Two questions i dont know if there are available answers for... deep deep doctrine

[SteveVH]

The scriptures tell us to put off our natural man (humanity) - not part of it, or some of it - but all of it and take upon us the divine nature (spirit) of G-d. And according to 1Corinthians 2:14.

The "natural man" refers to man without the Holy Spirit dwelling in him. The reason we do not "naturaly" have the Spirit with us is that we lost it after the fall. Christ became human and gave incredible dignity to the "humanity" because of that act. When we have the Spirit dwelling in us we are truly human; back to the way we were created to be in the beginning. It is not our humanity we are to throw off and the scritpure doesn't say that. It is our old ways, our old self; the one without the Spirit of God dwelling in it. Jesus will have a human body for eternity, just as we will. There is nothing wrong with our humanity. It was created by God and he saw it and said "It is very good".

Just to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will assume my words in prevous posts have not conveyed the meaning which they were intended to convey. So let me be very clear. Jesus is 100% human. Being human does not require one to sin. That is a choice each human makes. Jesus chose not to sin. That does no make him any less human than us. However, lest we forget, Jesus is also 100% divine. That is about as far as I think I can go without expressing parts of my faith that seem to be upsetting some folks. Actually, it pretty much bring this converstation to an end.

Our humanity is corruptible. Jesus was not and is not corruptible. Jesus is not 100% as we are. Why do you believe such a thing? As I said before - he has some similarities but that is quite different than 100%.

Well, I've explained my position more than a few times now. If there is any question of what I believe please see above. I would be interested in your assessment of the nature of Jesus. What do Mormons believe Jesus was? All human? All divine? A little of both? Do you even believe that there is a difference between human and divine nature? Is Jesus any different than you or me? Has he just progressed further than us or is he altogether different than us (especially in his divinity)?

Thanks.

Edited August 27, 2012 by StephenVH

[Traveler]

The "natural man" refers to man without the Holy Spirit dwelling in him. The reason we do not "naturaly" have the Spirit with us is that we lost it after the fall. Christ became human and gave incredible dignity to the "humanity" because of that act. When we have the Spirit dwelling in us we are truly human; back to the way we were created to be in the beginning. It is not our humanity we are to throw off and the scritpure doesn't say that. It is our old ways, our old self; the one without the Spirit of God dwelling in it. Jesus will have a human body for eternity, just as we will. There is nothing wrong with our humanity. It was created by God and he saw it and said "It is very good".

Just to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will assume my words in prevous posts have not conveyed the meaning which they were intended to convey. So let me be very clear. Jesus is 100% human. Being human does not require one to sin. That is a choice each human makes. Jesus chose not to sin. That does no make him any less human than us. However, lest we forget, Jesus is also 100% divine. That is about as far as I think I can go without expressing parts of my faith that seem to be upsetting some folks. Actually, it pretty much bring this converstation to an end.

Well, I've explained my position more than a few times now. If there is any question of what I believe please see above. I would be interested in your assessment of the nature of Jesus. What do Mormons believe Jesus was? All human? All divine? A little of both? Do you even believe that there is a difference between human and divine nature? Is Jesus any different than you or me? Has he just progressed further than us or is he altogether different than us (especially in his divinity)?

Thanks.

I will speak to my understanding as LDS. I believe that Jesus had a mortal mother who was Marry. This gave Jesus many traits of man but Jesus' Father is G-d the Father and as such had power over death that he could suffer and sacrifice himself in death but power of resurrection to physically reunite his life and never again suffer death.

The LDS view goes to before this mortal existence to a time that we all lived as the spiritual offspring of G-d the Father. As spiritual offspring our destiny is to become like the Father. So in essence Jesus is our brother the "first Born" and most like the Father of all the Father's children. Because of his love of the Father and his spiritual siblings he offered himself to be sacrificed for our sins. This he did of his own free will and choice. There was a great disturbance in the society of heaven and part of heaven rebelled against G-d the Father and His first born - Jesus Christ.

All of us that are born of Adam and Eve come to earth and live out our fallen circumstance of our own free will and choice as a personal sacrifice to support the divine plan of the Father to come to know good from evil.

The difference is that we come to earth stripped of our divine heritage with no power to over come death. Unlike us Jesus comes to earth only partially stripped of his divinity in order that he can suffer the wages of sin for all mankind - which is death. But because he is not fully 100% human he has power over death to free us.

It may be semanticists to some but for me it is honesty and truth at the very core. Not a pretend but cold hard truth - in plain simple terms that are accurate and believable. This my point is that if we intend to use logic - we use it honestly without exaggeration.

The Traveler

[Blackmarch]

These questions drive me insane because i dont believe mankind will have the answer for them until everything is all said and done.

what Im asking is:

God is the author of Good. God could not, and would not create evil. (am i right? lol)

God created Lucifer, Son of the Morning, Someone all of us looked up to.

Lucifer made his own conscious decision to walk away and try and make his own way.

Evil was created by Lucifer, The father of lies.

What my question is, is God said evil is necessary for the plan, yet couldnt create evil? So was He taking a gamble that someone would step up to plate to be evil? (speaking VERY casually) What if Satan chose to accept Christ? Where would evil come from then?

One of my friends gave me the best response but i want more lol. He said 2/3 also fell. THATS ALOTA PEOPLE. SOMEONE out of those billions of billions of souls would have stood up if he didnt.

I heard a good analogy once;

Does darkness exist?

the answer it does not- its merely an expression we use to describe the lack of light.

In a similar way so is evil and good- Evil is the absence of Godliness, its not something you create.. its what happens when you seperate yourself from what is godly.

In the creation of Lucifer, I'd wager that God foresaw events... and I'd have to say that i'm very impressed that God would give even such as he the chance and potential to become great (which he did, before he fell by consequence of his own choice).

for the one third that followed the amount would be counted unto us as infinite, for such are the hosts of heaven.

For God needing an opposing force, I'd imagine if he didn't foresee someone falling from grace, that he had all the time in the world to wait for someone to want to do something their own way without him.... I mean something would have to happen at sometime with an infinite or almost infinite amount of intelligent beings that have some level of will.

And i can see why in a small degree why so many would choose Lucifer's;

It is a very attractive proposition.

--------------------------

Next Queston:

Adam and Eve.

Why did God command them not to partake of the fruit if it was necessary for the plan to continue? Did he "sin" for the good of mankind? is it possible to Sin for the good of anything? Or did he "transgress" and somehow thats different than sinning? I mean be blatantly disobeyed God..

On the flip side, Did God know they would fall? If he did, did He basically set them up for failure by creating a law he didnt want them to follow? Can God do that lol? probably not but im just asking conclusive questions that may lead to nothing.

On adam and eve, i would like to point out that they were given permission to partake of the tree of life from the very start.... But then God goes on to say, But don't do that because youll die, however the choice is up to you.

If anyone was "set up" i think it was Satan. And I'm pretty sure that God knew that they would partake of the tree of life.

From what i may or may not understand, