Was Eve wise or beguiled? and at which point?

[nimrod]

Original Poster

I have found the answer in a number of sources. Eve was decieved in the first instance. "It was not so with Adam....He knew that unless he did partake there would be an eternal seperation between him and the (woman)...." (Cannon, Gospel Truth 1:24)

"Adam voluntarily, and with full knowlege of the consequences, partookof the fruit...." (Marion G. Romney, The Message of Seminary and Institute Teachers , 1966)

"Adam was not deceived, but the woman being decieved was in the transgression" (1 Tim. 2:14)

"The woman was captivated by these representations (of Satan); and being eager to possess the advatages pictured by Satan, she disobeyed the command." ....... "(Adam) deliberately and wisely decided to standy by the first and greater commandment; and, therefore, with understanding of the nature of his act , he also partook..." See (Articles of Faith, Talmage, pg 59)

[Justice]

Lucifer, knowing Adam would not partake, backup plan was to use Eve; probably knew of her flaw character of seeking further truths [impatience].

I don't think Eve was the back-up plan. I think Eve was the target from the git-go. Here is why...

Without getting into the scripture and logic as to why I believe this, but the offspring takes on the characteristics of the mother, not father.

Or, if the mother is mortal (has blood), the child will be mortal (have blood). If the mother is immortal (no blood), the child will be immortal (no blood).

So, it makes no difference what state Adam's body was in, as long as Eve remained mortal, Father's plan was possible. However, if Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, learned how to have offspring, and THEN partook of the tree of life, and became immortal, all of mankind would have been born immortal.

Think of the far-reaching implications, including, there could have been no mortal mother to give birth to a mortal Savior. Man was doomed.

Plus, Satan's plan was fulfilled. Man's agency was destroyed. Man no longer had the option to choose God, or if He did, there was no way to return to Him. They were fallen forever.

Read Alma 12.

Eve was target numero uno.

Also, I don't think Eve had a character flaw that led her to be decieved. I think she was "different" than Adam (woman different than man? woah!) in that she wanted to have children more than she wanted to not eat the fruit.

What she didn't do was eat the tree of life afterward, become immortal, and hide her transgression, and following sin, from Adam or God. I believe she knew what she wanted, and she got what she wanted. She wanted to fulfill the purpose for which she was put on earth, to multiply and replenish it.

As far as her being deceived... I haven't quite put my finger on that one yet. I know she was, but I'm still trying to figure out exactly what about. Others have made some very insightful comments so far.

She was deceived about something in this verse:

6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

1) good for food

2) pleasant to the eyes

3) to be desired to make one wise

I beleive she was deceived about one of these things.

I'm thinking of the temple teachings, and nothing comes to mind.

Edited March 12, 2009 by Justice

[Justice]

Here's a question that might help some picture what I'm saying.

Why didn't God put Adam and Eve on the earth at the same time?

Did God create Adam, then say, "You know, I think it would be better if man had a female..."

Not hardly. God knew He was going to put BOTH man and woman on the earth. There is something to learn in the fact that He didn't, and that He put man first, then female.

Also, what was this "deep sleep" that God caused to come upon Adam? God just created every living thing on earth, including man. Why did He put Adam to "sleep" and "use" one of his "ribs" (I'm not picturing open-chest surgery) to create Eve?

All rhetorical questions to provoke thought.

Edited March 12, 2009 by Justice

[Justice]

Interesting verse in the New Teatament:

2 Cor. 11:

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Christ is the tree of life, right?

so your minds should be corrupted

should be corrupted

from the simplicity that is Jesus Christ

Sounds like Satan over-complicated some aspect of God's plan. My guess is since he wanted to take away agency (or in my view mortality), he tried to over-complicate agency or mortality.

She was corrupted against how simple the plan was to send a Redeemer in mortality.

Sounds like he convinced her it was easier to partake of the fruit, then partake of the tree of life since it was the easier, simpler path. Why go through all the pains and sufferings of mortality just so a Savior can be born? Just eat of the tree of life after you eat the forbidden fruit, and tada! you won't die!

