A question about Satan's plan


Webster
 Share

How would Satan have implemented his proposal to save all? (Leave additional comments if you like)  

55 members have voted

  1. 1. How would Satan have implemented his proposal to save all? (Leave additional comments if you like)

    • Require each person to atone for their own sins
    • Don't hold anyone accountable / Redeem all unconditionally
    • Force everyone to be good or to comply with the rules
    • Change the rules or laws so that nothing would be evil
    • Something else (please explain)
    • Don't know


Recommended Posts

Hmmm. Interesting thoughts.

Here is Daniel H. Ludlow, in a 1976 Ensign (admittidly, I don't know who that is).

We do not know all of the details of Lucifer’s amended proposal, but we do know from revelation that he “sought to destroy the agency of man.” (Moses 4:3.) This could be accomplished in many ways, including denying us either the opportunity of choice or the freedom of choice. In either case, not “one soul” would have been lost. It is sin that causes a soul to be lost, but how can a person sin if he does not have the opportunity to sin? That is, how can a person disobey a law if he does not have a law?

I see what you're asking and implying.

Let me present a few other thoughts.

As long as man had agency, no matter what law they were under, no matter what the consequences, some would have chosen not to follow Satan.

Satan did not want anyone to choose because he knew some would not choose him. Since his plan guranteed ALL would be redeemed, he had to remove the ability to choose.

As long as some still had the ability, some would oppose him.

John Taylor's comment is interesting. He states it as an opinion.

However, here is the crux of the matter.

Man always had agency, even in the pre-mortal existence.

God created an earth, and provided a space or place where we could exercise that agency freely.

Now, it's clear (or should have been clear to Lucifer) that man must have his agency, because they had it. It is clear Lucifer knew man had agency as an inherent right, because he exercised his when he rebelled.

I think, after further thought, it was not our absolute agency, the agency we had in the pre-mortal realm, that Lucifer sought to take away. It was the ability to exercise our agency freely, or the moral agency we now enjoy, he sought to take away.

Moses 7:

32 The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;

I believe it was this statement here, by God, that Satan wanted to prevent.

He would create the world, give us law, and the knowledge of good and evil, but he would prevent man from choosing it, so there would be no fall. However, I don't know how man would need redeemed, then.

What are your thoughts on how we would need to be redeemed if we had no law, or there were no consequences? What would we need redeemed from?

Here are President Faust's

Satan became the devil by seeking glory, power, and dominion by force. In contrast, Jesus, chosen “from the beginning,” said unto God, “Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.” What a difference in approaches! Wrong as Satan was, he was persuasive enough to entice one-third of the hosts of heaven to follow him. He practiced a great deception by saying, “I am also a son of God,” persuading others to love him more than God.

Agency—Our Alternative

Our agency, given us through the plan of our Father, is the great alternative to Satan’s plan of force. With this sublime gift, we can grow, improve, progress, and seek perfection. Without agency, none of us could grow and develop by learning from our mistakes and errors and those of others.

I see that it can work backwards. I see that if you remove consequence, or law, that we could not exercise agency. However, I believe Lucifer knew that with agency, some would choose not to follow him, even if he removed law or consequence. I believe he went straight for the jugular... he wanted to retain our agency on earth to freely choose. This meant he could force all men to follow him, or so he thought.

Edited by Justice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What amazes me is - Satan must have known about the origins and importance of Agency. He must have known, ahead of announcing his plan, that such a thing was not possible without destroying all of creatioin, let alone our chances for exaltation:

D&C 93: 30

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

Satan knew that we cannot abide being MADE to do something. We must choose it for ourselves if progress is to be made.

I don't think Satan believed his own words. He knew they were lies. A Liar from the beginning, it would seem.

Perhaps the same issue that plagued us there plagues us here: Trusting Him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. Interesting thoughts.

Here is Daniel H. Ludlow, in a 1976 Ensign (admittidly, I don't know who that is).

