The fall of Adam and the atonement of Christ are linked together—inseparably, everlastingly, never to be parted.

[Fair Dinkum]

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

01. Sin

02. Physical Death

03.Spiritual Death

and 

04. The ability to procreate

Into the world.  However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven.  There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.  The Fall did not first introduce death nor procreation into the world.

And as Bruce R McConkie so eloquently taught "The fall is the foundation upon which the atonement rests...If there was no fall, there was no need for a Savior"  The whole house of cards come tumbling down.

As a side note I ask the question, Can Christ be omnipotent if He believed and taught the existence of both Adam and Eve and the story of Noah?  Both of these stories are myths.  Why would an all knowing God teach falsehoods and claim them to be real when in fact they were myths?

LDS doctrine is also built on the foundation of an actual Fall.  Without the fall LDS scripture falls apart as well and seem silly.

Quote

Because that Adam fell, we are; and by his fall came death; and we are made partakers of misery and woe. . . .

And men have become carnal, sensual, and devilish, and are shut out from the presence of God. [Moses 6:48, 49]

Quote

If Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. [2 Nephi 2:22]

Quote

All things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. [2 Nephi 2:22]

Quote

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 to all the obedient. [Moses 5:11]

Quote

All things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. [2 Nephi 2:22]

Quote

If Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. [2 Nephi 2:22]

Quote

And they have brought forth children; yea, even the family of all the earth. [2 Nephi 2:20]

Quote

“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:20–22).

 

[CV75]

32 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

01. Sin

02. Physical Death

03.Spiritual Death

and 

04. The ability to procreate

Into the world.  However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven.  There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.  The Fall did not first introduce death nor procreation into the world.

And as Bruce R McConkie so eloquently taught "The fall is the foundation upon which the atonement rests...If there was no fall, there was no need for a Savior"  The whole house of cards come tumbling down.

As a side note I ask the question, Can Christ be omnipotent if He believed and taught the existence of both Adam and Eve and the story of Noah?  Both of these stories are myths.  Why would an all knowing God teach falsehoods and claim them to be real when in fact they were myths?

LDS doctrine is also built on the foundation of an actual Fall.  Without the fall LDS scripture falls apart as well and seem silly.

 

A finer point, this lesson does not refer to ability (never mentions the word) vis-à-vis procreation, but to opportunities, states, and conditions:

• “it gave us the opportunity to be born on the earth”
• “all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created”
• “[Adam and Eve] would have had no children”
• “Adam fell that men might be”
• “we never should have had seed”

I think Adam and Eve were always able to procreate, but were prevented under the terms of the laws of Eden. You seem to be ignoring the impact of spiritual laws on physical laws (and vice-versa, i.e. their interplay) in your analysis.

I’m not seeing how you see Jesus’ omnipotence and presumed lack of sophistication as problematic.

[bluebell]

41 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

01. Sin

02. Physical Death

03.Spiritual Death

and 

04. The ability to procreate

Into the world.  However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven.  There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.  The Fall did not first introduce death nor procreation into the world.

And as Bruce R McConkie so eloquently taught "The fall is the foundation upon which the atonement rests...If there was no fall, there was no need for a Savior"  The whole house of cards come tumbling down.

As a side note I ask the question, Can Christ be omnipotent if He believed and taught the existence of both Adam and Eve and the story of Noah?  Both of these stories are myths.  Why would an all knowing God teach falsehoods and claim them to be real when in fact they were myths?

LDS doctrine is also built on the foundation of an actual Fall.  Without the fall LDS scripture falls apart as well and seem silly.

 

I agree with you.  I don't think there is any way to separate the gospel of Jesus Christ, and a need for a Savior, from the Fall.  That's why, in the BOM especially, when someone is going to teach someone about Jesus Christ, they start with Adam and Eve.

I think your struggle though is in trying to get Christ to fit in the box that you have built, when, from my perspective, what you need to do is try to figure out what box He's actually in, and go from there.

