Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Fall of Man and the justice of G-d


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8600 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 26 June 2013 - 09:15 AM

Sometimes there are a number of concepts that get lost in specific doctrine. Perhaps one of the most confusing and conflicting doctrine in Christianity is the fall of man or as sometimes referred to as the fall of Adam.

I will begin this discussion by asking a couple of questions.

First is: Why did the fall of Adam affect all of mankind – and what was the extent of that effect?

Second question: Is G-d just to force the consequence of one person’s actions and choices on others that were not involved in the choice? In essence is G-d just in making everyone responsible for the choices and actions of someone else (ie. Adam and Eve)?


The Traveler

#2 ElectofGod

ElectofGod

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 415 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 09:40 AM

Sometimes there are a number of concepts that get lost in specific doctrine. Perhaps one of the most confusing and conflicting doctrine in Christianity is the fall of man or as sometimes referred to as the fall of Adam.

I will begin this discussion by asking a couple of questions.

First is: Why did the fall of Adam affect all of mankind – and what was the extent of that effect?

Adam and Eve were Celestial, they fell becoming Telestial. Thus everyone born was born INTO aa Telestial world and AS a telestial body.

A simpler answer would be because they became sinful (degenerate) thus all their children were born in sin.


Second question: Is G-d just to force the consequence of one person’s actions and choices on others that were not involved in the choice? In essence is G-d just in making everyone responsible for the choices and actions of someone else (ie. Adam and Eve)?

We consented to it in the grand council. We will not be punished for adams transgression, YET we are AFFECTED by it therefore are we not punished by it? So what does that mean? I take it that it just means that it will not become SIN upon us in the judgment but what we do with our time that WE ARE GIVEN will.

Perhaps we were also pre-ordained to come into a certain condition based off our prior agency and obedience. Thus our "sin" of our fathers is passed down to us because that is what we per-qualified for.

Much is given much is required.


The Traveler


Great Questions.

I would like to add to question 2)

Did we all have agency in our "first" organization form intelligence into spiritual bodies? Did we not have agency into what we ARE capable of BECOMING? Did Satan get organized with deceipt to come into his heart at a later time? Why didn't God just organize ALL to have the "intellgience" of to BE perfect the quickest way possible? Why do some fall? Did they not have agency in what they were organized as? Or is there a some element to the plan of salvation we don't understand in the Temporal Fall AND spiritual creation?

Not to get off topic just wanted to expand on "where agency" plays into the entire picture.

The fall was and IS important to God's plan. Without it two things would happen.

1) Earth would have become Terrestrial
2) We would not be able to progress as God.

There would be progression in 1) but one is only capable of descending so far until their progression stops.

Edited by ElectofGod, 26 June 2013 - 09:42 AM.


#3 Anddenex

Anddenex

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 2747 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 10:24 AM

First is: Why did the fall of Adam affect all of mankind – and what was the extent of that effect?


First thoughts, I am reminded of Adam's words regarding Eve, "bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh," (source).

As children, we inherit the mortal flesh of our parents, Adam and Eve. We are bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh -- along with Eve.

I do not know the extent save what has been revealed. Death is now a part of our existence. Knowledge is a part of our earth experience. Sin is a part of our earth experience. Resurrection will be a part of this experience. We are removed from the presence of God. We have a veil which inhibits our remembrance of our life as spirits.

Second question: Is G-d just to force the consequence of one person’s actions and choices on others that were not involved in the choice? In essence is G-d just in making everyone responsible for the choices and actions of someone else (ie. Adam and Eve)?


I am not sure God has made everyone "responsible" for the choices of Adam and Eve. We inherit the consequences of their decision, as we are their children, but we are not held responsible for their decisions.

Thus, I would say God is just. We are born innocent, unaffected by the sin of Adam, such that a child which dies before the age of accountability automatically inherits eternal life. It isn't until we sin, like unto Adam, that we truly feel the affects of the fall -- such as in being removed from the presence of God.

This question is also interesting to contemplate with regard to Jesus Christ, who was also born of "Eve", but not of "Adam". How did the fall effect our Savior? He received a tabernacle of flesh. He, however, did not sin.

