Why would God want Adam and Eve to disobey Him?

[Guest tomk]

But, Eve did die.

At least for a time:)

God was right in two ways.

Something in what ever it was she ate, I believe it was of the grape tree, that made a change in her body that produced "blood" in her system and made her mortal subject to death.

She "shall surly die".

Bro. Rudick

I am not sure what you are saying.

I know Eve died.

Please explain. :)

[MormonGirl02]

How we perceive things makes all the difference in our interpretation.

I think what you are in need of is a paradigm shift, of sorts.

Your question seems to suggest that there is something wrong with what God did.

But that is not possible. God does nothing wrong and makes no mistakes.

If you accept that as true, then God's plan was NOT contradictory or ill-thought-out. Do you see how that must be true?

So if God's plan was not contradictory or ill-thought-out -- then the task becomes one of seeking to understand why. Why was God's plan NOT contradictory or ill-thought-out?

Moses 3: 17

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Perhaps this verse may be made more clear by pulling out this part:

nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it

If we do this, the verse reads like this:

Moses 3: 17

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

God was not cautioning against PHYSICAL DEATH -- but against SPIRITUAL DEATH.

God HAD to forbid Adam and Eve doing something that would remove them from His presence. He had to WARN them of the consequences. This is God being a perfect God. Leaving the presence of God is necessary, but also contrary to eternal law -- for it is the presence of God which represents a fullness of joy. Anything that detracts from that is forbidden (technically) even though it is also necessary for our growth.

I wish I knew how to explain it better.

Imagine you had a child who just graduated from High School. That child is about to go to college. That child is about to leave the comfort of home and the safety of your presence (for the purposes of this analogy). You know they need to go, but you still must forbid them to do something that potentially places them in jeopardy. Ultimately, they leave:

nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it

"Go to college if you must, but remember you will be required to leave my presence in order to do so. You must leave the comforts and relative innocence of home to venture out into that cold cruel world. I forbid you to go, but you can choose for yourself."

It is a very tender thing ... a loving thing ... that God did. It had to be their choice - and yet - He could not just let it happen without warning them.

I hope this helps. It is clear in my mind and heart -- but words are only shadows of what only God can reveal.

Tom

Hi Tom. Would it be accurate to say that maybe God didn't want them to partake of the fruit but he was giving them the choice to do so rather than outright forbidding them? If that is the case, then it makes much more sense to me.

[JohnnyRudick]

God was not cautioning against PHYSICAL DEATH -- but against SPIRITUAL DEATH.

I knew you knew that brother Tom.

I was just highlighting that for others;)

But, Eve did die.

At least for a time

God was right in two ways. . .

After all. He's always right:)

She "shall surly die".

Bro. Rudick

[Guest tomk]

I knew you knew that brother Tom.

I was just highlighting that for others;)

But, Eve did die.

At least for a time

God was right in two ways. . .

After all. He's always right:)

She "shall surly die".

Bro. Rudick

Ahhh - I understand you now. Yes, I agree.

What's funny is - technically - Satan was also correct in his statement:

7 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.)

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

9 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.

10 And the serpent said unto the woman: Ye shall not surely die;

11 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.

Because of the Atonement, we will not die --- we will not REMAIN DEAD. There is a Resurrection. We can be as God, knowing good and evil and choosing good.

[Justice]

Thanks, Justice; I think I see where you were going.

What do you think about the possibility that, had Adam and Eve done nothing, the Father might have returned to them later and instructed them to go ahead and partake of the fruit?

Well, that would have removed the opposition. I don't know how long they were in the Garden, but I believe given enough time (another reason this earth was created where time could be measured) they would have partaken. They had all the time in the world, because the world wasn't going anywhere until they partook (double meaning). :)

[Justice]

You know, it really breaks down to this:

All partake of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Those who choose evil, having the knowledge of what it is, will be punished. Those who choose the good, and obey the commandment to multipy and replenish the earth, or to eat of the tree of life, will be rewarded.

I know it's more complex than that, but the opposing commandments were given so there could be a reward for those who obey the first commandment, and a punishement for those who disobey the second. The opposition is there, and a "time" was given. We must choose one or the other.

[PastorBob]

Only ego and mortals punish...

After death, during the life review, people throw themselves into hell when they realize they spent more time chasing (thinking about or desiring) after whatever over God.

