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

  • Thread starter Thread starter ParkerD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please explain your interpretation of line 67 which you underlined:

“Before I was afflicted I went astray.”

How do you interpret “afflicted” and what do you think it means to be “afflicted”?

Affliction is also used in line 50 as well, yet you possibly overlooked that.
“This is my comfort in my affliction: for thy word hath quickened me”

I truly don’t think this Psalm means what you are thinking it means because I don’t see any support of your position here. Perhaps your answers to the above questions will help me see your point.
Jay53,
The word “afflict” or “affliction” in those verses means a similar connotation to the word “chasten” in Proverbs 3:12. The connotation is similar to Proverbs 6:23 with the word “reproofs.”

To be afflicted means to be chastened by adversity that brings humility so that the person who has been chastened will be ready to be “quickened” by the word of God and quickened by the Holy Spirit. Until the humility happens, the quickening influence is not likely to happen. Until the person is ready to listen to the correcting message, they are unlikely to figure out that they need to change. So the “affliction”, be it an illness or a “trouble” or a setback of some kind in life, gets the attention of the person such that they can be ready to listen (if they do indeed humble themselves and have faith that God still loves them even in their adverse situation.)

The dictionary definition for “afflict” is to “strike down”, or “to trouble grievously inflicting some great injury or hurt, causing continued pain or mental distress.”

So verse 50 is saying that this Psalmist feels comforted in their affliction through the quickening influence of the word, and that connotes a cause and effect relationship between the two (but only because the Psalmist was humble enough to recognize the Lord’s hand in what was going on.)
 
Jay53,
The word “afflict” or “affliction” in those verses means a similar connotation to the word “chasten” in Proverbs 3:12. The connotation is similar to Proverbs 6:23 with the word “reproofs.”

To be afflicted means to be chastened by adversity that brings humility so that the person who has been chastened will be ready to be “quickened” by the word of God and quickened by the Holy Spirit. Until the humility happens, the quickening influence is not likely to happen. Until the person is ready to listen to the correcting message, they are unlikely to figure out that they need to change. So the “affliction”, be it an illness or a “trouble” or a setback of some kind in life, gets the attention of the person such that they can be ready to listen (if they do indeed humble themselves and have faith that God still loves them even in their adverse situation.)

The dictionary definition for “afflict” is to “strike down”, or “to trouble grievously inflicting some great injury or hurt, causing continued pain or mental distress.”

So verse 50 is saying that this Psalmist feels comforted in their affliction through the quickening influence of the word, and that connotes a cause and effect relationship between the two (but only because the Psalmist was humble enough to recognize the Lord’s hand in what was going on.)
OK. I would agree. How does that translate into meaning that Adam & Eve had to disobey God/sin in order to gain wisdom? And how does that translate into they couldn’t have children until they sinned? :confused:

(There was no suffering/affliction before they disobeyed God and took on the fallen nature/propensity to sin. If the verses I posted show that we (in our sinful state) can gain wisdom by keeping the commandments, how was it different for Adam & Eve before the fall - that you believe they were unable to gain that wisdom?)
 
To the general reader:

I suppose that I need to again clarify for the benefit of anyone who happens to read bits and pieces of this thread, that when it is brought up about sexual sins such as adultery as though that is something to be tolerated and “learned wisdom from”, then that is a ludicrous example as I have previously noted. Adam and Eve were not dealing with a sin of adultery, and any sort of thinking along those lines has not only never been part of my thinking, but I think anyone who is that selfish and out of control of their own behavior needs more than repentance in their life–they need to re-learn basic human decency and self-control.

As one seeks to be lifted up by Christ and become sanctified by the Spirit, they are going to encounter hidden areas of their life that they need to “work on” through repentance, and those sins are not the obvious ones–they are the subtle ones like using the wrong tone of voice in interaction with loved ones, misjudging others, not using time in service to others but perhaps seeking self-entertainment instead, practicing poor health habits, spending money on frivolous things, not being patient with others’ mistakes, and a host of other things that a lot of people need to work on–self included (except that my money spending is the reverse in that I don’t spend money on anything beyond family basics and sometimes that means I am too tight with the finances.)
I don’t believe adultery is a ludicrous example as you allege here. You have to remember that Adam & Eve did not have the “10 commandments” as they were given to Moses. They only had a couple: “Be fruitful and multiply” and “Do not eat of the tree of knowledge”. Why do you think Adam & Eve breaking one of those commandment is any more acceptable than us breaking one of the 10 commandments?
 
It seems this has been the key question from the beginning. Have we ever received a Biblical non-verbose answer to this?
This will be as non-verbose as I can make it:

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband…

Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

“Multiply” would mean “greatly increase the likelihood of”.

“Desire” to thy husband would mean (you figure it out).
 
Questioner,
What I will admit is that we are not even in the same world with our thoughts. I allow that you can have whatever world you choose to have, but it is so far off of being scripturally based and what you have said about me is so off base that we have no communication going on so to try and do so is entirely futile. I don’t care what you think about me or my choices in life or the fact that I admit I commit communication sins with those I love, and fall short and need the Redeemer and His redeeming grace and am grateful for His grace beyond my ability to express.

You have the world you choose to have–but it’s not my world. We are worlds apart, and haven’t communicated from square one. I simply can’t help that situation, though I tried.
No, there is only one world and one truth. I believe it is one way and you believe it is another. You have yet to show me adequate evidence for your beliefs.

You have not shown me that the fall was God-willed
You have not shown me that wisdom has to necessarily come from suffering
You have not shown me that sin is OK with God
You have not shown me that death in and of itself are good things
You have not argued well against the biblical passages showing the very opposite of these opinions (i’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn’t see them, check out posts 297 and 298)

What you are basically saying is “we disagree on these points so lets not discuss them anymore”, but I am trying to reach the very root of your beliefs and I have seen that they all stand on those fundamental points, all of which have no biblical evidence and actually stand in contradiction to the bible. Instead of further trying to show me that they don’t you are simply choosing to ignore me. You’re not even admitting defeat.

I’m not too sure you understand how a discussion works. If you realize you are wrong then admit it. Don’t simply ignore a poster. This shows stubbornness in your approaches and dishonesty in your style of debate.
 
This will be as non-verbose as I can make it:

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband…

Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

“Multiply” would mean “greatly increase the likelihood of”.

“Desire” to thy husband would mean (you figure it out).
I’m going to interject here.
  1. If multiply means “greatly increase the likelihood of” then what God is saying to Eve is that He will increase the likelihood of her conceptions. This doesn’t mean that she couldn’t have had children before the fall.In fact it would imply the opposite. How do you increase the likelihood of an event that would never happen?
  2. If multiply means to take what is one and make it many (a more accurate and classical/dictionary definition) then how do you multiply 0?
I have no idea what Genesis 4 was supposed to hint toward.

Also, the ‘desire’ of women for their husband could easily (and traditionally) mean that they would have to submit to their husbands, and work to please him.
 
No, there is only one world and one truth. I believe it is one way and you believe it is another. You have yet to show me adequate evidence for your beliefs.

You have not shown me that the fall was God-willed
You have not shown me that wisdom has to necessarily come from suffering
You have not shown me that sin is OK with God
You have not shown me that death in and of itself are good things
You have not argued well against the biblical passages showing the very opposite of these opinions (i’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn’t see them, check out posts 297 and 298)

What you are basically saying is “we disagree on these points so lets not discuss them anymore”, but I am trying to reach the very root of your beliefs and I have seen that they all stand on those fundamental points, all of which have no biblical evidence and actually stand in contradiction to the bible. Instead of further trying to show me that they don’t you are simply choosing to ignore me. You’re not even admitting defeat.

I’m not too sure you understand how a discussion works. If you realize you are wrong then admit it. Don’t simply ignore a poster. This shows stubbornness in your approaches and dishonesty in your style of debate.
Questioner,
I have been far from stubborn. I have given very ample support and evidence from the Bible for the positions I have explained. The reason I stopped answering your assertions is that you showed no evidence of “listening”, and thus showed no evidence of being able to understand what I was saying–so it seemed to be a useless and futile exercise to continue presenting what I had already presented.

If you have one question, or have one point from your reading of the Bible that specifically deals with the issues I have explained, then I am happy to discuss that one question or one point.
 
I’m going to interject here.
  1. If multiply means “greatly increase the likelihood of” then what God is saying to Eve is that He will increase the likelihood of her conceptions. This doesn’t mean that she couldn’t have had children before the fall.In fact it would imply the opposite. How do you increase the likelihood of an event that would never happen?
  2. If multiply means to take what is one and make it many (a more accurate and classical/dictionary definition) then how do you multiply 0?
I have no idea what Genesis 4 was supposed to hint toward.

Also, the ‘desire’ of women for their husband could easily (and traditionally) mean that they would have to submit to their husbands, and work to please him.
First, I hope no Catholic women read your last comment, or if they do I hope they realize it is a completely wrong idea.

You might consider asking a woman who is also a mother to explain what “thy desire shall be to thy husband” would mean in consideration of having children by a marriage relationship.

“Increase the likelihood of” may not mean they could not have had children before the fall–absolutely correct.👍
 
This will be as non-verbose as I can make it:

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband…

Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

“Multiply” would mean “greatly increase the likelihood of”.

“Desire” to thy husband would mean (you figure it out).
Funny how you skipped right over the words “thy sorrow” in Genesis 3:16, particularly if you also look at the other translations of that verse.
Genesis 3:16 (New International Version)
16 To the woman he said,
“I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
with pain you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”
Genesis 3:16 (New American Standard Bible)
16To the woman He said,
“I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you will (A)bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And (B)he will rule over you.”
Genesis 3:16 (New Living Translation)
16 Then he said to the woman,
“I will sharpen the pain of your pregnancy,
and in pain you will give birth.
And you will desire to control your husband,
but he will rule over you.[a]”
If you will notice, the overwhelming theme is that it is the “pain” that will be multiplied and increased - thus the orginal plan was for no or very little pain during childbirth - NOT that they couldn’t have children at all.

I can attest (and I’m sure your wife can as well ;)) that there is excruciating pain in childbirth.
 
I don’t believe adultery is a ludicrous example as you allege here. You have to remember that Adam & Eve did not have the “10 commandments” as they were given to Moses. They only had a couple: “Be fruitful and multiply” and “Do not eat of the tree of knowledge”. Why do you think Adam & Eve breaking one of those commandment is any more acceptable than us breaking one of the 10 commandments?
Personally, my issue is that the commandment not to eat of the fruit is a manipulative one. It is baseless, as a rule. “Don’t understand good from evil” is the command. Or, simply, “Don’t eat from that tree because I said so.” Both those purposes are hard to justify permanent suffering and mortality for ALL further generations of humanity. And painful childbirth!
 
This will be as non-verbose as I can make it:

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband…

Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

“Multiply” would mean “greatly increase the likelihood of”.

“Desire” to thy husband would mean (you figure it out).
Thank you for being straight to the point of the argument.

Multiply does not mean the increased likelihood of something.
Multiply - to increase in number especially greatly or in multiples
It means the increase of something.

I found three different ways this verse has been translated. It seems clear what is multiplied is the pain of having children. Which clearly indicates children were possible without labor pains before Eve sinned; therefore children were possible before the fall.

A. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

B. Unto the woman He said: ‘I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy travail (labor); in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.’

C. To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

I’m not sure how Genesis 4:1 fits into your argument.
 
First, I hope no Catholic women read your last comment, or if they do I hope they realize it is a completely wrong idea.

You might consider asking a woman who is also a mother to explain what “thy desire shall be to thy husband” would mean in consideration of having children by a marriage relationship.

“Increase the likelihood of” may not mean they could not have had children before the fall–absolutely correct.👍
Yeah, great job. Attack the poster and not his argument:shrug:.
 
Questioner,
I have been far from stubborn. I have given very ample support and evidence from the Bible for the positions I have explained. The reason I stopped answering your assertions is that you showed no evidence of “listening”, and thus showed no evidence of being able to understand what I was saying–so it seemed to be a useless and futile exercise to continue presenting what I had already presented.

If you have one question, or have one point from your reading of the Bible that specifically deals with the issues I have explained, then I am happy to discuss that one question or one point.
But I have been listening, and the evidence you presented has not been adequate. Instead of admitting that you are choosing to ignore me.

