Question About The Fall Of Adam

[LifeOnaPlate]

This thread is directed to those who generally believe there is sone truth in the Adam and Eve story we read in the bible; not for those who want to make a mockery of the idea of Adam and Eve. The thread is seeking the non-LDS view on the subject.

According to Genesis, God created the heavens and the earth, and then created man and woman:

Genesis 1:

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

In the Garden, God says the two are married:

Genesis 2:

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

So here in the Garden of Eden, we have God telling Adam and Eve to be fruitful, multiply and replenish the earth, and that they were married as husband and wife.

In this state they were immortal, they would never die unless they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

A few questions here:

-Adam and Eve were married for eternity in the Garden. Did God intend them to stay in the Garden, then?

-Does this illustrate God intended for eternal marriage?

-If Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit, would they still be there?

-Would they be able to follow God's command to multiply; ie, would they have had children in the Garden of Eden?

-If yes, would their children also be immortal?

-Were Adam and Eve "gods" in the sense that they were immortal beings with the capacity to procreate?

-If God did not intend for Adam and Eve to stay in the Garden, but that they should fall, why did he want them to fall?

-Did Christ atone for the sins of Adam and Eve, thus enabling them to return to God?

-If so, would they "go to heaven" in a smaller capacity, unmarried and unable to procreate, as they had that ability in the Garden?

-Why?

-Would a full "atonement" repair ALL effects of the Fall?

-Why or why not?

Thanks for all your thoughts.

[Olavarria]

Nephi broke it down quite nicely, "Adam fell that men might be, men are that they might have joy".

Booooya!

[LifeOnaPlate]

Nephi broke it down quite nicely, "Adam fell that men might be, men are that they might have joy".

Booooya!

Sure enough, but it was actually Lehi who said it.

At any rate, think more about my questions, Her, and see the deeper message here. Rhinomelon, other evangelicals, etc, do you have any answers on this?

[jadams_4242]

This thread is directed to those who generally believe there is sone truth in the Adam and Eve story we read in the bible; not for those who want to make a mockery of the idea of Adam and Eve.

According to Genesis, God created the heavens and the earth, and then created man and woman:

In the Garden, God says the two are married:

So here in the Garden of Eden, we have God telling Adam and Eve to be fruitful, multiply and replenish the earth, and that they were married as husband and wife.

In this state they were immortal, they would never die unless they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

A few questions here:

-Adam and Eve were married for eternity in the Garden. Did God intend them to stay in the Garden, then?

-Does this illustrate God intended for eternal marriage?

-If Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit, would they still be there?

-Would they be able to follow God's command to multiply; ie, would they have had children in the Garden of Eden?

-If yes, would their children also be immortal?

-Were Adam and Eve "gods" in the sense that they were immortal beings with the capacity to procreate?

-If God did not intend for Adam and Eve to stay in the Garden, but that they should fall, why did he want them to fall?

-Did Christ atone for the sins of Adam and Eve, thus enabling them to return to God?

-If so, would they "go to heaven" in a smaller capacity, unmarried and unable to procreate, as they had that ability in the Garden?

-Why?

-Would a full "atonement" repair ALL effects of the Fall?

-Why or why not?

Thanks for all your thoughts.

If we were intended to stay in the garden of eden forever, What would have been

the point in us even being born? We could have stayed in heaven and done the same

thing as the garden of eden. After we prove ourselves worthy in this life we will hopefully

be able to return to a garden of eden, {celestial kingdom}

[Revenant]

This thread is directed to those who generally believe there is sone truth in the Adam and Eve story we read in the bible; not for those who want to make a mockery of the idea of Adam and Eve.

According to Genesis, God created the heavens and the earth, and then created man and woman:

In the Garden, God says the two are married:

So here in the Garden of Eden, we have God telling Adam and Eve to be fruitful, multiply and replenish the earth, and that they were married as husband and wife.

In this state they were immortal, they would never die unless they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

A few questions here:

-Adam and Eve were married for eternity in the Garden. Did God intend them to stay in the Garden, then?

-Does this illustrate God intended for eternal marriage?

-If Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit, would they still be there?

-Would they be able to follow God's command to multiply; ie, would they have had children in the Garden of Eden?

-If yes, would their children also be immortal?

-Were Adam and Eve "gods" in the sense that they were immortal beings with the capacity to procreate?

-If God did not intend for Adam and Eve to stay in the Garden, but that they should fall, why did he want them to fall?

-Did Christ atone for the sins of Adam and Eve, thus enabling them to return to God?

-If so, would they "go to heaven" in a smaller capacity, unmarried and unable to procreate, as they had that ability in the Garden?

-Why?

-Would a full "atonement" repair ALL effects of the Fall?

-Why or why not?

Thanks for all your thoughts.

I believe that God absolutely intended them to fall. That is evident in the Council in Heaven we read about in Abraham. Were the Fall not to have occured, then there also wouldn't be a need of a Savior, who was central to the plan and designated before the creation. That being said, I don't think that God required the Fall to happen in the exact way that it did. I've asked myself often: what if, in the pre-mortal councils in Heaven, Satan would have exercised his agency wisely (something he surely could have done) and chosen to go along with God's plan? Then there is no Satan to tempt Eve and Adam to partake of the forbidden fruit. Does that frustrate God's plan, or does that mean that Satan (as we now know him) wasn't an original cast member in that play?

