NeedleinA

22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. 23 And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having nojoy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin. Carb, I wish I had the short answer, but here are his words: "Were Adam and Eve inherently immortal when they were placed in the Garden? If so, please give me all the scriptural references that you can find–the one that’s usually referred to is 2 Nephi 2:22. Let’s look at that scripture: “And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the Garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.” That seems fairly straightforward and it’s used quite commonly to establish the idea that there was a paradisiacal state and that all things, everything would have remained in the same state in which it was created. And in fact, the word “all things” there is used oftentimes to include literally all living things–not only Adam and Eve but everything else. But let’s read the very next verse which is oftentimes left out, verse 23, which says, “And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.” Is this talking about grass? Or is this just talking about the humans? Now, I have highlighted the word “they” because if we use–if we’re using proper grammatical construction “all things” or “things” indeed is the noun of that sentence; “they,” then, in both the remainder of that sentence and the following sentence should refer back to the previous noun. So “all things” are not talking about all things; it’s not talking about the grass, it’s not talking about the fruit tress necessarily. It seems to be talking, when we get down to verse 23, about something that’s capable of sinning, i.e., apparently Adam and Eve. Now we use that same vernacular today. “Hey, if I hadn’t gotten in a car wreck, things would’ve been fine today.” Right? All things would have been hunky dory, they would have continued on just the way they had been. Because if “all things” really refers to all things in the garden–including say the fruit–how do we account for this scripture: “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat” (Genesis 2:16). Now, look at something like a mango growing in the garden; in what inflorescent stage was the mango created in the first place? Or was it maybe a full-grown fruit and if it was a fruit, that suggests that there was reproduction going on in the garden. And when Eve prepared that mango for dinner that evening, how did it remain in a state in which it was created once it had been chowed down? The most reasonable interpretation of 2 Nephi 2:22 is that it referred to Adam and Eve specifically, not to other organisms in the garden. Now, once 2 Nephi 2:22 is dealt with, then I would throw out the challenge (and I’ve done this to many students over a number of years) to identify any other scripture that tells us that Adam and Eve were inherently immortal. Interesting question! Well where do we get the idea that we were inherently immortal? From St. John. He says in Paradise Lost, Book XI: “I, at first,” meaning God, “with two fair gifts Created him endowed; with happiness, And immortality.”8

Is there a particular part FP that strikes you as flat out wrong? I'm not defending his "theory". It struck me as something different and worth taking a moment to dissect, similar to many posts on here. Sharing it here, well...this is me dissecting it.

I'll second that solid answer.

Well, do you ever have a moment when you learn/hear something different/outside of the box and go, "Hum, that was really interesting!". I just had one of those moments. I just finished up 40 minutes of watching a lecture: Evolution and Latter-day Saint Theology: The Tree of Life and DNA, from a FAIR Conference. Perhaps old news to others, but new to me in several areas. If I understood the speaker correctly as he gave his opinion, I took away the following and would be interested in your thoughts. 1. Adam & Eve were not inherently immortal. 2. Death (in various forms) was occurring in the garden. Examples he gave: Did Adam & Eve have hair, nails and human skin? If so, they are the result of dead cells. Did Adam & Eve ever pick a fruit off of a tree and discard it on the ground? Being separated from the tree, did it rot or live forever on the ground? 3. He addresses our common understanding/translation regarding: 2 Nephi 2:22 4. His theory: two mortal beings Adam & Eve had been plucked out of the mainstream (ongoing population on Earth), isolated in the Garden of Eden and while there had access to the Tree of Life. The tree made them immortal while they were partaking of it. Once kicked out, a cherubim had to then be placed in front of tree to stop them from "continuing" to eat from it. Anyways, I thought it was interesting enough to open up for a discussion if anyone had any thoughts about it. FYI: The videos are 4x 10min parts into 40min whole. Parts 3 & 4 are where he gets into his theory.

