Question about BoM on Original Sin

[majick275]

Majick275,
I think if I have understood what I have read about “catholic dogma of original sin,” that I agree there really is no equivalent in Mormon doctrine.

i agree

I suppose a person may get fuller understanding or they may get misunderstanding from the LDS temple ceremony, but the standard works of LDS scripture contain the full doctrine about the fall of Adam and Eve.

well it has always been the position of the LDS leadership that only in the temple can one achieve “full” understanding of the scriptures but for arguments sake we can probably find most of the material in LDS scriptures.

I am going to clarify some of your statements. I don’t think Eve thought she would “have the same knowledge God has” or thought “she will not die”.

perhaps i wasn’t clear in my brevity. Satan first tells her (when she protests that if she eats the fruit she will die) “You shall not surely die but shall be as the Gods, knowing good and evil”. he next tells her it will make her wise and finally tells her that this how God obtained his knowledge. he tells her there is no other way to obtain knowledge. THEN she eats it. we may differ in opinion on the specifics of her expectation but it appears that the she eats the fruit to get the knowledge.

She heard the words of temptation, but that doesn’t mean she thought they were true. She was thinking and evaluating. Genesis 3:6 is clear that what she wanted was what would “make one wise”. She wanted wisdom, but knew that God had given a commandment that she was breaking and therefore would die.

she must have believed some of it or she would not have broken the commandment. i find it of importance that while the “as far as it is translated correctly” bible account here says wisdom where the “divinely revealed” account uses knowledge.

I think it is unfair to say that Eve manipulates Adam into eating the fruit. She restates the consequence for her and restates the other commandment they had received. She lets him think about it. This is not manipulative at all. Adam could choose to feel manipulated, or he could recognize that what she was saying was precisely true and he could choose to eat the fruit knowing that such a choice was the best thing for him to do given the circumstances.

Adam initially tells her he will not partake. if he had true faith then he would know that God could provide another spouse…a worthy one. Eve now has her “eyes opened” and knows even more than Adam that this is true. yet she leads him to believe that he is already disobedient to Gods commandments and can only choose in which way he will sin. i think her performance here is very self serving. remember that she does this immediately upon Satan telling her to get Adam to eat the fruit.

I agree that spirits and intelligences make choices that result in their progress, but I think we don’t know much at all about how other worlds’ conditions are. Choices and potential for wrong choices must exist, so perhaps your statement of inference is correct.

we know the underlying principles that LDS doctrine requires. so while we may not know the specific mechanics (such as how spirit children are born or nurtured) we can state that (within LDS doctrine) it is required that free agency be given, that a tempter be present, that exaltation requires a physical body and a mortal probation, a savior to atone for sin and endless increase for those who are exalted

I think all kingdoms of glory are kingdoms where there will be progress, but in different ways. Glory implies progress, creativity, joy within the limits of the kingdom the person has lived to receive by their choices. How could a kingdom be described as being “glory” if there were no progress in a way that brought a sense of satisfaction and purpose to living forever? “Eternal progression” is different than “eternal progress”. “Eternal progression” implies “eternal increase” by bringing other spirits into a condition where they can advance, but “eternal progress” I think would just mean “progress forever”. Christ wanted that for all of the spirit children of Heavenly Father, and offered it to them by offering Himself as the Savior and Redeemer.

my meaning here is that those who are not exalted will remain in their respective kingdoms. forever unable to go to higher kingdoms, unable to become exalted and especially unable to procreate.

I hope this has clarified a few of your points.

and vice versa

 

[Jerusha]

Parker,

If you could find out what Spalding’s sources were, your counter-argument would have substance. As it is, the book is extremely poorly written, plagirized from many sources. The idea of the book had merit, but many other things would have had to happen before an idea with merit could become a masterpiece.

 

[majick275]

Jerusha,
I think it is more likely that someone like Shakespeare (i.e. someone super-intelligent and a super-writer in disguise) wrote the Book of Mormon than Solomon Spalding (surely you can’t be serious since you surely have studied literature and surely would have made comparisons between the two works before making such a “studied” comment), but even that would be akin to there being another Shakespeare in that it would be one of the greatest perplexities ever to have happened in the history of the world.

The problem Catholics don’t deal with is that the book of Revelation talks repeatedly about becoming joint-heirs with Christ and receiving a throne with Him.