[LifeOnaPlate]

If we were intended to stay in the garden of eden forever, What would have been

the point in us even being born? We could have stayed in heaven and done the same

thing as the garden of eden. After we prove ourselves worthy in this life we will hopefully

be able to return to a garden of eden, {celestial kingdom}

Yes, I am familiar with the LDS theology. I should have been more clear and said I am seeking information from a non-LDS perspective.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Bump for rhino

[LifeOnaPlate]

A reluctant bump. Anyone care to sound off?

[Sentinus]

A reluctant bump. Anyone care to sound off?

Ok first question.

Where do you get that they were married for eternity?

Regards

Sentinus

[valkator]

Intending something to happen would appear to suggest complicity in helping to bring it about - setting up the conditions for a Fall that one desires to happen.

Knowing something is going to happen, however, and then allowing it to happen because agency cannot be abridged is a far more agreeable scenario.

With the first, the parent is playing nothing more than a 'good cop/bad cop' role. I wonder what type of parent would create children intending them to 'fall' -- and then, in a sort of psychopathic glee, providing the means for them to do so - knowing full well the damage it's going to do. All this, of course, because it, somehow, will reinforce the power the parent thinks he has over his children.

An example will illustrate:

'Hi, junior .. here's a case of beer, some pot, and a few hookers to try out.....oops, sorry, forgot to tell you that these things have very severe consequences. Not to worry, though. Even though I basically surrounded you with these things so that you would try them out and change your nature, I have a 'good plan' for you to 'get back home. Now, follow this plan or perish.'

A parent like this would be locked up and put into mandatory therapy; the children taken away and placed in a better home.

With the second, however, a loving parent knows that he cannot simply order his children around and turn them into robots who just 'obey'. He does not intend anything negative for his children and gives them advice as to what is 'good' and 'right'. He certainly doesn't give them the weapons to kill themselves, either. He knows that his children are likely to make some poor choices and, as a reult, provides a 'salvific' model for the children to look to, fully accepting and welcoming them 'home', as they seek to return to their true nature if they 'Fall'; all the more wise and ready to assume the responsibilities and exercise the potential they were created with and still retain - despite 'learning their lessons the hard way'.

As a caveat, though, within the fullness of the 'whole' - or uncreated eternal intelliegence/mind - everything is as it is supposed to be and all things that occur are, in a sense, 'intended' to happen. If this weren't true, then it wouldn't have happened in the first place. The issue, from my perspective, is what was the Heavenly Father - the manifested being that brought other manifested forms (our original forms in his image) into existence, intending through his actions as a parent: Deliberate sabatoge and setting up his children for a Fall in order to have some sort of ego-centeric power over them - or loving acceptance (along with a 'guide' or 'map' already in place to lead the prodigals back 'home') of a Fall that was likely to occur as the children 'leave home' and begin their own journey of experience?

[T-Shirt]

Ok first question.

Where do you get that they were married for eternity?

Regards

Sentinus

It is a simply logical conclusion. Since they were married and since they were intended to live forever, they would, therefore, have been married forever.

T-Shirt

[LifeOnaPlate]

Ok first question.

Where do you get that they were married for eternity?

Regards

Sentinus

They were married while immortal, before partaking of the fruit, as demonstrated by the scriptures in Genesis I quoted.

[Doctor Steuss]

It is a simply logical conclusion. Since they were married and since they were intended to live forever, they would, therefore, have been married forever.

T-Shirt

Not only that, but they were married by G-d (who else was there to make them man and wife?)... and in Ecclesiastes 3:14 we find:

I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever...

[krose]

I don't believe that any part of this story ever actually happened; does that count as mockery in your book?

But I can play the "what if" game. First off, I don't see a necessary connection between being in a paradise and an inability to reproduce. Why would that be? Surely they could have grown their family inside the garden, all partaking of the ambrosia on the Tree of Life, to live forever. Of course, the garden would have to get a lot bigger to allow all the future generations to fit, what with there being no death and all.

If these two truly had their agency, one of their options would have had to be to stay there forever. If not, that's not true agency, and why even bother with the garden in the first place?

[jana at jade house]

First off, I don't see a necessary connection between being in a paradise and an inability to reproduce. Why would that be?

The connection is not between the place and reproduction, but the anatomy and physiology of premortal and mortal bodies. Premortal bodies are incorruptible, knowing no death: premortal beings have no decay, no blood. Without blood we cannot conceive nor bear mortal children. Our eternal , immortal bodies are just like that of the resurrected Jesus, mortal and spiritual (premortal) fused for eternity. A mortal body is essential. Blood is essential. The Fall was essential.

If these two truly had their agency, one of their options would have had to be to stay there forever. If not, that's not true agency, and why even bother with the garden in the first place?