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

2 Cor. 11:

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Interesting.

Edited March 12, 2009 by Justice

[Just_A_Guy]

Without getting into the scripture and logic as to why I believe this, but the offspring takes on the characteristics of the mother, not father.

If you get some extra time later today, I would love to see the scriptures that lead you to that conclusion. :)

Not directly related, but one of the things that has always struck me about the Garden of Eden narrative is that Adam left Eve alone, and that's when she was beguiled. I've always wondered whether the priesthood wasn't, in a sense, actually a kind of penance for Adam and his posterity--"Okay, you botched it up the first time by not standing by your companion. If you hang her--or any of your fellowman--out to dry again; and thereby anyone loses their salvation; you are going to be accountable to me for that." (See, e.g., Jacob 1:19).

[Justice]

I don't know. I'm not sure where that would go.

Maybe a PM?

[voiceoftruth]

The following comes directly from the LDS Old Testament Institute manual in regards to Genesis chapter 3.

Elder James E. Talmage explained how, even in her being deceived, Eve still brought about the purposes of the Lord:

“Eve was fulfilling the foreseen purposes of God by the part she took in the great drama of the fall; yet she did not partake of the forbidden fruit with that object in view, but with intent to act contrary to the divine command, being deceived by the sophistries of Satan, who also, for that matter, furthered the purposes of the Creator by tempting Eve; yet his design was to thwart the Lord’s plan. We are definitely told that ‘he knew not the mind of God, wherefore he sought to destroy the world’ [Moses 4:6]. Yet his diabolical effort, far from being the initiatory step toward destruction, contributed to the plan of man’s eternal progression. Adam’s part in the great event was essentially different from that of his wife; he was not deceived; on the contrary he deliberately decided to do as Eve desired, that he might carry out the purposes of his Maker with respect to the race of men, whose first patriarch he was ordained to be.” (Articles of Faith, pp. 69–70.)

Eve was innocent, and her pure naivety is what left her susceptible to Satan's deceit. Because she had not yet partaken of the fruit, she did not have the knowledge of good and evil. She did not know Lucifer for who he was until after partaking of the fruit.

We should look down upon Eve for being deceived. She did not know any better. She was trusting and innocent, like a small child. She did not know right from wrong. Satan's efforts to frustrate the plan merely enabled it. Father knew that in her state of innocence, Eve would yield to the enticings of Satan. He designed the plan this way. It had to be.

Eve was beguiled.

[skippy740]

We should look down upon Eve for being deceived. She did not know any better. She was trusting and innocent, like a small child. She did not know right from wrong. Satan's efforts to frustrate the plan merely enabled it. Father knew that in her state of innocence, Eve would yield to the enticings of Satan. He designed the plan this way. It had to be.

Eve was beguiled.

Should? or Shouldn't? (I'm pretty sure you meant shouldn't.) :)

[Vort]

"Beguilded" has no connotation of "innocent and therefore sinless". It just means "deceived", and of course we are commanded to be not deceived.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Vort

[Vort]

"Beguilded" has no connotation of "innocent and therefore sinless". It just means "deceived", and of course we are commanded to be not deceived.

[Traveler]

"Beguilded" has no connotation of "innocent and therefore sinless". It just means "deceived", and of course we are commanded to be not deceived.

I think you are being deceived concerning the intent of the scripture you are quoting as it applies to what is being commanded and who it is; that according to the scripture and the commandments (covenant) in question, will not inherit the kingdom of G-d.

The Traveler

[Vort]

I think you are being deceived concerning the intent of the scripture you are quoting as it applies to what is being commanded and who it is; that according to the scripture and the commandments (covenant) in question, will not inherit the kingdom of G-d.

The Traveler

Not sure what you're talking about. I linked to six scriptural quotations to substantiate the point that we are commanded to "be not deceived".

[Seminarysnoozer]

Maybe I don't have this very clear; wasn't Eve behind the veil when she made that decision?