We do not know all of the details of Lucifer’s amended proposal, but we do know from revelation that he “sought to destroy the agency of man.” (Moses 4:3.) This could be accomplished in many ways, including denying us either the opportunity of choice or the freedom of choice. In either case, not “one soul” would have been lost. It is sin that causes a soul to be lost, but how can a person sin if he does not have the opportunity to sin? That is, how can a person disobey a law if he does not have a law?

I see what you're asking and implying.

Let me present a few other thoughts.

As long as man had agency, no matter what law they were under, no matter what the consequences, some would have chosen not to follow Satan.

Satan did not want anyone to choose because he knew some would not choose him. Since his plan guranteed ALL would be redeemed, he had to remove the ability to choose.

As long as some still had the ability, some would oppose him.

John Taylor's comment is interesting. He states it as an opinion.

However, here is the crux of the matter.

Man always had agency, even in the pre-mortal existence.

God created an earth, and provided a space or place where we could exercise that agency freely.

Now, it's clear (or should have been clear to Lucifer) that man must have his agency, because they had it. It is clear Lucifer knew man had agency as an inherent right, because he exercised his when he rebelled.

I think, after further thought, it was not our absolute agency, the agency we had in the pre-mortal realm, that Lucifer sought to take away. It was the ability to exercise our agency freely, or the moral agency we now enjoy, he sought to take away.

Moses 7:

32 The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;

I believe it was this statement here, by God, that Satan wanted to prevent.

He would create the world, give us law, and the knowledge of good and evil, but he would prevent man from choosing it, so there would be no fall. However, I don't know how man would need redeemed, then.

What are your thoughts on how we would need to be redeemed if we had no law, or there were no consequences? What would we need redeemed from?

Here are President Faust's

Satan became the devil by seeking glory, power, and dominion by force. In contrast, Jesus, chosen “from the beginning,” said unto God, “Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.” What a difference in approaches! Wrong as Satan was, he was persuasive enough to entice one-third of the hosts of heaven to follow him. He practiced a great deception by saying, “I am also a son of God,” persuading others to love him more than God.

Agency—Our Alternative

Our agency, given us through the plan of our Father, is the great alternative to Satan’s plan of force. With this sublime gift, we can grow, improve, progress, and seek perfection. Without agency, none of us could grow and develop by learning from our mistakes and errors and those of others.

I see that it can work backwards. I see that if you remove consequence, or law, that we could not exercise agency. However, I believe Lucifer knew that with agency, some would choose not to follow him, even if he removed law or consequence. I believe he went straight for the jugular... he wanted to retain our agency on earth to freely choose. This meant he could force all men to follow him, or so he thought.

I have a friend who is trying to work with me in understanding how to work these quotes but till he gets me straighten out I will have to cripple on.

"Man always had agency, even in the pre-mortal existence.

God created an earth, and provided a space or place where we could exercise that agency freely.

Now, it's clear (or should have been clear to Lucifer) that man must have his agency, because they had it. It is clear Lucifer knew man had agency as an inherent right, because he exercised his when he rebelled.

I think, after further thought, it was not our absolute agency, the agency we had in the pre-mortal realm, that Lucifer sought to take away. It was the ability to exercise our agency freely, or the moral agency we now enjoy, he sought to take away."

Satan was able to draw 1/3rd of the heavenly population with him.

That was one monkey wrench thrown into his plans.

There would have had to be a war no matter what.

and an earth created to suit those who followed Satan.

Weather or not the drama would have unfolded as it did for us in Eden but no choice or Agency would have to be given the two young people as in our case.

The agency that God gave our parents in the garden was the test of the "fruit of the tree".

God gave them there agency in that test weather to listen to Him or Satan.

That choice was given us in the pre-existence and it is given to us now.

Our agency is constantly given to us to act upon but are we agents unto ourselves?

Those outside the law still act on their agency.

