fatima

I have no thoughts on where Adam and Eve will be for eternity. There is nothing in Catholic teaching, either, that says they have gone to hell or heaven.

I don't think there is a parallel between two rational, adult people and infants/ toddlers. A&E were in the presence of God and they had abundant knowledge before they made their choice. So, why place the tree there? So that A&E would have a chance to express that love in return to Almighty God by their obedience. Whether one is of LDS theology or Catholic/traditional Christian theology, I think we can agree that God set His Son down right in the middle of certain death, death on a Cross, in order to return that love to God in Perfect Obedience, including all of the suffering that it entailed. And what happened? Jesus Christ died, BUT that was not the end of the story, was it? He rose again and lives in glory! It is my opinion that A&E would also have enjoyed that glorious resurrection had they obey God unto death.

Perhaps there is difficulty understanding because the way LDS view God and the way Catholic Christians (and perhaps other branches of traditional Christianity) view God not as a man who has been exalted, but as a being entirely separate and unique. Beyond our comprehension and not a being that was once like us (although He became like us in all things but sin), and not a being like unto which we will one day become. He does not deal in 'what ifs' or hypotheticals. He is Creator and we are creatures. He IS, He WAS and He always WILL BE. The great I AM. God knowing what a person will do is not because He 'sees the future' in a linear fashion, as though it has not happened yet. He knows what we will choose because there is something to know, which is only possible to know because we were created, not contingent on when we were created. If we hadn't been created there would be nothing that had happened for Him to know. When a man and a woman get married, they do not (as a rule) decide not to have children because of what that child might do. We love our spouses and that love is brought forth in new life. That same great love, even more, is why God created us. I might be able to assume one of my children might commit one sin or another over the course of their lives, but I don't know which sin they will commit until it' has happened. And how do I know it happened? Because it has happened. For God, iit is all present before Him at all times. He doesn't know what didn't happen because there is nothing to know. I can't know my daughter will steal a car if she never does it. God doesn't know what didn't happen because it didn't happen. I had a whole bunch of other paragraphs, which I have now deleted because there is no way I am making this clear. I don't have the language skills.

I didn't intend to cross a line, but I would rather err on the side of caution.

One could argue that the beauty and the curse of many topics, and probably faith and theology more than any other, is that one topic leads to the next, as they are all intertwined in Salvation History.

God, being perfect is incapable of creating something imperfect. I was responding to your statement, bolded above.

I think you are looking for a contradiction where there is none. God is not bound by time, but we are, and therefore the topic of when in time we were created is perfectly logical. As to your inquiries about Catholic teaching, I have been notified by @Vort that the LDS Gospel discussion forum is not the place to discuss my church's teachings on any topic, and I might find myself in somewhat tentative agreement with him. My previous posts were not meant to be a challenge to LDS teaching, but just as a way of expressing how difficult it is to understand LDS theology.

God saw His creation and that it was good. At the time of our creation there was no sin. No sin=good.

Just as darkness itself is not a 'thing' in and of itself, but an absence of light, so is sin. God is all light and goodness, and He has no sin. By His very nature He cannot sin, nor can He will sin, IMHO. If He wills sin, He is no longer perfect; if there is an absence of perfection is Him, He certainly doesn't sound like a Supreme Being I would want to worship. Once again, as a parent, I want my children to live as I teach them to live. I do not want them to sin so that they may more fully recognize that...what?...I was right all along? I know that they will become the best men and women God created them to be if they live a certain way. I do not want them to suffer through poverty, STD's, legal battles or whatever earthly and eternal consequences may come from poor choices. It is not better that my 2nd child is living as sinful life, a life I know will bring suffering and sadness. I would rather that she took the same course her older brother did, which is to walk the straight and narrow. He will not suffer like she will. Is there a chance my daughter will repent someday, and that some great goodness will come from that? Yes, absolutely! She may fall on the Mercy of God and become a very holy woman. So...anyway...

God is the only perfect being, IMHO. Perfect goodness, perfect knowledge, perfect love, etc. We are to grow in perfection, that is, holiness, but only the perfection our particular species (for lack of a better word) is capable. I do not believe we will ever be a god of any sort. Further, to person's statement: I don't know what good parent would ever send their child (best child, worst child, whatever) to go and suffer and die such as Jesus did, rather going Himself, which is the relevant point when we say God became man.

Choosing to do God's Will is only possible if we have a choice to make, which is why the tree was there in the first place. Once again, love is only love if it is freely given, and A&E did not give God and His law first place in their lives. For me, the idea that God willed the sin/transgression is impossible to wrap my head around. Not a single good parent would want their child to disobey even the smallest command. I mean, what's the point in giving a command at all unless you want and expect it to be followed? I've read through the responses (although as I write this I don't know which response belonged to whom), but I have always found it fascinating that the 'fall', however you define it, did not happen until after Adam participated. It is my belief that the supernatural union of man and wife, that the two shall become one, and that the man is the head, is evident here. If Adam had either defended Eve from the serpent, or otherwise guided her to the good, perhaps she would not have eaten of the fruit at all. Or, even if she did, perhaps the fall would not have happened if the head of the family had not participated. In Catholic theology, Eve got the ball rolling, but Adam effected it. So, too, our salvation: the Blessed Mother got the ball rolling, but she did not save us, Jesus effected that salvation. Mary, knowing an unwed woman could be stoned to death, trusted God and said 'yes' to His Will, same as Abraham. He was ready to obey God's command to kill Issac, but God stepped in at the end and stopped him. Abraham trusted God and trusted that He knew best. If A&E had done the same, I believe that God would have come to them and raised them up to the fullness of what He intended in the first place . I'm not LDS, but if I were, that would mean exaltation.

This overlaps with a discussion on free will that was in another thread a short time ago. God doesn't know things "in advance" as we think of it, because God is not bound by time. Everything is present to Him at all times. Additionally, He knows what did happen because it happened and He is timeless. He isn't like us in that "if they choose to do this, I'll do that. But if they do that, then I'll do this". Before He created us there was nothing about us for Him to know in terms of our choices, and He doesn't decide not to create because that creation might do something because He doesn't know what doesn't exist. I'll check this thread out again in the morning. Past my bedtime now.

The act of disobeying God's command was something LDS believe that God wanted? Ummmm....okay...I guess that...sort of...explains it...

I am wondering if someone can give me some insight on the LDS teaching on Eve. I just read Jewel's post about an image at the SLC temple, and I am surprised at all the praise heaped upon her, and I assume that Adam shares in those praises. And if Eve is worthy of some sort of praise (although I cannot imagine why), does Mary, the Mother of Jesus Christ, also receive some sort of...added appreciation for her role in salvation history?

If this man doesn't believe in God, why do you suppose he is being chaste until his marriage?

I posted briefly already, but I wanted to re-post to you specifically, because you've laid it out so thoroughly. God exists...period. He is the Supreme Being, the Uncaused Cause, etc. He created us from nothing to love us and He desires that we return that love to Him. Not unlike the great love between a married couple that brings forth life (with God's grace) in marriage. That said, while God knows all things about His creation, He doesn't know what is going to happen with something He hasn't yet created, because there is nothing to know. 'It" doesn't exist. My mind is comparing it to my newborn grand-nephew. Before he was born we didn't know he would have the genes for cystic fibrosis, because there was nothing to know. Now his parents know and proceed accordingly knowing that each new child of theirs has an x% chance of this disease. Do/should all married couples cease to have children based on what horrible thing might happen to their children? And God did not create us as one thing that He expects to somehow become something else, as though a dog is supposed to have some ability to become a cat. He created us rational beings that can see the world and the love around us. We can observe and participate in natural law, the order of the universe and know God, and be good people. However, rational beings can also convince themselves of all sorts of things that are not from God, such as abortion being some sort of good thing. This is our free will, and our free will and observance of all things good and beautiful in this world should lead us towards the existence of [a] God, even if we don't have the benefit of Him having revealed Himself to us, such as Aristotle did. Anyway, I am getting off topic. The point is, we are not created as creatures that have no ability to be what God intends. He created and He saw that 'it was good'. We are His creation and we were created for goodness. As an athlete can train his body, a person can train his soul. It takes discipline and ordering our minds and hearts towards the good, but it is categorically not that God is asking us to be ABC while creating us as XYZ.

