LDS Freedom Forum

Adam and Eve, and the writers of the translation are trying to hide and minimize the obvious fact that there indeed was a better way for Adam and Eve, had they obeyed the Father rather than the devil.

Therefore the correct meaning of the following verses is this:

 
Moses 5:10,11

10 And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for [despite] of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.
11 And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression [because we were stupid] 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 unto all the obedient. [For there verily was a better way for us, had we listened to the Father, but gratefully He has forgiven us because of our faith on his Son.]

I'm sorry to be skipping ahead, but 31 pages is alot to sift through and I am often impatient. Lol
Near the beginning of this thread someone mentioned 2Nephi 2:22-23 and how Lehi says they must have remained forever... and had no children.
If this has already been answered I will gladly sift through post but I believe it was overlooked (at least in the responses that followed the original post).
I very much agree with the OP at this point, but is there some restriction you feel Lehi is referencing? Or is my assumption that the doctrine is simplified for his audience more likely the case?

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑February 18th, 2019, 1:12 pm I'm sorry to be skipping ahead, but 31 pages is alot to sift through and I am often impatient. Lol
Near the beginning of this thread someone mentioned 2Nephi 2:22-23 and how Lehi says they must have remained forever... and had no children.
If this has already been answered I will gladly sift through post but I believe it was overlooked (at least in the responses that followed the original post).
I very much agree with the OP at this point, but is there some restriction you feel Lehi is referencing? Or is my assumption that the doctrine is simplified for his audience more likely the case?

Thank you.

Good question. Sorry I did not notice your post earlier.

Lehi is exactly right in that if Adam and Eve were not exposed to temptation/opposition, they would have remained in their innocence, and would not have known good from evil, and consequently would not have had children.

What he fails to mention however, is that though exposure to opposition/temptation was necessary, the fall was not.

In other words, though it was necessary and proper for them to be exposed to temptation, they did not have to yield to it .

In fact, it was their duty and a commandment of God that they should have resisted the temptation. Which if they had done, their eyes would have been opened without transgression, and they would have had posterity without the fall, precisely as the Father commanded them from the beginning.

But because they listened to the devil rather than God they fell and incurred a curse upon themselves and their posterity.

And though God forgave them afterwards, there indeed was a better way for them had they listened the the Father from the beginning, and the notion that "there was no other way" is the doctrine of the devil, and is a bold-faced lie.

What makes the matter difficult is that apparently Joseph Smith himself, Brigham Young, and even the current prophet Russel Nelson, seem to believe the lie that the devil told Eve.

But it is all part of a test. Prophets are liable to be wrong in their personal opinions just like anybody else. God alone never makes mistakes.

But to me it is a further testimony of the truthfulness of the calling of the prophet Joseph, that despite his personal opinions that sometimes contradicted the scriptures, logic and the truth, Joseph faithfully transmitted to us the words of God, which words make the truth very plain and evident, namely that: Adam and Eve did wrong in the Garden of Eden. There was a better way for them. God never contradicts Himself, nor gives self-contradictory commandments (as many suppose), because if He did He would cease to be God.

If Adam listened to the Father instead of his wife and the devil, the world would have began in a Paradisaical/Terrestrial state, the same that will prevail on the earth, but now only in the Millennium, where billions of children will be born and live out their lives in a paradisaical state unto salvation (as many other worlds have done), without ever knowing a fallen, lone and dreary world.

That was what the Father had for Adam and Eve from the beginning, had they chosen to listen to Him rather than the devil at the time.

Thanks for your question.

It is true that the value of the lessons we learn through consequences of error, (the lesson how not to make errors), is greater than the price of the error.

Nevertheless it does not mean that there is no other way to live but to make errors.

In fact it is a self-contradiction to believe that making errors is necessary and unavoidable, for that makes God a liar, who commanded us to be as perfect as Himself.

What's the difference, you'll say: everyone below God has errors.

Yes. But the second you say there is no other way, you made God a liar.

God does not make mistakes. That is the whole point:

THERE IS A BETTER WAY!

Which is listen to the Father, instead of the devil. That is the lesson Adam and Eve had to learn.

And if you say there was no better way, then you've learned nothing, and unwittingly made God a liar, shutting the door on the truth and the lesson that needs to be learned.

What is the lesson?

The lesson is that:

• THERE IS A BETTER WAY. That is the lesson.

• Sin and error are not mandatory (as Satan would have you believe). That is the lesson.

• God can save you from your errors if you stop lying that there was no better way. That is the lesson.

I say it again, those who repeat with Satan that “there is no other way” but to make mistakes, are making God a liar, and are in a state of self-contradiction, which will prove their eternal misery if they will not forsake this satanic lie.

A child learns to walk precisely because he believes there is a better way. If he believed there was no better way (as Satan falsely asserts) he would not even try.

So for Adam and Eve and for all beings who made mistakes: There was and is a better way.

What?

Listen to the Father instead of the devil.

That is the better way.

dup - see following.

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑February 24th, 2019, 4:57 pm

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑February 18th, 2019, 1:12 pm I'm sorry to be skipping ahead, but 31 pages is alot to sift through and I am often impatient. Lol
Near the beginning of this thread someone mentioned 2Nephi 2:22-23 and how Lehi says they must have remained forever... and had no children.
If this has already been answered I will gladly sift through post but I believe it was overlooked (at least in the responses that followed the original post).
I very much agree with the OP at this point, but is there some restriction you feel Lehi is referencing? Or is my assumption that the doctrine is simplified for his audience more likely the case?