If so, there are two Eve's, the one that with full intellect and purpose volunteered to take on the huge responsibility of being the first woman, knowing what she was getting herself into and thus very wise. And, the Eve behind the veil that is made like a child and experiencing the unfamiliar aspects of a body (I would assume, maybe not if it is a perfect body) with all of it's "what-if" parts of the frontal lobe firing. God will take into account all aspects of Eve just like He will all of us. She was deceived. I am thankful that God judges what is in a person's heart. And I am thankful that God knows we all fall short and so He provided a Savior that even Eve depended on to pull her out of her shortcomings. The Savior, I am sure, has already put the fact that Eve was deceived behind Him (it's not fully taken care of until the completion of His mission of course) in terms of what Eve is held accountable for and therefore we should likewise have a completely forgiving heart and not feel the least bit that Eve is currently responsible. Whatever harsh judgment we place on her, I am sure will be the level of judgement we get. So, I choose to see her as the wise spirit she is; both before and now. It would be a mistake to think of her as anything else as God wouldn't ask the question of "At what point?"; He looks at the whole and at the heart.

There are many battles lost in this life but the end result can still be refinement and improvement. I don't think we are going to be characterized for eternity by the measurement of our lowest point but more so if we maintained our integrity through the process. Jesus descended below us all and yet is the highest. ... So, good job Eve!

[garryw]

Too bad the forbidden fruit was not a coconut. Those are hard to open, it would have given her time to think about her choice as she tried to open it.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Too bad the forbidden fruit was not a coconut. Those are hard to open, it would have given her time to think about her choice as she tried to open it.

Paradisical coconuts don't have a hard shell, that is a "fallen" feature.

[Traveler]

There are two principles I find interesting in the decision concerning Adam and Eve.

Principle #1. How do those that believe in G-d understand justice and mercy as it is directly applied concerning Adam and Eve - but especially punishments for their children yet to be born.

Principle #2. If they expect any better treatment or results from G-d for what they have done. For example - they express that G-d was just to expel Adam and Eve from his presents because Adam and Eve disobeyed his commandments - which is in essence amounted to rebelling and turning their back on G-d. But should they transgress a commandment - they will not be expelled - G-d will forgive them and they will not have to suffer for their transgressions because they believe in G-d (Christ)

In essence I believe most of what is meant in the story is lost in interpretations of details that are at the heart and core; contrary to the justice and mercy of G-d.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

There are two principles I find interesting in the decision concerning Adam and Eve.

Principle #1. How do those that believe in G-d understand justice and mercy as it is directly applied concerning Adam and Eve - but especially punishments for their children yet to be born.

Principle #2. If they expect any better treatment or results from G-d for what they have done. For example - they express that G-d was just to expel Adam and Eve from his presents because Adam and Eve disobeyed his commandments - which is in essence amounted to rebelling and turning their back on G-d. But should they transgress a commandment - they will not be expelled - G-d will forgive them and they will not have to suffer for their transgressions because they believe in G-d (Christ)

In essence I believe most of what is meant in the story is lost in interpretations of details that are at the heart and core; contrary to the justice and mercy of G-d.

The Traveler

What is the punishment specifically? An opportunity to become more like God is a punishment?

[james12]

Was Eve wise or beguiled? The question for me hinges on how much knowledge Adam and Eve possessed regarding good and evil and the Plan of Salvation.

In the book of Moses we read the following, "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" (Moses 7:32). According to the scripture, God gave Adam and Eve knowledge when he created them. They were also given the ability to use that knowledge in the Garden of Eden, or in other words, they were given agency. Based on subsequent events it appears they were held accountable for the agency they were given. So to work the point backwards; to have accountability Adam and Eve must have had agency, to have agency they must have had knowledge of right and wrong.

