Examining the LDS plan of salvation

[JLHPROF]

33 minutes ago, Alan said:

I believe the Fall was a catastrophe at the time. When we say that Adam and Eve didn't sin but instead transgressed, we talk in riddles. Of course they sinned.

They were given a straight choice. Obey God or obey Lucifer. They chose to obey Lucifer.

Actually, according to Moses their choice was to obey God or obey God.
Kind of a catch 22.  Pick the higher or lower law.

[Darren10]

18 hours ago, theplains said:

Do you believe Joseph Smith's teaching (and other teachings in LDS literature) that Heavenly Father was a
man who became a God?

Thanks,
Jim

Yes but none of it matters for no Mormon has to believe it. This teaching is not canon and I do not think it ever will be; at least not before the Millennium.

[JLHPROF]

39 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Yes but none of it matters for no Mormon has to believe it. This teaching is not canon and I do not think it ever will be; at least not before the Millennium.

Wow.
 

[Freedom]

12 hours ago, Alan said:

In my view I think the accounts we have of the pre-existence, the council in heaven, the Fall etc, are very brief and lacking in any meaningful detail. So it is very tempting to read between the lines and develop our own theology. There is nothing wrong with this as long as we don't try to pass it off as the truth and demand others accept it.

I believe the Fall was a catastrophe at the time. When we say that Adam and Eve didn't sin but instead transgressed, we talk in riddles. Of course they sinned.

They were given a straight choice. Obey God or obey Lucifer. They chose to obey Lucifer.

This isn't rocket science.

Well, for you it might be. If they sinned, you would have to explain why they rejoiced afterwards. 

[Bobbieaware]

13 hours ago, Alan said:

In my view I think the accounts we have of the pre-existence, the council in heaven, the Fall etc, are very brief and lacking in any meaningful detail. So it is very tempting to read between the lines and develop our own theology. There is nothing wrong with this as long as we don't try to pass it off as the truth and demand others accept it.

I believe the Fall was a catastrophe at the time. When we say that Adam and Eve didn't sin but instead transgressed, we talk in riddles. Of course they sinned.

They were given a straight choice. Obey God or obey Lucifer. They chose to obey Lucifer.

This isn't rocket science.

Adam and Eve were given two commandments. The first was the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, the second was to not eat of the forbidden fruit. Lehi tells us if they had not partaken of the forbidden fruit but remained in the garden of Eden forever, they would never have been able to have children. This is  a complicated situation because they couldn't keep one commandment without breaking the other. They couldn't have children unless they violated the second commandment, and they couldnit remain in the garden prevent the fall unless they were willing to leave the first commandment unfulfilled. I don't know why people so often forget there were two conflicting commandments.

[JLHPROF]

22 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Adam and Eve were given two commandments. The first was the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, the second was to not eat of the forbidden fruit. Lehi tells us if they had not partaken of the forbidden fruit but remained in the garden of Eden forever, they would never have been able to have children. This is  a complicated situation because they couldn't keep one commandment without breaking the other. They couldn't have children unless they violated the second commandment, and they couldnit remain in the garden prevent the fall unless they were willing to leave the first commandment unfulfilled. I don't know why people so often forget there were two conflicting commandments.

Agreed.
And since the fall was planned we know which of the commandments was always going to be broken. 
Agency exists because of the fall (Alma 42:3 - 3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil)

If we did not know good and evil as a result of the fall we would have had no need for agency to choose one or the other.
If the fall wasn't going to happen Lucifer and Christ wouldn't have presented themselves in premortality as redeemers from the fall.
If the fall wasn't going to happen the Gods would have had no way to prove us.

One of the two commandments was never meant to be kept.
And while I can't quote verbatim, anyone who has been through the temple knows what Satan's defense was to God when accused of tempting Eve - he was just following the plan and how dare God be mad about that but as it says in Moses 4:6 "for he knew not the mind of God".


Moses 4:1 And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.
2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.
3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;
4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice.

Abraham 3:23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.
24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;
25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;
26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.
27 And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first.
28 And the second was angry, and kept not his first estate; and, at that day, many followed after him.

Edited January 28, 2017 by JLHPROF

[mfbukowski]

On 1/24/2017 at 5:25 PM, theplains said:

I was reading some LDS teachings on the plan of salvation.

