Adam and Eve - blessings for disobedience

[theplains]

I had a question on the January 2004 Ensign article "Book of Mormon Principles: Favored of the Lord."

"The God of heaven has never made covenants that are independent of obedience and righteousness."

This seems to be a contradiction in what the teaching manual Gospel Principles says; that God 
bestowed great blessings on Adam and Eve for their disobedience.

Is this the first time God ever gave people blessings for disobeying Him or are there other
examples?

Thanks,
Jim

[Wanderer7]

I'm a little unclear on what your OP is referring to. First, what exactly does the Gospel Principles manual say and where? Second, I don't see a contradiction in God making covenants with the righteous and blessing the disobedient (i.e. He make th His rain to fall on the good and the bad). Third, the "blessings" God bestowed on Adam and Eve for their disobedience were the trials of mortality. So it's kind of like saying the trials I received for my bad choices were blessings. I suppose they were, because they helped me learn from my choices.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Wanderer7

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

I had a question on the January 2004 Ensign article "Book of Mormon Principles: Favored of the Lord."

"The God of heaven has never made covenants that are independent of obedience and righteousness."

This seems to be a contradiction in what the teaching manual Gospel Principles says; that God 
bestowed great blessings on Adam and Eve for their disobedience.

Is this the first time God ever gave people blessings for disobeying Him or are there other
examples?

Thanks,
Jim

The LDS scriptures clearly and unambiguously declare the Adam and Eve were cursed by God, as a consequence of their disobedience, with physical and total spiritual death. As the Book of Mormon prophet Jacob testifies, the curse God placed upon Adam and Eve -- and their earthy posterity -- Is the death of the physical body, with no hope of resurrection, and a total separation from God's presence forever:

 7 Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite atonement—save it should be an infinite atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption. Wherefore, the first judgment which came upon man must needs have remained to an endless duration. And if so, this flesh must have laid down to rot and to crumble to its mother earth, to rise no more.

 8 O the wisdom of God, his mercy and grace! For behold, if the flesh should rise no more our spirits must become subject to that angel who fell from before the presence of the Eternal God, and became the devil, to rise no more.

 9 And our spirits must have become like unto him, and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of lies, in misery, like unto himself; yea, to that being who beguiled our first parents, who transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light, and stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness. (2 Nephi 9)

So as you can see, Adam and Eve were most certainly punished by Almighty God for their disobedience in the Garden, and that punishment is surely the ultimate and most terrible of all possible divine punishments. You see, in his infinite foreknowledge God knew Adam and Eve would eventually disobey him (this is one of the reasons why Paul says Christ was the Lamb of God who was slain before the foundation of the world). But even though God knew beforehand that Adam and Eve's acts of disobedience were going to take place, because of his divine justice he had no choice but to mete out his most dreadful punishment and that punishment is what Christians call 'the curse of the fall.'

But as you know, God is not only just, he is also most merciful and kind. So because of that foreknowledge, and his great love for his human creation, the Lord made a provision to reverse the curse of the fall through the teachings of Jesus Christ and his great infinite and eternal atoning sacrifice. So because of Christ -- and only because of Christ -- the curse of the fall has been transformed into a blessing in disguise for all those who accept and obey the Gospel. 

Edited March 24, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

I had a question on the January 2004 Ensign article "Book of Mormon Principles: Favored of the Lord."

"The God of heaven has never made covenants that are independent of obedience and righteousness."

This seems to be a contradiction in what the teaching manual Gospel Principles says; that God 
bestowed great blessings on Adam and Eve for their disobedience.

Is this the first time God ever gave people blessings for disobeying Him or are there other
examples?

Thanks,
Jim

Nope no contradiction.
They were blessed for righteously obeying higher laws despite having to disobey a lower one to do it.

[halconero]

Without going into details the covenant made between God and Eve is different from the one made between God and Adam. The former acknowledges the transgression and accounts for it. The latter does not, as indicated by some prophets that Adam did not transgress in partaking the fruit.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, halconero said:

Without going into details the covenant made between God and Eve is different from the one made between God and Adam. The former acknowledges the transgression and accounts for it. The latter does not, as indicated by some prophets that Adam did not transgress in partaking the fruit.

Eve transgressed but Adam didn't?

[Bobbieaware]

51 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Eve transgressed but Adam didn't?

 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

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

 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. (1 Timothy 2)

[halconero]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Eve transgressed but Adam didn't?

According to a number of scriptures and latter-day prophets, yes.

I don't mean that pejoratively, or negatively either.

[Freedom]

Adam and Eve transgressed the law, they did not sin. This is an important distinction. Sin is a type of transgression. The police transgress the law when they speed to an emergency, but they are not violating the law. We have a rule in our house that you take off your shoes when inside, but of course we must transgress this law when we enter and leave because we must either put our shoes on or take them off while inside. Adam and Eve celebrated when they let the garden so they clearly did not sin and were clearly not in need of repenting. Eve introduced live and knowledge. The following article certainly is not LDS doctrine but it is a wonderful way to consider the roll of Eve in the plan of salvation. They did not break the law, they transcended it. 

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2010-fair-conference/2010-the-two-trees

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, theplains said:

I had a question on the January 2004 Ensign article "Book of Mormon Principles: Favored of the Lord."

"The God of heaven has never made covenants that are independent of obedience and righteousness."

This seems to be a contradiction in what the teaching manual Gospel Principles says; that God 
bestowed great blessings on Adam and Eve for their disobedience.

Is this the first time God ever gave people blessings for disobeying Him or are there other
examples?

Thanks,
Jim

We learn in latter day revelation that it was not "disobedience".  They were given ambiguous instructions- "Do not eat, for in the day you eat of the fruit, you shall surely die, yet it is given unto you".  Of course a day for the Lord is said to be 1000 years, and Adam died before the age of 1000 according to Genesis.

They were to make up their own minds and use judgement.  Eve saw that for the plan of salvation to happen, she must eat of the fruit, and then convince Adam of the rightness of the decision.

No disobedience.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

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

 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. (1 Timothy 2)

That seems directly opposite temple accounts.

[halconero]

Really? I'd say it's in direct accordance with the temple accounts. Though perhaps the word beguiled might be better used than deceived.

[JLHPROF]

8 hours ago, Freedom said:

Adam and Eve transgressed the law, they did not sin. This is an important distinction. Sin is a type of transgression. The police transgress the law when they speed to an emergency, but they are not violating the law. We have a rule in our house that you take off your shoes when inside, but of course we must transgress this law when we enter and leave because we must either put our shoes on or take them off while inside. Adam and Eve celebrated when they let the garden so they clearly did not sin and were clearly not in need of repenting. Eve introduced live and knowledge. The following article certainly is not LDS doctrine but it is a wonderful way to consider the roll of Eve in the plan of salvation. They did not break the law, they transcended it. 

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2010-fair-conference/2010-the-two-trees

This is a very good explanation.  I'll have to remember it.

Personally I think the fall was the plan laid out in the pre-mortal council -else why would a Saviour be chosen if man wasn't supposed to fall then be redeemed?

And I think Adam and Eve did exactly what was expected of them.

[Bobbieaware]

6 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

That seems directly opposite temple accounts.

That"s why I threw it into the mix: just to perplex everyone.

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

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

 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. (1 Timothy 2)

Thanks Bobbie.  Can i get a reference?

[bluebell]

10 hours ago, halconero said:

According to a number of scriptures and latter-day prophets, yes.

I don't mean that pejoratively, or negatively either.

I'm not taking it personally as a woman, it's just not anything that i've ever heard taught in church before.

But if it's true, it is negative though, isn't it?  It means that women are kept removed from God (and that their husbands must serve as their intermediary) because of Eve's choice in the garden.  That doesn't seem like a positive thing. It seems like punishment.

[ALarson]

16 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not taking it personally as a woman, it's just not anything that i've ever heard taught in church before.

But if it's true, it is negative though, isn't it?  It means that women are kept removed from God (and that their husbands must serve as their intermediary) because of Eve's choice in the garden.  That doesn't seem like a positive thing. It seems like punishment.

I believe this is also stated in the temple (I know we can't quote or link to anything with temple content).  But, if you listen closely to the covenants made (look up "Law of Obedience"), you'll see what I'm speaking of here (and it was even more clearly stated prior to the 1990 changes, IMO).  Women obey or listen to their husbands (as long as he is righteous) and men obey or listen to God.

Edited March 24, 2016 by ALarson

[Bobbieaware]

18 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Thanks Bobbie.  Can i get a reference?

You can see the verse is from 1 Timothy 2. More than this I would do a search under "the woman being deceived was in transgression" LDS.

[bluebell]

8 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

You can see the verse is from 1 Timothy 2. More than this I would do a search under "the woman being deceived was in transgression" LDS.

I did a search on LDS.org and every reference that i found that talked about Eve having transgressed the law, also mentioned Adam having done so as well.  There are 3 pages of the teaching that both transgressed and not just Eve.

 

17 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I believe this is also stated in the temple (I know we can't quote or link to anything with temple content).  But, if you listen closely to the covenants made (look up "Law of Obedience"), you'll see what I'm speaking of here (and it was even more clearly stated prior to the 1990 changes, IMO).  Women obey or listen to their husbands (as long as he is righteous) and men obey or listen to God.

Yes, this is a hot topic among mormon women.  I would love to hear any explanation from someone who wasn't just sharing their own personal opinion (not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just not always helpful).

[ALarson]

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Yes, this is a hot topic among mormon women.  I would love to hear any explanation from someone who wasn't just sharing their own personal opinion (not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just not always helpful).

I would like to hear an explanation or some good reasons behind this too.  I actually never caught this wording in the temple for years (until my wife pointed it out to me  )

[halconero]

58 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not taking it personally as a woman, it's just not anything that i've ever heard taught in church before.

But if it's true, it is negative though, isn't it?  It means that women are kept removed from God (and that their husbands must serve as their intermediary) because of Eve's choice in the garden.  That doesn't seem like a positive thing. It seems like punishment.

I have to be careful here, because there's temple content. A live session actually kind of addresses the intermediary part, not in the dialogue, but in the actions performed (though at a deeper level in other ordinances a woman must also eventually acts as intermediary for her husband upon the full realization of the covenants made in the endowment). It is also somewhat addressed in the dialogue with the differentiation in covenants, partially predicated upon the different reasons why Adam & Eve partook of the fruit.

I actually tend to view it not as negative, but as tremendously positive. Think about it, the first covenant made between God and humanity was made between God and woman. Though Timothy is likely pseudipigraphal, the text could be read in such a way where woman actually recapitulates the fall in a divine way. Eve received her name due to becoming the mother of all living, and what the apostle here advocates is a recapitulation of that event wherein the faithful woman becomes an Eve unto herself.

There are other scriptures, and prophets including Joseph Smith and Brigham Young elaborated on the issue, but in no sense does the differentiation in covenants or transgressions prove something negative for Eve. Just that different acts were performed by both, with different results in covenant responsibilities.

Edited March 24, 2016 by halconero

[Bobbieaware]

27 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I did a search on LDS.org and every reference that i found that talked about Eve having transgressed the law, also mentioned Adam having done so as well.  There are 3 pages of the teaching that both transgressed and not just Eve.

 

Yes, this is a hot topic among mormon women.  I would love to hear any explanation from someone who wasn't just sharing their own personal opinion (not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just not always helpful).

Both disobeyed. Eve disobeyed because in her wisdom she could see there was no other way to have a meaningful existence. And Adam disobeyed because he didn't want to be separated from the woman he loved. Adam also saw he could not keep God's commandment to multiply if he remained a lone man in the Garden of Eden.

[halconero]

I was wrong after pulling up some of my old quotes. Brigham Young talks about Adam having transgressed, but then says that Eve was found in transgression, not Adam. I'm not sure, but I believe this is speaking to the events and motivations behind both actions. Eve herself confesses that she was beguiled, though she doesn't regret her choice. I (personally, not doctrinally) believe that Adam's statement regarding Eve giving him the fruit was not a matter of throwing her under the bus, but giving his reasons behind partaking of the fruit (staying with Eve and fulfilling the commandments).

Going back to recapitulation theory. It's the Atonement theory held by the Eastern Orthodox Churches which states that one of Christ's purposes was to come to earth and recapitulate (meaning "to go over again, line by line") the life of Adam and all of humanity, and rectify all the sorrows, mistakes, and sufferings and come out conqueror. I don't believe that pseudo-Paul is regulating women to subservient childbirth, but advocating a recapitulation of Eve's life so that they too can become the Mothers of All Living.

[ALarson]

18 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Both disobeyed.

But only Eve was cut off from God and needs their husband to be their intermediary?

 

18 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Eve disobeyed because in her wisdom she could see there was no other way to have a meaningful existence.

This seems to contradict the scripture you quoted above:

12 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

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

.

Edited March 24, 2016 by ALarson

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I'm not taking it personally as a woman, it's just not anything that i've ever heard taught in church before.

But if it's true, it is negative though, isn't it?  It means that women are kept removed from God (and that their husbands must serve as their intermediary) because of Eve's choice in the garden.  That doesn't seem like a positive thing. It seems like punishment.

I should be more like you.  I do take it personally.