Our Earth was the last to be subjected to the Fall?

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, longview said:

No basis? With reference to God, ALL science is a subset of Eternal Truths. Mortals only know a tiny subset of science.

This is another declaration based in your faith system. 

[Robert F. Smith]

On 1/15/2025 at 12:01 AM, Calm said:

There are other opposites that don’t convey opposition though, just relationship or contrast:  up-down, back-forward, in-out, black-white, cold-hot, smooth-rough (textures), hairy-bald, etc

Certainly, and perhaps we should see all that the way the Asian intellectuals did, as complementary tension reflecting balance in the Yin & Yang.  Heaven and earth, for example, can be a merism meaning "the universe."

[Robert F. Smith]

14 hours ago, longview said:

Your tabular list are NOT polar opposites. Men are NOT totally righteous, neither are men completely wicked. It is possible to be joyful and happy, even in the midst of misery. The moral agency to ACT is also the moral agency to allow the self to be ACTED UPON. Not polar opposites but a broad spectrum of possible choices and experiences that are possible in mortality. Both the righteous and the wicked can be all over the different spectrums to some degree or other. President Hinckley talked of choices we can make that are either good, better or best. Sometimes the most righteous person might take the "good" choice (instead of the best he would normally do) in order to better minister to the troubled soul.

Lehi was saying that happiness is NOT possible if misery was not experienced to some degree. I think Lehi's use of the word compound refers to conglomeration of all kinds of experiences. God said: "the earth shall be cursed for thy sake (paradoxical blessings). Instead of producing fruits and flowers spontaneously, it shall bring forth thorns, thistles, briars, and noxious weeds to afflict and torment man; and by the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread all the days of thy life, for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

Yes, such nuances are well taken, but that is because we are here on earth to gain experience -- which includes pain and suffering and temptation.  That doesn't eliminate the opposites.  Indeed, in natural law (physics), opposites are always present.

[Benjamin McGuire]

22 hours ago, longview said:

God said: "the earth shall be cursed for thy sake (paradoxical blessings).

This isn't a paradoxical blessing. The Hebrew of Genesis 3 doesn't have the meaning of "for thy sake" meaning "for your benefit". It has the meaning of "for they sake" meaning "because of you." And the curse in Genesis 3 (from which this is taken) is prophesied to be lifted in Genesis 5:29, and the lifting of the curse is recognized in 8:21 - when God subsequently says: "I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake."

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

the lifting of the curse is recognized in 8:21 - when God subsequently says: "I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake."

So according to this scripture the earth is no longer cursed as it was after the Garden and won’t ever be again?

Quote

20 Then Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. 21 And the Lord smelled a soothing aroma. Then the Lord said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination[a] of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

 

[Benjamin McGuire]

59 minutes ago, Calm said:

So according to this scripture the earth is no longer cursed as it was after the Garden and won’t ever be again?

I wouldn't use the term "the earth" because it isn't the earth that is cursed in Genesis 3, but the ground. And the ground is no longer cursed. There is a lot of wordplay going on in the first 11 chapters of Genesis, and the language is significant.

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

I wouldn't use the term "the earth" because it isn't the earth that is cursed in Genesis 3, but the ground. And the ground is no longer cursed. There is a lot of wordplay going on in the first 11 chapters of Genesis, and the language is significant.

That is a rabbit trail I want to go down….any recommendations for explaining this curse and similar ones in the OT?  That don’t require purchase of an expensive book as my list to get is full.

Edited January 16, 2025 by Calm

[Benjamin McGuire]

On 1/16/2025 at 5:41 PM, Calm said:

That is a rabbit trail I want to go down….any recommendations for explaining this curse and similar ones in the OT?  That don’t require purchase of an expensive book as my list to get is full.

Not really. I think that the closest that I have to this sort of thing would be this book. But, its not that cheap. Its mostly about curses in the Psalms, but it has an overview of early curse narratives because, as the author notes:

Quote

In a helpful metaphor, Peter J. Leithart argues that texts function like jokes, requiring previous knowledge from outside the text in order to “get it,” and that intertextuality names the way texts appeal to outside knowledge of previous texts.

Quote

Interpreters must be well informed about the subject matter of the text. A reader of Virgil who is innocent of Homer will not get it, and a reader of Eliot who is not familiar with Dante, and Dante’s readings of the Latin literary tradition, will not understand what Eliot is up to. The interpreter must have the relevant information at hand to get the joke, or, when he does not have that information, he must be able to find it. Of course, the best interpreters of jokes are the ones who have the relevant information at their fingertips, and do not have to do research to discover what the jokester intends to call to mind.

We might add that a reader of the psalms who is not familiar with Genesis will not get it and that the best interpreters of the psalms are those who have the Old Testament at their fingertips, primed to hear the intertextual connections and get in on the joke.

He then goes on to suggest of his book:

Quote

What follows is thus not a detailed exegetical analysis of every conceivable textual, grammatical, syntactical, and historical issue of the imprecatory psalms but rather a theologico-ethical and intertextually sensitive exposition in dialogue with the body of existing and able exegetical scholarship on the psalms, concentrating theological attention on the ethics of the psalms within their allusively constructed narrative world.

Laurence covers some of the ground in Genesis as a way of providing this background. Most of the discussions about these curses (at least in terms of books) are found in commentaries and studies of the larger works in which they are found - and not often in isolated discussions. There are a lot of journal articles on the subject of biblical curses. The Bibliography in Laurence's books is tremendous. Anyway, this may not fit what you are asking for, but it isn't a bad addition to your library in any case.

Edited January 18, 2025 by Benjamin McGuire

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

Not really. I think that the closest that I have to this sort of thing would be this book.

I would have been surprised, it seems rather niche (maybe not the right word, but something not discussed casually because it requires knowledge of languages, etc).

I wonder if we will be reading for knowledge in the next life…I kind of hope so.  I have had too much fun working my way through substantial texts and it’s too early to think of that as just a fond memory because of stupid fibro (which does a number on my comprehension/retention of the written word, though being on a lighted screen helps for some reason).

Edited January 18, 2025 by Calm

[marineland]

On 1/13/2025 at 6:46 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

All the worlds are organized in a common pattern, . . in all the worlds you will find God alone rules but with a presidency of three and a council of twelve.  This is the rule of all worlds.  The repetitions are infinite in number and scope . . . .  As a Yeu becomes a Father, the Father then appoints new Yeus (Jehovahs) for new worlds who in turn become Fathers, etc. (cf. First Jeu 48:8; 50:1-3; 97:25-28; Pistis Sophia I, 91, 94; III, 285, 319, 329-330; IV, 355:15,23, 370:10,19,24).  See C. Schmidt & V. MacDermot, Books of Jeu (Leiden: Brill, 1978).

I read this church teaching about the Great Council in heaven.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/1984/04/the-great-council-in-heaven?lang=eng

Did Heavenly Father hold one council for all the earths he would create and populate
or were there millions (billions?) of separate councils held for each of these worlds?

Were all of Father’s children present for each council or were children segregated 
to only their council based on which world they would go to? 

Did all Satans and Christs compete in just one council or did each Satan and Christ
(knowing or unknowing all the other Satans and Christs) compete in their separate
councils?

[marineland]

On 1/15/2025 at 1:54 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

Mortality is not punishment, but a key part of the divine plan agreed to by everyone in the Divine Council -- except Satan and his followers.

How do you come to that conclusion?  Do you have scriptural support?

Edited January 19, 2025 by marineland

[marineland]

On 1/14/2025 at 3:06 PM, longview said:

Because the Garden of Eden on each of the concurrent worlds were in the Terrestrial State, there was no need for Lucifer and his fallen angels to do any coordinating/synchronizing efforts to deceive the respective Adams and Eves. I suppose Lucifer could easily split up his host into "innumerable" teams to cover all the concurrent worlds. OR the teams eachcould have worked handful of worlds.

You said earlier (on January 9) that Satan was already deceiving other worlds before
he is punished.  And it seems our Earth is the world for which his act of temptation is
being punished.

"Then God asked Lucifer: "What hast thou been doing?" Lucifer replied: "The same
thing which I have been doing on other worlds." God: "What is that?" Lucifer: "Giving
the fruit to them." God then imposed a punishment on Lucifer: "Because thou hast
done this you shall go upon your belly and eat dust . . ." Lucifer is stunned and rages
at God saying: "Why am I being punished for doing the same things as on other worlds?"

So it seems you believe all the other temptations of Adam and Eve on all these other
worlds did not cause their Falls but only when our Earth fell, then all the other worlds
also entered their fallen state.

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, marineland said:

......................

Did Heavenly Father hold one council for all the earths he would create and populate
or were there millions (billions?) of separate councils held for each of these worlds?

Were all of Father’s children present for each council or were children segregated 
to only their council based on which world they would go to? 

Did all Satans and Christs compete in just one council or did each Satan and Christ
(knowing or unknowing all the other Satans and Christs) compete in their separate
councils?

There is only one planet Earth, but there are other worlds -- an infinity of them.

At the Great Council in Heaven for this Earth, all of our Father in Heaven's children were present, and 2/3 of them chose to come to this Earth.

Satan rebelled and he and his host were cast out of Heaven.  There is only one Savior, just as there is only one Satan for this Earth.  That is their unique function.

This pattern of rebellion and exile continues on Earth with the exile from the Garden of Eden, the exile of Israel & Judah for their rebellion against God, and the exile of Judah for rebellion against God, all of which are part of what N.T. Wright describes as the narrative arc from Genesis through Deuteronomy.  Indeed, in the last two exiles of Judah, the temple was destroyed on the very same day hundreds of years apart.  In 1841, Apostle Orson Hyde went to the Holy Land and dedicated it to the return of the Jews and the rebuilding of their temple.  We can see this taking place in real time in these latter-days.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, marineland said:

How do you come to that conclusion?  Do you have scriptural support?

You cited https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/1984/04/the-great-council-in-heaven?lang=eng , which cites Abraham 3:21-28, and Moses 4:1-4.

In fact, it is precisely this well-known doctrine which is considered by anti-Mormons a main point of attack against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Yet both faithful and secular biblical scholars accept the Divine Council:  https://www.thedivinecouncil.com/#:~:text=January 8%2C 2015,worldview of the biblical writers. 

See also Psalms 82:1, 89:5-7, Job 1:6-12, 2:1-7, I Kings 22:19-23, Isaiah 6, Zechariah 3, Daniel 7, etc.

[longview]

7 hours ago, marineland said:

You said earlier (on January 9) that Satan was already deceiving other worlds before
he is punished.  And it seems our Earth is the world for which his act of temptation is
being punished.

"Then God asked Lucifer: "What hast thou been doing?" Lucifer replied: "The same
thing which I have been doing on other worlds." God: "What is that?" Lucifer: "Giving
the fruit to them." God then imposed a punishment on Lucifer: "Because thou hast
done this you shall go upon your belly and eat dust . . ." Lucifer is stunned and rages
at God saying: "Why am I being punished for doing the same things as on other worlds?"

So it seems you believe all the other temptations of Adam and Eve on all these other
worlds did not cause their Falls but only when our Earth fell, then all the other worlds
also entered their fallen state.

No. I already touched on these and other points previously. I talked about the differences between Terrestrial Time and our linear mortal time.

[marineland]

On 1/19/2025 at 7:11 PM, longview said:

No. I already touched on these and other points previously. I talked about the differences between Terrestrial Time and our linear mortal time.

In terms of Terrestrial Time, is our Earth the last or the only world were Lucifer
is punished for tempting people like he has supposedly been doing on other worlds?

[marineland]

On 1/19/2025 at 6:51 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

You cited https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/1984/04/the-great-council-in-heaven?lang=eng , which cites Abraham 3:21-28, and Moses 4:1-4.

Neither of those scriptures mention a divine council in heaven.

[marineland]

On 1/19/2025 at 6:40 PM, Robert F. Smith said:

There is only one planet Earth, but there are other worlds -- an infinity of them.

At the Great Council in Heaven for this Earth, all of our Father in Heaven's children were present, and 2/3 of them chose to come to this Earth.

Did each world have its own council?

[longview]

1 hour ago, marineland said:

In terms of Terrestrial Time, is our Earth the last or the only world were Lucifer . . .

No. I mentioned that Lucifer and his fallen angels (the third part of Heaven that were cast out) could have worked in teams.

To clarify what I believe, @Robert F. Smith said "other worlds -- an infinity of them." My perspective is there is only a finite number of concurrent worlds for a given creative generation. Robert would be correct if he was speaking of an infinite number of creative generations (which I believe). Each creative generation is implementing its own Plan of Redemption.

1 hour ago, marineland said:

. . . is punished for tempting people like he has supposedly been doing on other worlds?

Yes. Lucifer and his fallen angels are in cahoots. The punishment for them was imposed only AFTER ALL the concurrent worlds (including our Earth) in this present creative generation had successfully transitioned to the Fall. Remember the term "Fortunate Fall" ? Lucifer was the "commander" over his fallen angels. When Lucifer was punished, so also was his army of devils punished.

[Mfbnew]

On 1/14/2025 at 1:41 PM, Teancum said:

...what we know about the Universe.

Every discussion created by humans have these limits as well.  For me, it's more about what our little brains can paste together into an alleged "reality".