Thank you.

Good question. Sorry I did not notice your post earlier.

Lehi is exactly right in that if Adam and Eve were not exposed to temptation/opposition, they would have remained in their innocence, and would not have known good from evil, and consequently would not have had children.

What he fails to mention however, is that though exposure to opposition/temptation was necessary, the fall was not.

In other words, though it was necessary and proper for them to be exposed to temptation, they did not have to yield to it .

In fact, it was their duty and a commandment of God that they should have resisted the temptation. Which if they had done, their eyes would have been opened without transgression, and they would have had posterity without the fall, precisely as the Father commanded them from the beginning.

But because they listened to the devil rather than God they fell and incurred a curse upon themselves and their posterity.

And though God forgave them afterwards, there indeed was a better way for them had they listened the the Father from the beginning, and the notion that "there was no other way" is the doctrine of the devil, and is a bold-faced lie.

What makes the matter difficult is that apparently Joseph Smith himself, Brigham Young, and even the current prophet Russel Nelson, seem to believe the lie that the devil told Eve.

But it is all part of a test. Prophets are liable to be wrong in their personal opinions just like anybody else. God alone never makes mistakes.

But to me it is a further testimony of the truthfulness of the calling of the prophet Joseph, that despite his personal opinions that sometimes contradicted the scriptures, logic and the truth, Joseph faithfully transmitted to us the words of God, which words make the truth very plain and evident, namely that: Adam and Eve did wrong in the Garden of Eden. There was a better way for them. God never contradicts Himself, nor gives self-contradictory commandments (as many suppose), because if He did He would cease to be God.

If Adam listened to the Father instead of his wife and the devil, the world would have began in a Paradisaical/Terrestrial state, the same that will prevail on the earth, but now only in the Millennium, where billions of children will be born and live out their lives in a paradisaical state unto salvation (as many other worlds have done), without ever knowing a fallen, lone and dreary world.

That was what the Father had for Adam and Eve from the beginning, had they chosen to listen to Him rather than the devil at the time.

Thanks for your question.

This is entirely a moot issue. The fall did happen and when you became accountable and sinned it happened to you. You honestly and sincerely and justly were found wanting and included in the ranks of all who fall. You are fallen man. Your next of kin is fallen man. Your dog is fallen dog. The gerbil you had as a child is fallen. The chickens that layed the eggs you had for breakfast are fallen. (Bacon is not the product of a fallen world however but is of a holy origin.) It's done, it is over, there is no constructive benefit from what if's that suppose to correct Adam and Eve...too late. That train has left the station. Those baby birds have been pushed out of the nest. You are beating a dead and fallen horse...aaaggghhhhh!

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 2:49 pm

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑February 24th, 2019, 4:57 pm

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑February 18th, 2019, 1:12 pm I'm sorry to be skipping ahead, but 31 pages is alot to sift through and I am often impatient. Lol
Near the beginning of this thread someone mentioned 2Nephi 2:22-23 and how Lehi says they must have remained forever... and had no children.
If this has already been answered I will gladly sift through post but I believe it was overlooked (at least in the responses that followed the original post).
I very much agree with the OP at this point, but is there some restriction you feel Lehi is referencing? Or is my assumption that the doctrine is simplified for his audience more likely the case?

Thank you.

Good question. Sorry I did not notice your post earlier.

Lehi is exactly right in that if Adam and Eve were not exposed to temptation/opposition, they would have remained in their innocence, and would not have known good from evil, and consequently would not have had children.

What he fails to mention however, is that though exposure to opposition/temptation was necessary, the fall was not.

In other words, though it was necessary and proper for them to be exposed to temptation, they did not have to yield to it .

In fact, it was their duty and a commandment of God that they should have resisted the temptation. Which if they had done, their eyes would have been opened without transgression, and they would have had posterity without the fall, precisely as the Father commanded them from the beginning.

But because they listened to the devil rather than God they fell and incurred a curse upon themselves and their posterity.

And though God forgave them afterwards, there indeed was a better way for them had they listened the the Father from the beginning, and the notion that "there was no other way" is the doctrine of the devil, and is a bold-faced lie.

What makes the matter difficult is that apparently Joseph Smith himself, Brigham Young, and even the current prophet Russel Nelson, seem to believe the lie that the devil told Eve.

But it is all part of a test. Prophets are liable to be wrong in their personal opinions just like anybody else. God alone never makes mistakes.

But to me it is a further testimony of the truthfulness of the calling of the prophet Joseph, that despite his personal opinions that sometimes contradicted the scriptures, logic and the truth, Joseph faithfully transmitted to us the words of God, which words make the truth very plain and evident, namely that: Adam and Eve did wrong in the Garden of Eden. There was a better way for them. God never contradicts Himself, nor gives self-contradictory commandments (as many suppose), because if He did He would cease to be God.

If Adam listened to the Father instead of his wife and the devil, the world would have began in a Paradisaical/Terrestrial state, the same that will prevail on the earth, but now only in the Millennium, where billions of children will be born and live out their lives in a paradisaical state unto salvation (as many other worlds have done), without ever knowing a fallen, lone and dreary world.