I absolutely agree that the sin of pride is a serious sin. If Christ and the Apostle John hadn’t said what they said or written what is in the Bible, then I wouldn’t believe “receiving a throne” is attainable, but who am I to deny what Christ has promised? What gratitude would I be showing if I were to say, “I don’t believe it–it’s not possible”?

i think you greatly exaggerate the prose in the BoM. it doesn’t even rise to the level of the koran. it includes it’s own caveats on this as it’s alleged writers mention in more than one place that they are NOT writers but merely those called to chronicle the events it contains.the BoM is not a great literary piece…and that’s okay. it doesn’t need to be. but i think it wrong to use this claim to bolster the “it must be true because JS could not have written this” argument. (oliver was involved and so was emma as a minimum) the original was a lot “rougher” too. and that is without resorting to the view of the hebrews or spauldings manuscript.

as to the joint-heirs issue…the catholic view is that we are NOT literal offspring and thus have no RIGHT to inherit. that is why it so amazing that God lifts us up and sets us beside him and allows to enjoy all of his kingdom. we are called joint heirs because we will be denied no part of Gods kingdom (which is all of creation) but it is due to him taking us there and sharing his divinity with us. kind of like a poker in a fireplace. it has the same light and heat as the fire…but only because it is in the fire. it is still a piece of metal. it will never be “fire”

 

[ParkerD]

I believe Adam and Eve had enternal life till the fall. Having said that why would God give them a Tree of Life? They had to be aware of it don’t you think? I think it is a mistake to put it all on Eve.Were in the Bible does it say Adam was not present when the Serpent con her?Christ is the New Adam in the Bible. He died for his Church Eph. 5:22-35. Don’t you think the anology of the NEw Adam could be related to the Old Adam?
Just a thought

Racing59,
I think I understand your points about Christ and the Church being compared with Adam and Eve in their relationships. Adam needed to learn to love and protect and nurture Eve and honor her just as Christ does with the Church. But I don’t think it means Adam needed to be willing to give his life (which he really couldn’t do in the garden of Eden) to protect Eve.

I want to make clear that I do not “blame” Eve for the choice that she made. I think it was a heroic and brave choice–she is a complete success in my book. (I think Adam appears to have been more “status quo” oriented, which certainly describes me personally so perhaps I can relate. I think he had different things on his mind than Eve had on her mind.)

Perhaps Adam was aware Eve was being tempted, but again, I don’t think he would think, “I had better stop this from happening.” He was living in innocence, and if anything he would be opposed to using force or cooercion.

I agree that they were in a condition in the garden of Eden that they would have “lived forever” in a condition that didn’t change from one day to the next, or one year to the next.

Thanks for sharing your perspective and pointing out the analogy in Ephesians.

 

[Cluny]

Don’t expect to find Mormon theology in the Book of Mormon.

It’s been changed over 4.000 times since the first Kirtland edition of 1812 (or thereabouts). Verses were even added in the mid-1980’s that were never in any previous edition.

In fact, many statements of the BofM conflict with revelations in Doctrines and Covenants.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca J,
It is absolutely true that God does not “will sin as necessary.” But He absolutely does “allow sin as a necessary part of mortality for His children, so they can experience opposition and can gain humility and come unto Christ.”

He set up a circumstance where it may appear to us that in the garden of Eden, He “wanted” Adam and Eve to fall. But why is wanting them to have a choice wanting them to fall? He foreknew that they would fall. I suppose one could say that, because of all the spirits waiting to come to earth and progress on earth, He hoped that they would make the choice of eating the forbidden fruit, but He had given a commandment against making that choice for if they did “they would die.” That was the penalty for making the choice. They were carrying out their own will, not His. He cannot “will sin as necessary” because that is against His perfection.

Parker, you are saying here God setup circumstances in Eden where it was necessary for Adam and Eve to disobey God. Which, is a sin. Believing it was pre-destined is not an atmosphere of free will. What you describe is manipulation.

“Hope for failure” is also not an attribute we believe about God.

 

[ParkerD]

I agree.
Well it has always been the position of the LDS leadership that only in the temple can one achieve “full” understanding of the scriptures but for arguments sake we can probably find most of the material in LDS scriptures.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear in my brevity. Satan first tells her (when she protests that if she eats the fruit she will die) “You shall not surely die but shall be as the Gods, knowing good and evil”. He next tells her it will make her wise and finally tells her that this how God obtained his knowledge. He tells her there is no other way to obtain knowledge. THEN she eats it. We may differ in opinion on the specifics of her expectation but it appears that she eats the fruit to get the knowledge.

She must have believed some of it or she would not have broken the commandment. I find it of importance that while the “as far as it is translated correctly” Bible account here says wisdom where the “divinely revealed” account uses knowledge.
Adam initially tells her he will not partake. If he had true faith then he would know that God could provide another spouse…a worthy one. Eve now has her “eyes opened” and knows even more than Adam that this is true. Yet she leads him to believe that he is already disobedient to Gods commandments and can only choose in which way he will sin. I think her performance here is very self serving. Remember that she does this immediately upon Satan telling her to get Adam to eat the fruit.
We know the underlying principles that LDS doctrine requires. So while we may not know the specific mechanics (such as how spirit children are born or nurtured) we can state that (within LDS doctrine) it is required that free agency be given, that a tempter be present, that exaltation requires a physical body and a mortal probation, a savior to atone for sin and endless increase for those who are exalted.
My meaning here is that those who are not exalted will remain in their respective kingdoms. Forever unable to go to higher kingdoms, unable to become exalted and especially unable to procreate.

Majick275,
A lot of material to clarify, but I’ll try.
I disagree about the temple being the place to understand the scriptures. I’ve never had better understanding of them in the temple than in my own home, reading and pondering.

I agree that Eve wants knowledge, or in other words, “wisdom” which I think was a good translation of her intent. I think she realized there was something she wanted that she couldn’t have if she didn’t eat the forbidden fruit, and she was willing to take the risk of not knowing the specifics of how she would die or what else might happen after she ate the fruit. Perhaps she would have eventually “broken the commandment” anyway without the serpent’s temptation. (I don’t know.) He did tempt her, but I think she understood clearly that it meant she was going to die and be cast out of the garden of Eden.

You made an assumption about Adam that I wouldn’t make at all, that “he would know that God could provide another spouse…a worthy one.” I think that is quite incorrect. Adam knew he had been given Eve as a special gift, a helper worthy (“meet”) for his companionship. Why would he turn his back on her now? Maybe this was the first chance he had to begin to understand love and compassion and real companionship, including going through the hard times with someone at your side.

She did counsel with him (a good thing) to help him understand the implications of a difficult choice he had to make. I think her instinctive desire to “mother” the human race guided how she framed the counsel she gave to Adam, but she didn’t force him to make the choice he made, nor cooerce him, nor tell him he was already disobedient at that point. (Maybe she flirted a bit–who knows? )

I honestly don’t have a full picture of the need for a “tempter” to be present, since there won’t be one during the Millenium yet children will be born and live and grow. I have no idea what the conditions are on other worlds with respect to temptations.

As to your last point, I don’t think of “procreate”–I think more of “bring forth” spirit children. As to “unable to go to higher kingdoms,” I agree but it will be because that is precisely what they chose and therefore what they wanted.

I might as well deal with the issue of “pride” here since it has come up. I just can’t get from the text that Adam or Eve were having issues of “pride” or issues of wanting to be “like God” in the ultimate sense. Just because Eve wanted wisdom, what is prideful about that?

As for myself, again I will write my sincere feeling that no way in the world would I “want” to be “as God is” except for the fact that by not hoping for that ultimate condition of joy and love and service only through Christ’s atonement, I would be denying the plainness of several verses of scripture in the Bible, so how that would be considered prideful I just don’t buy into. How is wanting to have the kind of charity and compassion that Christ has prideful? How is wanting to exercise the power of faith such that matter and energy obey because they recognize the pure intent and righteous faith of a person who has received that kind of authority, prideful? Matter and energy would just sit still if faith were exercised in any prideful way at all, even minutely–of course. So there can be no pride involved, absolutely none. Such power would be completely other-centered, and would always glorify and honor God the Father and His Beloved Son.

 

[ParkerD]

Rebecca J,
I simply disagree with your statements. But it’s fine with me for you to have a different opinion about Adam and Eve and the fall.

 

[racing59]

Racing59,
I think I understand your points about Christ and the Church being compared with Adam and Eve in their relationships. Adam needed to learn to love and protect and nurture Eve and honor her just as Christ does with the Church. But I don’t think it means Adam needed to be willing to give his life (which he really couldn’t do in the garden of Eden) to protect Eve.

I want to make clear that I do not “blame” Eve for the choice that she made. I think it was a heroic and brave choice–she is a complete success in my book. (I think Adam appears to have been more “status quo” oriented, which certainly describes me personally so perhaps I can relate. I think he had different things on his mind than Eve had on her mind.)

