Hi,
This has been an interesting thread, and one that has remained remarkable on topic. (well except, maybe the (#1) kids or no kids in Eden sidebar, or the did the “no death rule” include cellular death?
)
My sense of the answer from the responding LDS(s) perspectives, (If I got it right) is
(#2) - God allowed the fall, but did not “will” it.
(In this case, to “will” it means “to make it happen”).
But it seems that God did “want” it. Because he had
this great gift that had meaning
only if we really
needed it, which was the case after the fall.
Code:
So at least his plan *relied* on it.
Other interesting points from the LDS vantage point:
- Adam and Eve chose their course of action freely and purposefully
- at least Eve thought it a good idea, and probably did so even afterward.
As there were no challenges and therefore no overcoming of challenges
so it may have been monotonous.
After the fall life became a struggle that could be won and that gave
existence a new meaning, And the choice should even be celebrated.
- Adam and Eve were ‘enlightened’ by the event.
(#3) - the choice of disobedience was compared with other choices in human history where
the status quo (or oppression) was challenged *. (I struggle with
this because I have a hard time thinking of Eden as having an oppressive regime
that needed to be overthrown.)
Thought provoking points to be sure, but they’re from a very “human” angle, and it
has a feel of rationalization.
also
(#4) - the notion that pride wasn’t a factor was stated, yet there was an immediate shifting of blame which to me smacks of pride. (Believe me I know
) i.e. Adam–“the woman that you (God) gave me, made me do it” and Eve–“the serpent made me do it” didn’t get a lot of discussion.
This is just me talking!
thanks,
-kc*
Kikkichan,
Thank you again for writing with such clear use of language and such good, valuable questions and re-stating. The issues you have raised are significant.
(#1) I suppose you had recognized that the “kids no kids in Eden” pertained directly to the topic because Adam and Eve had received the commandment to “be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” yet the Book of Mormon verses cited includes the phrase “they must have remained forever, and had no end. And they would have had no children;”
This may seem like “another guess” about their condition before the fall, and does leave a big question unanswered which is, “why would they have had no children?” I think it is guesswork to try and answer that question (was it because they didn’t know how–possibly, although of course we assume instinct would tell them how, but what if instinct wasn’t in their bodies until after they fell to become “mortal humans”?) (Or was it because Eve’s body was not yet active in releasing an egg that would die?–that was what I was alluding to as a possibility.)
I was suggesting that they had received a commandment that they were not yet actively “keeping” since they hadn’t had children yet, so the fall does appear to me to be part of the whole plan of salvation, planned (i.e. foreseen and planned for through Adam and Eve whom God knew personality-wise and could predict what they would do) and then allowed by God as an act of free agency by each of them.
I agree with your re-statement which I identified as #2. The “great gift” was of course the atonement and crucifixion of Jesus Christ to allow for humankind to sin and yet to return to the presence of God as resurrected persons. God being perfect could not do something that would bring forth or eventuate acts of sin by His children or any spirit. He could create human beings and allow them to sin, but by definition of being perfect He would not create human beings who would have human weaknesses such that in all likelihood they would sin, unless He also provided for a perfect way for them to escape the effects of the sins they were likely to commit, but as has been noted they would need to turn toward Christ and love Him with all of their hearts and ask forgiveness for those sins.
I am saying that I completely believe that God planned for this likelihood of sin, by planning for the atonement of Jesus Christ during the pre-mortal period when He planned for the earth to be created and for humankind to be brought into being from their pre-mortal condition as spirits. I think Peter alludes to this foreordained plan when he wrote in 1 Peter 1:19-20, “But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you. [meaning for everyone]”
(#3) I wasn’t meaning that the garden of Eden was oppressive at all–it was a “free will” condition of existence. By Adam adhering to the “status quo” I meant that he wanted to obey all of God’s commandments as best he could (leaving things well enough alone), and liked what they were doing in the garden of Eden such that he didn’t seem to question whether there was something more to life than their innocent condition, as Eve seems to have questioned and therefore been susceptible to being tempted by the serpent.
I don’t think it’s rationalization to explain these profound possibilities for how the fall of Adam and Eve was planned for and “relied on” as a step forward into their unknown but into God’s known, meaning God knew it was likely to happen because Eve had a personality with curiosity and “longing for more” and Adam was willing to keep the commandment that implied he should stay with Eve even though it meant they would both die.
To be continued for item #4.
That you believe this is sad Parker. God does not desire that we disobey Him in order to gain wisdom. I hope you can learn to not believe this.