The Fall

[MannyPaquio]

Yes.

But James 1: 13- 14 states that God tempts no one.

Where the mormon teaching of Lucifer is flawed is this: If Lucifer wanted everyone to be saved by him, and God wanted transgression, then that means that Lucifer would want everyone to go to heaven while God would want some people to go to hell; therefore, making Lucifer more loving than God.

I don't understand how we would have never had children had Adam and Eve not transgressed.

[thesometimesaint]

Godislove:

God will not allow us to be tempted beyond that which we are able to withstand. God was simply allowing Agency. It was Lucifer who tempted A&E to eat the forbidden fruit.

A&E were innocence like little children, not knowing good from evil.

[Hoops22]

I think you are misinterpreting it. The bible says they transgressed. This is not sin. Sin is a type of transgression. For example, if I were to drive my car 10 miles over the speed limit I would be transgressing the law and sinning. If a police man drove 10 miles over the speed limit with his lights and sirons on, he would be transgressing the law but not sinning. To transgress simply means to step over. They ate of the fruit gaining a knowledge of good and devil and they where then taught the facts of life. No punishment. Where in the bible does it say that Gods plan was disrupted?

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

[Ray Callis Hatton III]

Death is not a relevant factor. By Christ, ALL shall be made alive again.

[Lachoneus]

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

(Romans 5:14)

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

(1 Timothy 2:14)

So, did you want to discuss the proper translation of parabasis v. hamartano, or do you prefer to build your beliefs on incorrect understandings of God's Word.

[wenglund]

Since prior to the foundations of the earth the Son was fore-ordained to redeem the world, or at the very least the Father fore-knew that the Son would redeem the world, it then is obvious that a fall, from whence mankind would need to be redeemed, was anticipated and built into the plan of salvation.

And, for those of us who don't limit the powers of the Father to that of redemption, but think him not only able but desirous for his children to become like him, believe the fall necessary, and this because it enables his children to become as God, knowing good from evil.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

But James 1: 13- 14 states that God tempts no one.

Where the mormon teaching of Lucifer is flawed is this: If Lucifer wanted everyone to be saved by him, and God wanted transgression, then that means that Lucifer would want everyone to go to heaven while God would want some people to go to hell; therefore, making Lucifer more loving than God.

I don't understand how we would have never had children had Adam and Eve not transgressed.

I thought that God tempted Pharoh?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I wouldn't put it that way, but, yes, I would.

He is. I don't see how knowing the potential for evil/sin, and even knowing it will occur disputes that.

It certainly does not make sense. It makes about as much sense as saying that God required sin to accomplish His purpose. That is not the Christian God.

That Is not the Christian God??? What ever Hoops.

It sound like you are saying "that doesn't sound like the God I believe in".

We are still waiting for your response in the other thread for the "age of grace".

Any way if "sinning" wasn't part of the plan as you state, then it appears that God didn't know or forsee that it was going to happen, thus God had to change the plan. If it was part of the plan then God did know and forsee that they were going to transgress the law and planned for it. The way you talk you make it out to be that Adam or rather Eve threw a wrench into God's plan and trnagressed. And then God had to make a new plan to accomidate that screw up.

THe other nice thing is that if it was part of the plan then Eve really didn't mess up because it was supposed to happen and God planned it that way from the beginning.

One other thing you cannot sin in ignorance as Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good or evil, how could they sin in ignorance??

In case Hoops missed this Wade makes a really good point.

Since prior to the foundations of the earth the Son was fore-ordained to redeem the world, or at the very least the Father fore-knew that the Son would redeem the world, it then is obvious that a fall, from whence mankind would need to be redeemed, was anticipated and built into the plan of salvation.

And, for those of us who don't limit the powers of the Father to that of redemption, but think him not only able but desirous for his children to become like him, believe the fall necessary, and this because it enables his children to become as God, knowing good from evil.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

Paul declared: "Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die." (see: 1 Cor. 15:360

Implied in Paul's declaration (particularly when read in context), is the mystery that if we are to be quickened as the Father desires, then we must die (it is appointed unto all men to die--Heb. 9:27). We cannot die except there were a fall. The fall, then, was necessary for God's children to be quickened, and thus the fall was a part of God's plan. It was intended that mankind be sown as a seed in corruption (via the fall) in order to be raised to incorruption.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[David T]

I think the following is fair to say: The Adam and Eve Fall Narrative is a template, that is often reused by prophets to emphasize particularly relevant doctrines that they feel important to emphasize.