Once again...my understanding... You (LDS) believe that God would not create something He knew would fail, yes? He would not create a creature only to see that creature fall to Hell, yes? If that is correct, why is it not equally illogical that God would establish a church that He knew would fail? It is the LDS position that Jesus Christ did establish the True Church, but that sinful men went so far off the reservation that the church fell into irretrievable error?

It is my understanding that the LDS position is that God did not give us the gift of free will, because we already had it in our intelligences, correct? And those existed before God made (not created) us, correct? So the discussion I think we are having is this: LDS are saying God would not create us with free will, knowing that some of those created beings of His would end up in Hell. The truth is I'm not sure if we are having an 'ex nihilo' discussion or a free will discussion, or a Divine Foreknowledge discussion. I'm considering the latter two as I post. As I was chatting about this with my Catholic priest son, he pointed out a couple of things, which I'm not sure I have the language skill to get across here, but I'm going to try. As to free will and divine foreknowlege: someone asked why God would create us knowing we would sin? My son pointed out that God is outside of time, and that what is the future to us is always present to God. He knows what will happen, but He only knows what will happen because there is something to know. Meaning, it is only after we are created that there is something to know, and God doesn't deal in 'hypothetical' situations, e.g. if I create this person, what if he/she sins. More to follow...

I think this dove-tails with another thread on free will/polyandry. LDS posters say that they don't understand why we believe a loving father would create us with free will, knowing some would end up in Hell. But they do understand/believe that God established a church He (presumably) knew would fail and lead souls into apostasy?

I haven't read the whole thread, but I've gotten to page 4 (whew!) Correct me if I'm wrong here.. LDS are saying that our intelligence existed before God made our bodies, which is why we have free will? God did not give us free will, because a loving father would not give us something that would lead us away from Him? Prison Chaplain is saying God created us with free will from nothing? If that is the discussion in a nutshell (and I'll go back and read the rest of the thread), why is it not equally 'unloving' for God to take our intelligence, which lived with him in Heaven before He gave us bodies, and put us on this earth to not choose Him? To not choose exaltation? To me the answer lies not so much in the 'how' of creation, but in the definition of what love is.

It is my understanding that the LDS teaching of a Great Apostasy is basically based on teachings going astray after such-and-such a time (death of Christ? Last apostle? I'm not sure) A question came to mind: if LDS doctrine teachings continuing revelation, how can you know that what was being taught was indeed erroneous, as opposed to continued revelation? For instance, the doctrine that Christ is True God and True Man in a hypostatic union. LDS doctrine established with Joseph Smith that Jesus was a separate person (details escape me). To my mind it doesn't follow logically to say that there is continuing revelation (and further that Christ presumably would have established that in the first place with the priesthood keys, etc.) but that when something was 'revealed' in the 400's, you don't accept it. Christ had established the priesthood, given the proper authority to his apostles, and promised the protection from error, correct? Another thread about polyandry was posted, and while I didn't read the whole thing, most respondents agreed that they would submit to the church's teaching if that ever happened. When you study church history, why do those same people not submit to what was taught through the early church, even if they don't quite understand it?

Continuing, I fully admire, support and believe those good Christians did what is pleasing in the sight of God. I think the LGBT groups and courts have offended God. And perhaps if the time comes, I will find my stomach turning and ultimately determine that refusal to provide service is God's Will, and He will give me that Grace at that time to take a stronger stand for the Sacrament of Marriage.

I'm just throwing it out there as a thought process, I'm not saying there is one way to handle the situation. While I think I should be able to refuse service to anyone, the fact is, we don't have that freedom in our country today, the way I see it. My little business is not our livelihood, so I could take that stand and not lose everything. But, if my small business was family's sole income? I might choose to make my statement by working on campaigns. My own sister has just decided not to do weddings at all because she lives in a super-liberal area.

I own a business that participates in weddings, and while I haven't yet been approached to provide service to a gay 'wedding', one thought occurred to me that might help me avoid a legal battle if religious freedom is my reasoning... As a person who has a 'sincerely held religious belief' that gay marriage is wrong/a sin/whatever, I also believe that no matter what the state calls it, in the eyes of God, no marriage actually exists. God does not suddenly accept these two people as 'married' because the U.S. gov't accepted it. If I want to make a political/cultural statement about gay marriage, I would save it for somewhere else.

Thank you.