose the fall (not sin per se, but the condition of experiencing choices in life and realizing that I will sometimes, often, choose in a way that is imperfect–I will be a “sinner” and will need repentance and will need Christ’s atonement). I choose the fall because I realize that I could not progress without such a fall–that I would not react perfectly and would not gain wisdom were it not that I can learn wisdom by being in a position to make choices and learn from making them.

How many times did Paul have to write that “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” for it to sink in that God is not “offended” by the fact that humankind sin, but is offended when they either judge others or do not forgive others or do not seek repentance in their own life? The atonement of Christ is about repentance and forgiveness through Christ. It is about making progress through making changes for the better, and learning all the while. The fall was about making progress also–but not if one is not willing to even accept that the fall led to a condition where the atonement could work its inestimable and infinite work in behalf of humankind, as they accepted grace and sought to apply grace in their lives.

The atonement and the gospel are not about “oh no–I am going to offend God if I step out the door, I had better stay home or stay cloistered or stay in a cocoon.”

 

[zaffiroborant]

Questioner,
I suppose that you will want to provide several Biblical examples of how wisdom descended from God to people when they merely asked for it and had had no life experiences (including some kind of suffering or hardship or tests of faith) to provide context for their “wisdom”.

LOL at the irony

 

[ParkerD]

LOL at the irony

Zaffiroborant,
Seriously–I would accept an example or several from you also, showing that God intended “wisdom” to have descended upon humankind with the mere asking for it, and showing it by examples that it actually happened that way during Biblical history.

 

[TheQuestioner]

Questioner,
I suppose that you will want to provide several Biblical examples of how wisdom descended from God to people when they merely asked for it and had had no life experiences (including some kind of suffering or hardship or tests of faith) to provide context for their “wisdom”.

1 Kings 3

3 Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of his father David; only, he sacrificed and offered incense at the high places. 4The king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there, for that was the principal high place; Solomon used to offer a thousand burnt-offerings on that altar. 5At Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night; and God said, ‘Ask what I should give you.’ 6And Solomon said, ‘You have shown great and steadfast love to your servant my father David, because he walked before you in faithfulness, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart towards you; and you have kept for him this great and steadfast love, and have given him a son to sit on his throne today. 7And now, O Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David, although I am only a little child; I do not know how to go out or come in. 8And your servant is in the midst of the people whom you have chosen, a great people, so numerous they cannot be numbered or counted. 9Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, able to discern between good and evil; for who can govern this your great people?’
10 It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. 11God said to him, ‘Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches, or for the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, 12I now do according to your word. Indeed I give you a wise and discerning mind; no one like you has been before you and no one like you shall arise after you. 13I give you also what you have not asked, both riches and honour all your life; no other king shall compare with you. 14If you will walk in my ways, keeping my statutes and my commandments, as your father David walked, then I will lengthen your life.’

 

[ParkerD]

1 Kings 3

3 Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of his father David; only, he sacrificed and offered incense at the high places. 4The king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there, for that was the principal high place; Solomon used to offer a thousand burnt-offerings on that altar. 5At Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night; and God said, ‘Ask what I should give you.’ 6And Solomon said, ‘You have shown great and steadfast love to your servant my father David, because he walked before you in faithfulness, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart towards you; and you have kept for him this great and steadfast love, and have given him a son to sit on his throne today. 7And now, O Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David, although I am only a little child; I do not know how to go out or come in. 8And your servant is in the midst of the people whom you have chosen, a great people, so numerous they cannot be numbered or counted. 9Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, able to discern between good and evil; for who can govern this your great people?’
10 It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. 11God said to him, ‘Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches, or for the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, 12I now do according to your word. Indeed I give you a wise and discerning mind; no one like you has been before you and no one like you shall arise after you. 13I give you also what you have not asked, both riches and honour all your life; no other king shall compare with you. 14If you will walk in my ways, keeping my statutes and my commandments, as your father David walked, then I will lengthen your life.’

Questioner,
If you have sincerely read 1 Kings 1 and 1 Kings 2 before reading 1 Kings 3, then you will have found situations where Solomon was experiencing opposition to his leadership. He also observes in verse 6 that he has learned from the experiences of his father, David, who had “faithfulness” but that means it is because he had choices whether to be “faithful” or no, whether to be “upright of heart” or no. It means Solomon had context for his wisdom by having observed the choices of his father, David.

If you have read Proverbs 1 including verse 30, “…they despised all my reproof” then you will have noticed that Solomon has context for his wisdom that includes observing the choices made by “sinners” (v. 10), and the results of those choices which included that those “sinners” “despised all my reproof.”

Proverbs 2:4 calls knowledge and understanding qualities that need to be sought for “as for hid treasures.”

Proverbs 3:7 says “fear the Lord, and depart from evil.” This means there is an existent choice whether to do evil, or not. Then in verse 11 Solomon writes “despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction: For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.”