#4 james12

james12

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 343 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 04:51 PM

First is: Why did the fall of Adam affect all of mankind – and what was the extent of that effect?

Because we, like Adam, chose to fall. Indeed, "all are fallen and are lost". The effect of the fall was that we were separated from the presence of God. This separation from God causes both spiritual and physical death. When we once again return to his presence we receive both spiritual and physical life.

Second question: Is G-d just to force the consequence of one person’s actions and choices on others that were not involved in the choice? In essence is G-d just in making everyone responsible for the choices and actions of someone else (ie. Adam and Eve)?

As Joseph said, "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression." I'm not sure why we as LDS still persist in trying to fit false religion into such a plain statement. We insist on believing that Adam caused us to come to this Telestial world full of death, disease, and heartache and yet at the same time say that we are not punished for Adam's transgression. Such "reasoning" makes no sense.

#5 james12

james12

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 343 posts

Posted 30 June 2013 - 02:19 PM

Traveler, No comment?

#6 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8600 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 30 June 2013 - 03:44 PM

Because we, like Adam, chose to fall. Indeed, "all are fallen and are lost". The effect of the fall was that we were separated from the presence of God. This separation from God causes both spiritual and physical death. When we once again return to his presence we receive both spiritual and physical life.

I had hoped there would have been more interest.

I believe the garden epoch is presented to us in symbolic form. The term Adam in ancient Hebrew can be used as a personal name and also used in a generic sense meaning mankind. So it is possible to understand the story of Adam and Eve as presented in scripture as a symbolic representation of man’s pre-life paradox dealing with the importance of knowledge and remaining innocent with G-d. The other great lesson deals with the serpent symbolism.

It is interesting to me that as a universal symbol in the ancient world - serpents were often use to symbolize both good and evil and their venom as both poison (death) and medicine (healing and rebirth). What is most interesting to me is that the serpent symbol in biblical references is defined as both a symbol of G-d (Jesus Christ) and Satan. This dual symbol of death and life is played out in the medical profession in both modern and ancient uses as well as across many cultures. Thus the serpent as a symbol reaches across time and circumstance. Many have forgotten that the serpent is a symbol of Christ (Messiah). There is a lot more to this particular symbol but I will leave that as an exercise for the reader.

Sometimes LDS fall into the same misunderstanding that is prevalent in the Great Apostasy that mankind was “victimized” unwittingly by the fall of Adam and that G-d allowed such to happen even though G-d knew the future and the inevitable result of Adam and Eve in the Garden with the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. Though we LDS often debate many issues with those of Traditional Christianity the necessity and the choice of all mankind in a pre-existence to obtain the knowledge of good and evil is so often overlooked - but this is a major difference in LDS theology and all other religions and exist among us LDS only because of our latter day revelation that restores many precious truths that were lost until the restoration.


As Joseph said, "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression." I'm not sure why we as LDS still persist in trying to fit false religion into such a plain statement. We insist on believing that Adam caused us to come to this Telestial world full of death, disease, and heartache and yet at the same time say that we are not punished for Adam's transgression. Such "reasoning" makes no sense.



I believe there is also something hidden and forgotten because many LDS do not understand the vast difference between LDS theology and the theology of the Great Apostasy. The point here is that many see the excommunication of Adam and Eve from the garden into world where the ground is cursed and man is “forced” to labor throughout his life in order to survive. Missed is the blessing that the ground was cursed as a blessing, benefit and aid for man in his journey to obtain knowledge necessary for salvation. All the sorrows and pain to be experienced are actually for benefit and not punishment.

Again these precious truths were lost in the Great Apostasy and even to many LDS remain hidden in symbolism that will not be understood until one is enriched beyond the scriptures and taught by the Holy Ghost and frequent worship in the Temple of G-d.

The Traveler

#7 Seminarysnoozer

Seminarysnoozer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2969 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, California

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:18 AM

Sometimes there are a number of concepts that get lost in specific doctrine. Perhaps one of the most confusing and conflicting doctrine in Christianity is the fall of man or as sometimes referred to as the fall of Adam.

I will begin this discussion by asking a couple of questions.

First is: Why did the fall of Adam affect all of mankind – and what was the extent of that effect?

Second question: Is G-d just to force the consequence of one person’s actions and choices on others that were not involved in the choice? In essence is G-d just in making everyone responsible for the choices and actions of someone else (ie. Adam and Eve)?


The Traveler


Everyone who passed the first estate test already agreed to come to this world and agreed with the plan. The Fall of Adam is simply the referee blowing the opening whistle to say "game on". The players on the bench waiting for their turn are also affected by the 'blow of the whistle' but not yet in the game. The Fall of Adam was a start. It was a door opening for all mankind to move forward in their progression. We had come as far as we could, we matured as much as we could as spirit beings, we learned all we could as spirit beings so now the second phase of our development started and that is how it affected all mankind, it widened our potential and our responsibility and accountability at the same time. It was like cutting the ribbon for a grand opening of a college that we were all accepted to and one day will attend. It's affects are widespread in that if there is no college nobody could ever attend. Now that the doors are opened, our potential for greater glory is opened.

This life is not a punishment but an opportunity. I know it is hard to see that now, but I believe that is how we viewed this life then. We didn't look at the Fall of Adam as 'oh boy, we are going to get punished now', I think it was more of a joyous event for all of us mixed with a tiny bit of trepidation, like getting that missionary call or the acceptance letter to college.

The other thing to keep in mind is that we believe in vicarious acts. It shouldn't be too hard of a stretch to believe that someone could do something for us in the flesh and someone else reaps the benefits of it. Is that not what we do for baptisms and sealings of the dead? Is that not just either? It would be unjust if the person didn't accept it. But the Fall of Adam was accepted by all who accepted the plan of salvation with the first estate test, then the vicarious act was that of Adam and Eve, which is well within our play book. We certainly accept the vicarious acts of Jesus without any question.

Edited by Seminarysnoozer, 02 July 2013 - 09:22 AM.


#8 BenRaines

BenRaines

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 5505 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 11:20 AM

Traveler, I have enjoyed your two most recent threads. Thank you.

Ben Raines
"If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties." Sir Francis Bacon

#9 Smeagums

Smeagums

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 01:06 PM

I won't say where I read this but I did read that eventually God would have told them to partake of the fruit. They partook of it too early. If they would have partaken it when commanded to do so this Earth wouldn't be one of God's most wicked.

The Earth would have been in a more Terrestial state if they would have waited.

On a different note, I'd like to use the story of Adam and Eve to show how important it is that men do not altar, even with good intentions, God's command at all.

God commanded Adam to not EAT the fruit. Adam told Eve that they can't eat OR TOUCH it. God said, and Adam reiterated, that in the day you eat, or touch according to Adam, you'll die. In comes Satan HOLDING the fruit. Eves sees Satan holding the fruit and notices that Satan isn't dead but actually very much alive. This deceives Eve because she previously thought it could not be touched. She believes Satan that it will benefit her to partake and does so. Adam follows Eve in partaking.

#10 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8600 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 03 July 2013 - 07:12 AM

I won't say where I read this but I did read that eventually God would have told them to partake of the fruit. They partook of it too early. If they would have partaken it when commanded to do so this Earth wouldn't be one of God's most wicked.

The Earth would have been in a more Terrestial state if they would have waited.

On a different note, I'd like to use the story of Adam and Eve to show how important it is that men do not altar, even with good intentions, God's command at all.

God commanded Adam to not EAT the fruit. Adam told Eve that they can't eat OR TOUCH it. God said, and Adam reiterated, that in the day you eat, or touch according to Adam, you'll die. In comes Satan HOLDING the fruit. Eves sees Satan holding the fruit and notices that Satan isn't dead but actually very much alive. This deceives Eve because she previously thought it could not be touched. She believes Satan that it will benefit her to partake and does so. Adam follows Eve in partaking.