Perhaps Adam was aware Eve was being tempted, but again, I don’t think he would think, “I had better stop this from happening.” He was living in innocence, and if anything he would be opposed to using force or cooercion.

I agree that they were in a condition in the garden of Eden that they would have “lived forever” in a condition that didn’t change from one day to the next, or one year to the next.

Thanks for sharing your perspective and pointing out the analogy in Ephesians.

Thank you too for being willing to be in an open to discuse Eden. I found your post intresting and thoughtful. I’ve enjoyed it!
God Bless

 

[ParkerD]

Parker, you are saying here God setup circumstances in Eden where it was necessary for Adam and Eve to disobey God. Which, is a sin. Believing it was pre-destined is not an atmosphere of free will. What you describe is manipulation.

“Hope for failure” is also not an attribute we believe about God.

Rebecca J,
I apologize for my short answer previously. I have decided I should have explained rather than just disagree without explaining.

Fore-ordination because God knows all things, including knowing Eve’s personality and disposition, is not predestination. He let them choose whether to obey the command to not eat the forbidden fruit and thus not die, or to disobey that command and thus die but also gain wisdom in the process. It was not manipulative to allow Eve to be tempted, nor was it manipulative to let her think about what she wanted or about her instinctive desire to be a mother.

I think God hopes we will all make good choices, but He is fully aware that we will not always make right choices. Did Eve make a “wrong choice”? I don’t think so, and neither did she after she found out about the Savior and the promise of redemption. She rejoiced! She did not “fail” either herself, Adam, or her eventual posterity. She could have made a different choice, and they would still be there, even now. Perhaps we would be watching or be wondering whether we would ever move beyond where we were.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca J,
I apologize for my short answer previously. I have decided I should have explained rather than just disagree without explaining.

Fore-ordination because God knows all things, including knowing Eve’s personality and disposition, is not predestination. He let them choose whether to obey the command to not eat the forbidden fruit and thus not die, or to disobey that command and thus die but also gain wisdom in the process. It was not manipulative to allow Eve to be tempted, nor was it manipulative to let her think about what she wanted or about her instinctive desire to be a mother.

I think God hopes we will all make good choices, but He is fully aware that we will not always make right choices. Did Eve make a “wrong choice”? I don’t think so, and neither did she after she found out about the Savior and the promise of redemption. She rejoiced! She did not “fail” either herself, Adam, or her eventual posterity. She could have made a different choice, and they would still be there, even now. Perhaps we would be watching or be wondering whether we would ever move beyond where we were.

hi Parker, when God created the world and everything in it, He said it was good. (As God is good.) God created the world as it should be. As He meant it to be.

It is the second easiest thing in the world to see the result of original sin, the evidence is all around you, and no, it is not good. It is not how the world was created. The world is fallen and so are we. God could have left us in our fallen state. It is because of His goodness, His love for us, that He chose to redeem us.

God created the world and lived in it. The fall made the world a place where God could not dwell. God gave Adam and Eve their free will. He commanded them to not eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil. They disobeyed God. Both of them. Satan I am sure was quite satisfied.

The easiest thing in the world to see is that Satan does not have dominion. That, in itself, is yet another lie. God’s remedy brought untold graces into the world. Mormons try to see this as some underlying conspiracy. A complicated plan. God has had only one plan all along, and that is for us, His creation made in His image, to be with Him. That is how He created the world. This is what His Sacrifice renews. That is what every encounter with God in the OT teaches. It is the supreme teaching of the NT.

God is not going to force us to be with Him, and so He gives us free will. In His Mercy He has shown us that even in our sin, His desire is for us to be with Him. This is the Truth of God’s divine mercy and His plan of Salvation.

 

[ParkerD]

hi Parker, when God created the world and everything in it, He said it was good. (As God is good.) God created the world as it should be. As He meant it to be.

It is the second easiest thing in the world to see the result of original sin, the evidence is all around you, and no, it is not good. It is not how the world was created. The world is fallen and so are we. God could have left us in our fallen state. It is because of His goodness, His love for us, that He chose to redeem us.

God created the world and lived in it. The fall made the world a place where God could not dwell. God gave Adam and Eve their free will. He commanded them to not eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil. They disobeyed God. Both of them. Satan I am sure was quite satisfied.

The easiest thing in the world to see is that Satan does not have dominion. That, in itself, is yet another lie. God’s remedy brought untold graces into the world. Mormons try to see this as some underlying conspiracy. A complicated plan. God has had only one plan all along, and that is for us, His creation made in His image, to be with Him. That is how He created the world. This is what His Sacrifice renews. That is what every encounter with God in the OT teaches. It is the supreme teaching of the NT.

God is not going to force us to be with Him, and so He gives us free will. In His Mercy He has shown us that even in our sin, His desire is for us to be with Him. This is the Truth of God’s divine mercy and His plan of Salvation.

Rebecca J,
I sincerely enjoyed reading this. I think it makes sense, except for the aspect that God did plant the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden. Why would He do that, and yet still have done all that He did in the creation and call it “good”? I’m not trying to tease, I just want to understand your underlying belief about that particular element in the creation given what you wrote. (Thanks for writing it.)

 

[chromatica]

Rebecca J,
I sincerely enjoyed reading this. I think it makes sense, except for the aspect that God did plant the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden. Why would He do that, and yet still have done all that He did in the creation and call it “good”? I’m not trying to tease, I just want to understand your underlying belief about that particular element in the creation given what you wrote. (Thanks for writing it.)

God loves us, He desires our love in return. A love that is forced is not really love. If God had created the world without the choice to not love Him, then it is in all basis and reality, a forced love.

Sin is an offense against God. It is a choice made. It is the teaching of Pope John Paul II that the Church has nothing to say to anyone until they understand the love of God.

racing59 and I have discussed this before. If you reduce religion, including the “religion” in Eden, to nothing but following rules, then you have not understood the love of God. To follow God is to do so in freedom, to make the choice to do as He commands because that is how we can show God that we do love Him.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil was not evil itself. It was only a choice, in order the Adam and Eve could love God in freedom.

 

[kikkichan]

Parker,
I have some comments re: some of yourn. But I agree with the OP (original poster ??)
that it’s easy to interpret Nephi as “God willing the fall”. But I’ll get to that.

Rebecca J,
I agree that God (who knows all things past, present, and future) knew that Adam and Eve would partake of the forbidden fruit, and had a plan in place with Jesus Christ as the Foreordained Lamb who would suffer the atonement and the crucifixion in order to redeem all of Heavenly Father’s spirit children from the effects of the fall of Adam and Eve.

I agree, (well, except the part about “spirit children”.) God knew the fall would occur, and still allowed it. Choosing God’s will over one’s own will would have less value, if it weren’t a free will.

…
But God knowing something does not make it His will, and I think He was absolutely deliberate in allowing for choice by Eve and Adam. He also allows each of us to choose, without inhibiting or pre-determining our choices for us.

Still good …

…
There is an important difference between God “desiring” a thing to happen, and God “allowing” a thing to happen. We should never believe God “desires” those actions by His children (many of which are downright bad actions) which He allows. In the case of Adam and Eve,* it did fulfill a future good purpose to allow their choice*, which was fully provided for in His plan for us.

I slightly lost you here. Might just be your wording " … by allowing their choice a future purpose could be fulfilled". Is this just a statement that ’ The choice was allowed, and no matter what choice was made, God had it covered’? Because, it seems that this good purpose required a specific choice or it would have been unfulfilled. Excuse my pedestrian analogy here, but here it is. I have a pet peeve about traffic signals operating where there’s no traffic. Think of traffic lights, in the middle of nowhere as being the effects of original sin. I sometimes have need for a green light. However, if there was no traffic light at all (i.e., no original sin), the unfulfilled need for a green light, no matter how good green lights are, wouldn’t matter. So, in my analogy, the unfulfilled good purpose, no matter how good, wouldn’t matter.

…But that does not mean He desired that they “must” sin. He desired that they “choose for themselves” whether to undergo pain and death and work, or not. He did not impose a choice on them. This can be so instructive for us–as parents, as teachers, or as leaders.

Mostly ok again …, however, work is not a result of the fall.
Genesis 2:15
15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.

Now I have my final point re: the analogy above and 2 Nephi, Chapter 2 22:25
22 … And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created;

Not sure what “same state” Nephi’s referring to. Animals were pro-creating, Adam and Eve had ‘tending’ to do, …

23 *And they would have had no children;*

Not sure why Nephi thinks this, after the fall, child birth was going to become painful, but the fall wasn’t a prerequisite for child birth.

23 … having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

Nephi sounds like he’s guessing. I think he lives in a world where joy comes only as a result of having met a challenge, and he can’t imagine otherwise.

In any case, I don’t believe that Adam and Eve were without joy, or if they were it wasn’t because they hadn’t sinned yet!

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*.

I’ve read most of your comments in this thread and it seems that you believe that God didn’t will the fall, but did make good use of it. But I think Nephi is saying much more, your interpretation notwithstading. It looks a lot like “all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things” and that “Adam fell that men might be …” is one of those things that have been done.

Are you sure you can meditate on this and get something else?

thanks,
-kc
+±+

 

[RebeccaJ]

Parker, God loves us, it is His desire that we love Him in return. If God had created Adam and Eve with only the choice to love God, then it would not have been a love freely given. It would be in all basis and reality a forced love, which, is not love at all.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil was not evil in itself. It was a choice, in order that Adam and Eve could love God freely. When we love God, we choose to do as He commands. God does not desire that we love Him while simultaneously hoping for our ruin.

This does not mean we should reduce religion to following rules. People can follow rules for many reasons, including reasons that are not related to love. Reducing religion to rule-following does not allow “us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ”

 

[ParkerD]

Rebecca J,
I also have wanted to understand your perspective and beliefs about several more questions that this topic gives rise to:

1. Would an Edenic world include death of people, or no death? If death would happen, then how would it be introduced (meaning brought into the world as an eventuality)?
2. Would an Edenic world include pain, including the pain of childbirth, or would this life be pain-free? If pain-free, then does God not want us to have pain in the world He created that He pronounced "good’? Should we blame all pain on Adam and Eve?
3. Would Eve have had children in the garden of Eden if they had stayed there for a year or more? Would she have had children without having a menstrual cycle? Would the children have never quarreled and would the parents have never gotten angry or out of sorts or impatient?

I hope these questions have not seemed impertinent or disrespectful. I do respect your beliefs, and would like to understand their implications better, including underlying assumptions.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca J,
I also have wanted to understand your perspective and beliefs about several more questions that this topic gives rise to:

1. Would an Edenic world include death of people, or no death? If death would happen, then how would it be introduced (meaning brought into the world as an eventuality)?

No death.

1. Would an Edenic world include pain, including the pain of childbirth, or would this life be pain-free? If pain-free, then does God not want us to have pain in the world He created that He pronounced "good’? Should we blame all pain on Adam and Eve?

That is what we can infer from scripture. God pronounced that women would have pain in childbirth.

God does not desire sin. Suffering as a result as sin would not exist.

1. Would Eve have had children in the garden of Eden if they had stayed there for a year or more? Would she have had children without having a menstrual cycle? Would the children have never quarreled and would the parents have never gotten angry or out of sorts or impatient?

This is a puzzlement to me, where you get this idea that Eve had no menstrual cycle. At any rate, yes, God commanded that Adam and Eve be fruitful and multiply. He also commanded that they not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It is not our belief that these two commandments are mutually exclusive.

The choice to follow God, or not, would still remain.

Would children quarrel? You could ask 1000 questions like this. How would we know without having the experience? Maybe they would quarrel, but do so in truth and love.

Scootch your mind and thoughts to the Tree of Life, and contemplate on that. It is a better indicator of the “good” that God created, and where God works at bringing us to. All we have to do, is cooperate.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,
I have some comments re: some of yourn. But I agree with the OP (original poster ??)
that it’s easy to interpret Nephi as “God willing the fall”. But I’ll get to that.

I agree, (well, except the part about “spirit children”.) God knew the fall would occur, and still allowed it. Choosing God’s will over one’s own will would have less value, if it weren’t a free will.

Still good …

I slightly lost you here. Might just be your wording " … by allowing their choice a future purpose could be fulfilled". Is this just a statement that ’ The choice was allowed, and no matter what choice was made, God had it covered’? Because, it seems that this good purpose required a specific choice or it would have been unfulfilled. Excuse my pedestrian analogy here, but here it is. I have a pet peeve about traffic signals operating where there’s no traffic. Think of traffic lights, in the middle of nowhere as being the effects of original sin. I sometimes have need for a green light. However, if there was no traffic light at all (i.e., no original sin), the unfulfilled need for a green light, no matter how good green lights are, wouldn’t matter. So, in my analogy, the unfulfilled good purpose, no matter how good, wouldn’t matter.

Mostly ok again …, however, work is not a result of the fall.
Genesis 2:15
15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.