Exodus 20:2-3 I am The Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt (materialism), out of the house of bondage (attachment to the world). Thou shalt have no other gods (anything soever) before Me (in your heart).

Most only spend about 1-5% of their time pondering over God, if that, and it needs to be 100%. No matter what is happening, pleasing God within us all should be #1, not trying to satisfy our own personal desires.

Selflessness is Self, and only the one who has given to oneself until overflowing and spilling onto others is truly selfless.

Edited March 15, 2009 by PastorBob

[Justice]

Only ego and mortals punish...

It is true the punishment that comes to man is what he chooses. But, in a sense God claims to punish because of the resurrection. The common knowledge part of the resurrection is that all will have their body and spirit joined one to another, and become a living soul once again. Except after the resurrection we will be immortal, never to die again.

The less common knowledge, or less frequently talked about part of the resurrection, is the restoration that will happen of good to good and evil to evil. The resurrection will not change who you are or what you desire. The sins while committed on earth in mortality have been paid for by Christ the Son of God, but only those who repent of those sins are changed from desiring those sins to desiring the things of God.

I believe it is as you say, and here are some words of Alma to his son Corianton:

Alma 41:

1 And now, my son, I have somewhat to say concerning the restoration of which has been spoken; for behold, some have wrested the scriptures, and have gone far astray because of this thing. And I perceive that thy mind has been worried also concerning this thing. But behold, I will explain it unto thee.

2 I say unto thee, my son, that the plan of restoration is requisite with the justice of God; for it is requisite that all things should be restored to their proper order. Behold, it is requisite and just, according to the power and resurrection of Christ, that the soul of man should be restored to its body, and that every part of the body should be restored to itself.

3 And it is requisite with the justice of God that men should be judged according to their works; and if their works were good in this life, and the desires of their hearts were good, that they should also, at the last day, be restored unto that which is good.

4 And if their works are evil they shall be restored unto them for evil. Therefore, all things shall be restored to their proper order, every thing to its natural frame—mortality raised to immortality, corruption to incorruption—raised to endless happiness to inherit the kingdom of God, or to endless misery to inherit the kingdom of the devil, the one on one hand, the other on the other—

• • • 10 Do not suppose, because it has been spoken concerning restoration, that ye shall be restored from sin to happiness. Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness.

So, this restoration, which is done by the Son of God, is where the judgement happens, in a sense. If you repented and chose the things of the righteous during this life then He will be able to restore you to those desires of righteousness, and to joy. If you did not repent and remained in your desires for evil during this life, then according to justice, He must restore you to that evil, and to your guilt and shame, which will bring misery.

So, you are right, in that we actually choose it ourselves. What we don't always remember is that we are making that choice of what we want to become with each and every choice we make every day, or if we realize it, it does not fully impact us the way it should.

The sins of this life will be washed away through the Atonement of Christ, and along with it the guilt and shame and just punishment (or consequence) of being restored to your guilt and shame. So, we do not need to fear the consequence of sin in this life as long as we repent. But, if you failed to repent and have a mighty change of heart, then you will be restored to those desires to sin and will not be permitted to dwell in the presence of God. You will then suffer guilt, shame, and misery just as Christ suffered.

It's not that "anything that committed sin while on earth" will not be allowed to dwell with God. It's that "anything that desires to commit sin" following the restoration will not be allowed to dwell in the presence of God. In actuality, this is a merciful plan. If anything was allowed to return to God's presence that desired sin, then they would lose all chance at any kingdom of glory, as did Lucifer.

So, in a sense, the punishement is in the restoration.

Edited March 15, 2009 by Justice

[applepansy]

Hi Tom. Would it be accurate to say that maybe God didn't want them to partake of the fruit but he was giving them the choice to do so rather than outright forbidding them? If that is the case, then it makes much more sense to me.

Yes. It makes sense to me too.

[Vort]

Would it be accurate to say that maybe God didn't want them to partake of the fruit but he was giving them the choice to do so rather than outright forbidding them? If that is the case, then it makes much more sense to me.

Yes. It makes sense to me too.

No, it would not be more accurate. God did indeed outright forbid eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Believing otherwise may make sense to you, but it is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures clearly teach that God commanded that they not partake. When they partook, just as with any other sin, they were shut out from the presence of God.

In our efforts to understand religious history and our own doctrines, let us not ignore or twist the plain teachings of the scriptures.

[Justice]

Moses 3:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

It's an interesting dilemma, for sure.