Some of us (me included) are of the educated opinion that the commandment to not partake was a relative command. Just as we "command" our unready young to never cross the street, complete and unending compliance would have adults never crossing a street. Thus at some time, when they were ready and prepared, Adam and Eve would have partaken under the direction and with the approval of the Father.. That they partook under another "authority" and before time thereby exercising agency is what the punishment is for, not partaking necessarily.

Some of this opinion above is NOT meant as final and written and stone doctrine. As with much of the symbolic scriptures, it is based upon definitions of words in ancient tongues, study of what some pretty great minds have to say, and plain old faith. In other words, basic apologetics.

[LifeOnaPlate]

The connection is not between the place and reproduction, but the anatomy and physiology of premortal and mortal bodies. Premortal bodies are incorruptible, knowing no death: premortal beings have no decay, no blood. Without blood we cannot conceive nor bear mortal children. Our eternal , immortal bodies are just like that of the resurrected Jesus, mortal and spiritual (premortal) fused for eternity. A mortal body is essential. Blood is essential. The Fall was essential.

Some of us (me included) are of the educated opinion that the commandment to not partake was a relative command. Just as we "command" our unready young to never cross the street, complete and unending compliance would have adults never crossing a street. Thus at some time, when they were ready and prepared, Adam and Eve would have partaken under the direction and with the approval of the Father.. That they partook under another "authority" and before time thereby exercising agency is what the punishment is for, not partaking necessarily.

Some of this opinion above is NOT meant as final and written and stone doctrine. As with much of the symbolic scriptures, it is based upon definitions of words in ancient tongues, study of what some pretty great minds have to say, and plain old faith. In other words, basic apologetics.

Can it be inferred from the Genesis account that Adam and Eve were married for eternity? This union being disrupted by the fall, and then restored through the atonement of Jesus Christ?

[katherine the great]

I don't think God married Adam and Eve--he separated them into two distinct individuals. Adam was first created as just a man. Eve was taken out of his body. She was already his wife because she was part of him. (Now, is there really anyone in the world who doesn't think this story is symbolic?)

[LifeOnaPlate]

I don't think God married Adam and Eve--he separated them into two distinct individuals. Adam was first created as just a man. Eve was taken out of his body. She was already his wife because she was part of him. (Now, is there really anyone in the world who doesn't think this story is symbolic?)

so Adam and Eve, then, were essentially the same person? I don't understand your evidence that God did not marry Adam to Eve, as he refers to Eve as his "wife" and commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth. To revisit the original intent of the thread, could you be so kind as to answer the short list of questions in the original post?

[katherine the great]

so Adam and Eve, then, were essentially the same person? I don't understand your evidence that God did not marry Adam to Eve, as he refers to Eve as his "wife" and commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth. To revisit the original intent of the thread, could you be so kind as to answer the short list of questions in the original post?

I interpret the story metaphorically, so I can't really answer the list of questions. Yes, according to the text, Adam and Eve were one person before the Lord took Eve out of Adam. (Haven't you ever heard of Adam's rib?) I interpret this to mean that Male and Female are meant to be two parts of one perfect human being, and that should be our goal in marriage.

[LifeOnaPlate]

I interpret the story metaphorically, so I can't really answer the list of questions. Yes, according to the text, Adam and Eve were one person before the Lord took Eve out of Adam. (Haven't you ever heard of Adam's rib?) I interpret this to mean that Male and Female are meant to be two parts of one perfect human being, and that should be our goal in marriage.

I see. I guess the list doesn't really apply if you don't believe in an actual Adam and Eve, whether or not some of the details are allegorical.

[katherine the great]

I see. I guess the list doesn't really apply if you don't believe in an actual Adam and Eve, whether or not some of the details are allegorical.

I didn't say that I don't believe in an actual Adam and Eve. I believe they were real people, but not the first human beings on earth. I believe they were the first parents of the lineage through which God would establish His covenant with humans.

[LifeOnaPlate]

I didn't say that I don't believe in an actual Adam and Eve. I believe they were real people, but not the first human beings on earth. I believe they were the first parents of the lineage through which God would establish His covenant with humans.

Were they, at any point, immortal before the fall in your theory?

[katherine the great]

Were they, at any point, immortal before the fall in your theory?

I don't know. I've always felt that "the fall" from the preexistent spirit world to the flesh was about as much of a fall as humans would need.

[BCSpace]

There is no doubt that the Bible implicitly teaches the Fall was planned for. That verse set is.....

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, 1 Peter 1:19-20

The key of course being that Jesus was foreordained before the creation to overcome the effects of the Fall. Partaking the fruit was no mistake and God provided all the conditions required to make it happen.

[jana at jade house]

Can it be inferred from the Genesis account that Adam and Eve were married for eternity? This union being disrupted by the fall, and then restored through the atonement of Jesus Christ?

From an LDS view: since God, the highest of high priests, supervised and created the union of Adam to Eve one could infer it was indeed a temple sort of marriage; eternal.

I do not believe that the union of Adam and Eve was disrupted at any time. I do not believe the Atonement of Jesus Christ restored marriage to a prior higher state. I never before in my life ever heard such a teaching, so I would have to read and study the references which indicate that this might be so.