Listen, I get it. You want to defend Mormon doctrine, but the issue is that when it was written in the book of Nephi that the fall had to happen in order for there to be Children (says nothing specifically about wisdom) it caused a theological problem. If God wanted the man and woman to multiply, but also didn’t want them to disobey Him then they could not fulfill both commandments. The Mormon solution is to say Adam and Eve chose the lesser of two evils, though both were still evil since they went against God. Basically God set them up to fail. So the only way to fix the second theological problem is to say that God knew they would fail and was ok with that and/or God was really giving them a choice. The problem with both solutions is that neither of them make sense.

If the first is true then God is a God with arbitrary commandments. He left them with two contradicting commandments, and one could not be fulfilled without breaking the other. Either way they would be punished. It would be a completely unfair situation set up by an unfair God.

If the second is true then the scriptures are lying since God gives them the explicit command not to eat the fruit and also to multiply. If it was really a choice then you cannot trust the creation story.

Now here is the reason why you will have a hard time with people on this forum Parker. Without the Book of Nephi there is no dilemma to start with. You will have to create a dilemma like “the need to gain wisdom through suffering” or “the ability to have children”, but that dilemma doesn’t exist when only the bible is taken into account. It won’t work with anyone here and it would be hard to convince anyone.

Now if Mormons have not figured out this dilemma then it is your job to help them out as a Mormon, but don’t create false dilemmas that have never ever been taught or existed for those who do not use the BoM in order for it to seem like everyone has this dilemma.
 
Funny how you skipped right over the words “thy sorrow” in Genesis 3:16, particularly if you also look at the other translations of that verse.

If you will notice, the overwhelming theme is that it is the “pain” that will be multiplied and increased - thus the orginal plan was for no or very little pain during childbirth - NOT that they couldn’t have children at all.

I can attest (and I’m sure your wife can as well ;)) that there is excruciating pain in childbirth.
Jay53,
I would be interested in your observation of what the words “thy desire shall be to thy husband” mean in the context of Genesis 3:16.

As far as the other translations you cited, I don’t use those nor would I now that I have looked up the Hebrew to English translations that are available online. The word “conception” could be rendered “travail” but it wouldn’t be left out entirely in a true-to-the-Hebrew translation. (Maybe some of the modern translators left it out because it created ambiguity in that “travail” can mean “parturition” or “act of giving birth” or it can mean “intense pain and agony” or it can mean “toil”. They instead focused entirely on the first word, using the translation “pain” which is indeed true to the Hebrew in lieu of “sorrow” but there is still the separate word to deal with.)

If you didn’t think I had been very much aware of the word “sorrow” and that there is pain in childbirth, then that was not a correct thought. I focused on the word “conception” because the two are joined together as being “greatly multiplied” so one needs to spend time figuring out the meaning whereas the word “sorrow” or “pain” has a pretty clear meaning in and of itself.

In any case, if when a woman is having her baby, she is thinking something along the lines of “if Eve hadn’t sinned, this would be so much easier!” then I think she would resent God as much as she would resent Eve, since the consequence of “death” did not necessarily imply “pain” but “gaining wisdom” may be logically assumed to mean it would involve pain since someone who experiences a lot of pain will logically be more compassionate and perhaps more tender-hearted than someone who has had minimal pain in their life. Having had kidney stones a few times, I can attest of the intense pain but can also attest that I can feel more compassion toward someone who says they are suffering intense pain.

If you or anyone believes that a serious goal of this life is to become like Christ, then it would seem that having to undergo a great deal of pain in life would be “part of the package”. I sense that women are generally more compassionate than men: perhaps one learns one of the reasons why in Genesis 3:16.

An LDS belief is that Christ bore our pains, sorrows, weaknesses and travails, as well as our sins during His atoning sacrifice, and that He has all the more compassion for us and helps us endure our pains and sorrows by helping us get through them through His succor as well as sometimes lifting them from us, and that ultimately He will “wipe away all tears” from our eyes through His atoning grace.

I think these experiences increase our gratitude for Him and for what He went through for us, besides enabling increased compassion and sensitivity to the pains and trails of others. (That would be gaining wisdom.)
 
But I have been listening, and the evidence you presented has not been adequate. Instead of admitting that you are choosing to ignore me.

