"Evil Spirit"

[Seminarysnoozer]

I'm purely commenting on your:

I.e. means "that is". Given the quote I think it's overextending to classify Elder Eyring's use of faithful to mean without full knowledge.

Then, does that mean that you think we had full knowledge of good and evil before this life?

[Dravin]

Then, does that mean that you think we had full knowledge of good and evil before this life?

Nope. It means that I think you are overextending by interpreting Elder Eyring's use of the worth faithful to mean 'those without a full knowledge'. Nothing in that quote indicates that he is using the term faithful in any other sense then to identify those who are obedient or loyal.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Dravin

[Vort]

If you are calling it "evil" then where did that "evil" come from while in the presence of God?

SS, what do you think "evil" is? Do you think it's a self-existent entity? By asking "where did that 'evil' come from", you sound to me like you think "evil" is some thing or substance or entity with an independent existence.

In my understanding, "evil" is acting in conscious defiance of God's will. Therefore, any time you have God's will presented to you, the possibility of evil exists. It's like a shadow: It exists only when there is light.

Do you also, as others are suggesting, believe that we were exposed to "evil" before this life? Or is this the life from which we are exposed to evil to make a choice between good and evil?

The two are not mutually exclusive. We came to this life, in part at least, to be tried by being exposed to evil in certain forms. That does not in any way mean we didn't experience and reject (or perhaps accept) evil before this life.

If we had "evil" before this life, then Satan doesn't need to be the source of "evil" in this one.

If it's night and you have a campfire, that fire is "the source" of light. That doesn't mean the sun doesn't exist as the source of light at other times. It doesn't mean that you can't have a flashlight or a lantern to provide light, as well. It simply means that, when you're all sitting around the campfire, the campfire itself is the light source.

In this life, Satan functions as our primary source of temptation and evil. But make no mistake, we carry the seeds of evil choice within us, and Satan uses those seeds to further his purposes. But the fact that Satan is a source of evil and temptation, or even the primary source of evil and temptation now, does not imply that Satan is the only source of evil in creation. Such a supposition is naive and vastly oversimplified.

Then, does that mean that you think we had full knowledge of good and evil before this life?

Do you think you have a "full knowledge" of good and evil now? Your understanding of good and evil is continually changing, hopefully for the better. We may suppose that our understanding of good and evil is better, or at least more mature in some ways, today than it was premortally. Similarly, we can hope that our understanding of good and evil will vastly improve in coming ages during and after this life.

So if by "full knowledge" you mean the ability to distinguish and choose between good and evil, then I would say yes, of course we had a "full knowledge" of good and evil. But we did not, and do not, have a perfect knowledge. That will only come in the eternities, I think.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Nope. It means exactly what I said, that you are overextending by claiming that Elder Eyring's used the worth faithful to mean 'those without a full knowledge'.

Okay .... I wasn't using Elder Erying's talk as the source of my thought more than as being consistent with that possibility. I think it would also be over extending to suggest that full knowledge or even knowledge of evil (which includes the opportunity to sin) is necessary to follow God's command to that point, and that was the intention of the quote. One's ability to trust in God and put all focus on Him seems to be the measure from which the divisions are made in who is in versus who is out, not knowledge based. Elder Eyring's words seem to imply a sense that the characteristic of those that followed God's plan are those that put full trust, obedience, faith and loyalty in Him and it was not a decision based in the most logical answer, or secular knowledge. It was a character division. Elder Eyring also describes it as a brave decision. Bravery is not needed if there is full knowledge. With full knowledge it opens the possibility for a decision based in logic without it being a real desire. Don't get me wrong, I think we knew a lot about this life and what was going to happen before coming here, but I don't think we knew what being exposed to evil choices under a veil of forgetfulness and the sensations that a mortal body provides before coming here. Without the actual experience of having done it before, there is at least a portion of trust needed to take that step.

[Seminarysnoozer]

SS, what do you think "evil" is? Do you think it's a self-existent entity? By asking "where did that 'evil' come from", you sound to me like you think "evil" is some thing or substance or entity with an independent existence.

In my understanding, "evil" is acting in conscious defiance of God's will. Therefore, any time you have God's will presented to you, the possibility of evil exists. It's like a shadow: It exists only when there is light.

