The Fall of Adam, Ancient Lie, and Redemption of Zion

[rongo]

1 minute ago, Obeone said:

Of course not! As I said, if Adam did not fall, Christ would have been born on some other fallen world. 

(citation needed)

So,you think Adam and Eve could have had billions in posterity without the Fall,and Jesus would have come to another world if they hadn't fallen?

[Obeone]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

I agree.  But I am curious as to why it did.  So I speculate.

Everyone must be free to exercise their agency, so that everyone may receive all the blessings they are willing to enjoy. That necessitated a veil, which those who desire can overcome, and thus gain joy in their victory, grow as individuals, and return to God's presence victorious. 

[pogi]

34 minutes ago, rongo said:

Without the Fall (and their eyes being opened), they would not have been wearing anything,even trillions of years later. Remember, the Lord made them clothing of skin after their eyes had been opened by eating the fruit (plus,death didn't enter in until the Fall). Ditto with eating squirrel meat. Neither of your (admittedly tongue in cheek) examples were possible until after the transgression/Fall.

Ha! Good point, but yes it was tongue in cheek.  My point is that they were clearly susceptible to deception.  They would have been spiritual infants and would have fallen just like the rest of us do with temptation eventually, even without the aide of conflicting commands.  As I said, only Christ is the perfect sinless being.  There is no reason to think differently.

Edited June 14, 2022 by pogi

[Obeone]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The flaw with your reasoning is that our first parent’s decision is somehow binding on all humanity which makes little sense. If it were a choice between an easier path and a harder one why do two people make the decision for everyone?

Why do drunken, drug addicted parents "make decisions" for their children to be born into sad and dangerous circumstances?

You have to agree that choices parents make do effect their children, for better or for worse.

But gratefully, through Christ, all have an option of overcoming tellestial, fallen world, and regaining the paradise lost by our first parents. 

And the very extra challenges we overcome here, are compensated by God with grater blessings of inner peace and joy, and faster exaltation in the world to come. It all balances out in the end, if you do your best and stay on the Lord's side. 

[Obeone]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I have a hard time believing God let this fundamental misinformation persist for millennia (perhaps since Abraham but certainly since Lehi) and go uncorrected by Joseph Smith in the Restoration. Stranger things have happened.

I think God has a sense of humor and of justice. 

He allowed latter day saints to have a gaping error in the middle of their doctrine, a point that the rest of the world gets correctly, so that His church would not be arrogant when all the cards are laid down and the truth is revealed in the eyes of all. 

The world gets pretty much everything wrong except the fall, and we get pretty much everything right  except the fall. A poetic inversion, so we would understand in the end that we need them, and they need us. We are nothing without each-other.  

There is one more point of inversion. Perhaps I'll talk about it later. 

Edited June 14, 2022 by Obeone

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I don’t think that specific transgression was inevitable, but that transgression itself was inevitable - they not being half God and all… 

I think think after a trillion years, Adam might have eventually transgressed after being commanded not to lie for example - “no Eve, that sheep skin doesn’t make you look fat…”  Or, “No Cain, I don’t know what happened to your squirrel dinner left-overs.”

Have you read C.S. Lewis’s novel Perelandra? It is the second book in his (sort of ) science fiction trilogy. In it the protagonist (who previously went to Mars in the first book) is sent to Venus on a mission he doesn’t understand that well. He arrives to find an unfallen world and meets the local “Eve” who is awaiting the advent of her promised “Adam”. Then the protagonist’s old adversary the rocket scientist shows up in a rocket ship and is eventually possessed by a devil. The devil moves in to try to convince Eve to break the one rule God gave her which is not to go to the island that does not move. The devil tries all kinds of trickery. The protagonist realizes that eventually she will give in if she is tempted endlessly and this devil keeps trying new methods of temptation so has to find a way to stop it.

[The Nehor]

10 minutes ago, Obeone said:

I think God has a sense of humor and of justice. 

He allowed later day saints to have a gaping error in the middle of their doctrine, a point that the rest of the world gets correctly, so that His church would not be arrogant when all the cards are laid down and the truth is revealed in the eyes of all. 

The world gets pretty much everything wrong except the fall, and we get pretty much everything right  except the fall. A poetic inversion, so we would understand in the end that we need them, and they need us. We are nothing without each-other.  

There is one more point of inversion. Perhaps I'll talk about it later. 

Nah, we are closer to right but I suspect there is more and if I am right I understand why God is not sharing. I am not sure whether I hope I am right or not.

[Hamba Tuhan]

53 minutes ago, Obeone said:

That necessitated a veil, which those who desire can overcome, and thus gain joy in their victory, grow as individuals, and return to God's presence victorious. 

In my experience, those who espouse the heresy you are advocating for here nearly always believe themselves to be examples of what it looks like to progress without sin/transgression.

[Obeone]

3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Whatever your intent, this does not explain why the prophets are wrong while you are right.

😃 What explains why I am right is the words of God and Reason. Nothing more. 

Why the prophets are wrong in their opinions about the fall? Perhaps they are blinded by the authority and standing of Adam, who is an archangel after all. Perhaps they are blinded by authority and standing of Joseph Smith, who is a head of the Final Dispensation, and one of the 7 angels spoken of in the book of Revelation. They venerate these men so much that it suspends their critical and rational thinking, even to the point they unwittingly make God Himself a liar!

In saying all this, I have high respect for Adam, Joseph, and all the prophets and apostles who were so deceived. They will embrace the truth when they are finally confronted with it. 

In fact, I believe Adam would be forever damned, and not allowed to rule over the earth, unless he publicly admits to all that God indeed had a better way for him in the garden, were Adam willing to listen to God more than to the devil. I think Adam-ondi-Ahman will in large part be about this: Adam apologizing for the fall.  I think the church will know it within 5 years or so. Then shortly Zion will finally be redeemed, and New Jerusalem built. Watch and see. Not too long now. ...

[rongo]

59 minutes ago, pogi said:

Ha! Good point, but yes it was tongue in cheek.  My point is that they were clearly susceptible to deception.  They would have been spiritual infants and would have fallen just like the rest of us do with temptation eventually, even without the aide of conflicting commands.  As I said, only Christ is the perfect sinless being.  There is no reason to think differently.

I'm wondering what they could have been deceived about and transgressed, even after billions of years, other than the commandment not to eat of the fruit. They were innocent and ignorant, and without any experience. Setting aside the fruit dilemma (placed in the middle of the garden), what could Satan have deceived them about and tempted them to do? They didn't even know that they were naked, and I don't think this would have dawned on them without having their eyes opened by eating the fruit. 

[Obeone]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

They transgress a lesser law to keep a higher law. Like deciding to break the speed limit to take someone to the emergency room. 

A commandment that is not suspended is the higher law. Not partaking the forbidden fruit was the higher law, because it would have allowed them to have a higher level of existence, for themselves and for their posterity: a Millennium right out of the gate, just like millions of worlds have done before. They took the lesser law, and were cursed for it. Just stating the facts here. Read it for yourself.

[The Nehor]

50 minutes ago, Obeone said:

Why do drunken, drug addicted parents "make decisions" for their children to be born into sad and dangerous circumstances?

That is just asking my question but kicking the can down the road. Saying God does allow it doesn’t answer why God allows it.

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, Obeone said:

A commandment that is not suspended is the higher law. Not partaking the forbidden fruit was the higher law, because it would have allowed them to have a higher level of existence, for themselves and for their posterity: a Millennium right out of the gate, just like millions of worlds have done before. They took the lesser law, and were cursed for it. Just stating the facts here. Read it for yourself.

You are still insisting that they could have had posterity without eating the fruit. 

Have you been through the temple? 

How do you explain "Adam fell that man might be?" (Book of Mormon) Or, "Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil" (Eve in the Book of Moses)?

Do you just ignore those because they go against your theory?

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, Obeone said:

Not partaking the forbidden fruit was the higher law, because it would have allowed them to have a higher level of existence ...

Just like you're personally doing right now, right?