Now, how far did that knowledge extend? Jeffery R. Holland says:

These terrible risks of sorrow and death were facts Adam and Eve were willing to face in order that "men might be." But they-like us-were able and willing to venture these only with the knowledge that there would be safety at the end of the day for those who wanted it and lived for it. They were willing to transgress knowingly and consciously (the only way they could "fall" into the consequences of mortality, inasmuch as Elohim certainly could not force innocent parties out of the garden and still be a just God) only because they had a full knowledge of the plan of salvation, which would provide for them a way back from their struggle with death and hell. (Christ and the New Covenant, p 203,204. See also Brigham Young, in Journal of Discourses, 9:149)

This only makes sense because there is no way a just God could punish Adam and Eve if they did not have knowledge of the risk and reward they faced. Nor would they eat of the fruit if they did not know they could be saved. Genesis 3:6 may allude to the knowledge Eve had, it says,

And when the woman

1. saw that that the tree was good for food

2. and that is was pleasant to the eyes

3. and a tree to be desired to make one wise

she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat...

It is my opinion that the above three points must not be taken only literally but figuratively.

Having said all of this, it also seems clear that Eve still lacked some understanding, for after the fall she says, "Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption and the eternal life which God giveth to the obedient" (Moses 5:11). What then did she lack or what was there to gain? Perhaps this question can be answered in part by looking in 2 Nephi 2:23, it says, "And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence". It is interesting that their innocence in this verse is tied to them not having children. It may be that one can understand about the experience of having children but it truly remains unknown until a person experiences the bond of love between mother and daughter or father and son. Could Adam and Eve have known or felt what it would be like to sacrifice so that their children might succeed? Can such a thing be know cerebrally? Now the second part of the same verse says, "having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin." I have little doubt that Adam and Eve might have been happy from time to time, but to have true joy it may be that they had to know misery. This is a deeper joy, tempered by, and gained precisely because, one has experienced anguish and loss. This I believe is the joy Adam and Eve lacked and did not yet know. when Eve partook she mentally knew the plan, had heard of the joy she might find but had not yet understood "according to the flesh". She lacked the breadth and depth of knowing by hard experience. Thus she could say later "the serpent beguiled me and I did eat" for she did not know the extent of what she had to face. Further, while she was decieved by Satan it could be that he also lacked understanding in very much the same way as Eve, for it says, "and he sought also to beguile Eve, for he knew not the mind of God" (Moses 4:6).

Now back to the original question: was Eve beguiled? In short I would answer, "Yes". But if someone were to ask me if Eve was wise I would also say "Yes".

Edited October 20, 2012 by james12

[Traveler]

What is the punishment specifically? An opportunity to become more like God is a punishment?

Specifically two punishments - both of which carry the label of death. The first is spiritual death - which is separation or being expelled from the kingdom of G-d (loosing one citizenship rights to that kingdom). The second is physical death which is punishment for sin.

My point here is when someone believes that these "punishments" were passed on to all mankind without any choice - In other words punished for something in which they had no role or choice. I make this point because I do not believe G-d's justice works at all in any such way and therefore any doctrine that remotely suggests such a thing is untrue.

The Traveler

[ztodd]

It would be a mistake to think of her as anything else as God wouldn't ask the question of "At what point?"; He looks at the whole and at the heart.

That's the thought I was having- why do we have to concern ourselves with the question "at which point"? I know that she was very wise pre-mortally, and after the fall she definitely saw the wisdom of their decision. That's all I care about.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Specifically two punishments - both of which carry the label of death. The first is spiritual death - which is separation or being expelled from the kingdom of G-d (loosing one citizenship rights to that kingdom). The second is physical death which is punishment for sin.

My point here is when someone believes that these "punishments" were passed on to all mankind without any choice - In other words punished for something in which they had no role or choice. I make this point because I do not believe G-d's justice works at all in any such way and therefore any doctrine that remotely suggests such a thing is untrue.

The Traveler

Looking at the whole plan as we did before coming here, from that perspective, would one still call it a punishment?

I guess what I am trying to say, is to clarify that the world sees it as a "punishment", I am not sure that we do. I have always looked at it as an opportunity for advancement. Is that not how we are supposed to look at it as well as consider that is how Adam and Eve looked at it?