In the original Genesis account in all of our Bibles, the Fall was a Very Bad Thing brought on by rebellion that would eventually have to be reversed. (Much like the Exile from Israel and the destruction of the Temple)

Later Prophets re-contextualized, re-allegorized, and added inspired details to this 'foundational' story to show the origins, or universal application, of their teachings (such as Lehi, teaching about Agency, and Paul, teaching about the reversal of conditions brought through the Atonement).

In the Restorationist Moses and Temple accounts, the story is re-framed even more clearly to combine these additional meanings into a plain account of everyman's journey in the Plan of Salvation and Redemption of Christ.

So my answer to the question would be: It depends what version of the story you're referring to.

[Lightbearer]

When Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit was it God's plan to temp them? I know Satan was the tempter, but did God intend for Adam and Eve to be tempted?

First God does not tempt anyone. He also cannot "create" evil. God's plan was for us to become like Him, to "know good from evil." Since Adam and Eve were created in a state of innocence, it was necessary that temptation enter the world through the forbidden fruit. The opposition of all things had to be started, God could not command Adam and Eve to partake of the forbidden fruit... yet His foreknowledge of all things told Him that Adam would fall, thus it was known before the foundation of the world that Adam would fall, death and sin would enter the world and man would have agency to choose, to learn by his own experience the difference between good and evil. The results of Adams fall had to be atoned, that is why the Savior Jesus Christ was chosen by the Father to break the bands of death and sin. Only in this way could men become as God is, a glorified perfected man with a physical body of flesh and bones. In fact if Adam had not fallen we would not be, there would be no mortal probation, no testing of our faith to see if we would do whatsoever God would command us when not in His presence. The Biblical account leaves out much of the things that are plain and precious and makes God out to be a being that just has to "make it up as he goes along." That is not the type of God that I worship. The following explains the fate of Adam after his fall:

(Moses 5:5-15) "And he gave unto them commandments, that they should worship the Lord their God, and should offer the firstlings of their flocks, for an offering unto the Lord. And Adam was obedient unto the commandments of the Lord. And after many days an angel of the Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer sacrifices unto the Lord? And Adam said unto him: I know not, save the Lord commanded me. And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth. Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore. And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will. And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God. And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient. And Adam and Eve blessed the name of God, and they made all things known unto their sons and their daughters. And Satan came among them, saying: I am also a son of God; and he commanded them, saying: Believe it not; and they believed it not, and they loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish. And the Lord God called upon men by the Holy Ghost everywhere and commanded them that they should repent; And as many as believed in the Son, and repented of their sins, should be saved; and as many as believed not and repented not, should be damned; and the words went forth out of the mouth of God in a firm decree; wherefore they must be fulfilled."

I am grateful for the restoration to have this understanding of Adam and Eve known to us. While the human race is fallen and lost, it is not without hope, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ is that hope which was taught from the very beginning.

[CV75]

I don't see much with which I disagree. I also don't see much in here that required man to sin for God to accomplish His purposes. Actually, I don't see anything that supports that idea.

My posts have dealt with the role of God in tempting Adam and Eve (He didn't). You asked for Biblical evidence for this and I provided it. But now you're framing an expectation for support of the idea that man was required to sin in order for God to accomplish His purposes. That is another matter entirely.

Since God's objective is to save all mankind, what does it matter whether our spirits enter bodies that were created in consequence of the Fall (Adam's sin/transgression) or by some other way? Any other way would be just as "painful", for as long as God wants to exalt His spirit children from the lesser state they occupy (albeit very happy in His presence) to the higher state He occupies and wants us to enjoy with Him, there will always be the necessity for atonement. This is because none but One (and others as I will explain below) of His children, whether spirits or spirits with bodies, have the capacity to live in perfect, voluntary submission to His will. It is not so much that Adam had to sin, but that it was in his nature--as it is in all our natures--to do so. Any one of us would have done the same thing, for we simply aren't advanced enough to avoid sinning.