Listen, I get it. You want to defend Mormon doctrine, but the issue is that when it was written in the book of Nephi that the fall had to happen in order for there to be Children (says nothing specifically about wisdom) it caused a theological problem. If God wanted the man and woman to multiply, but also didn’t want them to disobey Him then they could not fulfill both commandments. The Mormon solution is to say Adam and Eve chose the lesser of two evils, though both were still evil since they went against God. Basically God set them up to fail. So the only way to fix the second theological problem is to say that God knew they would fail and was ok with that and/or God was really giving them a choice. The problem with both solutions is that neither of them make sense.

If the first is true then God is a God with arbitrary commandments. He left them with two contradicting commandments, and one could not be fulfilled without breaking the other. Either way they would be punished. It would be a completely unfair situation set up by an unfair God.

If the second is true then the scriptures are lying since God gives them the explicit command not to eat the fruit and also to multiply. If it was really a choice then you cannot trust the creation story.

Now here is the reason why you will have a hard time with people on this forum Parker. Without the Book of Nephi there is no dilemma to start with. You will have to create a dilemma like “the need to gain wisdom through suffering” or “the ability to have children”, but that dilemma doesn’t exist when only the bible is taken into account. It won’t work with anyone here and it would be hard to convince anyone.

Now if Mormons have not figured out this dilemma then it is your job to help them out as a Mormon, but don’t create false dilemmas that have never ever been taught or existed for those who do not use the BoM in order for it to seem like everyone has this dilemma.
Questioner,
I chose to ignore you because you did not deal with the issues that I presented in answer to your assertion that Solomon gained wisdom without observation of the world around him.

The dilemma presented in the Bible is there for the reading. Just because you don’t “get it” doesn’t mean it isn’t there. I realize that it isn’t there for you to find–which is just fine. I have been trying to convey that the most important of God’s gifts is the gift of free will and choice–so choose as you wish.

The Book of Mormon does not say the fall had to happen in order for there to be children. It says (2 Nephi 2):
22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.
23 And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.
24 But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.
25 Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.
26 And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the commandments which God hath given.
27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.
28 And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit;

The words are “would have had no children”. This is similar to an expression Eve made as recorded in Moses 5:11, that she was glad in that they knew the “joy of our redemption” and otherwise “never should have had seed.”

The words “would” or “should” do not mean the same thing as the word “could”. The words “would” or “should” leave out the “why”, so the “why” could be that Eve was not menstruating until after the fall, or that they did not experience puberty until after the fall, or that Eve had no “desire toward being with Adam in a knowing way, and he with her, until after the fall when they were given those desires.”

But the most important thing you have said is that no one feels any sense of the kind of dilemma I have written about on this thread, so it would seem this thread should be about two pages long, right? (In other words, if people stop asking questions or making comments, I will certainly stop trying to answer the questions.)

Peace to all.
 
You have to remember that Adam & Eve did not have the “10 commandments” as they were given to Moses. They only had a couple: “Be fruitful and multiply” and “Do not eat of the tree of knowledge”. Why do you think Adam & Eve breaking one of those commandment is any more acceptable than us breaking one of the 10 commandments?
Jay53,
I sincerely think Larkin31 has shown more insight in looking at the situation in the garden of Eden with an honest perspective, than to say those two commandments are the same as the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are about gaining personal and societal happiness through obedience to God. They give a foundation for the best way (only way) to gain happiness.

I certainly agree that “be fruitful and multiply” is a way to move toward gaining happiness if one also has a compatible and “help meet” marriage. But “do not eat of the tree of knowledge” does not imply that that leads to gaining happiness. It actually implies a restriction against gaining true and honest happiness. To have no knowledge yet think one is truly happy is to be living in either an imaginary world or be living like Eliza Doolittle, in a garden oblivious to the outside world and the greater knowledge that is in the outside world, including the understanding that language and its proper use bring a whole set of opportunities for gaining wisdom by reading and thinking about the experiences and ideas of the human race over the centuries. To think of the loss of wisdom that would be extent in a world with no pain, no real work, no challenges to the intellect as to overcoming painful or frustrating circumstances or growing from them, no literary greatness through the minds of men and women dealing with the complexities of life–I just don’t look at that kind of a world as one that appeals to me.