A baby decides weather to squirm away from you or to lie quiet against your breast.

With many babies a gentle hug will bring them back down.

Some will fight against your slight correction.

A window perhaps into their teenage years?:o

Yet they are not yet thought of as rebellious even though in their own little way they are flexing that muscle.

You just gently correct and should feel no fault for they are without law.

Bro. Rudick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some more quotes from various leaders who referred to Satan's proposal as something other than forcing men to be good or inhibiting their choice. Many include the idea of saving them in their 'sins', implying that men could do whatever they wanted (chose) but still be redeemed.

Christ kept his first estate Lucifer lost his by offering to save men in their sins on the honor of a God, or on his father's honor.

– W. W. Phelps, The Answer., Times and Seasons, vol. 5 (January 1844-January 1, 1845), No. 24. Nauvoo, Illinois, Jan. 1, 1844. Whole No. 108 758

He did succeed in leading away about one-third part of that great family of spirits, because of their agency. They hearkened to his proposition; they thought it would be a very great and important thing to destroy the agency of man in the future creation that was about to be made, and to redeem them all in their sins, and consequently they joined with this rebellious character; hence came the fallen angels.

– Journal of Discourses, Vol.21, Pg.287 - Pg.288 (?), Orson Pratt, July 18th, 1880

How different the motives and plans of Lucifer. He would have mankind exalted in their sins, and he himself sought to enjoy the honor.

– Don't know who ???, Contributor, vol. 11, May, 1890. No. 7. 267

Satan desired that man should be saved through the taking away from him of his agency. He would save everybody regardless of their own acts and of their own agency.

– FOREKNOWLEDGE OF GOD by President George Q. Cannon, at the Tabernacle,

Salt Lake City, May 10th, 1891.

– Brian H. Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, 5 vols. [burbank, Calif., and Woodland Hills, Ut.: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992], 2: . (?)

Lucifer sought to dethrone God, to sit himself on the divine throne, and to save all men without reference to their works. He sought to deny men their agency so they could not sin. He offered a mortal life of carnality and sensuality, of evil and crime and murder, following which all men would be saved. His offer was a philosophical impossibility.

– Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah, Pg.666 - Pg.667

I find the last two examples particularly interesting as they both refer to the idea of saving everyone "regardless of their own acts" and "without reference to their works".

McConkie's quote above specifically says that denying men their agency would make it, "so they could not sin," but then he goes on to say that men would be allowed to choose evil things during their mortal life, after which they would be saved.

That's why I included option #2 in the poll--it fits well with the above ideas. You can even say that people had their 'sins', but they were not held accountable for them, so they were redeemed unconditionally.

Now don't get me wrong. I don't believe that any of the options for Satan's proposal could exalt anyone. The question is what to you think he was suggesting, not what would have worked.

Now my view of Agency is admittedly different from the majority, that's why these other options don't cause me grief. I follow the various dictionary definitions of Agency, that's why I want you to try to find the 'freedom or ability to choose' definition in the dictionary. (I don't think it can be done). But I do think there are definitions which fit the scriptures and the plan of salvation and allow freedom of choice and are intrinsically connected to one's accountability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bro. Rudick again brings in the example of little children.

I think Little Children offer a good analogy of how Satan may have tried to sell the idea of option #2-- "Don't hold anyone accountable / Redeem all unconditionally" (assuming that was the one he went with).

Little children do in fact have the ability to choose (as well as free will, freedom of choice, etc.). They do in fact make mistakes while they are young, mistakes that if made by an adult would be considered a sin. But because of the atonement of Jesus Christ they are not held accountable for those transgressions and they are redeemed by Him.

Now, what if Satan convinced his followers that they could go to the earth, but he would withhold a sufficient knowledge of good and evil from them (that is one of McConkie's four necessary things for agency to exist)? Or what if he said that they would go to earth, and no one would ever define what good and evil were? He could then tell his followers that they would therefore remain like little children--no one would be held accountable because no one had a sufficient knowledge to become accountable. He would then step in and redeem them all (as he claimed he would do in Moses 4:1).

This destroys the Agency of man (using the dictionary's definition of 'Instrumentality') since man has no instrumentality in his own salvation (it doesn't matter what he does; all will be saved regardless of their actions).

It also destroys the Agency of man (using the legal definition of 'acting for or representing another') since man is not allowed to legally represent himself and thus become accountable (under the law) for his own actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think of my statement that some would not choose to follow Satan if he allowed agency on earth?

The agency that God gave our parents in the garden was the test of the "fruit of the tree".

God gave them there agency in that test weather to listen to Him or Satan.

I think it was more than this. I think it ties in with the creation and that a Redeemer was chosen from before the foundation of the world.

Here is what I think the scripture means that God gave man his agency in the Garden.

Man had agency in the pre-mortal existence. But, they had not been "given their agency," so they did not have "freedom" to choose. There was no law given in which to make a choice about. To choose against God's will was sin in His presence which meant death, like Lucifer and all who followed him.

Here, God created an earth to act as a "space or time" (or death) which we could be redeemed from, since we were outside of God's presence. He made allowance for us to choose against Him and instituted a plan whereby mercy could be granted. So, in essence, He was saying...

NOW you can exercise your agency freely and have a chance at redemption.

Had man exercised his agency in God's presence, without the safety net of the mortal world including death, there was no chance at redemption.

Since this was the key, it is this Lucifer attacked. However, I'm not exactly sure what he wanted to do to destroy agency, but there are some good clues in 2 Nephi and Alma. I'll keep studying and pondering.

It is clear that Satan wanted to eliminate the need for suffering on his part.

The question this brings up in my mind is, if in the pre-mortal existence there was no law there could be no punishment, because there was no law attached to it. So, how could Stan and his followers be cast out? There has to be something I'm missing. Maybe they just turned against God and didn't want His plan, therefore they were not allowed to participate, not necessarily as punishment, but by choice. Maybe they got just what they wanted, to come to earth and not be given agency or law. Hmmm. There would be no need to have a physical body if you weren't given your agency to choose evil and be redeemed from it. It is the fact that we are mortal and have "died spiritually" that makes it possible to be redeemed. If they didn't want the choice, there was no need to have a body.

Edited by Justice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, except that little children are redeemed by the Atonement of Christ.

I'm thinking that Satan's goal was to eliminate his need to suffer entirely.

Think what you want, but the only actual quote we have from Satan as to what he was proposing is "Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor." (Moses 4:1)

He actually proposed that he would redeem all mankind (and maybe he thought if he had God's honor and power he could). Again, I don't think he could actually have pulled it off, but that is what he was proposing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think of my statement that some would not choose to follow Satan if he allowed agency on earth?

The agency that God gave our parents in the garden was the test of the "fruit of the tree".

God gave them there agency in that test weather to listen to Him or Satan.

I think it was more than this. I think it ties in with the creation and that a Redeemer was chosen from before the foundation of the world.

Here is what I think the scripture means that God gave man his agency in the Garden.

Man had agency in the pre-mortal existence. But, they had not been "given their agency," so they did not have "freedom" to choose. There was no law given in which to make a choice about. To choose against God's will was sin in His presence which meant death, like Lucifer and all who followed him.

Here, God created an earth to act as a "space or time" (or death) which we could be redeemed from, since we were outside of God's presence. He made allowance for us to choose against Him and instituted a plan whereby mercy could be granted. So, in essence, He was saying...

NOW you can exercise your agency freely and have a chance at redemption.

Had man exercised his agency in God's presence, without the safety net of the mortal world including death, there was no chance at redemption.

Since this was the key, it is this Lucifer attacked. However, I'm not exactly sure what he wanted to do to destroy agency, but there are some good clues in 2 Nephi and Alma. I'll keep studying and pondering.