When I go to the gym and beat up my body, I don't call it "punishment". When my kids went off to school, for a short period of time during the day, today, they didn't call it punishment (at least not in front of me). I think it depends on the perspective.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Was Eve wise or beguiled? The question for me hinges on how much knowledge Adam and Eve possessed regarding good and evil and the Plan of Salvation.

It hinges on "how much knowledge Adam and Eve possessed" but also when was the real decision made.

If I tell you that one of the nights over the next week I am going to sleep walk and go into my kitchen and eat some watermelon in the middle of the night. And so I leave the watermelon in the fridge, out in the open. And sure enough, one of the nights out of the week I happen to sleep-walk and sleep-eat, going into the fridge and eat some watermelon. At what point did I decide to eat watermelon? It would have been before I went to bed, because I put the watermelon available there in the fridge, ready to go and then I decided to fall asleep, knowing there was a chance to sleep walk and knowing myself well enough that I would eat the thing that is right there in front of me and easiest to grab. (I don't sleep walk, btw, I have taken care of patients that have done this exact thing though)

I think Heavenly Father knew Adam and Eve well enough, presented the plan to them and they said sure, we would love to serve in that way, we are ready. If that is true, (I don't know for sure but I believe they made an informed decision before coming here) then when did Eve really decide to partake of the tree of death? .... before she was placed in the Garden.

[Traveler]

Looking at the whole plan as we did before coming here, from that perspective, would one still call it a punishment?

I guess what I am trying to say, is to clarify that the world sees it as a "punishment", I am not sure that we do. I have always looked at it as an opportunity for advancement. Is that not how we are supposed to look at it as well as consider that is how Adam and Eve looked at it?

When I go to the gym and beat up my body, I don't call it "punishment". When my kids went off to school, for a short period of time during the day, today, they didn't call it punishment (at least not in front of me). I think it depends on the perspective.

I find it rather odd the difficulty you have recognizing either spiritual death or physical death as a "punishment". However, I do understand your context. But you are overlooking a most important principle. In Genesis it is call the knowledge of good and evil. Clearly the punishment for partaking of that fruit is death. And so the prophetic law is fixed and in partaking of the fruit the knowledge of evil and the resultant death is put into full effect.

But there are two points of great importance - first concerns the agency and free will granted to man by G-d. My point is that if man had no choice concerning the partaking of the fruit and the only choice made was by Adam and Eve that G-d would be unjust. Only if the choice was as much ours as it was the choice of Adam and Eve, can the claim be made that G-d is a just G-d.

Therefore in death is the knowledge of evil made known.

But the fruit of the tree was knowledge of good and evil. Thus to know good we must be fallen and suffer death and through the mercy of G-d and the innocent and eternal sacrifice of Christ - which is the ultimate example of good - we come to know good. Thus according to the covenant of Eden the knowledge of evil is death and the knowledge of good is the atonement of Christ.

The great misunderstanding in the doctrine of the fall is that mankind had no choice no free will and no agency and that Adam and Eve alone cause the circumstance of death. LDS should of all peoples know and understand that that choice was as much theirs as it was the man Adam and the woman Eve. The symbolism in Genesis is that we think of ourselves as Adam and Eve in order to understand the covenant of the fall.

The Traveler

[JudoMinja]

"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ." (2 Corinthians 11:3)

Looks to me like the answer to this question is "Eve was beguild".

Where, exactly? Well, let's look at the account in Moses:

"And Satan put it into the heart of the serpent, (for he had drawn away many after him,) and he sought also to beguile Eve, for he knew not the mind of God, wherefore he sought to destroy the world.

And he said unto the woman: Yea, hath God said—Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (And he spake by the mouth of the serpent.)

And the woman said unto the serpent: We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden;

But of the fruit of the tree which thou beholdest in the midst of the garden, God hath said—Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

And the serpent said unto the woman: Ye shall not surely die" (Moses 4:6-10)

Right there is the lie. The serpent tells Eve that she will not die after partaking of the fruit. Yet we know that it is the eating of the fruit that resulted in being cast out of God's presence- spiritual death- and brought about the fallen state of mortality- temporal death.