So choosing knowledge and wisdom is a far different thing than choosing the happiness that comes from obeying the 10 commandments. I don’t think a valid comparison can be made that says they are similar situations, if one seriously considers the implications.
 
OK. I would agree. How does that translate into meaning that Adam & Eve had to disobey God/sin in order to gain wisdom? And how does that translate into they couldn’t have children until they sinned? :confused:

(There was no suffering/affliction before they disobeyed God and took on the fallen nature/propensity to sin. If the verses I posted show that we (in our sinful state) can gain wisdom by keeping the commandments, how was it different for Adam & Eve before the fall - that you believe they were unable to gain that wisdom?)
Jay53,
The beautiful Psalm you cited and I cited (Psalm 119) does imply that we show wisdom as we keep the commandments, but it also shows that the Psalmist “got to that point in his life” by having been “afflicted” from having “gone astray like a lost sheep.” (That reminds of Isaiah 53:6, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way.”)

Eve and Adam were unable to gain wisdom until they saw the choices that were available to them, and actually made a knowledgeable choice when placed into the position of being able to see the choices and make them. Certainly, keeping the 10 commandments is the “right choice”–but it is a choice among other possible choices.

Wisdom can come by working one’s way out of the difficulty of having made a wrong choice in life, or by reading the experiences of others (history), or by trying to be “perfect” and then, realizing we are not perfect, coming unto Christ and allowing Him to change us so we can really, truly, become better people than we would ever be able to be in and of ourselves “doing our own thing”. I think it is safe to assume that Eve did indeed enjoy her opportunity to gain wisdom as she made choices in her life that had been unavailable to her prior to her fall. She went from innocence to the gaining of knowledge and the gaining of experience through suffering.

I think we’ve pretty much covered the “having children” question. It was not a “could” situation. It was a “would they have?” situation, to which we have assumptions but not an answer from the Bible.

Have a good day.
 
Jay53,
The beautiful Psalm you cited and I cited (Psalm 119) does imply that we show wisdom as we keep the commandments, but it also shows that the Psalmist “got to that point in his life” by having been “afflicted” from having “gone astray like a lost sheep.” (That reminds of Isaiah 53:6, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way.”)

Eve and Adam were unable to gain wisdom until they saw the choices that were available to them, and actually made a knowledgeable choice when placed into the position of being able to see the choices and make them. Certainly, keeping the 10 commandments is the “right choice”–but it is a choice among other possible choices.

Wisdom can come by working one’s way out of the difficulty of having made a wrong choice in life, or by reading the experiences of others (history), or by trying to be “perfect” and then, realizing we are not perfect, coming unto Christ and allowing Him to change us so we can really, truly, become better people than we would ever be able to be in and of ourselves “doing our own thing”. I think it is safe to assume that Eve did indeed enjoy her opportunity to gain wisdom as she made choices in her life that had been unavailable to her prior to her fall. She went from innocence to the gaining of knowledge and the gaining of experience through suffering.

I think we’ve pretty much covered the “having children” question. It was not a “could” situation. It was a “would they have?” situation, to which we have assumptions but not an answer from the Bible.

Have a good day.
Parker

I think I’ve exhausted trying to help you understand. I realize that you have Mormon doctrines that you believe and have to defend which influences your reasoning. There is no evidence in the Bible that Adam and Eve would not have had children without disobeying God. Your assertions regarding that come from “other” scripture.

The bottom line that I keep coming back to is that you think it is acceptable to disobey God if the ends are worthy enough. You think it is OK that Adam & Eve disobeyed God’s commandment because you think they wanted wisdom. You also seem to think that God intentionally wanted Adam & Eve to sin - either by disobeying the commandment to eat of the tree or disobeying the commandment to be fruitful and multiply. Sin is not OK with God. He would not deliberately put Adam & Eve in that position. The ends don’t justify the means for any of us. (Thus my example about embryonic stem cell research which I don’t think you understood.)

I’ve tried different ways to help you see this, but obviously to no avail. After seeing the actual passages in Nephi that were quoted, I understand your reluctance better - you have that scripture to defend. 🤷

Have a good day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top