In this life, Satan functions as our primary source of temptation and evil. But make no mistake, we carry the seeds of evil choice within us, and Satan uses those seeds to further his purposes. But the fact that Satan is a source of evil and temptation, or even the primary source of evil and temptation now, does not imply that Satan is the only source of evil in creation. Such a supposition is naive and vastly oversimplified.

If that is your definition of "evil" than a spirit that is cast out of God's presence is no longer under his will and therefore not evil.

I don't think we have the seed of evil in our spirit self. I think it had to be introduced via the corrupted mortal body to make it a personal struggle, "within" us. That is what creates the test that we did not face before this life. Without that aspect of a dual being, both carnal and spiritual, there is no knowledge of good and evil as there is no opposition to our obedience. We all kept our first estate, in other words, we were all obedient. I think it is that knowledge that we were going to be exposed to opposition we had never faced before that actually caused people to doubt and realize the level of their loyalty to God and His plan. Without having a certain level of loyalty (even if the person is somewhat loyal, not "evil" necessarily) they opt out of the plan.

If an American says that they are not willing to fight for their country, does that make them an enemy to America? Some would say that it makes them "unamerican" but that is just a measure of their loyalty, not an enemy. If, though, we said that a person who is not willing to lay down their life for America will be kicked out of the country, and upon making that decision they are actually kicked out, then they would likely be angry and very well become an "enemy" or metaphorically "evil", at that point. Lucifer became the devil upon being cast out. It was his choices that led to that, but the "evil" from that is not in the presence of God. .... in my opinion.

[Dravin]

It was a character division.

It was a choice or it was not rebellion. Likewise there is no loyalty, no obedience, no faithfulness if it was not a choice. People chose who they would follow, they were aware if they were choosing God or not. You would propose that telling a room full of people to have blue eyes is rebellion by those with brown eyes and brave obedience to those with. I reject your characterization of the nature of the premortal council where we were being sorted like potatoes.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Dravin

[Vort]

In my understanding, "evil" is acting in conscious defiance of God's will. Therefore, any time you have God's will presented to you, the possibility of evil exists. It's like a shadow: It exists only when there is light.

If that is your definition of "evil" than a spirit that is cast out of God's presence is no longer under his will and therefore not evil.

No, that does not follow. If, as I have suggested, "evil" means knowingly acting contrary to God's will, then even those cast out of God's presence can act against his will and thus be evil. We in our mortal state do not dwell constantly in God's presence; do you suppose that means we cannot sin? Of course we can. We can choose evil, just as the rebellious spirits who were cast out can (and do) choose evil.

I don't think we have the seed of evil in our spirit self. I think it had to be introduced via the corrupted mortal body to make it a personal struggle, "within" us.

You are free to believe whatever you wish to believe, of course. But the doctrine of the LDS Church is quite clear: We made important moral choices before ever being born into mortality, as did other spirits. Some of those spirits ("the third part") chose evil.

If you wish to believe the teachings of the kingdom of God, those are the teachings. If you wish to ignore them for some other philosophy, one that ultimately denies the very existence of evil, then of course you are free to do so. But in choosing that belief, you are also choosing the consequences of that belief. I think it's a dangerous belief, one that I stay far away from and try to teach my children to avoid at all costs. Evil is real; Satan is real; destruction of the spirit is real. Dancing around the terminology or trying to convince oneself that Satan isn't really evil, because evil doesn't really exist, will never change the reality of things.

That is what creates the test that we did not face before this life. Without that aspect of a dual being, both carnal and spiritual, there is no knowledge of good and evil as there is no opposition to our obedience.

Again, you are free to believe this doctrine, but it is a false doctrine.

If an American says that they are not willing to fight for their country, does that make them an enemy to America? Some would say that it makes them "unamerican" but that is just a measure of their loyalty, not an enemy.

Your comparison is ill-considered. Satan and his hosts did not merely "refuse to fight". They actively rebelled against the Father and sought his honor, openly lying to further their wicked ends.

[jayanna]

OKay, I have had a lot of thought about this topic recently when I went to the temple. It struck me kind of hard actually..