It is clear that Satan wanted to eliminate the need for suffering on his part.

The question this brings up in my mind is, if in the pre-mortal existence there was no law there could be no punishment, because there was no law attached to it. So, how could Stan and his followers be cast out? There has to be something I'm missing. Maybe they just turned against God and didn't want His plan, therefore they were not allowed to participate, not necessarily as punishment, but by choice. Maybe they got just what they wanted, to come to earth and not be given agency or law. Hmmm. There would be no need to have a physical body if you weren't given your agency to choose evil and be redeemed from it. It is the fact that we are mortal and have "died spiritually" that makes it possible to be redeemed. If they didn't want the choice, there was no need to have a body.

I do understand that you want to chain these things together.

I will go back to my child.

He knows what he wants in his limited view.

Whe wants and he will beat the heck out of you if he could to get it.

He does not know if it is good or evil.

You are God to him.

You say what is good and evil.

He can choose to believe you and obey you or not believe you and still obey you. The reverse is true also.

He can choose.

He wants what he wants.

Yet outside the law with free agency.

Bro. Rudick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think of my statement that some would not choose to follow Satan if he allowed agency on earth?

From a strictly logical point of view, I don't think it matters either way. Satan claimed he would redeem all and none would be lost. If that's were true, then who cares what anyone chooses; it doesn't matter; all would be redeemed and none would be lost.

By the way, the only 'force' I can find tied to Satan's proposal in any way is the implication that he would force everyone to be 'saved', whether they wanted it or not. (The atonement forces everyone to be resurrected and come into God's presence to be judged regardless of what they do and what they want. For that matter, the law will 'force' a punishment upon the wicked at the last day (2 Nephi 2:26) so I don't get too upset about the idea of force--it's everywhere! And I don't care much for the argument where people say that this or that law takes away their agency--it may take away freedom, but not agency. Again, check the dictionary.:))

Having said that, I do find some of your points of view interesting. The idea of the 'safety net' not being in the pre-mortal existance is something I've not heard before. Also, when you connected God's honor with His ability to give agency, that was a new twist. I'm not sure where you're getting those things from, but I enjoy hearing others' ideas and interpretations.

Man had agency in the pre-mortal existence. But, they had not been "given their agency," so they did not have "freedom" to choose. There was no law given in which to make a choice about. To choose against God's will was sin in His presence which meant death, like Lucifer and all who followed him.

They freely chose to rebel against God with full knowledge since there was no veil, and they were punished accordingly. If there was no law, then how did God justly kick them out?

It is clear that Satan wanted to eliminate the need for suffering on his part.

I don't think that is clear at all. I would guess that, but there's nothing I can think of in the scriptures which gives a clue one way or the other.

The question this brings up in my mind is, if in the pre-mortal existence there was no law there could be no punishment, because there was no law attached to it. So, how could Stan and his followers be cast out? There has to be something I'm missing. Maybe they just turned against God and didn't want His plan, therefore they were not allowed to participate, not necessarily as punishment, but by choice. Maybe they got just what they wanted, to come to earth and not be given agency or law. Hmmm. There would be no need to have a physical body if you weren't given your agency to choose evil and be redeemed from it. It is the fact that we are mortal and have "died spiritually" that makes it possible to be redeemed. If they didn't want the choice, there was no need to have a body.

They were given everything they wanted . . . except to get a body . . . and to be saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big choice that Satan's proposal (that he would redeem all that not one soul would be lost) would have taken away was whether you could choose Eternal Life or something less. His plan would force all to have the same outcome.

By the way, his 'no one will be lost' idea does not say we will all receive Eternal Life. It only promisses no one will be lost. (Even if he could pull off his plan, the outcome would still be something less than Eternal Life, in my opinion.)

When Satan said, "one soul shall not be lost," he was right --- all of them would be!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think of my statement that some would not choose to follow Satan if he allowed agency on earth?