"Before we were born, we lived with Heavenly Father as His spirit children. In the Council in 
Heaven, the Father presented to us His plan of salvation, and Jesus Christ was chosen to be 
our Savior. Satan sought to amend the plan, taking away our agency, and he and his followers 
were cast out. We accepted our Father’s plan and chose to follow Jesus Christ."
(source: video - https://www.lds.org/youth/learn/ap/plan-of-salvation/premortal?lang=eng#d )

Some other teachings are found in the training manual (Religion 250 - Jesus Christ and the 
Everlasting Gospel - Teacher's Manual, 2015):

Page 7 - "[Jesus Christ] was apparently the only one sufficiently humble and willing in the
premortal council to be foreordained to [bring about the infinite Atonement]" (“The Atonement 
of Jesus Christ,” Ensign, Mar. 2008, 35).

"At the first organization in heaven we were all present and saw the Savior chosen and appointed 
and the plan of salvation made, and we sanctioned it" (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: 
Joseph Smith [2007], 209).

Page 64 - "We could remember the Savior’s premortal life and all that we know him to have done 
as the great Jehovah, creator of heaven and earth and all things that in them are. We could 
remember that even in the Grand Council of Heaven he loved us and was wonderfully strong."

Page 79 - "In our preexistent state, in the day of the great council, we made a certain
agreement with the Almighty. The Lord proposed a plan, conceived by him. We accepted it."

From an Ensign magazine:

"Satan proposed to save all the spirit children of God, assuring that result by removing their 
power to choose and thus eliminating the possibility of sin. When Satan’s plan was rejected, he 
and the spirits who followed him opposed the Father’s plan and were cast out" (Ensign, November 
1993, Elder Oaks, The Great Plan of Happiness).

In the same Ensign magazine, it also said, "It was Eve who first transgressed the limits of Eden 
in order to initiate the conditions of mortality. Her act, whatever its nature, was formally a 
transgression but eternally a glorious necessity to open the doorway toward eternal life. Adam 
showed his wisdom by doing the same."

A few questions come to mind.

1] When the spirits were deciding on choosing whether to follow the choice of their spirit brother
Jesus or their brother Satan's amended plan, did they realize that Jesus was already a God?  Or 
hadn't he yet become a God in the spirit world at that time?

2) When Eve partook of the forbidden fruit first before Adam, why didn't she realize she and Adam 
were naked?  Why did this knowledge only come to her after Adam partook?

Thanks,
Jim

It's a symbolic allegory. Loss of innocence, the struggle to be righteous vs the natural man.  Free will vs determinism.

Literalism will be the end of religion including yours. 

Edited January 30, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Bobbieaware]

On 1/30/2017 at 1:19 AM, mfbukowski said:

It's a symbolic allegory. Loss of innocence, the struggle to be righteous vs the natural man.  Free will vs determinism.

Literalism will be the end of religion including yours. 

Sorry if I keep rehashing the same territory, but my lack of training in philosophy makes it difficult for me to retain a clear mental picture of the way you perceive reality. Two questions: 1) If video technology existed 21 hundred years ago, and the Lord gave permission for a video/audio record of his post-resurrection visit to the Nephites to ne made, do you believe (if shown the video) 21st century humans would be able to see with their eyes and hear with their ears a video of an actual historical event that happened in real time to real people in ancient America? 2) Do you believe these same Nephites would be justified in having a very literal perception of the Lord"s post resurrection visitation? (please see the portions below in bold)

 13 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto them saying:

 14 Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, THAT YE MAY KNOW that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.

 15 And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come.

 16 And when they had all gone forth and had witnessed for themselves, they did cry out with one accord, saying:

 17 Hosanna! Blessed be the name of the Most High God! And they did fall down at the feet of Jesus, and did worship HIM. (3 Nephi 11)

Edited January 31, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[theplains]

On 28/01/2017 at 0:38 AM, Bobbieaware said:

Adam and Eve were given two commandments. The first was the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, the second was to not eat of the forbidden fruit.

Based on comments in this thread, Adam and Eve could not procreate before the fall. Are there any LDS teachings
which say if the animals couldn't also?

Thanks,
Jim

[Bobbieaware]

6 minutes ago, theplains said:

Based on comments in this thread, Adam and Eve could not procreate before the fall. Are there any LDS teachings
which say if the animals couldn't also?

Thanks,
Jim

Yes, some in authority have said so. But LDS proponents of organic evolution disagree.