Before being on earth we had our first estate. In that first estate we had intelligence, but not understanding. IN fact we were made up of intelligence, we were called intelligences (Abr. 3 21-24)Like when a math student (and I was one of these) can follow all of the steps to a complicated math equation to come to an answer, but have no idea why, we all had information, we only knew what we were told. We had feelings, and hopes, but not faith yet. Faith requires being away from HF presence, so faith was not available to us yet.

The adversary did not keep his first estate. He actively chose his own plan over our Father's. He made himself out to be more intelligent than our HF. He not only used his intelligence to go against HF plan, but also used his particular abilities to convince his and our brothers and sisters to rebel as well. Because they did not keep their first estate, they were not able to move on to their second estate. They cannot recieve physical bodies, and cannot learn faith. Basically there is no where else for them to go. The chains spoken of for them are chains that are mostly of their own creation. They had an opportunity to gain bodies and become more than what they were, but they gave that up and focus all thier energies on keeping us from getting past our second estate.

The fact that the adversary has knowledge, but not understanding means that he constantly plays into HF hands. For example tempting Adam and Eve with the fruit, part of the plan, tempting Judas to betray the Savior for money...tada very important part of the plan. Tempting the Lord in the wilderness, bang we have an example of how to answer temptation, and a record of the perfection of the Savior, and becuase of that trial of His, we have a Savior that has experienced temptation, which if He hadn't He couldn't be a true advocate for us with the Father.

We couldn't learn faith without him, that is why he was placed here on earth with us. If he were, say, on Mars, or Saturn, he couldn't tempt us, we wouldn't learn faith, we couldn't gain understanding of 'why' of being like our HF. Knowledge is great, but we need understanding to fully apply the principles we learned by wrote before we came here.

Here is a link that I think is a good one for further study: Premortal Life

In order for us to try to be like the Savior, we also have to have an opportunity to try not to be like Him. Without a choice, there is no agency. Satan, every time he gives us an alternative to HF, regardless of which path we choose, we are gaining understanding that we can use later, whether here in the second estate ( defined here Mortal, Mortality )where we repent, or in the spirit prison where we can look back and know why the path away from HF's didn't work. With this understanding of good and evil, we are then much more likely to grab on to repentence and accepting the Atonement.

IN fact as the parable of the debtors (here Luke 7:41  ) , when Satan talks someone into having a great debt, he is giving them an opportunity to love his Savior even more than if he had tempted him only a little. Either way, Jesus wins.

It's kinda beautiful actually. The moment Adam ate that fruit, as long as Jesus would keep the promise He made, HF won the whole show, Satan just didn't know it yet. Kinda lets us know what a jerk Satan is though, and how dumb we are to give in to him like we do.

Edited November 30, 2011 by jayanna

[Traveler]

There are a few things we should understand about good and evil.

1. Good and evil are opposites. This means that there is no intersection in the sets of good and evil.

2. That which is not good is evil and vice versa. This means that there is nothing that cannot be divided into one or the other. (A note here – According to scripture the creation or the things of this universe are good. This tells me that in order for there to be evil (encounter evil here) the source must be outside of creation.) This idea is very important and part of the flaw of traditional Christianity that in essence believes that G-d created evil. If G-d had created evil he could not be a “good” G-d.

3. Good and evil cannot coexist. One must remove, replace or destroy (overcome) the other. No matter how much good there is – the tiniest of evil if allowed to remain will corrupt all of that which is good. This is why we must be clean and pure before we can return to the Father. It is also why Satan must corrupt (make miserable) all he can.

4. Agency is the gift we have that allows us to align ourselves with one or the other.

Now some might ask – why would anyone choose evil over good? This is a rather foolish and redundant question since we all have done exactly that. But the caveat is that in our fallen state we must act on faith and not knowledge – if we were to have knowledge then there would be no repentance. That then is why we live by faith. But back to the question of why choose evil. The simple answer is pride and selfishness. However, the reality is a little more complex because evil is the default – good must be sought for and the means of seeking is very specific and thus requires discipline.

The evil we obtain because of lack of faith can be overcome by the atonement but that time will come when we will have knowledge and according to our discipline will become good (G-d is the example of what is meant by good) or be overcome by evil. This is my understanding of the “final judgment”. Being the time of faith having past and now being either good by discipline or having become overcome and given in to – even enjoying and delighting in evil. This is what I believe is the importance of disciplining ourselves to do good now – so that once we are pure and clean; we will remain so.

The Traveler

Edited November 30, 2011 by Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

It was a choice or it was not rebellion. Likewise there is no loyalty, no obedience, no faithfulness if it was not a choice. People chose who they would follow, they were aware if they were choosing God or not. You would propose that telling a room full of people to have blue eyes is rebellion by those with brown eyes and brave obedience to those with. I reject your characterization of the nature of the premortal council where we were being sorted like potatoes.

Choices are based in a persons character, based in whether a person is willing or not, whats the diff?

[Seminarysnoozer]

You are free to believe whatever you wish to believe, of course. But the doctrine of the LDS Church is quite clear: We made important moral choices before ever being born into mortality, as did other spirits. Some of those spirits ("the third part") chose evil.

If you wish to believe the teachings of the kingdom of God, those are the teachings. If you wish to ignore them for some other philosophy, one that ultimately denies the very existence of evil, then of course you are free to do so. But in choosing that belief, you are also choosing the consequences of that belief. I think it's a dangerous belief, one that I stay far away from and try to teach my children to avoid at all costs. Evil is real; Satan is real; destruction of the spirit is real. Dancing around the terminology or trying to convince oneself that Satan isn't really evil, because evil doesn't really exist, will never change the reality of things.

Your comparison is ill-considered. Satan and his hosts did not merely "refuse to fight". They actively rebelled against the Father and sought his honor, openly lying to further their wicked ends.

I've got to figure out how to do multi-quotes.

Of course we made moral choices. What we know is that all of us made the correct moral choice. All we know is that we were all morally correct, we kept our first estate, so where is the evil in that?

2nd paragraph; I don't deny the existence of evil, that is your misinterpretation of what I am saying. I am asking about the existence of evil in the presence of God, in the premortal existence. Of course, I have no doubt, evil exists here and Satan is evil. Please.

3rd Paragraph; "My comparison" was not a comparison, again, your misinterpretation. It was only an example of a decision that is made in bravery and loyalty to suggest that it is possible to make such decisions that are not good versus evil choices but reflect one's level of loyalty to something else versus self.

[Seminarysnoozer]

We in our mortal state do not dwell constantly in God's presence; do you suppose that means we cannot sin? Of course we can. We can choose evil, just as the rebellious spirits who were cast out can (and do) choose evil.

There is a big difference. We contracted with Heavenly Father to come here and keep our second estate. We are under contracted obligation to follow his will outside of his presence and if not we suffer the consequences of what is outlined by that contract. That is part of the terms of that contract to see if we will do His will without His direct presence, behind the veil.

The spirits that broke away from the first contract are out of that contract or serving the terms of the penalty of that contract, which is to be cast out and never signed up for the second one.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Seminarysnoozer

[Seminarysnoozer]

Vort, just keep in mind what L. Tom Perry said: “We first heard about the plan of salvation before we were born, in what the scriptures call our first estate (see Abraham 3:26). What occurred in this first estate is dimly understood, but we do know that we lived there as spirits, children of our Heavenly Father, and we made certain steps of advancement to prepare for the opportunity of housing our eternal spirits in earthly bodies. We also know that our Father held a great council to explain the purpose of earth life. We had the opportunity of accepting or rejecting the plan of salvation. It was not forced upon us. The essence of the plan was that man would have an opportunity of working out his own salvation on earth, with God’s help. A leader was selected to teach us how to follow the plan and to redeem us from sin and death. As the Lord explained to Moses, “Behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever” (Moses 4:2).” Bold added.

We had the opportunity to choose and it was not forced upon us. The will of God at that moment was for us to choose. He gave a fork in the road. ... just keep that in mind when talking about going against the will of God. Here it is different because we all contracted to follow the gospel and do what God asks us to do in this setting. But at the council in Heaven, the choices were presented which was to follow (be loyal and obedient) or not be part of a program that requires following God (for selfish reasons) before the choice was actually made. The discussion about the choice is the war in Heaven. The actual choosing was not the war in Heaven but the discussion about the choice given. Lucifer being the lead presenter of the 'not follow God's plan' choice, revealing his selfish desires. The selfish desire of those spirits that were attracted to that plan for various specific reasons disqualified them from a plan that required a desire for obedience. By choosing that path, they broke the contract of the first estate which is to, by word, follow God's plan. It was by word alone that they broke the contract. Here we can break the contract by what we do.