Follow Satan where?

To an Earth to live out his plan?

Well, those who chose to not follow Satan(I thought I answered this in another place.) to live out his plan would have gone their own way if they had not been forced into it by a majority of those who did follow Satan.

But it did not work out that way.

If Satan was such a libertarian in the beginning, then those who did not wish to choose to follow him would have packed up their little things and looked for another leader.

HUmmmmmmmmmmmmm:rolleyes:

Bro. Rudick

Edited by JohnnyRudick
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big choice that Satan's proposal (that he would redeem all that not one soul would be lost) would have taken away was whether you could choose Eternal Life or something less. His plan would force all to have the same outcome. . .

When Satan said, "one soul shall not be lost," he was right --- all of them would be!

The statement in the middle (that I skipped over)about says it.

People would be living on an earth making their choices of good and evil even if the second (which I believe it is) was used.

You see, as I said, Good and evil are eternal principals.

Romans 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do

by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the

law, are a law unto themselves:

Romans 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their

hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts

the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

At the end of Satan's world, all would be redeemed from physical death and left to move on as they will.

Those who have lived evil and those who have tried to live well all equal in outcome.

Sound familiar?

It should.

Under God's plan we can be rewarded according to our good works.

1 Corinthians 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye

are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given

unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and

another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he

buildeth thereupon.

1 Corinthians 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than

that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation

gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

1 Corinthians 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for

the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire;

and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

1 Corinthians 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built

thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

1 Corinthians 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall

suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

The evil also at the last day.

Revelation 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that

sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away;

and there was found no place for them.

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand

before God; and the books were opened: and another book was

opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out

of those things which were written in the books, according to

their works.

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it;

and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and

they were judged every man according to their works.

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of

fire. This is the second death.

Bro. Rudick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first three choices of this poll are:

1. Require each person to atone for their own sins

2. Don't hold anyone accountable / Redeem all unconditionally

3. Force everyone to be good or to comply with the rules

I Chose number 1, but considering the timeline, these options are not at the

same level. Number 3 is the outgoing position. After number 3 would be valid

number 2 is the result. As the Father denied the plan of Lucifer, number 2 is

not valid and all the spirits that don´t accept the atonement of Jesus Christ

are under number 1. They must suffer for their own sins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was pondering this and Alma 12 came to mind. Alma spends a considerable amount of time explaining what would have happened if man was allowed to partake of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, and then immediately partake of the tree of life.

I don't know why he would explain a "what if" unless there was a purpose for it. It's at least possible he was explaining Satan's plan.

Alma 12:

22 Now Alma said unto him: This is the thing which I was about to explain. Now we see that Adam did fall by the partaking of the forbidden fruit, according to the word of God; and thus we see, that by his fall, all mankind became a clost and fallen people.

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.

It's also interesting that this is the lie Satan told to Eve, that they would not die. It seems he was still trying to push his plan to get them to eat the other fruit immediately? He knew they would die, but was planning on forcing them to eat the other fruit immediately. Maybe God knew Satan would tempt them to eat of the other fruit (tree of life) once they partook of the first fruit. This could explain why God placed cherubim to guard the tree of life.

If this is the case, which seems likely, then Alma goes on to explain how Satan's plan would have failed.

To remove the mortal probabtion period would have:

1) Eliminated the need for an Atonement.

2) Eliminated man's probationary state, or the time God prepared for man to exercise their agency.

3) Allowed man to know good and evil.

4) Allowed man to be under law.

It seems Satan wanted them to eat both fruits, and remain in the Garden of Eden, and all that it implies.

I'll have to ponder and pray about this one further, but with this comment in Alma, and the fact that Satan said "you shall not die," and the fact that God guarded the tree of life, it's all logical. It just needs to be confirmed.

Edited by Justice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....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....