Wonderful addition LP. As always I'm glad you added your thoughts and I appreciate you and your experiences tremendously. I tried not to define "well" in the OP, but rather simply hoped that as a person goes through a trial, they would take time to step back and ask themselves, "Am I simply enduring or enduring this well?". What "well" is, is going to be very individual and like you said, judging ourselves too harshly is counterproductive. On the flip side, I'm afraid that if we don't periodically ask ourselves this question during the trials, we can easily fade down the opposite path, away from God. There are blessings in both, enduring and enduring well, I pray we can all strive to receive "all" of those blessings.

I have shared this thought with members over the years, and leave it here today in the hopes of helping someone else as well. It comes from D&C 121: 7-8. Section heading reads: ...The Prophet and several companions had been months in prison (Liberty). Their petitions and appeals directed to the executive officers and the judiciary had failed to bring them relief. In one of the most trying times in Joseph Smith's life and after pleading/crying/begging to the Lord to relieve him of his burdens, Joseph received the following answer: 7. My son, peace be unto thy soul; thine adversity and thine afflictions shall be but a small moment; 8. And then, if thou endure it, God shall exalt thee on high; thou shalt triumph over all they foes. I love these scriptures, however, I wrote it wrong...did you notice? Sometimes we understand the fact that we need to "endure" trials, however, I personally believe that is not where the blessings lay. Enduring for some is just basic survival instinct. A P.O.W. can "endure". A mother giving birth can "endure". A marriage facing heavy financial troubles can simply "endure" too. I think the blessings are not simply in "enduring" but rather "enduring it WELL". The Lord told Joseph "if thou endure it well", you get the blessing "exalt thee on high". When trials come our way, do we find ourselves "enduring" OR "enduring it well"? Do we curse God or our Spouse during trials? If we do, that probably isn't "well", that is simply enduring and I suggest we miss out on many blessings. This idea is seen every month during fast Sunday. Do you simply (endure) starve yourself and get mad and upset you can't eat, or is fast Sunday a pleasure? A little food for thought (no pun intended) the next time trials come your way... try enduring it WELL and see the difference.

Here is where you can get them and others too: https://bookstore.fairlds.org/

Perfect! There are others that go into actual answers to questions versus addressing "doubt" by itself. Again, welcome!

Currently in the middle of reading a LDS book by the Chair in Mormon Studies at Claremont Graduate University, CA called: "Planted" Belief and Belonging in an age of Doubt Brief Summary: " For all its advances, our secular age has also weakened ties to religious belief and affiliation, and Latter-day Saints have not been immune. In recent years, many faithful Church members have encountered challenging aspects of Church history, belief, or practice. Feeling isolated, alienated, or misled, some struggle to stay. Some simply leave. Many search for a reliable and faithful place to work through their questions. The abundance of information online can leave them frustrated.Planted offers those who struggle—and those who love them—practical ways to stay planted in the gospel of Jesus Christ."

Welcome! We are always happy to help where possible. Enjoy!

Also, I'll leave with one of my favorite Sisters of all time: Sister Okazaki. (Thanks LP) Chieko Nishimura Okazaki (October 21, 1926 – August 1, 2011) was first counselor to Elaine L. Jack in the Relief Society general presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) from 1990 to 1997. She was the first non-Caucasian woman to serve as a general presidency member of an LDS Church auxiliary organization.[2] Okazaki was born and raised in Hawaii as a Buddhist, the daughter of Hawaii-born parents of Japanese descent. At the age of fifteen she converted to the LDS Church. She later married Edward Y. Okazaki and they had two sons. Professionally she was an educator and taught in Hawaii, Utah, and Colorado, and was also an elementary school principal.

I agree with Vort. Our family just had a discussion about this thread during dinner. We are a mixed race family from the USA. We talked about how we would feel if roles were reversed. What if the church was restored, and had primarily grown through it's history in another country, say Japan, Congo or Tonga instead. We would perhaps naturally see more Japanese or Congolese or Tongans in higher up leadership roles as a result of: proximity, language barriers, or even generational maturity in the gospel. We discussed the fact that there are wonderful, incredibly strong diverse members across the world, but perhaps right now they can "best" serve by building up the church in their own nations and languages first. Ultimately it is not our choice to pick and choose leaders, we are not in control despite any political landscape or personal desires. It can often be hard being in the minority of anything, political, religiously, or ethnically, but that fact alone doesn't make others wrong or open to criticism just because they aren't what we had hoped for.

Not women in the latter days, but still a demonstration of called vs. already qualified in Church History...

Thumbs up AI!

Same experience as you both... also BYUtv on Roku. Wonderful first session. There is no doubt that General Conference(GC) takes on a totally different tone when you are prepared, listening for answers and have a sincere desire to watch and be taught by the Spirit. As a youth GC was unfortunately a time to take a nap and often done as an obligation... one of those things I wish I could go back and change about myself.

Bingo, bingo Vort... exactly the same impressions here.

Here is a link from lds.org that might shed some light on your question. This not an official statement, as it says, but is helpful "guidance". I personally use the KJV only. I remember being in a religious book store one time, not LDS, and looking through all the different versions of bibles they had. On one row itself, it seemed like there where 100 different "Bibles". Versions for any age or lifestyle. Two that stood out: 1. What I would call a Nature/Hippie version 2. Teenage talk version. It read like teenager/high school kids would talk to one another Though we use the KJV, we use a slightly different version of it. Slightly different in that there are tons of study guides included in the LDS version. Footnotes & Chapter headings to give additional clarifications, definitions, and scriptures that tie into the theme. There is also a Bible Dictionary & Topical Guide with massive information. Edit/Added: From the cover sheet of my KJV Bible, "Authorized King James Version with explanatory notes and cross references to the standard works of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"

During LDS church services, on Sunday, there are two main combined adult classes for instruction: Gospel Principles (basics) & Gospel Doctrine (more advanced). I should be attending the advanced, but like going into the basics instead. This class is intended for investigators of the church and newer members just starting out. There are about 3 of us in this class who should be in the advanced class, but choose to be there instead. Sometimes I feel like I better not leave the basics class, if for nothing more than trying to keep the other 2 "advanced" members from "information dumping and overloading" the investigators and new members. In any setting, it is obviously good to get to know your audience and if you want to have a meaningful dialogue, start by speaking at their level first. No different than a doctor or computer "nerd" dumbing things down into understandable/common terms for clients. Cute missionary story, but bummer.

Oh boy, can I add a nerd comment too? Okay, just bought Star Wars the Force Awakens and watched it with the kids tonight. My new favorite motivational nerd quote when dealing with Anti-Mormon lit/comments: "Go straight at 'em, don't let these thugs scare you." - Poe Dameron (Resistance Pilot)

Aaaahhh, April 1st still isn't it...bummer, thought I could get $2k worth of stuff for free again, dang!

Welcome Steve!

è tutto bellissimo Vort! (I attempted google translation) I agree and believe she understands exactly what you and others were saying. In addition to the help of this thread, she says she just read her Ensign that arrived today in which there was a, "massive article about recognizing Satan's counterfeits or using the Bom to know when you are being spiritually duped. That is what I love about the Church". She is looking forward to General Conference this weekend. Life is even better for her since my post 3 hrs ago. Thank you everyone!

Untrue? You then disproved yourself by giving an example of it being possibly true...hum?

Just an update to everyone that has added their comments thus far - thank you! The Sister has been reading this thread, with understandably mixed feelings on certain subjects. I will leave this one quote from the Church: " Avoid sensationalism and speculation when talking about plural marriage. Sometimes teachers speculate that plural marriage will be a requirement for all who enter the celestial kingdom. We have no knowledge that plural marriage will be a requirement for exaltation."

Bob Ross spoke in General Conference several years ago, not sure if anyone remembers it? Some quotes from it: "Brothers & Sisters, we don't make mistakes. We just have happy accidents" "Trees cover up a multitude of sins" lastly "I remember when my Dad told me as a kid, ‘If you want to catch a rabbit, stand behind a tree and make a noise like a carrot. Then when the rabbit comes by you grab him.’ Works pretty good until you try to figure out what kind of noise a carrot makes…"