[Blackmarch]

Sorry, this may sound like a silly question but I couldn't come up with a reasonable answer myself ... Does an evil spirit really know what "evil" is? If yes, where did it get that knowledge without experiencing the knowledge of good and evil?

I would think it is only through the experience of this life that we can understand what good and evil are. As far as that goes, Satan, himself really doesn't understand good and evil, then, right?

Maybe they do evil things without understanding what they are doing and therefore do not have a knowledge of good and evil but are still the same, evil. It is hard to understand how an "evil spirit" knows to influence evil without understanding the difference between good and evil. Could it inadvertently influence good, without knowing the difference, without having a specific motive? Does the "evil spirit" really have evil as its goal or is it just 'being himself'?

yes. they did not have to go through the veil as did adam and eve. they kknew exactly what they were doing when they chose to leave God.

And yes they both have goals and are being themselves.

[Martain]

Sin and righteousness exist only in the presence of law. For without law, there could be no sin for disobeying or righteousness for obeying.

Heavenly Father is a just God. He could not punish Lucifer or any others of our spirit siblings save they broke a law.

Why are children not held accountable for their actions until the age of 8? Is it not because they do not properly have a knowledge and understanding of the difference between good and evil?

If Lucifer did not have a proper knowledge and understanding of the difference between good and evil in the pre-mortal world, then would

he not also be innocent and therefore unable to be held accountable for his actions?

Therefore I conclude that Lucifer and the rest who fell with him must have had a knowledge of good and evil in order to be held accountable

for breaking laws which they must have broken in order to justly be punished as they were.

If they knew the difference between good and evil then I conclude that I must have too. In addition to having intelligence, I must have had

understanding.

I do not know about others but I can speak for myself.

I know I had faith in the Spirit world and I exercised it to follow Jehovah and to accept my Heavenly Father's plan.

How can I conclude otherwise? For surely God knew that Cain would rebel and become a son of perdition. Yet surely Cain did not know or he would have refused to come here. He did not know whether he would make it home and neither did we.

I am convinced that I would rather have stayed a spirit forever and never obtain a body in order to stay in the presence of my heavenly parents whom I loved and love rather than obtain a body and be forever cut off from their presence.

If I did not have exceedingly great faith in myself and in the plan, I would not have come.

But I did come. I did have faith. I exercised it. I exercised it then in following my Savior and in coming here and I exercise it now to do the same.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Sin and righteousness exist only in the presence of law. For without law, there could be no sin for disobeying or righteousness for obeying.

Heavenly Father is a just God. He could not punish Lucifer or any others of our spirit siblings save they broke a law.

Why are children not held accountable for their actions until the age of 8? Is it not because they do not properly have a knowledge and understanding of the difference between good and evil?

If Lucifer did not have a proper knowledge and understanding of the difference between good and evil in the pre-mortal world, then would

he not also be innocent and therefore unable to be held accountable for his actions?

Therefore I conclude that Lucifer and the rest who fell with him must have had a knowledge of good and evil in order to be held accountable

for breaking laws which they must have broken in order to justly be punished as they were.

If they knew the difference between good and evil then I conclude that I must have too. In addition to having intelligence, I must have had

understanding.

I appreciate everyone's responses. I am still trying to comprehend these things as much as possible and I think in a general sense I agree with most everything everyone has said ... even Vort

I think "evil" in this sense, as it relates to our premortal existence is and could be synonymous with our level of selfishness expressed when given agency. I suppose, in my mind, I was trying to break down the "evil" that is related to simply being selfish versus a desire to act in opposition to God when in reality those two things are not possible to separate. In other words, if a person has a selfish nature and they simply are given the opportunity to express their selfishness by being given a choice, agency, then they do it as an act that comes naturally to their spirit, not out of any knowledge, per se. If a spirit exhibited a selfish and therefore "evil" nature, then they were cast out. Those that remain would be innocent as to that kind of "evil" as they are not selfish by nature.