The only others who evidently haven't the capacity to sin are little children. There are other threads that discuss this. They are sent to earth to receive bodies. The question here is, "Is there any other way that perfect spirits can receive immortal, glorified bodies?" If not, then Adam's sin could be construed as "necessary" as well as "unavoidable". If so, then what does it matter to us if Christ saves us? At best it might even draw some into much more adoration of Him, knowing that he condescended as low as He did. But I think his and our sinning is unavoidable.

Christ Himself was given a body through this "fallen" mechanism. Could he have been given a body through some alternative means? Perhaps, but He didn't. I suppose His choice to receive a body as the consequence of the sin of a lesser spirit (on his mother's side, by her ancestor Adam) is all part of the Atonement, so that He could enter into this fallen world, descend below all things and overcome them, and then ascend above all things.

Bottom line is, none of God's children have the capacity to create their own bodies and dwell with Him eternally. None of them have the capacity to receive and occupy an exalted body from Him, and so they have to gain a lesser one first. The reason for this is that none of them has what He has or is what He is. As long as any of them are not what He is, all but One (and little children) will ultimately sin/transgress once given a body, whether immortal or of flesh and blood; or whether it is necessary for them to sin or not; or whether God wants them to sin or not, etc. You may as well criticize God for creating imperfect spirits, but that is addressed in another thread.

So even before the Fall, Adam and Eve could not endure exaltation (joint-heirs with the Father). Otherwise, they would have been there already, for it cannot be that their actions leading to the Fall were consistent with the deeds of perfect people. Also note there is a big difference between the paradisiacal immortal bodies Adam and Eve had and an exalted immortal body.

[cksalmon]

I will be rebuked by Mr. Salmon any day of the week.

Pfft. I can't even effectively rebuke my cat, Hoops.

My logic at this point is simple: (1) if one holds that it has always been God's plan to ransom His elect people from the bondage of sin through the Atonement of Christ, then, as a corollary, it follows that (2) sin has always been part of God's plan.

I would be interested in understanding why you might not agree that (1) is true.

cks

[cksalmon]

We agree. Let this be known to all that CKS can now say that he agrees with mormons on this one point.

(I'd suggest that, if anything, Mormonism agrees with the chronologically prior Protestant Reformers.)

I've commented in the past (on this board, I'm sure) on this very odd convergence of thought between Reformed Protestants and Latter-day Saints. It is striking, at first blush. I'm convinced, however, that the similarity is more apparent than real, Mola.

Note the Reformed justification for holding this position (from the Westminster Confession):

WCF 3.1 God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:(1) yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,(2) nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.(3)

(1) Eph. 1:11; Rom. 11:33; Heb. 6:17; Rom. 9:15,18.

(2) James 1:13,17; 1 John 1:5.

(3) Acts 2:23; Matt. 17:12; Acts 4:27,28; John 19:11; Prov. 16:33.

Obviously, this is a radically un-Mormon perspective. It makes no sense on Mormonism to say that God ordained sin. It makes no sense on Protestant Christianity to say that the Fall was "upwards," or whatever.

cks

[CV75]

I don't see much with which I disagree. I also don't see much in here that required man to sin for God to accomplish His purposes. Actually, I don't see anything that supports that idea.

Another consideration: For God to accomplish His purposes, He had to have spirit children, all having varying degrees of preparedness to join Him in His exaltation. Because of the varying degrees, 1 ) an atonement would be required; and 2 ) a condition such as a fallen world would provide the lowest common denominator for a starting point (getting physical bodies). All His children would qualify for being born into this fallen world because 1 )they are each imperfect enough; and 2 ) each of them would cause it (The Fall) to happen because of their un/underdeveloped ability to make correct spiritual choices in a physical environment (even with an immortal body in paradise such as Adam and Eve had). The exceptions of course are the Savior and little children as described above. So His plan does not require our sinning/transgressing, but accomodates the inevitability of our sinning/transgressing. Our sinning/transgressing is inevitable because that is what happens when God creates spirits that posses a will of their own, but little faith/knowledge and experience--all start out far less developed than He, but all are capable of dwelling with Him in exaltation if they choose. There are all types of choices because He does not control our wills.

[cksalmon]

(1) But James 1: 13- 14 states that God tempts no one.

(2) Where the mormon teaching of Lucifer is flawed is this: If Lucifer wanted everyone to be saved by him, and God wanted transgression, then that means that Lucifer would want everyone to go to heaven while God would want some people to go to hell; therefore, making Lucifer more loving than God.

(3) I don't understand how we would have never had children had Adam and Eve not transgressed.

Hi Godislove--

As to (1), I completely affirm it and will never deny it. We can bet our bottom dollars (were we gamblers) that God didn't, hasn't, and won't.

(2) At some philosophical remove, allowing for further fine-tuning and nuancing, you're onto something significant here. The Mormon worldview must implicitly hold that the God the Protestant Reformers believed in is more akin to Lucifer than he is to the Mormon Elohim.

(3) I don't either.

cks

[LDSMusic483]

Hi Godislove--

As to (1), I completely affirm it and will never deny it. We can bet our bottom dollars (were we gamblers) that God didn't, hasn't, and won't.

(2) At some philosophical remove, allowing for further fine-tuning and nuancing, you're onto something significant here. The Mormon worldview must implicitly hold that the God the Protestant Reformers believed in is more akin to Lucifer than he is to the Mormon Elohim.

(3) I don't either.

cks

CKS and Godislove,

In regards to your #2, God's purpose is for us to become like Him. We cannot do that if we are compelled to return to live with him. Of course God wants us all to return to Him, but it is definitely part of His plan that we CHOOSE to return to Him. As you pointed out earlier CKS,

(1) if one holds that it has always been God's plan to ransom His elect people from the bondage of sin through the Atonement of Christ, then, as a corollary, it follows that (2) sin has always been part of God's plan.

Holding true to these parts, and understanding that it is important to God for man to choose, I think you agree more with the Mormon God than you think. Or is your God more compulsory? Don't confuse our belief that God is not compulsory with the thought that He isn't merciful. Though God expects us to choose, He loves us all, wants us all to return, and does the utmost that He can without impeding our agency to insure this.

And the understanding for #3 is that all things must come in pairs, for their must needs be an opposition to all things. Adam and Eve learned good and evil, pain and happiness, sickness and health correct? If all things must have their opposite, how could birth exist without death?

[Deborah]

Where the mormon teaching of Lucifer is flawed is this: If Lucifer wanted everyone to be saved by him, and God wanted transgression, then that means that Lucifer would want everyone to go to heaven while God would want some people to go to hell; therefore, making Lucifer more loving than God.

In the first place Mormonism doesn't teach that God wanted transgression. Nor does he want anyone to go to hell. What is imperative is that man be given his agency to choose for himself. Since Mormons believe everyone but the Sons of Perdition will be saved in a kingdom of glory your argument is fallacious from the get go. Hell is the time we spend getting ourselves to the place God wants us to be not just to gain salvation but exaltation and being able to live in his Kingdom. Some will limit by their own actions what kingdom they can attain but they will still be saved in a kingdom of glory. Lucifer wanted to save everyone, but by force and in doing so no one could have become as God but would always be slaves to Lucifer rather than gods in their own right. Lucifer has no love for others, but wants everyone to be miserable like him. Hence when he was cast down from heaven he came to this earth to try to gain as many souls as possible. God uses him to fulfill his purposes but God himself does not tempt men but gives them the opportunity to overcome the temptations they face.

[Freedom]

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

What does this have to do with it?

[cksalmon]

CKS and Godislove,

In regards to your #2, God's purpose is for us to become like Him. We cannot do that if we are compelled to return to live with him. Of course God wants us all to return to Him, but it is definitely part of His plan that we CHOOSE to return to Him.

Hello Music--

I believe if you'll reread this post, you'll see why I'm convinced that the convergence of thought is merely superficial.

With regard to the underlined portion, the Protestant Calvinist would hold that no one has or will ever choose to love God unless God unalterably ordains--predestines--him to do so.

I would also deny that "[God] does the utmost that He can without impeding our agency to insure this" and affirm with Daniel, rather, that "All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, But He does according to His will in the host of heaven And among the inhabitants of earth; And no one can ward off His hand Or say to Him, 'What have You done?'" or with the Psalmist, "[God] does whatever He pleases [Psalm 115.3]."

I realize that you, as a Latter-day Saint, have a rich body of scripture from which you derive the concept of the sacrosanct nature of human agency (read: libertarian free will). I reject LDS scripture as authoritative, however, and don't find the notion of libertarian free will to be particularly consonant with the biblical witness.

So, what we're saying doesn't appear to be that similar, after all--at least to me.

Best.

cks