[Fether]

46 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

01. Sin

02. Physical Death

03.Spiritual Death

and 

04. The ability to procreate

Into the world.  However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven.  There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.  The Fall did not first introduce death nor procreation into the world.

And as Bruce R McConkie so eloquently taught "The fall is the foundation upon which the atonement rests...If there was no fall, there was no need for a Savior"  The whole house of cards come tumbling down.

As a side note I ask the question, Can Christ be omnipotent if He believed and taught the existence of both Adam and Eve and the story of Noah?  Both of these stories are myths.  Why would an all knowing God teach falsehoods and claim them to be real when in fact they were myths?

LDS doctrine is also built on the foundation of an actual Fall.  Without the fall LDS scripture falls apart as well and seem silly.

 

Darn it!… alright… Shut everything down! He caught us

Edited August 16, 2021 by Fether

[OGHoosier]

Retracted.

Edited August 16, 2021 by OGHoosier

[bluebell]

Just now, OGHoosier said:

https://benspackman.com/

Go take a look around if you actually care.

Your weekly "gotcha" threads are getting old. 

I don't know if I'm right, but I'm reading FD's threads not as gotcha's but as him sincerely struggling to mesh how he has always interpreted (or been taught) the gospel with these scientific 'facts'.  I think he's looking for a reason to believe with his new perspective, but is struggling to find one.

[OGHoosier]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I don't know if I'm right, but I'm reading FD's threads not as gotcha's but as him sincerely struggling to mesh how he has always interpreted (or been taught) the gospel with these scientific 'facts'.  I think he's looking for a reason to believe with his new perspective, but is struggling to find one.

Fine, I'll retract. I'll say that I read him differently but there's not much point in arguing it. 

Edited August 16, 2021 by OGHoosier

[bluebell]

14 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

Fine, I'll retract. I'll say that I read him differently but there's not much point in arguing it. 

The Spackman resource is an excellent one.  I like his stuff.

[bOObOO]

1 hour ago, Fair Dinkum said:

...There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced. 

Whoever convinced you that you are right about this idea did you a disservice.  It would have been better had you simply ignored him or her, and recognized the idea is wrong.  Our spirit has always been immortal and at one time our other body was too, when our spirit had never separated from it.  We don't die until or unless we actually die, with our other body no longer regenerating our body parts, and our spirit separates from it.  So the only reason you think you are going to die is because you have seen it happen to other people and you think that since it happened to them it could and most likely will happen to you too.  But there was a time when nobody on this planet died here or saw anyone else die here.  You just don't believe that because you have always been surrounded by death, ever since you got here.

1 hour ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.

Cells can divide and replicate and grow and develop themselves without the one who has those cells becoming dead. Our cells divide and replicate and grow and develop and yet we are still alive. 

 

Edited August 16, 2021 by bOObOO

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, OGHoosier said:

Fine, I'll retract. I'll say that I read him differently but there's not much point in arguing it. 

There other boards I could post my questions to but they tend to be affirming of my POV rather than giving me any push back.  I respect the various views and perspective given in this board.  While I disagree with many of the perspectives given here at least its not an echo chamber.

I want and appreciate these non confirming opinions I receive here.

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, bOObOO said:

 Our spirit has always been immortal and at one time our other body was too, when our spirit had never separated from it.  We don't die until or unless we actually die, with our other body no longer regenerating our body parts, and our spirit separates from it. 

This is a unprovable claim.  I accept that you believe this but you can not demonstrate the truth of it.

[bOObOO]

12 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

This is a unprovable claim.  I accept that you believe this but you can not demonstrate the truth of it.

Actually, I can demonstrate proof that our spirits are immortal/eternal, by the fact that nobody can prove our spirits will someday cease to exist, or that there was a time when they did not exist.  We can see that spirits separate from the body they occupy, which is what we refer to as death, but even then our spirit continues to live, just as our spirits did before joining its other body. So it is a provable claim to say our spirits have always existed, because there is nobody who can prove to the contrary.  And to prove when a spirit has joined with an immortal/eternal other body all we need to see is that it never separates from it, because if it ever does, or did, then that other body was obviously not an immortal/eternal body.

[CV75]

26 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

This is a unprovable claim.  I accept that you believe this but you can not demonstrate the truth of it.

Only God can demonstrate the truth of it to you, through spiritual means. It is provable only on spiritual, and not scientific, terms. I think the reconciliation is to use scientific tools for scientific knowledge, and spiritual tools for spiritual knowledge. Sometimes they may lead to the same conclusion, or supplement each other, but it is more effectual to use the right tool for the right job.

[bOObOO]

2 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Only God can demonstrate the truth of it to you, through spiritual means. It is provable only on spiritual, and not scientific, terms. I think the reconciliation is to use scientific tools for scientific knowledge, and spiritual tools for spiritual knowledge. Sometimes they may lead to the same conclusion, or supplement each other, but it is more effectual to use the right tool for the right job.

I see the demonstration of anything eternal as a demonstration that it is not anything less than eternal, so if you ever see anything that does not cease to exist, then you can consider that to be eternal.  Imagine looking at it forever and it always being there.

[Bob Crockett]

4 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

n which the atonement rests...If there was no fall, there was no need for a Savior"  The whole house of cards come tumbling down.

 

I agree that without the Adam and Eve story the need for the Church vanishes.  What, then, is your point?  Without my feet I couldn't be a runner. So what?

[ksfisher]

3 hours ago, bOObOO said:

We don't die until or unless we actually die...

🤦‍♂️

[JLHPROF]

4 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven.  There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. 

No, to all of this.

[bOObOO]

6 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

🤦‍♂️

Amazing how the truth can be so obvious, at least sometimes, isn't it.  Also amazing how some people take it as fact that we are all going to die when it hasn't happened, yet, if it ever will, with so many people so totally convinced that they will die.

Unprovable unless or until it actually happens.

[poptart]

Some may find this interesting.

The Chapels – Jerusalem Patriarchate News Gate (jerusalem-patriarchate.info)

Church of the Holy Sepulchre - Wikipedia

Even the happy death Crucifix alludes to Christs triumph over death and his sacrifice removing the sin from the original Adam as well as making the new one possible.  At least that's what I was told.

 

Edited August 16, 2021 by poptart

[smac97]

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

01. Sin

02. Physical Death

03.Spiritual Death

and 

04. The ability to procreate

Into the world. 

From the link you provided:

Quote

In the Garden of Eden, God commanded, “Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Moses 3:16–17). Because Adam and Eve transgressed this command and partook of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they were cast out from the presence of the Lord (see Doctrine and Covenants 29:40–41). In other words, they experienced spiritual death. They also became mortal—subject to physical death. This spiritual and physical death is called the Fall.

As descendants of Adam and Eve, we inherit a fallen condition during mortality (see Alma 42:5–9, 14). We are separated from the presence of the Lord and subject to physical death. We are also placed in a state of opposition, in which we are tested by the difficulties of life and the temptations of the adversary (see 2 Nephi 2:11–14; Doctrine and Covenants 29:39; Moses 6:48–49).

"In the Garden of Eden."  Not "the world."

"{T}hey {Adam and Eve} experienced spiritual death. They {Adam and Eve} also became mortal —subject to physical death."

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven. 

I think you mean "empirically" proven, right?

Also, please cite, chapter and verse, this "claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man."

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.  The Fall did not first introduce death nor procreation into the world.

I think you are tilting at windmills here.  

I also think you would have a hard time empirically proving what you are saying here.  

I am curious as to your thoughts about the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Has that been empirically disproven?  If so, how?

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

As a side note I ask the question, Can Christ be omnipotent if He believed and taught the existence of both Adam and Eve and the story of Noah? 

I believe so.  How is it that you question omnipotence based on this?

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Both of these stories are myths. 

"Myths" in what sense?

And how have these stories/events been empirically disproven?

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Why would an all knowing God teach falsehoods and claim them to be real when in fact they were myths?

He wouldn't.

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

LDS doctrine is also built on the foundation of an actual Fall. 

What do you mean by "an actual Fall?"

6 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Without the fall LDS scripture falls apart as well and seem silly.

Appeal to ridicule doesn't really do much for me.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

4 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Quote

Our spirit has always been immortal and at one time our other body was too, when our spirit had never separated from it.  We don't die until or unless we actually die, with our other body no longer regenerating our body parts, and our spirit separates from it. 

This is a unprovable claim. 

As are virtually all of the points you raise in these posts of yours.  

There are very few things that happened long ago that can be empirically proven or disproven.  That's just a very tall order.  This seems particularly important where, as here, the issues under discussion are an admixture of historical events (what actually happened), poetic description and metaphor (how it actually happened), and so on.  It seems like you want to take an absolutist, hyper-literal approach to these things.  I hope you can come to apply some measure of nuanced exegesis.  

Consider Luke 2: "And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed."  How literally do you take "all the world" in this verse?  Did Caesar attempt to tax the inhabitants of what is to day the Japanese archipelago?  The people living in the South Pacific?  The Americas?  Did the decree extend to plants and animals?  To the literal planet?  

If you can find a way to construe "all the world" with some measure of figurativeness, perhaps you could do the same with the poetry of Genesis?  It needn't be an all-or-nothing kind of thing.

4 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I accept that you believe this but you can not demonstrate the truth of it.

Quite so.  We none of us can prove or disprove these things.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[mgy401]

The need for a Christ revolves around a sort of “fallen” human nature that needs to be improved upon/redeemed/perfected.  I don’t know that, in the abstract, it *has* to have come from a literal Adam and a literal garden and a literal fruit; to the extent that the Genesis narrative had parallels or antecedents in other ancient near-eastern cultures, it may be that the scriptural authors and subsequent prophets and commentators (up to and including Christ Himself) merely found them convenient vehicles with which to illuminate fundamental truths about the human condition (and worthy of repeating in the modern temple liturgy).

That said:  the LDS Church has kind of entrenched itself in the idea of a historical Adam.  To some degree one can rationalize “well, however humanity evolved, there was  a ‘first man’ and ‘first woman’, unlike their predecessors, God saw as capable of attaining exaltation and worthy of covenanting with; and these are the ‘Father Adam’ and ‘Mother Eve’ that Joseph Smith claimed to have seen in vision.”  But it doesn’t completely resolve the issues.  McConkie, JFS, and others have been vocal enough on the issue that I’m reluctant to completely dismiss the idea that at some point in history, in some context, Satan confronted Father Adam and Mother Eve in a way that significantly changed the circumstances of their life and every life that came after them.  I’d love to discard that idea, because it doesn’t jibe with what I understand to be the anthropological and biological and geological evidence.  But; as they say, I’m not quite feelin’ it.

And again:  The idea of an afterlife is unscientific.  The idea of being raised from the dead is unscientific.  The idea of angelic beings is unscientific.  The idea of healings is unscientific.  The idea of a deep, fundamental change in human nature wrought by submitting to the will of someone who died two millennia ago, is unscientific.  If we’re waiting for “science” (as defined in the twenty-first century, or the nineteenth century, or the seventeenth century, or whatever other definition of “science” you prefer) to confirm every whit of Mormonism—per our own doctrine that’s only going to come when we hear Jesus Himself saying “welcome to the Terrestrial Kingdom”.

Edited August 16, 2021 by mgy401

[Kevin Christensen]

On 8/16/2021 at 11:22 AM, Fair Dinkum said:

The church still teaches HERE that the Fall first introduced:

01. Sin

02. Physical Death

03.Spiritual Death

and 

04. The ability to procreate

Into the world.  However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven.  There has NEVER been a time on the earth when life has existed and death has not existed nor when live could not reproduced.  So death was NOT introduced on earth through a fall nor was procreation.  These are provably false doctrines. Death has always existed since the very first cell divided or the very first multi cell organism first ceased to exist and procreation since that very first cell divided.  The Fall did not first introduce death nor procreation into the world.

And as Bruce R McConkie so eloquently taught "The fall is the foundation upon which the atonement rests...If there was no fall, there was no need for a Savior"  The whole house of cards come tumbling down.

As a side note I ask the question, Can Christ be omnipotent if He believed and taught the existence of both Adam and Eve and the story of Noah?  Both of these stories are myths.  Why would an all knowing God teach falsehoods and claim them to be real when in fact they were myths?

LDS doctrine is also built on the foundation of an actual Fall.  Without the fall LDS scripture falls apart as well and seem silly.

 

No death where?, is the question.  The answer, is, of course, Eden, a garden, from which Adam and Eve depart to a dreary place where different conditions apply than in Eden.  When they arrive are given garments of skin, which symbolizes their entry into physical bodies and mortality. And of course, the Eden story is not a history, but a symbolic temple drama.  Nibley even points out the stage directions included in the Book of Abraham in one of his last major articles.  "Abraham's Temple Drama."    The Book of Moses even has phrases like "Adam is many" and "there were many lands and each land was called earth."

In Godel, Escher and Bach, Hofstadter reminds us that "proofs are demonstrations within fixed systems of propositions" and that "Godel shows that provability is a weaker notion than truth no matter what axiomatic system is involved."  (pages 18 and 19.).

Or as Ian Barbour puts it in Myths, Models, and Paradigms: A Comparative Study of Science and Religion, 

Quote

Discordant data do not always falsify a theory. One can never test an individual hypothesis conclusively in a “crucial experiment”; for if a deduction is not confirmed experimentally, one cannot be sure which one, from among the many assumptions on which the deduction was based, was in error. A network of theories and observations is always tested together. Any particular hypothesis can be maintained by rejecting or adjusting other auxiliary hypotheses. ((Barbour, 99.))

Recall that in Moses 1, we are told that worlds without number have been created and destroyed, in an ongoing process.  Does not the destruction of worlds imply at least a little bit of death?  Which means, the assumption of "No Death Before the Fall" as an "Absolute thoughout all the Cosmos" is a demonstrably false assumption.   Remove that absolute, accept that that system of propositions is not base on close observation, or revelation, but rather, unexamined assumptions by people who have no claim to absolute knowledge, and accept that the stories we have actually put the notion relative to Eden and the Garden, both Temple dramas, and the problem, like many others, goes away.   Nibley's 1980 "Before Adam" talk goes into this sort of thing in detail.

Unless, the real priority is to have a problem that one can use to prick the vulnerable bubble of faith and thus be rid of something that one does not want to be burdened with.  Paradigm choice, Kuhn explains, always involving "Which problems are more significant to have solved?"

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, A

Edited August 18, 2021 by Kevin Christensen
typos

[The Nehor]

11 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

However the claim that physical death or procreation was first introduced into the world through the fall of man is demonstrably false and can be imperially proven. 

Well, did his majesty the Emperor prove it or not?

[california boy]

3 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

No death where?, is the question.  The answer, is, of course, Eden, a garden, from which Adam Eve depart, a dreary place where different conditions apply than in Eden.  When they arrivive are given garments of skin, which symbolizes their entry into physical bodies and morality. And of course, the Eden story is not a history, but a symbolic temple drama.  Nibley even points out the stage directions included in the Book of Abraham in one of his last major articles.  "Abraham's Temple Drama."    The Book of Moses even has phrases like "Adam is many" and "there were many lands and each land was called earth."

So where did the skins of animals in the Garden of Eden come from do you think?  Or are you saying that they received the skins after they left the Garden of Eden?  And did the Garden of Eden just disappear?  Do members believe there were other humans all around the Garden of Eden dying along with animals?  There was just a magical little area where no death was occurring?  Is that what you are saying?  Just trying to figure out how members think all of this happened if they believe it was an actual place with an actual Adam and Eve.

Edited August 17, 2021 by california boy