After this discussion and pondering, I am okay with saying that those spirits that were cast out are evil. (I think I was okay with that even before the conversation started, just didn't understand where that "evil" came from.) But, I still have a hard time understanding an idea that we knew the difference between good and evil, if we, those that kept the first estate, did not exhibit selfishness when given the choice. If we are not selfish by nature (all those that kept the first estate) how would we know what that feels like unless we are put in a situation where that is presented, our selfish mortal body that desires selfish things like food, water, attention, recognition, etc. Then we can know the difference between good and evil. Likewise, if an "evil spirit" is selfish by nature, when given the opportunity they express selfishness, how would that spirit know what it is to be "good" then, like Traveler said about understanding good.

I think, it is easier for me to comprehend how we were all innocent as to the difference between good and evil in the premortal world, even though I will concede that "evil" existed in the form of selfish natures of some spirits. I don't think spirits were deceived by the devil, in other words, when they decided to not take on God's plan. But that decision doesn't require an understanding of the good that comes from God's plan, it only requires an expression of one's level of selfishness (which is a measurement of "evil"). To me, that would make more sense as to why there is gnashing of teeth and anger that comes from not understanding why they couldn't get what they wanted the way they wanted it. If there is full understanding about the merits of one choice over another in that way then those that choice the selfishness path would not be rebellious about their choice. A lack of understanding of the merits of not being selfish could lead to a rebellious reaction though.

Russell M. Nelson: "“Next I speak of the spirit. Prior to our mortal existence here, each spirit son and daughter lived with God. The spirit is eternal; it existed in innocence in the premortal realm and will exist after the body dies.”

He seems to say pretty clearly that the spirit existed in innocence in the premortal realm.

And Revelations 12:7-8 “ 7 And there was awar in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.”

Seems to say that the rebelliousness was not found in Heaven after the war. It was not in us, that kind of "evil" was not in us.

2 Nephi tells us where the evil comes from that we experience here: 2 Nephi 2: 29 "And not choose eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom."

I don't think it is unreasonable or against the scriptures or the doctrine, from what I can see, to suggest that we did not know (in terms of experience) the difference between good and evil, we remained innocent as to that experiential difference until it was presented to us in this form that we find in a mortal realm where we are dual beings of both carnal nature and spiritual nature, at least for us that kept the first estate. But I will concede that the spirits who expressed their selfishness with the first estate are evil due to their selfish nature and therefore cannot be part of this plan of happiness.

[Justice]

Before being on earth we had our first estate. In that first estate we had intelligence, but not understanding. IN fact we were made up of intelligence, we were called intelligences (Abr. 3 21-24)Like when a math student (and I was one of these) can follow all of the steps to a complicated math equation to come to an answer, but have no idea why, we all had information, we only knew what we were told. We had feelings, and hopes, but not faith yet. Faith requires being away from HF presence, so faith was not available to us yet.

Thank you for these comments.

I just wanted to comment on this first part I quoted.

In order for us to follow Heavenly Father's plan we had to rely on Jehovah to redeem us. Part of His plan, as described to us, is that we would fall. Once fallen, the only way for us to be brought back into His presence was for a Redeemer to be sent. He had to atone for our fall.

We had to exercise faith in Jesus Christ in the pre-mortal world because it was something that caused us to act based on something that hadn't happened yet. We made the choice to follow Heavenly Father's plan with only the promise that He would send someone to redeem us once we fell. We had to exercise faith in Jehovah.

Faith does not require us to be away from Heavenly Father, it just requires a promise by God that He would do something in the future. We can exercise faith in God's promises as long as it requres something from us "now" and includes promised consequences and punishments, or rewards and blessings in the future.

We exercised faith in Christ in the pre-mortal existence.

Edited December 1, 2011 by Justice

[Justice]

Choices are based in a persons character, based in whether a person is willing or not, whats the diff?

People do things all the time they are unwilling to do. Part of this life is learning to do God's will, or what is right continually, in spite of what we want.

I tell my kids all the time that I can't force themk to do anything. They have their moral agency and choose to do whatever they want at each and every moment. Sometimes it takes doing what you don't want to do in order to do something right. We are not like animals, where we act out of instincts alone. We have instincts, but we can learn to not do what out instincts wants, and we can learn to do the will of God for us in spite of what our natural selves want.