Edited January 31, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

Sorry if I keep rehashing the same territory, but my lack of training in philosophy makes it difficult for me to retain a clear mental picture of the way you perceive reality. Two questions: 1) If video technology existed 21 hundred years ago, and the Lord gave permission for a video/audio record of his post-resurrection visit to the Nephites to ne made, do you believe (if shown the video) 21st century humans would be able to see with their eyes and hear with their ears a video of an actual historical event that happened in real time to real people in ancient America? 2) Do you believe these same Nephites would be justified in having a very literal perception of the Lord"s post resurrection visitation? (please see the portions below in bold)

1-Yes of course, absolutely!

2- Yes of course absolutely!

The question was about Adam and Eve, about spiritual events in the remote past.  Nothing can be known "historically" about these events. By "historically" I literally mean academic history as taught in major universities etc.  Scientific, objective evidential history.  Your video would solve the problem well. THAT evidence would make the events "historical" in my parlance.

That has nothing to do with "what really happened" about which we have no other evidence than words on a page of questionable authorship which must be accepted by the spirit,

Even technically your video would prove nothing about that individual being Christ the Messiah.  Presumably it would show a man with wounds on his hands and feet and side, preaching,teaching and loving other people. Theoretically it could be an imposter, it could be a magician, someone intent on gaining power by capitalizing on the legend of the Christ who was to come.

And the written words of scripture, written by men under the sublime influence of the spirit are symbols on a page of what those individuals wrote.  In order to fully understand their intentions and what they wanted to convey we would have to be virtually "inside their heads" and culture and know those individuals intimately.

Were there eyewitnesses to Adam and Eve?  Of course not- even the story makes that impossible.

Did it really happen?  Of course it could have.  I have no problem thinking that God and A&E literally walked together in a garden located in what is now Missouri.  Can it be shown "historically"?  Of course not.  Even if we had your hypothetical video I personally would now be questioning if the video was "genuine" which of course we know it could not be.

Could it be "only an allegory"?  Of course!  Do I find it any less spiritually important because it was "only an allegory?"  No!!

Scriptures are universal.  Just as Israel being dispersed and returning to the promise land may apply to multiple times that has happened in history, the latest being in the last 70 or so years.   Is that what the ancient prophets saw, or did they only see what was about to happen to them personally?  Could it be both?   Of course!

Our lives are shaped by our beliefs.

Again and again I come back to the phenomenon of healing by the "placebo effect".  YOU ARE WHAT YOU BELIEVE, regardless of what others observe about you.

If you BELIEVE you will be healed, you may very well be healed and that belief alone can cause the healing.  Or does God heal you because you believe in Him?  

Does it matter???

To me it makes no difference.  I CANNOT know scientifically, academically, if Adam and Eve existed, so it is up to me to decide for myself using my own revelation, common sense, etc.  But none of it can be proven.  If it is useful to think of it as an allegory on one occasion, then that is what it was.  If it is useful to think of it as a literal event, then that is what it was.  

Because "what really happened" is totally UNKNOWABLE "what really happened" becomes irrelevant to what you believe about it.  At that point for you, your belief becomes the reality- and you can switch between those realities.  Maybe it was one, maybe the other. Who knows?  Literally!  No one but God knows and we only have our own minds to tell us what God is telling us should be our path.  Prophets of course?  Sure but guess what- was that prophet a true prophet?  You still only have your own mind to tell you what God is telling you about that prophet.

So that becomes the bottom line on everything.  You only have your own mind to tell you what is right, what is real, what really happened and what did not really happen, if your kid is lying, if the guy next door is a crook or a millionaire or a spy or a prophet.  Whatever YOU believe about it becomes your reality and that is all subject to change, as you change personally

Hope that helps.

 

[CV75]

On 1/28/2017 at 0:38 AM, Bobbieaware said:

Adam and Eve were given two commandments. The first was the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, the second was to not eat of the forbidden fruit. Lehi tells us if they had not partaken of the forbidden fruit but remained in the garden of Eden forever, they would never have been able to have children. This is  a complicated situation because they couldn't keep one commandment without breaking the other. They couldn't have children unless they violated the second commandment, and they couldnit remain in the garden prevent the fall unless they were willing to leave the first commandment unfulfilled. I don't know why people so often forget there were two conflicting commandments.

On 1/28/2017 at 0:50 AM, JLHPROF said:

Agreed.
And since the fall was planned we know which of the commandments was always going to be broken. 
Agency exists because of the fall (Alma 42:3 - 3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil)

If we did not know good and evil as a result of the fall we would have had no need for agency to choose one or the other.
If the fall wasn't going to happen Lucifer and Christ wouldn't have presented themselves in premortality as redeemers from the fall.
If the fall wasn't going to happen the Gods would have had no way to prove us.