This means that Solomon had learned about wisdom by observing that the Lord does chasten and does provide correction, and this implies that a person receiving that chastening and that correcting has made some wrong choices during their life and has “listened” when they received chastening but thus there was a situation where they could make a choice and indeed made a wrong choice and learned from it, by listening to the Lord and His correction. This matches Proverbs 9:8 where we read, “rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.”

Why does a “wise man” need rebuking in the first place? Because he didn’t do the one perfect thing given a choice or a decision or an opportunity to learn, or whatever. The point is, a “wise man” is one who is willing to be “rebuked” and still love the “rebuker.”

Proverbs is full of contrasts between the wicked and the righteous, and never does Proverbs imply that if there had been no fall of Adam and Eve, there would have been a descending of wisdom to humankind with no condition of choices and condition of needing “rebuking” during the process of life.

 

[larkin31]

The story is allegorical. The affect of the tree did not come from the fruit. What the tree represented was the choice to disobey God. Thus, even if God had stopped them, because their final intent was to disobey God and they truly intended to do it they would have sinned in their hearts anyway and still have fallen. (this is all assuming the story is literal)

Mankind has free will, and thus is allowed to choose or reject God. There are consequences for rejecting God, these are natural. So God did not blame them for doing something they had the power to do, but for making a choice they should not have made (to turn away from Him). Because mankind was made to love God (has a mold in the heart which God perfectly fits into), to turn away from this means the natural consequence of evil and suffering.

do you mean that the tree was NOT a tree of “the knowledge of good and evil”? And the other was NOT a “tree of life”? God calls them this. But he does not mean it?

 

[Jay53]

Jay53,
My point was and is that I deliberately choose the fall (not sin per se, but the condition of experiencing choices in life and realizing that I will sometimes, often, choose in a way that is imperfect–I will be a “sinner” and will need repentance and will need Christ’s atonement). I choose the fall because I realize that I could not progress without such a fall–that I would not react perfectly and would not gain wisdom were it not that I can learn wisdom by being in a position to make choices and learn from making them.

How many times did Paul have to write that “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” for it to sink in that God is not “offended” by the fact that humankind sin, but is offended when they either judge others or do not forgive others or do not seek repentance in their own life? The atonement of Christ is about repentance and forgiveness through Christ. It is about making progress through making changes for the better, and learning all the while. The fall was about making progress also–but not if one is not willing to even accept that the fall led to a condition where the atonement could work its inestimable and infinite work in behalf of humankind, as they accepted grace and sought to apply grace in their lives.

The atonement and the gospel are not about “oh no–I am going to offend God if I step out the door, I had better stay home or stay cloistered or stay in a cocoon.”

Your point is rather moot because “the fall” already happened. We have no choice but to accept that reality and make choices in our lives.

You said:

I choose the fall because I realize that I could not progress without such a fall–that I would not react perfectly and would not gain wisdom were it not that I can learn wisdom by being in a position to make choices and learn from making them.

which seems to mean that in Eve’s place you would make the same choice because you value wisdom over obedience to God and you know that Jesus has redeemed us and atoned for our sins. That is the sin of presumption. I don’t know how else to explain that to you. Someone else quoted this scripture passage which appears to be relevant so I will quote it again:

Mark 8:36-37
"For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul?

"For what will a man give in exchange for his soul?

Wisdom/Acquiring Wisdom is not an end that is worth disobedience to God.

 

[ParkerD]

Your point is rather moot because “the fall” already happened. We have no choice but to accept that reality and make choices in our lives.

You said:

Quote:
I choose the fall because I realize that I could not progress without such a fall–that I would not react perfectly and would not gain wisdom were it not that I can learn wisdom by being in a position to make choices and learn from making them.

Jay53,
So it appears you disagree with Proverbs and disagree with Solomon who was told by God that he would be given wisdom? (If you have a chance, you could read my response to Questioner.)

It would seem important to quote the specific scripture that teaches about the idea of the “sin of presumption” if one is going to base their decision making about how to approach life and its decisions using that idea as its basis. That is certainly not taught by the Savior in Mark 8:36-37.

Have a good day.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,
I read your recent post. It is typical, and is exactly an example of what I meant. It is a waste of my time to respond to what you wrote.

Well thank you so much Parker. Obviously it was I that wasted my time. You speak in circles. You “deliberately choose the fall (not sin per se)”. I like to swim without getting wet. There is no fall without sin. You believe that sinning is necessary in order to progress and gain wisdom, yet wisdom is a gift of the Holy Spirit, not a result of experiencing sin. You do not believe that God is offended by sin. Sounds to me like you’re being led down the wrong road. That is all I am trying to say.

You interpret Paul’s words that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” as an indication that God is not offended by our sin. NO! He is making the case for the fact that we all need a Savior, not that the sin is ok.

In one of my previous posts on this thread I asked you a question that you have not answered. It is quite possible that you just missed it so I’ll ask it again. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught that Adam was “Heavenly Father” who brought one of his wives, Eve, to earth with him. I will give the quote if you require it but I know you are aware. Is this the reason you are so adamant about defending Adam and Eve’s case?