[Justice]

The actual choosing was not the war in Heaven but the discussion about the choice given.

The war in heaven was the war of words where each side tried to win over the other after each made their choice. Once sides were develpoed by the choices that were made, the war ensued when each side tried to claim members from the other side. This war continues on earth, and in the spirit world once Christ bridged the gap between prison and paradise.

[james12]

Does an evil spirit really know what "evil" is? If yes, where did it get that knowledge without experiencing the knowledge of good and evil?

Vort already answered clearly that we experienced good and evil. From scripture this statement seems obvious to me. Then you qualified your question but continue in the same thought by saying,

I don't think it is unreasonable or against the scriptures or the doctrine, from what I can see, to suggest that we did not know (in terms of experience) the difference between good and evil, we remained innocent as to that experiential difference until it was presented to us in this form that we find in a mortal realm where we are dual beings of both carnal nature and spiritual nature, at least for us that kept the first estate.

How did we experience good and evil? The form of that experience probably can't be completely and fully answered and of course it wasn't a mortal experience. However consider Revelations 12: 11-12. After Satan and his followers are cast out of heaven we get a glimpse of how this happened,

And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

This to me is a significant scripture...

How did Michael and his angels cast him out?

By the blood of the Lamb: They defeated Satan through the blood of the atonement.

By the word of their testimony: They openly testified against him.

They loved not their lives unto the death: They were willing to die for their testimony of the Lamb. The NIV gives it thus, "they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death".

And then this extremely interesting phrase, "Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them." From Strong's Concordance the Greek word is σκηνόω with the following definitions:

1) to fix one's tabernacle, have one's tabernacle, abide (or live) in a tabernacle (or tent), tabernacle

2) to dwell

Young's Literal Translation reads, "because of this be glad, ye heavens, and those in them who do tabernacle..."

In no way does this sound like inexperience. We knew what we were doing. It was no small matter to pass our first estate. Eternal consequences were at stake.

Edited December 1, 2011 by james12

[Forget-Me-Not]

Because they were thrust down and banished forever, I would think that to be a pretty clear indication that they had (and have) a far greater knowledge and understanding of the evil they did, and do, than even most of we who sojourn here in mortality presently have ourselves.

[jayanna]

Here is a link to a fanastic talk : Moral Free Agency - New Era Nov. 1976 - new-era

The following paragraph from that source explains what I was trying to say about faith better than I could:

"When we lived with our Father in heaven, we did not need to exercise a fullness of faith in whether or not he existed. We knew that he lived because we saw him; we walked and talked with him. We knew he existed and were convinced of his existence, but we were not necessarily converted to him and to his great principles because our knowledge of him had come from external sources without virtually any effort on our part. So that we would come to a knowledge of him in and of ourselves, our Heavenly Father proposed that when we came into this earth life a veil of forgetfulness would be placed over our minds so that we would not remember our pre-earthly existence with him. Only then could the choices that we made here upon this earth truly come from within us. Our Father in heaven then promised us that while we were here on earth he (1) would give us law, (2) would provide the possibility of opposites, (3) would give us free agency, and (4) would send angels and prophets to teach us and give us scriptures so we could learn the laws and understand why we should keep them. Thus, he promised us the necessary conditions on this earth so that we could become morally free."

I hope that explains what I mean a little bit better. This is a time for us to be proven, and we couldn't have that until we came to this mortality.

Did Satan know good and evil when he made his choice? Well, yes and no. There was no such thing as evil. Evil is to be the opposite of God. Until Satan actively became the opposite of God there was no such thing. So he didn't know evil he kind of invented it. Remember he is also called the father of lies. Although since the plan was presented and then Satan rebelled, HF must have known that someone was going to rebel, otherwise he could not provide #2 the possibility of opposites, thereby giving us #3 free agency.

So if you define evil as 'against God' there you have it. Evil can be a noun to replace the name Satan or Lucifer, or to describe something he would do to get us to alter our path from HF.