Now I have my final point re: the analogy above and 2 Nephi, Chapter 2 22:25
22 … And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created;

Not sure what “same state” Nephi’s referring to. Animals were pro-creating, Adam and Eve had ‘tending’ to do, …

23 *And they would have had no children;*

Not sure why Nephi thinks this, after the fall, child birth was going to become painful, but the fall wasn’t a prerequisite for child birth.

23 … having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

Nephi sounds like he’s guessing. I think he lives in a world where joy comes only as a result of having met a challenge, and he can’t imagine otherwise.

In any case, I don’t believe that Adam and Eve were without joy, or if they were it wasn’t because they hadn’t sinned yet!

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*.

I’ve read most of your comments in this thread and it seems that you believe that God didn’t will the fall, but did make good use of it. But I think Nephi is saying much more, your interpretation notwithstading. It looks a lot like “all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things” and that “Adam fell that men might be …” is one of those things that have been done.

Are you sure you can meditate on this and get something else?

thanks,
-kc
+±+

Kikkichan,
I deeply respect your questions and observations as well as your analogy about the green light. Thank you.

I was implying, yes, that a “specific choice” was needed in order for spirit children to come into this particular world. I don’t get the sense from Genesis that Adam and Eve would have (or perhaps even could have) had children without their having fallen and thus having become subject to death. I suppose one can assume either way, but it is just an assumption one makes by the fact that they had received the commandment to multiply.

My comment about “work” was recognizing that the fall brought “thorns and thistles” and less spontaneously abundant “ground” (“cursed is the ground for thy sake”). (I strongly dislike thorns and thistles. I even went so far as to dig a hundred or so fast-spreading thistles out of a park we were visiting two years ago, because I just couldn’t stand idly by while they took over the place by the next year. Did we have to get thistles added into the mix, and mosquitoes?)

“Same state” to me implies “no growth opportunities”–a state of innocence.

Your quote from *2 Nephi 2: 23 … “having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.”

“Nephi sounds like he’s guessing. I think he lives in a world where joy comes only as a result of having met a challenge, and he can’t imagine otherwise.”

“In any case, I don’t believe that Adam and Eve were without joy, or if they were it wasn’t because they hadn’t sinned yet!”*
I tend to agree with you that there is not enough logic offered to make verse 23 more than a “guess.” Lehi is doing the talking, and he is teaching his son Jacob who had been born during their travels and had seen all the intra-family conflicts during their travels and afterward.

Can a person really understand a feeling of “joy” if they haven’t felt "sorrow’? If elation and joy were the only feelings present with us, would we really acknowledge their “specialness”? Or would they be “ho-hum” matter-of-fact feelings? There are profound psychological, spiritual, and even physiological implications in the question of what elicits feelings of joy and the endorphins associated with elation.

I absolutely believe that God knew Adam and Eve well enough to predict their behavior in the garden of Eden, but He still was allowing not coercing, and Adam chose to fall “that men (and women and children) might” come into this world and experience joy here as well as hereafter.

 

[Finrock]

What I understand from this is that God willed the fall of Adam and Eve as being necessary so that men could experience joy and do good. Am I correct in my reading of this passage?

Hi SeattleCatholic. Good evening to you!

I love this section of the Book of Mormon and I think you’ve made a great observation. I can answer this question simply or with comments for clarification. Simply answered, I would say that in a sense God did “will” for the fall to occur, if by “will” we understand that this is something God wanted to happen. If we understand by “will” that God used His power to force the Fall come about, then I don’t believe that this is the case.

Now, for a more thorough answer I need to first make some general statements about what the LDS church teaches about our purpose in life and so forth. To understand the Fall from the LDS perspective it is essential to know that we pre-existed with God in Heaven prior to Earth life. In this pre-existence, we were spirits, without physical bodies. Sometime prior to the Earth being created, God explained His plan for us. In Heaven, we were given a choice to follow God’s plan, or to reject it. The purpose of God’s plan for us was to bring to pass our immortality and our eternal life. Immortality deals with having a physical body that is perfect, undying, and glorified. Eternal life deals with being joint-heirs with Christ and sharing in God’s life. It is important to understand that in our pre-existent state God covenanted with us that He would provide the place and a means by which we could receive immortality and eternal life.