That was what the Father had for Adam and Eve from the beginning, had they chosen to listen to Him rather than the devil at the time.

Thanks for your question.

This is entirely a moot issue. The fall did happen and when you became accountable and sinned it happened to you. You honestly and sincerely and justly were found wanting and included in the ranks of all who fall. You are fallen man. Your next of kin is fallen man. Your dog is fallen dog. The gerbil you had as a child is fallen. The chickens that layed the eggs you had for breakfast are fallen. (Bacon is not the product of a fallen world however but is of a holy origin.) It's done, it is over, there is no constructive benefit from what if's that suppose to correct Adam and Eve...too late. That train has left the station. Those baby birds have been pushed out of the nest. You are beating a dead and fallen horse...aaaggghhhhh!

Thank you for the response love is truth! also i agree that it is a moot point, because we all find ourselves in a fallen state, but I think it is important to understand the fall in order to truly understand and appreciate the Atonement. At least for me, I feel like if I never try to overthink what I know and review what I believe I limit what the Lord can show me.
I think I have always considered the fall a necessary part of progression, like all generations of spirits have to go through it in order to achieve salvation. But if I understand correctly, it may not be necessary but rather an understood possibility in the over arching plan of salvation. I understand the need to overcome temptation, and for a few years of my life I felt that part of overcoming temptation involved succumbing to it and then overcoming. It makes me wonder if a clearer understanding of the Fall and temptation might have spared me from some of the justifications I have made for my sins.

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 4:42 pm

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 2:49 pm

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑February 24th, 2019, 4:57 pm

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑February 18th, 2019, 1:12 pm I'm sorry to be skipping ahead, but 31 pages is alot to sift through and I am often impatient. Lol
Near the beginning of this thread someone mentioned 2Nephi 2:22-23 and how Lehi says they must have remained forever... and had no children.
If this has already been answered I will gladly sift through post but I believe it was overlooked (at least in the responses that followed the original post).
I very much agree with the OP at this point, but is there some restriction you feel Lehi is referencing? Or is my assumption that the doctrine is simplified for his audience more likely the case?

Thank you.

Good question. Sorry I did not notice your post earlier.

Lehi is exactly right in that if Adam and Eve were not exposed to temptation/opposition, they would have remained in their innocence, and would not have known good from evil, and consequently would not have had children.

What he fails to mention however, is that though exposure to opposition/temptation was necessary, the fall was not.

In other words, though it was necessary and proper for them to be exposed to temptation, they did not have to yield to it .

In fact, it was their duty and a commandment of God that they should have resisted the temptation. Which if they had done, their eyes would have been opened without transgression, and they would have had posterity without the fall, precisely as the Father commanded them from the beginning.

But because they listened to the devil rather than God they fell and incurred a curse upon themselves and their posterity.

And though God forgave them afterwards, there indeed was a better way for them had they listened the the Father from the beginning, and the notion that "there was no other way" is the doctrine of the devil, and is a bold-faced lie.

What makes the matter difficult is that apparently Joseph Smith himself, Brigham Young, and even the current prophet Russel Nelson, seem to believe the lie that the devil told Eve.

But it is all part of a test. Prophets are liable to be wrong in their personal opinions just like anybody else. God alone never makes mistakes.

But to me it is a further testimony of the truthfulness of the calling of the prophet Joseph, that despite his personal opinions that sometimes contradicted the scriptures, logic and the truth, Joseph faithfully transmitted to us the words of God, which words make the truth very plain and evident, namely that: Adam and Eve did wrong in the Garden of Eden. There was a better way for them. God never contradicts Himself, nor gives self-contradictory commandments (as many suppose), because if He did He would cease to be God.

If Adam listened to the Father instead of his wife and the devil, the world would have began in a Paradisaical/Terrestrial state, the same that will prevail on the earth, but now only in the Millennium, where billions of children will be born and live out their lives in a paradisaical state unto salvation (as many other worlds have done), without ever knowing a fallen, lone and dreary world.

That was what the Father had for Adam and Eve from the beginning, had they chosen to listen to Him rather than the devil at the time.

Thanks for your question.

This is entirely a moot issue. The fall did happen and when you became accountable and sinned it happened to you. You honestly and sincerely and justly were found wanting and included in the ranks of all who fall. You are fallen man. Your next of kin is fallen man. Your dog is fallen dog. The gerbil you had as a child is fallen. The chickens that layed the eggs you had for breakfast are fallen. (Bacon is not the product of a fallen world however but is of a holy origin.) It's done, it is over, there is no constructive benefit from what if's that suppose to correct Adam and Eve...too late. That train has left the station. Those baby birds have been pushed out of the nest. You are beating a dead and fallen horse...aaaggghhhhh!

Thank you for the response love is truth! also i agree that it is a moot point, because we all find ourselves in a fallen state, but I think it is important to understand the fall in order to truly understand and appreciate the Atonement. At least for me, I feel like if I never try to overthink what I know and review what I believe I limit what the Lord can show me.
I think I have always considered the fall a necessary part of progression, like all generations of spirits have to go through it in order to achieve salvation. But if I understand correctly, it may not be necessary but rather an understood possibility in the over arching plan of salvation. I understand the need to overcome temptation, and for a few years of my life I felt that part of overcoming temptation involved succumbing to it and then overcoming. It makes me wonder if a clearer understanding of the Fall and temptation might have spared me from some of the justifications I have made for my sins.

Understanding the fall is a great idea but seek to understand what occurred, what actually occurred instead of running a dozen what if scenario's. The atonement was calculated to over come exactly what occurred in the fall and has no influence over unrealized possibilities that could have made for some other outcome. That is the principle aspect that we need to understand.

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 5:29 pm

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 4:42 pm

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 2:49 pm

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑February 24th, 2019, 4:57 pm
Thank you.

Good question. Sorry I did not notice your post earlier.

Lehi is exactly right in that if Adam and Eve were not exposed to temptation/opposition, they would have remained in their innocence, and would not have known good from evil, and consequently would not have had children.

What he fails to mention however, is that though exposure to opposition/temptation was necessary, the fall was not.

In other words, though it was necessary and proper for them to be exposed to temptation, they did not have to yield to it .

In fact, it was their duty and a commandment of God that they should have resisted the temptation. Which if they had done, their eyes would have been opened without transgression, and they would have had posterity without the fall, precisely as the Father commanded them from the beginning.

But because they listened to the devil rather than God they fell and incurred a curse upon themselves and their posterity.

And though God forgave them afterwards, there indeed was a better way for them had they listened the the Father from the beginning, and the notion that "there was no other way" is the doctrine of the devil, and is a bold-faced lie.

What makes the matter difficult is that apparently Joseph Smith himself, Brigham Young, and even the current prophet Russel Nelson, seem to believe the lie that the devil told Eve.

But it is all part of a test. Prophets are liable to be wrong in their personal opinions just like anybody else. God alone never makes mistakes.

But to me it is a further testimony of the truthfulness of the calling of the prophet Joseph, that despite his personal opinions that sometimes contradicted the scriptures, logic and the truth, Joseph faithfully transmitted to us the words of God, which words make the truth very plain and evident, namely that: Adam and Eve did wrong in the Garden of Eden. There was a better way for them. God never contradicts Himself, nor gives self-contradictory commandments (as many suppose), because if He did He would cease to be God.

If Adam listened to the Father instead of his wife and the devil, the world would have began in a Paradisaical/Terrestrial state, the same that will prevail on the earth, but now only in the Millennium, where billions of children will be born and live out their lives in a paradisaical state unto salvation (as many other worlds have done), without ever knowing a fallen, lone and dreary world.

That was what the Father had for Adam and Eve from the beginning, had they chosen to listen to Him rather than the devil at the time.

Thanks for your question.

This is entirely a moot issue. The fall did happen and when you became accountable and sinned it happened to you. You honestly and sincerely and justly were found wanting and included in the ranks of all who fall. You are fallen man. Your next of kin is fallen man. Your dog is fallen dog. The gerbil you had as a child is fallen. The chickens that layed the eggs you had for breakfast are fallen. (Bacon is not the product of a fallen world however but is of a holy origin.) It's done, it is over, there is no constructive benefit from what if's that suppose to correct Adam and Eve...too late. That train has left the station. Those baby birds have been pushed out of the nest. You are beating a dead and fallen horse...aaaggghhhhh!

Thank you for the response love is truth! also i agree that it is a moot point, because we all find ourselves in a fallen state, but I think it is important to understand the fall in order to truly understand and appreciate the Atonement. At least for me, I feel like if I never try to overthink what I know and review what I believe I limit what the Lord can show me.
I think I have always considered the fall a necessary part of progression, like all generations of spirits have to go through it in order to achieve salvation. But if I understand correctly, it may not be necessary but rather an understood possibility in the over arching plan of salvation. I understand the need to overcome temptation, and for a few years of my life I felt that part of overcoming temptation involved succumbing to it and then overcoming. It makes me wonder if a clearer understanding of the Fall and temptation might have spared me from some of the justifications I have made for my sins.

Understanding the fall is a great idea but seek to understand what occurred, what actually occurred instead of running a dozen what if scenario's. The atonement was calculated to over come exactly what occurred in the fall and has no influence over unrealized possibilities that could have made for some other outcome. That is the principle aspect that we need to understand.

OK I think I see what you mean, like since the fall happened even if there are other possibilities none of them would apply to me since I am already fallen, and since the Atonement is specific to our fallen state any other scenarios (though they may be intriguing and satisfy that speculative part of my mind) wouldn't necessarily strengthen my understanding of the Atonement.
I suppose that makes sense (if that is actually what you mean), I do feel like in my search to understand everything that interests me I sometimes become so caught up in what doesn't really apply to me that it keeps me from truly understanding the things that do.

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 6:04 pm

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 5:29 pm

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 4:42 pm

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 2:49 pm

This is entirely a moot issue. The fall did happen and when you became accountable and sinned it happened to you. You honestly and sincerely and justly were found wanting and included in the ranks of all who fall. You are fallen man. Your next of kin is fallen man. Your dog is fallen dog. The gerbil you had as a child is fallen. The chickens that layed the eggs you had for breakfast are fallen. (Bacon is not the product of a fallen world however but is of a holy origin.) It's done, it is over, there is no constructive benefit from what if's that suppose to correct Adam and Eve...too late. That train has left the station. Those baby birds have been pushed out of the nest. You are beating a dead and fallen horse...aaaggghhhhh!

Thank you for the response love is truth! also i agree that it is a moot point, because we all find ourselves in a fallen state, but I think it is important to understand the fall in order to truly understand and appreciate the Atonement. At least for me, I feel like if I never try to overthink what I know and review what I believe I limit what the Lord can show me.
I think I have always considered the fall a necessary part of progression, like all generations of spirits have to go through it in order to achieve salvation. But if I understand correctly, it may not be necessary but rather an understood possibility in the over arching plan of salvation. I understand the need to overcome temptation, and for a few years of my life I felt that part of overcoming temptation involved succumbing to it and then overcoming. It makes me wonder if a clearer understanding of the Fall and temptation might have spared me from some of the justifications I have made for my sins.

Understanding the fall is a great idea but seek to understand what occurred, what actually occurred instead of running a dozen what if scenario's. The atonement was calculated to over come exactly what occurred in the fall and has no influence over unrealized possibilities that could have made for some other outcome. That is the principle aspect that we need to understand.

OK I think I see what you mean, like since the fall happened even if there are other possibilities none of them would apply to me since I am already fallen, and since the Atonement is specific to our fallen state any other scenarios (though they may be intriguing and satisfy that speculative part of my mind) wouldn't necessarily strengthen my understanding of the Atonement.
I suppose that makes sense (if that is actually what you mean), I do feel like in my search to understand everything that interests me I sometimes become so caught up in what doesn't really apply to me that it keeps me from truly understanding the things that do.

This life is shorter than we realize and I wonder if there is not barely enough time to understand the realities as opposed to taking from that valuable time to study alternative possibilities that have no bearing on our salvation.

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 4:42 pm Thank you for the response love is truth! also i agree that it is a moot point, because we all find ourselves in a fallen state, but I think it is important to understand the fall in order to truly understand and appreciate the Atonement.

Excellent point!

Shaffer89 wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 4:42 pm I think I have always considered the fall a necessary part of progression, like all generations of spirits have to go through it in order to achieve salvation. But if I understand correctly, it may not be necessary but rather an understood possibility in the over arching plan of salvation. I understand the need to overcome temptation, and for a few years of my life I felt that part of overcoming temptation involved succumbing to it and then overcoming. It makes me wonder if a clearer understanding of the Fall and temptation might have spared me from some of the justifications I have made for my sins.

Another great point! Thank you.

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 5:29 pm Understanding the fall is a great idea but seek to understand what occurred, what actually occurred instead of running a dozen what if scenario's.

"What if" scenarios are indispensable part of understanding of what actually occurred. The scriptures are full of "what if" scenarios, because without them understanding is impossible.

Here is an example of a "what if" scenario in the scriptures (one of many):

 Alma 12:23 
23 And now behold, I say unto you that if it had been possible for Adam to have partaken of the fruit of the tree of life at that time, there would have been no death, and the word would have been void, making God a liar, for he said: If thou eat thou shalt surely die.

So the Lord and his prophets seem to disagree with you on the value of "what if's" as full comprehension without them is impossible.

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 5:29 pm The atonement was calculated to over come exactly what occurred in the fall and has no influence over unrealized possibilities that could have made for some other outcome.

"Unrealized possibilities" are the definition of the fall. If you do not understand what is lost, you cannot fully appreciate the value of the atonement of Christ.

Besides, if the devil is right that "there was no other way," then God is a liar, because He gave a self-contradictory commandment, which makes Him no god at all!

Is it not worth correcting?

I will say more:

If Adam and Eve and their posterity do not acknowledge the truth that there indeed was a better way for them in the Garden of Eden had they listened to the Father instead of the devil, they will be damned, as God lives, and will not be permitted to rule.

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑April 4th, 2019, 9:42 pm

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 5:29 pm Understanding the fall is a great idea but seek to understand what occurred, what actually occurred instead of running a dozen what if scenario's.

"What if" scenarios are indispensable part of understanding of what actually occurred. The scriptures are full of "what if" scenarios, because without them understanding is impossible.

Here is an example of a "what if" scenario in the scriptures (one of many):

 Alma 12:23 
23 And now behold, I say unto you that if it had been possible for Adam to have partaken of the fruit of the tree of life at that time, there would have been no death, and the word would have been void, making God a liar, for he said: If thou eat thou shalt surely die.

So the Lord and his prophets seem to disagree with you on the value of "what if's" as full comprehension without them is impossible.

brlenox wrote: ↑April 2nd, 2019, 5:29 pm The atonement was calculated to over come exactly what occurred in the fall and has no influence over unrealized possibilities that could have made for some other outcome.

"Unrealized possibilities" are the definition of the fall. If you do not understand what is lost, you cannot fully appreciate the value of the atonement of Christ.

Besides, if the devil is right that "there was no other way," then God is a liar, because He gave a self-contradictory commandment, which makes Him no god at all!

Is it not worth correcting?

I will say more:

If Adam and Eve and their posterity do not acknowledge the truth that there indeed was a better way for them in the Garden of Eden had they listened to the Father instead of the devil, they will be damned, as God lives, and will not be permitted to rule.

The challenge for me is that you are trying to out think a celestial being with a telestial mind. I don't think you yet have enough information to take these things where you are trying to go.

brlenox wrote: ↑April 4th, 2019, 9:46 pm The challenge for me is that you are trying to out think a celestial being with a telestial mind. I don't think you yet have enough information to take these things where you are trying to go.

Those who repeat with the devil that "there was no other way" in direct contradiction to the commandments that God gave, are the ones who are trying to "out think a celestial being."

Don't you think?

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑April 4th, 2019, 9:53 pm

brlenox wrote: ↑April 4th, 2019, 9:46 pm The challenge for me is that you are trying to out think a celestial being with a telestial mind. I don't think you yet have enough information to take these things where you are trying to go.

Those who repeat with the devil that "there was no other way" in direct contradiction to the commandments that God gave, are the ones who are trying to "out think a celestial being."

Don't you think?

You are forcing your point...

brlenox wrote: ↑April 4th, 2019, 10:03 pm You are forcing your point...

The truth is forcing my point.

Some would say, "but Adam would have been left without Eve, for she partook of the forbidden fruit and would be cast out."

Not true! This is the persuasion of the devil.

The truth is:
If Adam put God the Father above his fallen wife, Eve indeed would have been cast out for a time, and after she learned her lesson, which was to listen to the Father more than the devil, she would have been allowed back with Adam after her resurrection, but Adam, who was left without a wife for his faithfulness to God, would have been given another wife by God, a wife who would listen to the Father more than to the devil in this thing, and thus Adam could have multiplied and replenished the earth without a fall, precisely as the Father has commanded him.

And he who will continue to assert with the devil that there was no other way for Adam in the garden, will be damned, for such assert a lie whose father is the devil, and this lie makes God a liar, for He verily commanded them not to partake, and therefore not to fall, and therefore to bring forth children in paradise, instead of lone and dreary world, precisely the same paradisiacal glory that will prevail in the Millennium, when billions of children will be born in paradisiacal glory, and not in a fallen, lone and dreary world.

That was what the Father commanded Adam from the beginning, that was what Adam lost, and that was what he could have had if he were true and faithful to the Father in the garden, as the Father commanded him, and that was what many other worlds did achieve, for many worlds did not fall, for their Adams listened to the Father in the garden more than to the devil. And that is the lesson Adam and his posterity must learn, and if they deny this lesson and so continue they will be damned as God lives, for by denying that lesson they directly contradict God and that which He has clearly commanded.

He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Yet some will say again: “But if Adam did not fall, how would the Savior be crucified?”

Jesus answered it well: “It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!” (Luke 17:1)

If Adam did not fall, Jesus would have been born on a different fallen world. For as He said, it is impossible but some worlds would fall, but woe to that world that falls!

He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

If you take the critics “non-logic” to its logical conclusion, then those who betrayed, beaten and crucified the savior did the “right” thing and should be rewarded rather than damned.

But Jesus said: “he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.” (John 19:11)

So those who do evil and disobey the commandments of God condemn themselves.

Yes it is all part of a plan, and so is hell part of God’s plan. But it does not mean that it is recommended by God. It is FORBIDDEN by Him. And those who think they know better than God will learn on their own experience why hell is forbidden, therefore they must stay in hell until they learn to believe the Father more than the devil.

So also was Adam given a choice, and he chose wrong, just like those who choose hell choose wrong:

26 Therefore, they have drunk out of the cup of the wrath of God, which justice could no more deny unto them than it could deny that Adam should fall because of his partaking of the forbidden fruit; therefore, mercy could have claim on them no more forever.
(Mosiah 3:26 )

Learn this: Listening to and obeying the Father is better than listening to the devil. If the Father forbids something, you would be wise to believe and listen to him, instead of the devil.

Then other’s say: “But if Adam did not partake of the forbidden fruit, how would then his eyes be opened to know good and evil?”

By resisting the temptation of course! Resisting temptations opens eyes BETTER than yielding to them. This is why it was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil, because whether they resisted or yielded to the temptation to partake of it, their eyes would have been opened.

But if they listened to the Father and resisted the temptation, as the Father expressly commanded them, their eyes would have been opened without a transgression, and they would have had posterity without the fall, as the Father commanded them. In which case the world would have started in the same state that will exist on the earth, but now only in the Millennium.

So the Father had much better plan for Adam in the garden had he listened to Him.

He who has ears to hear let him hear.

abijah wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2018, 6:30 pm LiT - I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the original purpose of Elohim & Jehovah’s second visit?

“We shall visit you again, and give you further instructions”

What do you reckon these “further instructions” were?

Just saying I’m still waiting to hear what the further instructions were. But I guess that’s an unfair question to an individual who hasn’t received them.

This has been on my mind a lot recently. If God had other plans (which He surely did), what do you think they were?

How do you incorporate the “tree of life” into the narrative? To acknowledge the tree of knowledge but not the tree of life which are somehow both in the centre, is ridiculous. Ephrem the Syrian suspects the foliage of the tree of knowledge covered the other.

abijah wrote: ↑May 26th, 2019, 9:58 am

abijah wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2018, 6:30 pm LiT - I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the original purpose of Elohim & Jehovah’s second visit?

“We shall visit you again, and give you further instructions”

What do you reckon these “further instructions” were?

Just saying I’m still waiting to hear what the further instructions were. But I guess that’s an unfair question to an individual who hasn’t received them.

This has been on my mind a lot recently. If God had other plans (which He surely did), what do you think they were?

Friend, I did answer your question here:
viewtopic.php?p=872501#p872505

You probably missed it.

abijah wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2018, 6:30 pm How do you incorporate the “tree of life” into the narrative? To acknowledge the tree of knowledge but not the tree of life which are somehow both in the centre, is ridiculous.

I think in the garden whatever tree you eat of last, that is the result for you: eat of the tree of life, and you live. Eat of the tree of death and you die. Simple.

This is why the Father said, AFTER Adam partook of the fruit of death:

 Alma 42:3 
3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—

So clearly, what you partake of last, that is the effect you end up with.

LoveIsTruth wrote: ↑May 26th, 2019, 10:06 am

abijah wrote: ↑May 26th, 2019, 9:58 am

abijah wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2018, 6:30 pm LiT - I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the original purpose of Elohim & Jehovah’s second visit?

“We shall visit you again, and give you further instructions”

What do you reckon these “further instructions” were?

Just saying I’m still waiting to hear what the further instructions were. But I guess that’s an unfair question to an individual who hasn’t received them.

This has been on my mind a lot recently. If God had other plans (which He surely did), what do you think they were?

Friend, I did answer your question here:
viewtopic.php?p=872501#p872505

You probably missed it.

abijah wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2018, 6:30 pm How do you incorporate the “tree of life” into the narrative? To acknowledge the tree of knowledge but not the tree of life which are somehow both in the centre, is ridiculous.

I think in the garden whatever tree you eat of last, that is the result for you: eat of the tree of life, and you live. Eat of the tree of death and you die. Simple.

This is why the Father said, AFTER Adam partook of the fruit of death:

 Alma 42:3 
3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—

So clearly, what you partake of last, that is the effect you end up with.

No I read what you said, and I agree. Was just looking if you had any additional insight into what the signs tokens and names would have been, had Adam remained faithful. What God would have given him in paradise as opposed to what Peter James and John gave him in the lone and dreary world.

You’re talking about the effects of the tree of life. I’m talking about what the act is. We already know what the act of partaking of the tree of knowledge is. It’s been done already.

abijah wrote: ↑May 26th, 2019, 10:15 am No I read what you said, and I agree.

Thank you.

abijah wrote: ↑May 26th, 2019, 10:15 am Was just looking if you had any additional insight into what the signs tokens and names would have been, had Adam remained faithful.

I'd think they'd remain the same, because the Savior and His Father are the same.

abijah wrote: ↑May 26th, 2019, 10:15 am What God would have given him in paradise as opposed to what Peter James and John gave him in the lone and dreary world.

What are your thoughts on this?

Holy Moly. I read all 32 pages. I may have skimmed a post here and there when it seemed like it was repeated information to answer questions that had already been asked. But I've been working through this thread for 3 days now. And here I am at the end. Here are my thoughts. The things I believe at this moment, but will continue to study and pray about and develop.

I like this idea. It is sweet to me. In all my 42 years in the gospel, which I embrace and love with my whole heart, including all the apostles and prophets, even the ones I don't always agree with lol, I have found very little to cause me concern. The gospel is sweet. There are save 2 things only that bother me. One of them is the contradictory commandments given in the garden of Eden.

It has always been my understanding (based on the supposed understanding of many prophets and apostles) that Adam and Eve could not procreate in the garden of Eden. So for God to say "Do not eat of this fruit" and "mulitply and replenish the earth" as if both were commandments (and call me old fashioned, but I believe anything that God says "do" or "don't do" rises to the level of commandment), while keeping one was supposedly IMPOSSIBLE if keeping the other, has always, always, bothered me. Why would God tell them to do something that they COULD NOT do, without breaking the other commandment He gave them. People ask why it matters. It matters to me to know that God does not give me a commandment unless there is a way to accomplish it. It matters.

The OP was like sweet nectar to my soul. Thank you for your time and effort in preparing and editing and adding to it. I love it.

Except one thing.

I feel like it is clearly evident that we are not privy to all the things that God said to/commanded Adam and Eve. For instance, in the temple, when we hear "the woman that thou gavest me, and commanded that she remain with me" or something to that effect, we are not privy to the moment God commanded that they stay together. We do not know if it was a commandment that God gave to one or the other or both combined. We know the other two commandments that we are privy to were given to both, so it does stand to reason that the commandment that they should remain together as one flesh would be given to both as well. It seems like it would be pretty silly for Adam to say "the woman thou gavest to me, and told HER that she has to stay with me, well she ate it, so I did too." The fact that Adam explains his transgression by saying "it's because we are supposed to stay together that I ate the fruit" to me would imply very strongly that the commandment was given to Adam, and most likely both of them.

If all three commandments that we have knowledge of were given to both Adam and Eve, would that not change the reason Adam fell? Stay with me a moment. I find no fault in the idea that Plan A could exist. In fact the IF word makes me certain it could. (IF they... THEN we will provide a Savior). So, I love the premise, I find nothing in scripture to contradict it. Anyway, if all 3 commandments were joint commandments to Adam and Eve together, then Adam DID fall that men might be. Not because of lust, and not because he loved Eve more than God.

I believe that if Eve had never partaken of the fruit, Plan A could have been in effect, and would have been glorious. But she did partake. So, she transgressed. (And honestly it is possible that Adam transgressed before that, but we don't know because we don't know the specifics of the commandment that Eve was to remain with Adam... maybe she was never supposed to be out of his sight and he sent her to go pick some berries, being careless with that commandment... guess we'll never know in this life unless we are blessed with further revelation). Regardless, at the moment Eve partook of the fruit, she transgressed the commandment.

At this point, I believe, Plan A was off the table. I'm not as callous about a God-ordained eternal marriage as you are, and there was clearly a commandment given that they remain together, that Eve remain with Adam. We do know that the Lord has said "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Eternal marriage is a big deal. To flippantly say Adam should have just stayed there and God would have just given him a new wife, is so distasteful to me that I feel it comes straight from Hell. We can agree to disagree, but I will tell you I felt the sweetness of the spirit while reading your OP, and when that part came up, that sweetness turned sour in my stomach, so I'll just disagree with your thoughts on that matter. Moving on...

So at the moment she partook of the fruit, Plan A goes away, and in my mind we are left with Plan B or Plan C. Either (B) Adam also partake, breaking ONE commandment (don't eat the fruit) to keep the other TWO (stay together as one flesh, multiply and replenish), or (C) Adam does not partake, keeping ONE commandment (don't eat the fruit) and transgressing the other TWO (stay together, multiply and replenish). At the point Eve had transgressed, I believe that Adam could no longer keep ALL of Father's commandments... or at least I truly believe that HE did not believe he could. He said "I see that this MUST be", meaning that he saw no alternative. He didn't say that "I see that this sounds way better than hanging out here alone, and no other wife will be as hot as you so I'll choose that" He said "I see that this MUST be", so in his understanding, whether correct or not, he saw no other way to multiply and replenish. He saw no other way for "man to be". So he choose to break one commandment in order to keep two of them. He chose to keep more commandments than he broke, in my opinion, because he loved God. Not because of lust. At that point, ADAM COULD NOT FEEL LUST. He was still innocent after all, when he made the choice. I would dare say he could not even love his wife more than God, being in the state he was in.

So, Adam fell, that men might be. That was his motivation, that is why he fell, and the scripture is not incorrect or contradictory. If Eve had not partaken, I believe men could have been without Adam falling. But she did partake. So maybe the scripture could more accurately read "Adam fell that men might be, because Eve transgressed the commandment and left Adam with no other choice than to join her, that he could see, to accomplish the multiplying and replenishing". Something to that effect.

I feel like aside from this one thing, I agree with just about everything else in the OP. I felt dismayed that I had to read through pages and pages on the Adam/God theory, when that is not what this thread should be about. I felt even more dismayed that your tone was condescending throughout all 32 pages. The biggest problem I see with trying to understand the mysteries is that "when they are learned, they think they are wise". Even if you are right, your pride will continue to be a stumbling block to you, until it may even lead you out of the kingdom. What a shame that would be.

These are my thoughts and feelings. I appreciate the questions that have been asked the arguments that have been presented... considering them leads me on to more learning and knowledge and humility I hope. I'm sure the things I believe on this subject will continue to grow and change and may one day resemble something very different than they do today, but for now, it is sweet to me, and I thank you for it.

Also, God commanded them to have joy therein. Mind blown. Thank you.

Dear sisterp,

Thank you for your kind post!

I apologize for coming across arrogant, it was not my intention.

You are right, pride/arrogance is the opposite of righteousness, and meekness and humility are synonyms of righteousness.

So in the spirit of meekness, may I clarify my position regarding Eve?

I am not ‘flippant’ regarding Adam and Eve’s eternal marriage.

Not at all.

In fact, in the OP I said:

“And even if Eve were cast out for transgression, … knowing God, He would have also prepared a way for Eve to eventually come back to God and to Adam, as well.”

So my position, repeating it in different words for clarity sake is this:

• a) Yes, God commanded Eve to remain with Adam and for them to be together.
  
  b) Eve transgressed that commandment and was to be cast out.
  
  c) Adam should have remained faithful to his Heavenly Father and resisted the devils temptation to partake of the forbidden fruit delivered to him through Eve.
  
  d) For this obedience Adam and his posterity would have been blessed as God promised. (Remember righteous spouses do not lose their blessings because of unfaithfulness of their partners).
  
  e) It was contrary to Adam’s duty to follow Eve into transgression. His duty was to resist the temptation of the devil delivered both in person and through fallen Eve.
  
  f) Now this is important: Eve, even if cast out at first, would still have a chance to repent of her transgressions, and after suffering the consequences of her wrong choices, through repentance and obedience to the gospel of Christ she could have returned to God and to Adam.

So, No it was NOT Adam’s duty to fall because of his wife, instead, it was his duty not to fall, despite of Eve’s error, and instead wait for Eve to come back to him through the Savior.

And meanwhile, yes, Adam would have been given another wife so he could have fulfilled the Father's commandment to multiply and replenish the earth IN PARADISAICAL STATE, the same Terrestrial/paradisaical state that will prevail on the earth, but now only in the Millennium.

Thank you for your wonderful post.

Remember, you are right: God does not, and CANNOT give self-contradictory commandments, or He would cease to be God.

So Adam was never under obligation to transgress one commandment in order to keep another. Adam was not under obligation to partake of the forbidden fruit in order to be with Eve.

She chose to disobey. His duty was not to.

And as I said, Eve would have come back to him, after she learned on her own experience to choose good over evil.

So I have utmost respect for Adam and Eve’s marriage, but marriage is never a higher priority than loyalty to God. Anyone who thinks otherwise will lose both God AND their marriage.

Thank you for your post. Best wishes.