Regardless of whether or not he ate the fruit, even if he did not fully understand the eternal consequences of his choice there is no going back for him. He did not keep his first estate, so he cannot receive a body, be baptized, or progress in any way. He must have been terribly short sighted, or possibly so angry that he refuses to see what the end result will be. He obviously must think there is some damage he can do, because even though we know good from evil, have bodies, and have a Savior, the adversary has still not given up. The game is over, why keep playing? He must just be having a massive temper tantrum or something, wanting to keep as many of us from moving on as he can.

[Seminarysnoozer]

How did we experience good and evil? The form of that experience probably can't be completely and fully answered and of course it wasn't a mortal experience. However consider Revelations 12: 11-12. After Satan and his followers are cast out of heaven we get a glimpse of how this happened,

This to me is a significant scripture...

How did Michael and his angels cast him out?

By the blood of the Lamb: They defeated Satan through the blood of the atonement.

By the word of their testimony: They openly testified against him.

They loved not their lives unto the death: They were willing to die for their testimony of the Lamb. The NIV gives it thus, "they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death".

In no way does this sound like inexperience. We knew what we were doing. It was no small matter to pass our first estate. Eternal consequences were at stake.

That is interesting because I would use that same scripture to suggest that "by the word of their testimony" and "they loved not their lives unto the death" means that they had faith in Christ and His plan and were not selfish by nature. They were willing to accept death (spiritual separation from God for a while), whereas those that were cast out did not have that testimony and did not have that much faith because they were not willing to go that far. A lack of faith does not prove knowledge.

All of us had that strong of a testimony because we kept our first estate. So, again, for us that kept our first estate and testified that we did not love ourselves that much that we were willing to die for it, where is the evil that we experienced in the pre-mortal world?

[Seminarysnoozer]

There was no such thing as evil. Evil is to be the opposite of God. Until Satan actively became the opposite of God there was no such thing. So he didn't know evil he kind of invented it.

Thank you!

I think allowing the spiritual self to mature and show itself by way of giving the agency to choose is what showed where Lucifer stood on the issue. This is kind of like a question of "How far would you go?" Up until that point, I don't think any of us faced an agency allowed decision of that magnitude; 'How far would you go?, would you be willing to be separated from God and have your loyalty tested by your acts without God's presence but with the help of a Savior?' Some would not go that far with their faith and Lucifer actively rebelled against the proposal of such a thing but that is because he couldn't appreciate the benefit of such a thing and he probably never will appreciate it, even if he intellectually understood the plan.

It is similar to a young child who may not understand the benefit of doing their homework every night. Some children rebel against that idea, others say, 'okay I will do what you say'. That does not mean in any way that they really understand the benefits of doing their homework, it is, at that point, just a representation of their character.

[Martain]

While there are a plethora of opinions on the matter, I'd like to try and explain further the logic I use to make my conclusions.

Let us refer to Adam in the garden of Eden for it has bearing on this subject.

Did Adam and Eve have a knowledge of good and evil when they transgressed the commandment given by God? No. Therefore, could an endless punishment of an eternal physical death be therefore just? No. Thus God had prepared the provision of the atonement.

1 Cor. 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Now did Satan and his angels have a knowledge of good and evil? If they did not, then their punishment was for transgressing a law and not sin. If it was not sin could an everlasting and eternal, as in without end, punishment be just? No. We could in such an event expect that, like adam, some provision would eventually be put into place so that the devil and his angels could be restored.

Say to the brothers Hulet and to all others, that the Lord never authorized them to say that the devil, his angels, or the sons of perdition, should ever be restored; for their state of destiny was not revealed to man, is not revealed, nor ever shall be revealed, save to those who are made partakers thereof: consequently those who teach this doctrine have not received it of the Spirit of the Lord. Truly Brother Oliver declared it to be the doctrine of devils. We, therefore, command that this doctrine be taught no more in Zion. We sanction the decision of the Bishop and his council, in relation to this doctrine being a bar to communion. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 21)

Since we can not expect that, like Adam, some provision would eventually be put into place so that the devil and his angels could be restored; we can also not expect or conclude that the devil and his angels did not have a knowledge of good and evil.

This does not prove that they did have such a knowledge but means we can not conclude or prove that they did not have such knowledge. For were the Lord to reveal such, it would in turn reveal that which the Prophet Joseph Smith said would not be.