They did not commit sin by partaking the fruit. The knowledge of good and evil, and of opposition and consequences, did not come to them until after they partook of the fruit. It's like when you tell your 3 year old child not to put their hand on the stove because they will get burned. There is no way they know of the danger you are warning them against until they actually put their hand on the stove once.

Someone who puts their hand on the stove once, and gets burned, can more appreciate the obedience of not putting their hand on the stove. They are then more intelligent, and more content with the law to not put their hand on the stove, because they have complete understanding of the consequences. One who never puts his hand on the stove can be obedient, but cannot know as well the joy in the obedience.

Understanding the consequences of death is what God wanted for us.

It's kinda like, after your child puts their hand on the stove, and gets burned, you are upset that they disobeyed and got hurt. But, you are relieved that you will never have to tell them not to put their hand on the stove again. You are glad they know for themselves. You didn't *want* them to do it, but now that they did, and you happen to have a first aid kit handy, they will be healed, and better off for the experience.

Edited March 15, 2009 by Justice

[Guest tomk]

Hi Tom. Would it be accurate to say that maybe God didn't want them to partake of the fruit but he was giving them the choice to do so rather than outright forbidding them? If that is the case, then it makes much more sense to me.

God HAD to forbid them. Otherwise He would be neglecting to warn His children of potential danger.

Adam and Eve HAD to disobey God. Otherwise they never could have had children, or learned (by experience) Good from Evil.

It seems like poor planning, but it's not. CHOICE has always been at the center of it. CHOICE cannot be taken from us. CHOICE is what allows us to grow and learn. Exaltation is a CHOICE we make. CHOICE determines what we BECOME. What we BECOME determines WHERE WE END UP.

It's all a GIFT. We don't EARN or DESERVE ETERNAL LIFE. Without Christ's Atonement ... all is in vain.

Watch what God says. I would even invite you to allow yourself to FEEL the depth of love in what God is saying:

Moses 3: 17

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

thou mayest choose for thyself,

"Its' up to you..."

"I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

Adam and Eve WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE GOD'S PRESENCE if they partook of the forbidden fruit.

God HAD to forbid them from doing this. For by so doing, they would HAVE to leave His Presence.

Leaving God's Presence is CONTRARY to Our Happiness.

Knowing it was necessary, God STILL had to forbid it from happening.

Maybe if we rephrased it this way:

Moses 3: 17

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely BECOME MORTAL, ABLE TO HAVE CHILDREN, ABLE TO HAVE JOY, ABLE TO LEARN TO CHOOSE THE GOOD -- BUT YOU WILL HAVE TO LEAVE MY PRESENCE TO DO IT.

uuuugh. :) It's the best I can do :)

[Guest tomk]

Moses 3:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

You didn't *want* them to do it, but now that they did, and you happen to have a first aid kit handy, they will be healed, and better off for the experience.

DON'T EAT IT, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE FOR YOURSELF, BUT REMEMBER I WARNED YOU NOT TO DO IT, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU, BUT REMEMBER THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU .....

You can almost see how "torn" God was. :)

Have you ever heard parents say, "THIS IS GOING TO HURT ME MORE THAN IT WILL HURT YOU" right before giving a spanking?

It's almost like this.

[deseretgov]

God had to make Adam and Eve with immortal bodies. If God made Adam and Eve with mortal bodies he would have been punishing them for something they never did. But they had to become mortal to bear any children. By forbidding then to eat the fruit of the tree he was being a loving God. If not, he would have been approving of them being punished for commiting no wrong. Eating the fruit casued a change in their body that made them mortal.

[Guest tomk]

God had to make Adam and Eve with immortal bodies. If God made Adam and Eve with mortal bodies he would have been punishing them for something they never did. But they had to become mortal to bear any children. By forbidding then to eat the fruit of the tree he was being a loving God. If not, he would have been approving of them being punished for commiting no wrong. Eating the fruit casued a change in their body that made them mortal.

Yes!! This is exactly what I was trying to put into words!

[Justice]

Eating the fruit casued a change in their body that made them mortal.

Yes, and it was the disobedience that caused their spiritual death.

[Vort]

God had to make Adam and Eve with immortal bodies. If God made Adam and Eve with mortal bodies he would have been punishing them for something they never did.

Why? In what sense is a mortal body a punishment?

But they had to become mortal to bear any children.