The symbolic use of fruit is not a uncommon reference in the scriptures. The idea of taking fruit or even being involved in bringing about fruit (growing or producing) as well as offering the fruit to others is a recurring gospel theme and I also believe that there are types and shadows associated with the symbolic use of fruit. This would point one by prophesy to things yet to be or happen as well as to things that have occurred.

The role of Satan in Eden is interesting and I appreciate your view. I agree that Satan uses cleaver "tricks" to challenge our understanding of things. I think the idea that Satan was able to produce proof that taking the fruit would not cause death is a fascinating demonstration of manipulation and deception. (a subject in and of its self worthy of careful study and discussion)

I believe there is another dimension - With study and consideration we can well understand the advantage of knowledge - especially knowledge of the difference between good and evil. Without question this knowledge is necessary to partake of salvation. Obviously partaking of the fruit (acquiring knowledge) is the inevitable result of intelligence and learning. But as we consider Satan and his desire to ruin mankind we gain insight to his methods. Rather than discouraging mankind from participating in the plan of salvation Satan use another tactic. Many think Satan rather unintelligent, stupid or foolish to tempt mankind knowing that partaking of the fruit would only fulfill G-d's plan. But here is another thought - knowing that man would eventually need knowledge of good and evil; Satan's methods and intelligence is given some light.

Rather than allow the male and female to work together to determine the benefits of knowledge Satan uses the paradox of knowledge to divide the male from the female and prevent them from working together. The man and the woman could have worked together and sought G-d in the decision. As subtle and simple as this seems it is devastating to the eternal covenant to be "one" in marriage. It ruins the marriage covenant. Thus when the man and the woman think they must make important decisions on their own - Satan is able to divide the man from the woman and make them rivals rather than partners in the quest for knowledge of good and evil.

I believe that the symbolism of Adam and Eve is a foreshadow of the difficulties men and women face in the divine covenant of marriage.

The Traveler

#11 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8600 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 03 July 2013 - 07:38 AM

I would add another thought concerning the fall. As I have considered these things it is obvious to me (not a new concept but a very ancient concept) that when the fall occurred it immediately had an effect on all of mankind (the spirit children of G-d). I submit for consideration and discussion that when the fall occurred that all of mankind as spirit entities were separated from the Father and excommunicated from the kingdom and society of G-d the Father. That the fall immediately affected all spirits that became fallen - the exceptions being the Son and the Holy Ghost.

The only means men have to commune with the Father is through the Son, Jesus Christ, that by appointment and agreement became the one and only G-d of the fallen. Thus Jesus is currently the one and only "true" G-d -- beside who there is no other G-d for the fallen man. By divine law not only must Jesus be present to mediate for us to the Father but must also be present to mediate for the Father to address us.

I would point to a couple of teachings to demonstrate this doctrine. Consider the Book of Job chapter 1 starting with verse 6. We know that Satan was expelled from "Heaven" where the Father is G-d and rules the divine kingdom. But here we see Satan coming before the very place from which G-d rules. The reason is because this is the Son Jesus Christ in his rightful place of G-d ruling the fallen of the Father. This scripture demonstrates the divinity of Christ and his rightful place as our G-d in the "Heaven" that Satan has access.

I would also encourage that those that are so in covenant to attend the temple and observe the separation from where Jesus directs the affairs of mankind and the place where the Father rules his kingdom.

The Traveler

#12 Seminarysnoozer

Seminarysnoozer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2969 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, California

Posted 03 July 2013 - 08:38 AM

I would add another thought concerning the fall. As I have considered these things it is obvious to me (not a new concept but a very ancient concept) that when the fall occurred it immediately had an effect on all of mankind (the spirit children of G-d). I submit for consideration and discussion that when the fall occurred that all of mankind as spirit entities were separated from the Father and excommunicated from the kingdom and society of G-d the Father. That the fall immediately affected all spirits that became fallen - the exceptions being the Son and the Holy Ghost.

The only means men have to commune with the Father is through the Son, Jesus Christ, that by appointment and agreement became the one and only G-d of the fallen. Thus Jesus is currently the one and only "true" G-d -- beside who there is no other G-d for the fallen man. By divine law not only must Jesus be present to mediate for us to the Father but must also be present to mediate for the Father to address us.

I would point to a couple of teachings to demonstrate this doctrine. Consider the Book of Job chapter 1 starting with verse 6. We know that Satan was expelled from "Heaven" where the Father is G-d and rules the divine kingdom. But here we see Satan coming before the very place from which G-d rules. The reason is because this is the Son Jesus Christ in his rightful place of G-d ruling the fallen of the Father. This scripture demonstrates the divinity of Christ and his rightful place as our G-d in the "Heaven" that Satan has access.

I would also encourage that those that are so in covenant to attend the temple and observe the separation from where Jesus directs the affairs of mankind and the place where the Father rules his kingdom.

The Traveler


Moroni 8: " 8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.

9 And after this manner did the Holy Ghost manifest the word of God unto me; wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children."

"12 But little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world; if not so, God is a partial God, and also a changeable God, and a respecter to persons; for how many little children have died without baptism!"

And I would be careful about adopting such ancient ideas that are the root of the doctrine for infant baptism; "14 Behold I say unto you, that he that supposeth that little children need baptism is in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; for he hath neither faith, hope, nor charity; wherefore, should he be cut off while in the thought, he must go down to hell.

15 For awful is the wickedness to suppose that God saveth one child because of baptism, and the other must perish because he hath no baptism.

16 Wo be unto them that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner, for they shall perish except they repent. Behold, I speak with boldness, having authority from God; and I fear not what man can do; for perfect clove casteth out all fear."

Bottom line; we are taught not to think little children need baptism or repentance. I don't think I would entertain such ideas with such a strong warning against it.

Also note, the Garden of Eden is a place outside of heaven called paradise and yet in the presence of God but it is not a place in which a person could be like God because it did not allow for progression while they remained in that place in a perfect (but not glorified) physical body. All the spirits did not experience the same thing, we did not start out with a perfect body in paradise. Also the Garden of Eden is not mortality. I am not aware of any teachings that say all the spirits found their self in the Garden of Eden while Adam and Eve where there with a perfect body. The point is that "the Fall" is not from spirituality to mortality but from paradise with a body to mortality with a corrupted body. In other words, the effect of the fall required to start with a perfect body so that it could later be redeemed and resurrected to it's former perfection. In a vicarious way, we all lost that perfect body but the dilemma is that we could never have a body without the fall. So, it was only in a vicarious sense that we fell. Adam fell that men might be. He did it for us.

And from Merlin Lybbert; "The Lord extends special protection to children and shares jurisdiction with earthly parents, even as we enjoy their presence. They cannot sin until they reach the age of accountability, which the Lord has declared to be eight years (see D&C 18:42; D&C 29:47)."

That is an interesting statement, to say that the Lord "shares jurisdiction" with all children until the age of 8. Doesn't sound like they are cast out at all. In other words, one cannot be "cast out" until the age of accountability which occurs while mortal for all those who passed the first estate test, not before mortality.

Not sure why you give so little credit for passing the first estate test, that was a big deal, you know.

#13 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8600 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 03 July 2013 - 10:55 AM

Moroni 8: " 8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.

9 And after this manner did the Holy Ghost manifest the word of God unto me; wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children."

"12 But little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world; if not so, God is a partial God, and also a changeable God, and a respecter to persons; for how many little children have died without baptism!"

And I would be careful about adopting such ancient ideas that are the root of the doctrine for infant baptism; "14 Behold I say unto you, that he that supposeth that little children need baptism is in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; for he hath neither faith, hope, nor charity; wherefore, should he be cut off while in the thought, he must go down to hell.

15 For awful is the wickedness to suppose that God saveth one child because of baptism, and the other must perish because he hath no baptism.

16 Wo be unto them that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner, for they shall perish except they repent. Behold, I speak with boldness, having authority from God; and I fear not what man can do; for perfect clove casteth out all fear."

Bottom line; we are taught not to think little children need baptism or repentance. I don't think I would entertain such ideas with such a strong warning against it.

Also note, the Garden of Eden is a place outside of heaven called paradise and yet in the presence of God but it is not a place in which a person could be like God because it did not allow for progression while they remained in that place in a perfect (but not glorified) physical body. All the spirits did not experience the same thing, we did not start out with a perfect body in paradise. Also the Garden of Eden is not mortality. I am not aware of any teachings that say all the spirits found their self in the Garden of Eden while Adam and Eve where there with a perfect body. The point is that "the Fall" is not from spirituality to mortality but from paradise with a body to mortality with a corrupted body. In other words, the effect of the fall required to start with a perfect body so that it could later be redeemed and resurrected to it's former perfection. In a vicarious way, we all lost that perfect body but the dilemma is that we could never have a body without the fall. So, it was only in a vicarious sense that we fell. Adam fell that men might be. He did it for us.

And from Merlin Lybbert; "The Lord extends special protection to children and shares jurisdiction with earthly parents, even as we enjoy their presence. They cannot sin until they reach the age of accountability, which the Lord has declared to be eight years (see D&C 18:42; D&C 29:47)."

That is an interesting statement, to say that the Lord "shares jurisdiction" with all children until the age of 8. Doesn't sound like they are cast out at all. In other words, one cannot be "cast out" until the age of accountability which occurs while mortal for all those who passed the first estate test, not before mortality.

Not sure why you give so little credit for passing the first estate test, that was a big deal, you know.


I find that your insistence that children that have not reached the age of 8 (or anyone without accountable mentality) do not exist in a "fallen" state is nonsense and a complete misinterpertation of scripture.

The Traveler

#14 Seminarysnoozer

Seminarysnoozer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2969 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, California

Posted 05 July 2013 - 12:10 PM

I find that your insistence that children that have not reached the age of 8 (or anyone without accountable mentality) do not exist in a "fallen" state is nonsense and a complete misinterpertation of scripture.

The Traveler


I never said they don't exist in a fallen state when they are here. Or course, your comment was about the fallen state before they were here. So, this is why I gave scriptures that say things like "children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin" and "little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world..." which is not an interpretation in any way. These are just postings of the scriptures.

So, how do you interpret those scriptures?

The scriptures seem to imply that the fallen state (not saying they don't exist in a fallen state) has no affect on their spirits, that they remain as pure and innocent as when the whole thing started. It is not a common LDS view to say that we all start this life as something less than innocent and pure. This is how a lot of the world views our existence but this is not how LDS view our selves and our pre-fallen, first estate passing spirit self. As these scriptures point out, ALL children are pure and innocent. They did not enter this world less than pure. This is not my interpretation, this is a common understanding of the scriptures which is confirmed by what the apostles say about it. (see this is one of those areas that you might be hurt by not realizing man is a dual being, body and spirit and being able to separate the two allows a person to exist in a fallen state but not be fallen, just like living in the world but not being of the world. If one believes there is only one being, not a dual being than this is an example of a doctrine that is hard to understand. I am not my body. A child is not their body. The spirit of the child is not the corrupted body.)

This is from Bruce R. McConkie; "Are children tainted with original sin?

Absolutely not. There is no such thing as original sin as such is defined in the creeds of Christendom. Such a concept denies the efficacy of the atonement. Our revelation says: “Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning”—meaning that spirits started out in a state of purity and innocence in preexistence—“and God having redeemed man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God” (D&C 93:38)—meaning that all children start out their mortal probation in purity and innocence because of the atonement. Our revelations also say, “The Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world.” (Moses 6:54.)"

and from McConkie; "Are children conceived in sin?

Since there is no such thing as original sin, as that expression is used in modern Christendom, it follows that children are not conceived in sin. They do not come into the world with any taint of impurity whatever. When our scriptures say that “children are conceived in sin,” they are using words in an entirely different way than when the same language is recited in the creeds of the world. The scriptural meaning is that they are born into a world of sin so that “when they begin to grow up, sin conceiveth in their hearts, and they taste the bitter, that they may know to prize the good.” (Moses 6:55.)"


So, how do you interpret that "They do not come into the world with any taint of impurity whatever."?

According to the Bible dictionary the Fall of Adam and Eve is "The process by which mankind became mortal on this earth." So, how exactly am I misinterpreting your description of some affect on spirits, who are not yet mortal, about a process which, by definition, is the process by which we become mortal? Add to that the fact that the scriptures and apostles with very clear terms say mortality has no affect on children but somehow you think I am misinterpreting that. What specific fallen change did the Fall of Adam have on spirits before mortality? Like I said before, the only change is opportunity for growth, a positive result. There was no "fallen" (mortal) result directly on those pre-mortal spirits. They did not become mortal at that moment. They did not receive a corrupted body at that moment. And the effect of the mortal body is not something that can taint the spirit until they reach the age of accountability.

Edited by Seminarysnoozer, 05 July 2013 - 12:13 PM.


#15 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8600 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 06 July 2013 - 06:00 PM

-

I never said they don't exist in a fallen state when they are here. Or course, your comment was about the fallen state before they were here. So, this is why I gave scriptures that say things like "children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin" and "little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world..." which is not an interpretation in any way. These are just postings of the scriptures.

So, how do you interpret those scriptures?

The scriptures seem to imply that the fallen state (not saying they don't exist in a fallen state) has no affect on their spirits, that they remain as pure and innocent as when the whole thing started. It is not a common LDS view to say that we all start this life as something less than innocent and pure. This is how a lot of the world views our existence but this is not how LDS view our selves and our pre-fallen, first estate passing spirit self. As these scriptures point out, ALL children are pure and innocent. They did not enter this world less than pure. This is not my interpretation, this is a common understanding of the scriptures which is confirmed by what the apostles say about it. (see this is one of those areas that you might be hurt by not realizing man is a dual being, body and spirit and being able to separate the two allows a person to exist in a fallen state but not be fallen, just like living in the world but not being of the world. If one believes there is only one being, not a dual being than this is an example of a doctrine that is hard to understand. I am not my body. A child is not their body. The spirit of the child is not the corrupted body.)

This is from Bruce R. McConkie; "Are children tainted with original sin?

Absolutely not. There is no such thing as original sin as such is defined in the creeds of Christendom. Such a concept denies the efficacy of the atonement. Our revelation says: “Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning”—meaning that spirits started out in a state of purity and innocence in preexistence—“and God having redeemed man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God” (D&C 93:38)—meaning that all children start out their mortal probation in purity and innocence because of the atonement. Our revelations also say, “The Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world.” (Moses 6:54.)"

and from McConkie; "Are children conceived in sin?

Since there is no such thing as original sin, as that expression is used in modern Christendom, it follows that children are not conceived in sin. They do not come into the world with any taint of impurity whatever. When our scriptures say that “children are conceived in sin,” they are using words in an entirely different way than when the same language is recited in the creeds of the world. The scriptural meaning is that they are born into a world of sin so that “when they begin to grow up, sin conceiveth in their hearts, and they taste the bitter, that they may know to prize the good.” (Moses 6:55.)"


So, how do you interpret that "They do not come into the world with any taint of impurity whatever."?

According to the Bible dictionary the Fall of Adam and Eve is "The process by which mankind became mortal on this earth." So, how exactly am I misinterpreting your description of some affect on spirits, who are not yet mortal, about a process which, by definition, is the process by which we become mortal? Add to that the fact that the scriptures and apostles with very clear terms say mortality has no affect on children but somehow you think I am misinterpreting that. What specific fallen change did the Fall of Adam have on spirits before mortality? Like I said before, the only change is opportunity for growth, a positive result. There was no "fallen" (mortal) result directly on those pre-mortal spirits. They did not become mortal at that moment. They did not receive a corrupted body at that moment. And the effect of the mortal body is not something that can taint the spirit until they reach the age of accountability.


This thread is about the fall of man. I put forth the idea that the fall of man as a choice and decision took place in the pre-existence before we were born. That choice was a choice made before any of us was born and the consequences of that choice had implications before we were born.