[pogi]

7 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'm wondering what they could have been deceived about and transgressed, even after billions of years, other than the commandment not to eat of the fruit. They were innocent and ignorant, and without any experience. Setting aside the fruit dilemma (placed in the middle of the garden), what could Satan have deceived them about and tempted them to do? They didn't even know that they were naked, and I don't think this would have dawned on them without having their eyes opened by eating the fruit. 

My belief is that the Lord was preparing them to partake of the fruit.  They would have been further instructed in the principles of the gospel and exaltation with further commandments like the law of consecration, they would have been commanded not to covet, to keep the Sabbath holly, to not lust, lie, to pray always, to give thanks in all things, to love perfectly, to forgive, to serve, etc. etc. etc.  Their eyes would have been opened to know good from evil.  They would have been susceptible to the temptations of Lucifer, no different from the rest of us.  

[Obeone]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

Adam and Eve were not like people in the Millennium because they were immortal

Death in the Millennium is not worth of the name. In a blink of an eye they are changed from Terrestrial to resurrected Celestial, if they deserve it.

Adam and Eve could have had the same had they listened to God at the time.

The Lord Himself says of the Millennium:

Quote

And there shall be no sorrow because there is no death. (D&C 101:29)

[Obeone]

2 hours ago, filovirus said:

I think Pogi and Obeone have many valid points. I will have to think a little more on the matter. Here is a question: Why would Lucifer temp Eve if it would bring about the Plan of Salvation? He knew exactly what the plan was and how it would work.

Thank you! I answered this question here.

[pogi]

40 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'm wondering what they could have been deceived about and transgressed, even after billions of years, other than the commandment not to eat of the fruit. They were innocent and ignorant, and without any experience. Setting aside the fruit dilemma (placed in the middle of the garden), what could Satan have deceived them about and tempted them to do? They didn't even know that they were naked, and I don't think this would have dawned on them without having their eyes opened by eating the fruit. 

To explain further, here is a more in-depth explanation that I wrote previously:

Quote

My conjecture and the basis of my entire theory is this: the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was forbidden it is true, but I believe that it was forbidden in the same way that baptism is forbidden before repentance; much like the temple endowment is forbidden before obedience, faithfulness, and preparedness; much like sex is forbidden before marriage. One cannot conclude that because the fruit was forbidden that it was inherently bad or that it could not have been acceptable at a later time.  There are many blessings in this life which the Lord forbids for a time, until the receiver is prepared and willing to make certain covenants.  One of these blessings I already mentioned is sexual relations.  This is forbidden until we are mature enough to be taught and able to understand the responsibilities and consequences in the partaking of such blessings. The responsibilities and consequences of partaking of the fruit were similar to those of sexual relations.  One of the consequences and responsibilities inherent in both was that of bearing and raising children.  That’s why I think comparing the forbidding of the fruit to the forbidding of sexual relations is a fair comparison; the results of both are the sacred responsibility of children. One must first be prepared to a degree and be willing to enter certain covenants before the partaking of such a blessing and great responsibility.  

We learn from the temple that after giving these two first commandments, the Lord promised Adam that he would return and give further instruction.  Adam never received that further instruction, because when the Lord returned, Adam had already fallen.  I believe that the further instruction would have been preparatory to partaking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and preparatory to fulfilling the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth.  The Lord has promised in scripture that he would provide a way.  I believe the way would have been revealed in that further instruction had they remained faithful.  That seems to be validated by the following scripture:

“He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things (knowledge of good & evil)…Behold here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light. And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation.” (D&C 93: 29,31-32)

Adam and Eve did not keep the commandment of God and partook of the fruit.  Had they remained faithful, I believe that they would have been given of the fruit from the Lord himself, having first been prepared.  Instead of receiving of the truth and light that was inherent in the fruit, they received of the darkness and hid themselves from the Lord.  I believe that the Garden of Eden was meant to be a preparatory state to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, just as this life is a preparatory state to partake of the tree of life.  It was an inverse reality from our own experience.  They were forbidden to partake of the fruit of knowledge but had full access to the tree of life.  We, like Adam, however are separated from the tree of life until we are fully prepared, but have been endowed with knowledge.

The Fruits

            There are only two fruits named in the Garden of Eden, the fruit of the tree of life and that of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  We know that there were other fruits in the garden that were good for the food of man, but there was something different about these two spoken of. They seemed to be more than just food, there was a spiritual element to these two trees.  It has been revealed that the trees were both actual physical trees and symbolic in many ways.  The consequences of eating them were both physical and spiritual.  We learn about the meaning of the tree of life and its symbolism from Nephi: “…and I beheld the tree of life was a representation of the love of God (1 Nephi 11:25).”  “Which fruit is most precious and most desirable above all other fruits; yea, and it is the greatest of all the gifts of God (1 Nephi 15: 36)”  Nephi explains that the tree which his father saw in vision was a representation of the tree of life, we must assume that this is the same tree of life spoken of in the Garden of Eden, which was a representation of the love of God. 

There is much more to be understood of the tree of life and this supernal and sovereign gift of love, but let this suffice for now.  First I would like to talk about the other tree mentioned in the garden, the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  This misunderstood tree seems to have fallen into the annals of history as the source of death, corruption, and evil.  It is connected with sin and forbidden temptation and therefore it is often thought of as corrupt or evil.  To make such a conclusion however is misguided. Once you understand its significance and symbolism, you will see clearly that such a judgment is a gross mistake.  

Let’s start out by asking ourselves what we know of this tree and its fruit?  First of all, we know that it was of such importance and consequence that it was included in the very first of God’s commands. After being commanded to multiply and replenish the earth, God forbade them to partake of the fruit.  He then left them alone and assured them that he would return with further instruction.  God warned that the consequences of partaking of the fruit would be death.  We are to understand that this death was referring to both a physical and a spiritual death.  We can conclude then that this fruit held properties which had the power to alter both the physical and spiritual properties of man.  Physically, the consequences were mortality; spiritually however, it made them like the Gods, knowing good and evil.  We know that the fruit was planted by God himself in the Garden of Eden.  We know that it was an essential part of the plan of salvation.  When we put all of these clues together we begin to form a picture.  If the tree of life is a representation of God and his love, what about the tree of knowledge?  Instead of asking what it represents, perhaps we should ask ourselves who it represents.  Ask yourself these questions:  Who is it that is the central part of the plan of salvation?  Who is it that has power over life and death, both physically and spiritually?  Who is it that bestows upon us the knowledge of both good and evil?  In the Salt Lake temple, the tree of knowledge is depicted in a beautiful mural on the right hand of the tree of life.  Who then was the only other being in the garden that stood, even on the right hand of God?  Through whose fruit do we become even as God?

I think it is blatantly obvious who I am referring to here.  When we think of the light or spirit of Christ, the association I think becomes obvious:  

“For behold, the spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil…” (Moroni 7:16)  Moroni clearly explains in this passage that the spirit or light of Christ is the source of knowledge of good and evil, in other words the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil – and is a gift from God, not something to be eternally forbidden. 

 

Christ comprehended the darkest abyss and the depths of evil itself as he bent over in pain and bled drops of blood from every pore.  Who could have a better knowledge of evil than he who took all evil upon himself as he partook of that bitter cup? On the other hand, who could have a better knowledge of good than he who was raised up and placed on the right hand of goodness himself, to become one with the source of all good - even God?  Is it any wonder than that the light of him who has tasted of both the bitter and the sweet, is the same light that influences the conscience of man and makes it perfect, that we might know the good from the evil? 

“He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things (knowledge of good and evil), that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; which truth shineth.  This is the light of Christ.” (D&C 88:6-7)

 It is that same light that dawned on the minds and the hearts of Adam and Eve as they partook of the fruit.  What fear and shame must have come upon the hearts and minds of our first parents as they perceived that the hands that fed it to them were not the hands of him to whom it belonged; the hands that later proved ownership by the prints on the wrists and palms.  

In a very powerful symbolic display, Christ “hung on a tree (Gal 3:13).” This, in representation of the fruit which hung from a tree in the garden of Eden, to redeem us from the curse of Adam which came because of the partaking of that very fruit before the time.  Christ then became the first fruits of the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20).  It is interesting to note that the three events of the atonement which redeemed us from the fall, use three defining words in their description: garden, tree, and fruit. The atonement happened in a garden and on a tree, which bore the first fruits of the resurrection; all these things pointing back to the Garden of Eden and the representation of Christ in the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  Christ himself having complete knowledge of good and evil and sole power over life, death, and sin.  The two trees in the garden represented the two heavenly beings that walked in their midst, even God and his love and Christ and his light. 

In making these connections, I could not deny the powerful symbolism.  Through partaking of the fruit, they became enlightened as to right and wrong. This light of Christ is a gift to man from God and was intended as such.  But like other gifts, the fruit, or the light of Christ, was intended to be given only through and after obedience to God’s word, and so it was forbidden until they were proven and prepared.  I believe that if Adam and Eve had remained faithful and had not been deceived, God would have given them the gift of the fruit or the light of Christ after he had proven their obedience.  Blessings of spiritual gifts are only given to those who have proven themselves faithful to that commandment upon which it is predicated.  Disobedience always preludes the fall into spiritual death, which is why God warned, “In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die”.  They would not die because the fruit was bad; on the contrary, the fruit was “good”, "very good" even.  Spiritual death only came because they partook before their time. Mortality also came by the fruit, even as the Savior took upon himself mortality, thus he had power over death and life.

Upon further reflection after writing this, I am less convinced that the fruit itself caused death, but that death was a consequence of transgression. 

Edited June 14, 2022 by pogi

[Obeone]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

(citation needed)

So,you think Adam and Eve could have had billions in posterity without the Fall,and Jesus would have come to another world if they hadn't fallen?

Reason is my citation here.

Precisely.

[mfbukowski]

On 6/11/2022 at 10:11 PM, Obeone said:

They COULD do it. See point (1).

Of course they could do it because they had agency to break commandments as we all do. Our agency to break commandments has nothing to do with GOD's agency to make them.

So God forgot we break commandments?

It therefore had to NOT be a commandment.  It's a transgression, and all allegorical anyway as announced in the pre-1990 endowment 

  

Edited June 14, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

27 minutes ago, Obeone said:

Reason is my citation here.

You think these are scientific facts?   What is " reason?"

This is about a spiritual / emotional experience in which GOD tells us that the paradigm is justified, as much as knowing right from wrong.

Nevermind. 

I won't bug you about it.

Edited June 14, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Obeone]

38 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is just asking my question but kicking the can down the road. Saying God does allow it doesn’t answer why God allows it.

It is the same question as "Why God allows evil and pain to occur." The answer is always the same, because these are joy to overcome, and joy is the only purpose of life.

[Obeone]

37 minutes ago, rongo said:

You are still insisting that they could have had posterity without eating the fruit. 

Have you been through the temple? 

How do you explain "Adam fell that man might be?" (Book of Mormon) Or, "Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil" (Eve in the Book of Moses)?

Do you just ignore those because they go against your theory?

Already answered it here, and here.

[manol]

Obeone, while I lean towards your line of thinking, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the importance you attribute to the acceptance of your ideas:

2 hours ago, Obeone said:

... no one who believes this garbage about "no better way but to transgress" can be resurrected or restored to Terrestrial glory or above. Which clearly means that all the honorable prophets and apostles who believed this nonsense will have to change their minds on the point before they are resurrected or before they receive a terrestrial glory or above.

It is clear to me that anyone who believes this lie, that was started by the devil himself(!), unwittingly makes God a liar, a self-contradictory God, which is no God at all!

I know probably no one means it that way, but if they think this through, this is exactly what this means.

Why is having the correct belief about the Fall so crucial? 

Do you think anyone has gone beyond the Telestial Kingdom without having essentially the same understanding of the Fall that you are describing here? 

[Obeone]

26 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Of course they could do it because they had agency to break commandments as we all do.

You are missing the point: When I said they COULD do it, I meant they could have children AND not partake of the fruit, as God commanded them.