Why? Don't immortal beings bear children?

By forbidding then to eat the fruit of the tree he was being a loving God. If not, he would have been approving of them being punished for commiting no wrong.

Only if you believe mortality is a punishment, which I reject.

[JohnnyRudick]

Why? In what sense is a mortal body a punishment?

Why? Don't immortal beings bear children?

Only if you believe mortality is a punishment, which I reject.

Maybe he is referring to being subject to physical pain and physical death?

I have ofter wondered if Adam and Eve could have had children with the bodies they had in the Garden.

But the Scriptures say other wise.

2 Nephi 2:22 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.

2 Nephi 2:23 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.

2 Nephi 2:24 But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom

of him who knoweth all things.

I take it from this that there was somthing about their perfect bodies that kept them from having children but I have no idea what that might have neen.

As I said.

Their bodies were perfect and Adam called her Woman. That is Womb - Man.

I have no idea why . . .

Bro. Rudick

[MormonGirl02]

Ok everyone, I think I get it. Basically God was just doing the loving thing to do. He was telling them not to eat the fruit because if they did, they would be cast out from His presence but he was also at the same time telling them that they had free will and so it was their choice. Am I getting this right?

[Justice]

Bro. Rudick,

I believe they *could have* had children physically, but lacked the knowledge of how to do it.

Think of "innocent" like a child. They had no knowledge; no physical attraction. They didn't recognize they were naked until after they partook of the fruit. They were not yet subject to physical temptation as they had not yet fallen. I believe they could have, they just would not have without the "knowledge."

Maybe it's just semmantics to some, but I just wanted to point out my belief.

[Guest missingsomething]

Hi everyone. I am just curious. But why would God want Adam and Eve to disobey Him just so that way they could have free agency? It makes no sense to me why God would want His children to disobey Him. Please help!

He did not set them up to fail.... he just knew that they would succomb. In my opinion - because they already had "free" agency. They could choose to partake of the fruit or not.

By partaking of the fruit their innocence was lost and they became mortal as many have said.

Our Heavenly Father does not set us up to fail either. He has given us the tools to make wise choices but ultimently he does let US choose - and He does know, we wont always make the best choice--meaning the one with less negative results. But would we really grow if we always knew which choice was the best? Or would we become like robots? He didnt want that.

Just remember, it was because of their agency that Heavenly Father allowed Adam to fall.

[Islander]

Also, keep in mind that the account of the genesis is not an x-rated description of what transpired. WE re the ones that have so me trouble with the text but the Hebrews understood quite well the whole story. The sages, over time, extrapolated and developed their own insights into the story.

[JohnnyRudick]

He did not set them up to fail.... he just knew that they would succomb. In my opinion - because they already had "free" agency. They could choose to partake of the fruit or not.

By partaking of the fruit their innocence was lost and they became mortal as many have said.

Our Heavenly Father does not set us up to fail either. He has given us the tools to make wise choices but ultimently he does let US choose - and He does know, we wont always make the best choice--meaning the one with less negative results. But would we really grow if we always knew which choice was the best? Or would we become like robots? He didnt want that.

Just remember, it was because of their agency that Heavenly Father allowed Adam to fall.

Right. And remember as I posted earlier, "Free Agency" means that we are "free agents".

God gave us that.

I don't know for sure if it came by birth, of if God dispensed it to us.

But He gave it to us.

Like a slave master freeing his slaves. Giving them the freedom to now act for themselves, giving them their free agency.

The freedom to act for ourselves and not only for Him.

Bro. Rudick

Edited March 16, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling

[Guest missingsomething]

Right. And remember as I posted earlier, "Free Agency" means that we are "free agents".

God gave us that.

I don't know for sure if it came by birth, of if God dispensed it to us.

But He gave it to us.

Like a slave master freeing his slaves. Giving them the freedom to now act for themselves, giving them their free agency.

The freedom to act for ourselves and not only for Him.

Bro. Rudick

:) No such thing as free agency - all our choices have consequences---cost a LOT sometimes hehehe

[JohnnyRudick]

:) No such thing as free agency - all our choices have consequences---cost a LOT sometimes hehehe

How we choose to use our gift of agency has consequences.

We can gain on a free gift

1. For the Good.

In Type "Gold , Silver, Precious stones".

2. Or for Not So Good.

It can cost us a bundle

In Type. "Wood, Hay. Stubble".

Bro. Rudick