There are two types of death. In This case adam´s body wouldn´t die,

but he might leave the presence of god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first three choices of this poll are:

1. Require each person to atone for their own sins

2. Don't hold anyone accountable / Redeem all unconditionally

3. Force everyone to be good or to comply with the rules

I Chose number 1, but considering the timeline, these options are not at the

same level. Number 3 is the outgoing position. After number 3 would be valid

number 2 is the result. As the Father denied the plan of Lucifer, number 2 is

not valid and all the spirits that don´t accept the atonement of Jesus Christ

are under number 1. They must suffer for their own sins.

I have to agree with your outcome.

You are right looking back from where we stand. (Hindsight)

But I understood the question to be more in line with;

What was in the mind of Lucifer in bringing man through this earth life with their bodies intact?

Bro. Webster explains it much better then I.

Bro. Rudick

Edited by JohnnyRudick
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was pondering this and Alma 12 came to mind. Alma spends a considerable amount of time explaining what would have happened if man was allowed to partake of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, and then immediately partake of the tree of life.

I don't know why he would explain a "what if" unless there was a purpose for it. It's at least possible he was explaining Satan's plan.

Alma 12:

22 Now Alma said unto him: This is the thing which I was about to explain. Now we see that Adam did fall by the partaking of the forbidden fruit, according to the word of God; and thus we see, that by his fall, all mankind became a clost and fallen people.

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.

It's also interesting that this is the lie Satan told to Eve, that they would not die. It seems he was still trying to push his plan to get them to eat the other fruit immediately? He knew they would die, but was planning on forcing them to eat the other fruit immediately. Maybe God knew Satan would tempt them to eat of the other fruit (tree of life) once they partook of the first fruit. This could explain why God placed cherubim to guard the tree of life.

If this is the case, which seems likely, then Alma goes on to explain how Satan's plan would have failed.

To remove the mortal probabtion period would have:

1) Eliminated the need for an Atonement.

2) Eliminated man's probationary state, or the time God prepared for man to exercise their agency.

3) Allowed man to know good and evil.

4) Allowed man to be under law.

It seems Satan wanted them to eat both fruits, and remain in the Garden of Eden, and all that it implies.

I'll have to ponder and pray about this one further, but with this comment in Alma, and the fact that Satan said "you shall not die," and the fact that God guarded the tree of life, it's all logical. It just needs to be confirmed.

Agreed;-)

Satan in his jealousy wanted to cause God's plan to fail and is still working in that cause.

This is the new context.

But remember, under Lucifer's plan there would not have been the command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil.

Satan would have given the gift of procreation outright and there would have been no lesson learned raising a world of spoiled brats thereby the established order we have today (quickly disappearing) of teaching your children lessons would have never been.

Bro. Rudick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in holy writ are we told that Satan "had a plan"? Satan's only "plan" was to destroy the souls of men. He had no other "plan".

Consider: What "plan" might he have implemented? A "plan" to "save" people without agency? That's a contradiction in terms; those without agency cannot be saved. Maybe a "plan" to "force" everyone to do "good"? Only if you believe that Satan had intent to "do good", and even then, the phrase is meaningless.

Satan desired to usurp God's glory for himself. That was his one and only plan. To that end, he made absurd, false claims, like "one soul shall not be lost". In other words: He lied.

Wow. Satan lied. What a concept!

And that, my friends, is the complete extent of Satan's "plan" for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in holy writ are we told that Satan "had a plan"? Satan's only "plan" was to destroy the souls of men. He had no other "plan".

Consider: What "plan" might he have implemented? A "plan" to "save" people without agency? That's a contradiction in terms; those without agency cannot be saved. Maybe a "plan" to "force" everyone to do "good"? Only if you believe that Satan had intent to "do good", and even then, the phrase is meaningless.

Satan desired to usurp God's glory for himself. That was his one and only plan. To that end, he made absurd, false claims, like "one soul shall not be lost". In other words: He lied.

Wow. Satan lied. What a concept!