We only know what humans are capable of knowing, and even nothing can be expressed about alleged "reality" except what humans have perceived in personal experience, and then "verified" what other human brains have found to be useful, and passed on in human-created language, after experiencing alleged "reality" with a human brain and our alleged "knowledge" of what is out there beyond the ability of our brains to surmise.

We often have to go by what "works best" instead of speculating on the "reality" of the paradigm.   What we "know about the universe" cannot possibly be fully "objective", ever.  It is only about comparing experiences with other human brains with whom we agree and then branding these ideas as "true".

Is Plato still a "planet"?    And who came first- the philosopher or the planet?     How did we pick his name?

Whales for example MAY be "more intelligent" than we are, but it's a little hard to communicate with them.   What is it like to know how to swim a few thousand miles under water to our birthplace, looking for a cute mate- and check out who has the best new songs,here, at "general conference"? 

  See what my hippie time growing up has done to me?

And do whales have their own Joseph Smith equivalent?      Maybe they don't need one! 

Yes, if we want to go beyond what human experience ALLOWS us to create a paradigm available to our limited abilities,  it seems like a bit of a waste of time.  

But hey--My brain only allows me to know a small part of what humans CAN know.

Some might go beyond, but for some reason I have trouble believing them, so I will stick with what my poor little brain can put together.

Oh, and by the way I happen to believe that the LDS paradigm system is the best for mankind.   Maybe it's "right" or "wrong" but all we have is our own "spiritual experiences" to play around with these ideas, but if I don't experience them, I will sit here and smile looking as affable as I can bare just to be nice.

But something else is probably going on in my own Human Brain that is often not that affable.   

 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2025 by Mfbnew

[Anonymous Mormon]

40 minutes ago, Mfbnew said:

Every discussion created by humans have these limits as well.  For me, it's more about what our little brains can paste together into an alleged "reality".

@Mfbnew @mfbukowski - It's good to see you back. Although I am mostly a lurker, I regularly read the forum and have missed your regular input over the last little while. I find your perspective so intriguing

[Mfbnew]

37 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

@Mfbnew @mfbukowski - It's good to see you back. Although I am mostly a lurker, I regularly read the forum and have missed your regular input over the last little while. I find your perspective so intriguing

Thanks!  I wish I had thought it up myself, but actually this is derived from Postmodernism.

OR "Post-Mormonism" !!   We are no longer Mormons, thanks be to God!  Out with racism, moving toward more recognition of women, it's the "restoration" of the RESTORATION.   Our canon is subject to further adjustment under the guidance of the Prophet.

The doctrine varies as the continuing Restoration requires!   

IN our culture, this is how we got all this Star Wars alien stuff and Star Trek stuff!     It is part of our present culture.  "Science" also changes almost daily!

It's a pretty common way of seeing the world, actually. 

Pragmatism, Phenomenology Postmodernism rule philosophy

 

Edited January 22, 2025 by Mfbnew

[Dario_M]

21 minutes ago, Mfbnew said:

 We are no longer Mormons, thanks be to God!   

We? There're still people here who are saints....so. 

Edited January 22, 2025 by Dario_M

[Robert F. Smith]

17 hours ago, marineland said:

Neither of those scriptures mention a divine council in heaven.

You gave a citation and asked for scriptural support, while ignoring the citations of Abraham and Moses.  The citation of Abr 3:21-28 was clearly in a divine council context, yet you deny it.  Those were the LDS Church website citations, which you ignored.  I then followed up with additional citations and information.  It is inappropriate to ignore the context of my comments, which I repeat here:

Quote

You cited https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/1984/04/the-great-council-in-heaven?lang=eng , which cites Abraham 3:21-28, and Moses 4:1-4.

In fact, it is precisely this well-known doctrine which is considered by anti-Mormons a main point of attack against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Yet both faithful and secular biblical scholars accept the Divine Council:  https://www.thedivinecouncil.com/#:~:text=January 8%2C 2015,worldview of the biblical writers. 

See also Psalms 82:1, 89:5-7, Job 1:6-12, 2:1-7, I Kings 22:19-23, Isaiah 6, Zechariah 3, Daniel 7, etc.

Those comments of mine are to be taken together, not separately.

You need to broaden your purview, context, and understanding.  Ordinary christians are typically unfamiliar with the very concept of a Divine Council.  I realize that.

Edited January 22, 2025 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

16 hours ago, marineland said:

Did each world have its own council?

Yup.  That is always the case.  Think of it as a family council.