One of the two commandments was never meant to be kept.
And while I can't quote verbatim, anyone who has been through the temple knows what Satan's defense was to God when accused of tempting Eve - he was just following the plan and how dare God be mad about that but as it says in Moses 4:6 "for he knew not the mind of God".

Agency did exist in the Garden of Eden (“…I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency…”), but at a paradisaical level of development. The fall opened the way for us to expand that agency to an exalted level.

I think Adam and Eve were actually given two choices, framed for our teaching as laws or commandments. Unto “every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions. All beings who abide not in those conditions are not justified.”

The first commandment was to live a celestial law: beget life as do those who abide that law of the celestial kingdom. The second commandment was to live a paradisiacal law: have no children, and remain abiding the incipient law of paradise, “in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.”

Because of the necessity of having opposition in all things, celestial law cannot be comprehended without comprehending the opposing telestial law, and so they had to Fall in order to acquire that level of knowledge, faith and experience, and the corresponding level of agency.

Did they sin by choosing the celestial law above the paradisiacal, and by passing through telestial life as a result? I think in a sense both yes and no, which is why we call it transgression, or balance the non-observance of the paradisiacal law with the observance of the celestial law via a telestial law, necessitating an Atoning Savior.

Even Christ had to descend below all things to ascend above all things. Now He did not accomplish this through sin and transgression, but because we are lesser stars than He, we did and do.

 

 

[JLHPROF]

31 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Agency did exist in the Garden of Eden (“…I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency…”), but at a paradisaical level of development. The fall opened the way for us to expand that agency to an exalted level.

I think Adam and Eve were actually given two choices, framed for our teaching as laws or commandments. Unto “every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions. All beings who abide not in those conditions are not justified.”
The first commandment was to live a celestial law: beget life as do those who abide that law of the celestial kingdom. The second commandment was to live a paradisiacal law: have no children, and remain abiding the incipient law of paradise, “in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.”

Because of the necessity of having opposition in all things, celestial law cannot be comprehended without comprehending the opposing telestial law, and so they had to Fall in order to acquire that level of knowledge, faith and experience, and the corresponding level of agency.
Did they sin by choosing the celestial law above the paradisiacal, and by passing through telestial life as a result? I think in a sense both yes and no, which is why we call it transgression, or balance the non-observance of the paradisiacal law with the observance of the celestial law via a telestial law, necessitating an Atoning Savior.

I can agree with that.  But it was the lack of knowledge of good and evil pre-fall that I refer to.  Kind of hard to choose good from evil if you don't recognize them.

I REALLY like your second point - perhaps they broke that law of the paradisiacal Eden kingdom (Terrestrial?) in order to keep the law of the Celestial (multiply and replenish, God's work and glory).  I may have to steal it.   
In fact, upon a reread, I absolutely love your explanation for the transgression.  Much more thought out than the usual basic "breaking the lesser law to live the higher law".
 

[CV75]

38 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I can agree with that.  But it was the lack of knowledge of good and evil pre-fall that I refer to.  Kind of hard to choose good from evil if you don't recognize them.

I REALLY like your second point - perhaps they broke that law of the paradisiacal Eden kingdom (Terrestrial?) in order to keep the law of the Celestial (multiply and replenish, God's work and glory).  I may have to steal it.   
In fact, upon a reread, I absolutely love your explanation for the transgression.  Much more thought out than the usual basic "breaking the lesser law to live the higher law".
 

Thank you!

They certainly knew the commandments, for God gave them to them, but they may not have attached much internalized meaning to them. I think the only way they could appreciate doing good and having joy (with the requisite “anti-appreciation” of sin and misery) was to break out of their state of innocence, or break out of the law of paradise by partaking of the forbidden fruit. This ushered in their connecting the devil and sin with misery, and the Savior and obedience with joy. Our feelings are likewise defined by the influence that we choose to follow.

I think the Savior may have broken out of His innocent state while still a premortal Spirit, by comprehending these two commandments and offering Himself to have a sorrowful, grief-stricken, smitten and afflicted life to succor us, and to also be our sacrifice for our sins.

Eve was beguiled to partake, so it is hard to say how much intent she had in which of the two laws to honor (and other reason to use the softer "transgress" to differentiate from more willful sin). But the Lord certainly wanted us to eventually break out of our innocence for the sake of the eternal blessings of the first commandment, and would have provided some way for that to occur. Perhaps it was as straightforward as allowing the devil, who “knew not the mind of God” to beguile Eve.

[JLHPROF]

30 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Eve was beguiled to partake, so it is hard to say how much intent she had in which of the two laws to honor (and other reason to use the softer "transgress" to differentiate from more willful sin). But the Lord certainly wanted us to eventually break out of our innocence for the sake of the eternal blessings of the first commandment, and would have provided some way for that to occur. Perhaps it was as straightforward as allowing the devil, who “knew not the mind of God” to beguile Eve.

Perhaps it was actually the devil who was beguiled. 
Eve gave thanks for the fall.  The devil claimed he was following the plan too.

Seems everyone was good with the fall happening.  Maybe less good with the consequences.

[CV75]

20 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Perhaps it was actually the devil who was beguiled. 
Eve gave thanks for the fall.  The devil claimed he was following the plan too.

Seems everyone was good with the fall happening.  Maybe less good with the consequences.

Yep, I was going to say that but then I thought the Lord was too good to beguile Satan, just as He was too good to coax Adam and Eve in making a choice. I think He let the truth "fall" where it may...! (D&C 93:30). But those pesky consequences...

Edited January 31, 2017 by CV75

[Alan]

On ‎27‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 4:40 PM, JLHPROF said:

Actually, according to Moses their choice was to obey God or obey God.
Kind of a catch 22.  Pick the higher or lower law.

I can't believe God would set them up like that. He doesn't engage in double-talk. Also, if they were obey God, why punish them? It makes no sense.

In my view the clue is in Lucifer's words when he complained he'd done nothing wrong in tempting Adam and Eve because he was "doing what had been done in other worlds". He didn't do it in other worlds, but it had been done. I suggest that taking the fruit in other worlds had been done at the behest of God. We know God frequently visited the garden and walked and talked with Adam and Eve. I'm sure they weren't discussing the weather and the price of chips! They were being trained. I believe there would have come a time when He would have told them they had learned all they needed to learn and could now take the fruit.

What actually happened is Lucifer jumped in first, got them to partake of the fruit prematurely at his behest, and threw the whole enterprise into disarray.

Edited February 1, 2017 by Alan
Clarification

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, Alan said:

I can't believe God would set them up like that. He doesn't engage in double-talk. Also, if they were obey God, why punish them? It makes no sense.

It wasn't "punishment".  It was natural consequences.
God didn't actually punish Adam and Eve for partaking of the fruit.  As you pointed out, this is what is always done on other worlds.
And the consequences of taking the fruit are exactly what he told them - the fall and death.
But that was always the plan.

Quote

In my view the clue is in Lucifer's words when he complained he'd done nothing wrong in tempting Adam and Eve because he was "doing what had been done in other worlds". He didn't do it in other worlds, but it had been done. I suggest that taking the fruit in other worlds had been done at the behest of God. We know God frequently visited the garden and walked and talked with Adam and Eve. I'm sure they weren't discussing the weather and the price of chips! They were being trained. I believe there would have come a time when He would have told them they had learned all they needed to learn and could now take the fruit.

What actually happened is Lucifer jumped in first, got them to partake of the fruit prematurely at his behest, and threw the whole enterprise into disarray.

Interesting theory.  I don't find it incompatible with the doctrine of the fall being the plan from the beginning.
It is very possible, although I am not sure it is in evidence.

[Alan]

55 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

It wasn't "punishment".  It was natural consequences.
God didn't actually punish Adam and Eve for partaking of the fruit.  As you pointed out, this is what is always done on other worlds.
And the consequences of taking the fruit are exactly what he told them - the fall and death.
But that was always the plan.

Interesting theory.  I don't find it incompatible with the doctrine of the fall being the plan from the beginning.
It is very possible, although I am not sure it is in evidence.

Being thrown out of the garden and Eve being told she was going to suffer pain during labour because of her disobedience, sounds like punishment to me. It may be the natural consequence of disobedience, but it can't legitimately be claimed that they we're being obedient to God in taking the fruit, when he specifically told them not to.

Your claim was that either option - taking the fruit or not taking the fruit - was obeying God. This cannot be true; God is not the author of confusion.

In partaking of the fruit they obeyed Lucifer.

[thesometimesaint]

15 minutes ago, Alan said:

Being thrown out of the garden and Eve being told she was going to suffer pain during labour because of her disobedience, sounds like punishment to me. It may be the natural consequence of disobedience, but it can't legitimately be claimed that they we're being obedient to God in taking the fruit, when he specifically told them not to.

Your claim was that either option - taking the fruit or not taking the fruit - was obeying God. This cannot be true; God is not the author of confusion.

In partaking of the fruit they obeyed Lucifer.

They were commanded to have children. Adam and Eve couldn't have children while in the Garden. They had to choose.

[JLHPROF]

18 minutes ago, Alan said:

Being thrown out of the garden and Eve being told she was going to suffer pain during labour because of her disobedience, sounds like punishment to me. It may be the natural consequence of disobedience, but it can't legitimately be claimed that they we're being obedient to God in taking the fruit, when he specifically told them not to.

Your claim was that either option - taking the fruit or not taking the fruit - was obeying God. This cannot be true; God is not the author of confusion.

In partaking of the fruit they obeyed Lucifer.

Again, not a punishment, but a natural consequence of the fall.

My claim is that God commanded them to multiply and replenish.  Eve said they could not have done that without the fall.
God commanded them not to "partake of the fruit" that caused the fall.
Lucifer told God he did nothing wrong because the partaking of the fruit, and thus the fall, is how worlds always operate.
The premortal council was to name the Savior to redeem us from the fall, showing that the fall was planned.

Hence, seeming the seeming contradiction.
 

[Alan]

But if God told them to eat the fruit when the time was right, they could have had children. Thus no contradiction.

In my opinion Lucifer jumped in while they were still very immature and said, in effect, "you can have it all now", which is exactly what he continues to tell us today.

I have never believed the church's teaching on the fall. It has never made any sense to me and I believe the reason is because it's non-sense.

The God I worship does not play games.

[JLHPROF]

50 minutes ago, Alan said:

But if God told them to eat the fruit when the time was right, they could have had children. Thus no contradiction.

In my opinion Lucifer jumped in while they were still very immature and said, in effect, "you can have it all now", which is exactly what he continues to tell us today.

I have never believed the church's teaching on the fall. It has never made any sense to me and I believe the reason is because it's non-sense.

The God I worship does not play games.

So to you the only difference between God's plan for his children and Lucifer's plan was timing?

I don't consider these things to be games.  The command to multiply and replenish required the fall.  God therefore required the fall.
The prohibition on the eating of fruit I do not consider to actually be a commandment.  I consider it that God was informing them of the consequences of becoming mortal to accomplish his higher purposes.
Kind of like God sending his son to be tortured and killed for a higher purpose.  Or Joseph Smith and his successors breaking the laws of the land to live God's higher law of Celestial plural marriage in spite of the commands to obey the law of the land. 
 

Edited February 1, 2017 by JLHPROF

[CV75]

5 hours ago, Alan said:

Being thrown out of the garden and Eve being told she was going to suffer pain during labour because of her disobedience, sounds like punishment to me. It may be the natural consequence of disobedience, but it can't legitimately be claimed that they we're being obedient to God in taking the fruit, when he specifically told them not to.

Your claim was that either option - taking the fruit or not taking the fruit - was obeying God. This cannot be true; God is not the author of confusion.

In partaking of the fruit they obeyed Lucifer.

I think taking the fruit was disobeying the law of paradise (the consequence being death and knowledge of the telestial world), while not taking it was obeying it (the consequence being perpetual innocent life). Not partaking of it, or obeying the law of paradise, was not necessarily disobeying the first commandment because in order to obey the first commandment, one must comprehend the telestial world (in other words, create death) in order to comprehend the celestial world (and create life).

Without death, Adam and Eve's respective gametes would not be able to "die" and form new life. They could not create life in the garden because there was no death to create it with. Even God needed chaos in His hands in order to create life in the physical world.

ETA: That they tended the garden and ate from it does not imply that anything was dying; element (without connected spirit) was just being recycled and redefined or organized. The gametes, however, in storing the codes of procreated life, contained sufficient intelligence to "die" in the process of genetic fusion, as opposed to elemental or cellular digestion/recycling of foodstuffs.

Edited February 1, 2017 by CV75

[CV75]

5 hours ago, Alan said:

But if God told them to eat the fruit when the time was right, they could have had children. Thus no contradiction.

In my opinion Lucifer jumped in while they were still very immature and said, in effect, "you can have it all now", which is exactly what he continues to tell us today.

I have never believed the church's teaching on the fall. It has never made any sense to me and I believe the reason is because it's non-sense.

The God I worship does not play games.

Which particular point is nonsensical?