And that, my friends, is the complete extent of Satan's "plan" for us.

Satan was an intelligent being among the heavenly population.

One held in high regard.

He was not a rash being. Though misguided, He had a plan.

He was not wroth until his "plan" was turned down.

Did he go into detail what his "plan" was?

Of course not, just as many things here are not gone into detail.

God saw the flaws in the plan of Lucifer's and gave diligence to the plan of Jehovah.

Satan was wroth and at that time many followed him into folly.

Bro. Rudick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with "Vort" on this one.

In Job 1:7-11 we read that Satan has audience with God and that he walks on the earth, accusing people. Clearly his "plan" is to simply keep people away from God, to create torment and pain, and torture the good because the existence of good is a torment to him.

Satan is the source of authority and rule, see Ephesians 6:12, and we read in Matthew 4:1-11, that those who worship him are granted it, along with wealth as a reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with "Vort" on this one.

In Job 1:7-11 we read that Satan has audience with God and that he walks on the earth, accusing people. Clearly his "plan" is to simply keep people away from God, to create torment and pain, and torture the good because the existence of good is a torment to him.

Satan is the source of authority and rule, see Ephesians 6:12, and we read in Matthew 4:1-11, that those who worship him are granted it, along with wealth as a reward.

Agreed.

Again that is where rightly dividing comes in.

I brought us up to the time that Lucifer was "wroth" and became Satan.

Bro. Rudick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Satan was an intelligent being among the heavenly population... Though misguided, He had a plan.

He was not wroth until his "plan" was turned down.

Did he go into detail what his "plan" was?

Of course not, just as many things here are not gone into detail.

God saw the flaws in the plan of Lucifer's and gave diligence to the plan of Jehovah.

Do you have any scriptural evidence of Satan's "plan"?

Btw, there was no "plan of Jehovah". Jehovah's only plan was to do the Father's will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . .Btw, there was no "plan of Jehovah". Jehovah's only plan was to do the Father's will.

Good plan;-)

There was a council in Heaven.

What all was discussed we are not told at this time.

I only point out the station of Lucifer and the level of his intelligence and say that such a bold statement did not come from a rash being.

Many followed after him.

I bet they were not rash beings as a whole either.

Yet the very wise are many times caught up in their own conceit and will not listen to other council when it takes them outside what they want to do.

I believe Lucifer had a plan.

I also believe he threw most of it overboard in his wrath not having his way and having another preferred above him.

This take me to a thought that I try to express over and over again as many times as I possibly can.

It is said by many;

The Scriptures contradict themselves.

But in this instance we have Lucifer, a confident, obedient son of God who I believe had a plan to save all his brothers and sisters.

Then we have Satan.

A being full of wrath and just wanting to get even for not being recognized for the genius he believes he is.

No contradiction, just a change of circumstance and time.

Bro. Rudick

Edited by JohnnyRudick
Getting rid of the extra - Bro. Rudick. I Hicc--uped:-(
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only point out the station of Lucifer and the level of his intelligence

What makes you think Lucifer's station was particularly exalted? He was a "son of the morning". What does that mean? Maybe you and I were sons of the morning, too, you think? As for his intelligence level...well, any being who would come out in open rebellion against the Almighty can't be as intelligent as all that. If "intelligence" means "light and truth", as the Doctrine and Covenants indicates, then Satan is a being without the least glimmer of intelligence.

and say that such a bold statement did not come from a rash being.

I have to think that openly rebelling against God Almighty is pretty much the ultimate expression of rash behavior.

Many followed after him.

I bet they were not rash beings as a whole either.

I'll take you up on that bet. I'll even give you 3:1 odds.

I believe Lucifer had a plan.

As do many other Latter-day Saints. But the only Satanic "plan" the scriptures mention is that of destroying the agency of men and usurping the glory of God. If you know of another "plan" of Satan, perhaps one to force everyone to do what's right, please let me know the scriptures that tell of it. Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share