In order for God’s purposes to come about, we first need a body. The mortal Earth life would provide that for us. Second, to receive eternal life, one must past through a testing phase. In order for the test to be meaningful and one that teaches us godly virtues, it must allow for free agency. It will also require a condition that will require us to exercise faith, to suffer through trials, to experience sorrow, to work, in short, to experience what we now experience as mortality. Mortal life, with all that it entails, is a requirement for exaltation. Once we understand this, then we can begin to see why God setup the conditions in the Garden as He did. Remember that God had covenanted with us that He would provide a place and a means for us to have immortality and eternal life. And, God knows perfectly what is required so that those things can be accomplished. God couldn’t just make Adam and Eve evil and sinful. Neither could He force them to choose mortality and trangression of His law. But, what He did do was place them in a good place, they were placed in the Garden in a state of innocence, they were given a choice and consequences for their choices, and God also allowed Satan to be in the Garden to temp them. With these conditions, Adam and Eve could now freely choose to transgress God’s commandment or not. I think that it is evident that God wants Adam and Eve to Fall, not because He wants them to sin, but because He knows that there is no other way for them to receive the things that He has in store for them. He wants them to fall, so that they can have an opportunity to gain immortality and eternal life. Once Adam and Eve partake of the forbidden fruit, they too recognize that it is better for them to pass through trials and tribulations so that they can have eternal life.

Usually people have a problem with the idea that God wanted Adam and Eve to Fall. Sometimes this is even misunderstood that God wanted Adam and Eve to sin. This, of course, isn’t the case. I think that in the same sense that God wanted Satan to be in the Garden (because had God not wanted Satan to be in the Garden He could have easily cast him out, but God chose not to) because Satan served to fulfill God’s plan as a tempter, in the same way God wanted Adam and Eve to Fall so that His plan could be realized by placing them in to that state of existence that will allow them to have His greatest blessings.

This whole explanation wouldn’t be complete, though, if I didn’t discuss that fact that God knew all of these things would occur and He provided a way for Adam and Eve to be saved. God the Father promised us a Savior, who would make up for the transgression of Adam, so that the general effects of the Fall of Adam and Eve are swallowed up in the grace of Christ’s atonement. But, furthermore, our personal sins can also be cleansed if we accept the atonement and apply it in our life. Even though God knew Adam would fall and He wanted Adam to fall so that Adam could have a chance at gaining immortality and eternal life, He also provided a means whereby Adam could be saved. God extended His mercy to Adam and to his posterity (all of us). So the fact that we can experience mortality in all of its implications is ultimately a good thing. God is fulfilling His covenant with us to provide us with a place and a means whereby He can bring to pass our immortality and eternal life.

Well, even if you do not agree with me, I hope that I’ve at least have been able to express my thoughts in a way that is understandable. Forgive me for any unintelligable parts, and allow me to clarify them if you come across any.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[ParkerD]

No death.

That is what we can infer from scripture. God pronounced that women would have pain in childbirth.

God does not desire sin. Suffering as a result of sin would not exist.

This is a puzzlement to me, where you get this idea that Eve had no menstrual cycle. At any rate, yes, God commanded that Adam and Eve be fruitful and multiply. He also commanded that they not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It is not our belief that these two commandments are mutually exclusive.

The choice to follow God, or not, would still remain.

Would children quarrel? You could ask 1000 questions like this. How would we know without having the experience? Maybe they would quarrel, but do so in truth and love.

Scootch your mind and thoughts to the Tree of Life, and contemplate on that. It is a better indicator of the “good” that God created, and where God works at bringing us to. All we have to do, is cooperate.

Rebecca J,
Thanks for emphasizing the Tree of Life. I totally agree that is it what “God works at bringing us to.” Great phrase!

If no death, then how long would it have been before this very good world of ours couldn’t hold all the people and have them survive providently? (I suppose perhaps the intent was for there to have been a shorter time period for the history of the world and the peopling of it?)

I cited the menstrual cycle because it involves a type of “life” (an egg) and a type of “death” (an unfertilized egg dies and is discarded by the body, and usually pain and blood are involved in the cycle.)

I again express that I appreciate having read your perspective, and I totally respect your beliefs and think they are valuable. I feel there are some profound implications that may be over-simplified by those beliefs, such as that opposition is necessary for our growth.

To me, the universe “cries out” with the truth of “balance” in all things–in nature, in light matter/dark matter or energy, in how orbits are held in place and so forth. To me, opposition is a necessary and integral part of that balance. Please don’t be disappointed that I don’t agree with the premise that God created a “good world” and didn’t have a plan that included the eventuality (if Adam and Eve chose) of there being opposition within that world.