Typical of the adversary's cunning and subtlety, the serpent continues to coat this lie with truth:

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil" (Moses 4:11)

This bit of truth immediately after the lie communicates far more between-the-lines information. The serpent paints a picture wherein God lied in order to keep Adam and Eve from partaking of the fruit because He did not want them to gain the knowledge of good and evil that would make them "as gods". His picture is also suggestive of an immediate transformation where this knowledge instantly puts them on the same level as God, and since we know God is immortal, immortality and no death must be part of the package, yes? And it sounds as though God wanted to prevent this from happening, probably because He felt threatened by the possibility of having an "equal" who might disagree with Him and seek to thwart Him.

When we remember where Satan is coming from, it is very likely that he actually believed this lie and the picture he painted, because he had been cast out of God's presence when he'd sought to claim His glory and thwart His plan. He truly did not know the mind of God and thought that through this lie and misdirection he could destroy the world, because he truly believed- and still believes- that he can threaten God's position and power and that he was cast out because God was fearful of being overthrown.

Whether or not Eve was convinced of this whole picture, she believed the lie- "Ye shall not surely die", and because she now believed there would be no adverse consequence to partaking of the fruit, she did so wanting the reward of the knowledge of good and evil. She was beguiled. This is the same system Satan uses with most all his lies. He convinces us that we can break the commandments and go against God's laws and councel without experiencing any adverse consequences. He convinces us that we "shall not surely die", so that we give in to the desires of the natural man thinking we will not have to face any consequences. He takes away accountability. He beguiles all of us.

In that fatal choice, mankind took a step both closer and further from God. Further, because it brought about the state of mortality, the Fall, cast out of our Father's presence and subject to the subtle temptations of the devil. Closer, because it set in motion His Plan for our progression so that we may learn of good and evil through experience and become "as gods". I would not say Eve was wise any more than we are wise, because wisdom is something that comes through experience. After partaking of the fruit, and facing the consequences, Eve may have earned some wisdom- but first, she was beguiled.

[Seminarysnoozer]

I find it rather odd the difficulty you have recognizing either spiritual death or physical death as a "punishment". However, I do understand your context. But you are overlooking a most important principle. In Genesis it is call the knowledge of good and evil. Clearly the punishment for partaking of that fruit is death. And so the prophetic law is fixed and in partaking of the fruit the knowledge of evil and the resultant death is put into full effect.

But there are two points of great importance - first concerns the agency and free will granted to man by G-d. My point is that if man had no choice concerning the partaking of the fruit and the only choice made was by Adam and Eve that G-d would be unjust. Only if the choice was as much ours as it was the choice of Adam and Eve, can the claim be made that G-d is a just G-d.

Therefore in death is the knowledge of evil made known.

But the fruit of the tree was knowledge of good and evil. Thus to know good we must be fallen and suffer death and through the mercy of G-d and the innocent and eternal sacrifice of Christ - which is the ultimate example of good - we come to know good. Thus according to the covenant of Eden the knowledge of evil is death and the knowledge of good is the atonement of Christ.

The great misunderstanding in the doctrine of the fall is that mankind had no choice no free will and no agency and that Adam and Eve alone cause the circumstance of death. LDS should of all peoples know and understand that that choice was as much theirs as it was the man Adam and the woman Eve. The symbolism in Genesis is that we think of ourselves as Adam and Eve in order to understand the covenant of the fall.

The Traveler

I think by calling it the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" (which is its proper name) it carries a connotation that that would be the reason to eat such a fruit and gives a suggestion that the attached result of eating such a fruit is unknown. That is not how Adam and Eve saw it though, they knew they "would surely die". So, let me challenge you to call it the "tree of death" for just a moment, that could still be its name and would properly be opposite the tree of life. So, now we have two choices, the tree of life or the tree of death. If you can look at it that way, then you will see that Eve chose death. And so, death is not a punishment, it is a choice. We all chose death by way of passing the first estate test. If death is something we all chose, how is that a punishment? .... God, punished us by giving us what we wanted and what He wanted? (that doesn't make sense to me)