I do not understand why you think children are some exception to the fall which is the only topic I have introduced in this thread. So I asked why you think the full meaning of fallen as we understand the fall of man; does not apply to children.

Perhaps I should ask do you believe that fallen man or anyone that has fallen is spiritually affected by the fall? If not - why? Is in your mind a fallen individual the same as a "natural" man? This is why I asked you if children at birth are in a fallen state - physically and spiritually. Right now I am rather confused with what you opinion is and what point you are really trying to make. So I ask again - do children according to all you understanding of what is a innocent pure child and what is a fallen being -- Are children born as fallen beings?

The Traveler

#16 Seminarysnoozer

Seminarysnoozer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2969 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, California

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:39 AM

-

This thread is about the fall of man. I put forth the idea that the fall of man as a choice and decision took place in the pre-existence before we were born. That choice was a choice made before any of us was born and the consequences of that choice had implications before we were born.

I do not understand why you think children are some exception to the fall which is the only topic I have introduced in this thread. So I asked why you think the full meaning of fallen as we understand the fall of man; does not apply to children.

Perhaps I should ask do you believe that fallen man or anyone that has fallen is spiritually affected by the fall? If not - why? Is in your mind a fallen individual the same as a "natural" man? This is why I asked you if children at birth are in a fallen state - physically and spiritually. Right now I am rather confused with what you opinion is and what point you are really trying to make. So I ask again - do children according to all you understanding of what is a innocent pure child and what is a fallen being -- Are children born as fallen beings?

The Traveler


No, your thread, in your OP, was about the possibility of an "immediate" affect of the fall on all. I don't think you understand the difference between being fallen and being affected by the fall. This isn't an all or nothing condition, it is variable. So, yes we were all affected by the Fall of Adam, a door was opened for all of us to have a greater potential than we had prior to the Fall. The Fall was a glorious event as it allowed the Plan to take a step forward. We all were then in a position of greater potential, so that is how the Fall affected all of us.

The effect of the Fall is to allow us a test while physically and spiritually separated from God. As little children, all of us, are not under such a test until we reach the age of accountability. Until then we are not affected by the Fall in such a way. Not sure why that is so hard to understand.

It would be like being accepted to college, yeah! I was accepted to college. Being accepted to college changed things even before I actually went. And then once I went I learn that I don't have to take English because my AP classes covered that requirement. I don't have to take College English, it is already covered - I will not have to face the test of College English while I am at college. Similarly, there are spirits that don't have to face the test related to the effects of the Fall. Are they fallen in nature for a period of time? Yes. Are they affected by the Fall? Not in the same way that everyone else is as they don't sin before the age of 8, they remained pure and innocent and so in that way their spirits were not affected by the Fall.

Is it possible to be in the world without being of the world? If the answer is yes then it is possible to be fallen without being affected by the Fall.

I think it would be good to ponder why Adam and Eve had to be in the flesh while in the Garden of Eden. Why not just be faced with the choice of the two trees while in spirit? If one understands the significance of being in the flesh with that choice then one would appreciate how the Fall relates to being in the flesh and not just being a spirit prior to mortality. Adam and Eve accepted the plan just like we did, prior to even going to the Garden of Eden. Why weren't they spiritually fallen to begin with then as they entered the Garden of Eden? How could they still be in the presence of God while in the Garden? Isn't that the same position we found ourselves in after the Fall of Adam but before being born here, as were Adam and Eve right before they were placed in the Garden?

The other thing to ponder is that if there is such an immediate affect like you are suggesting then there would also be an immediate affect at the same moment from the effect of the atonement. Why do you think there would be a delayed affect from the atonement on the children that died before the age of 8? The scriptures suggest that whatever moment the affect of the Fall took place, at the same moment the affect of the atonement was at play for those spirits. If that is true then there is no moment in between in which those spirits could have been affected by the Fall. And I would say to that, all of us remained innocent, via the atonement at the exact moment of the effect of the Fall, whenever that was, until we reach the age of accountability.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq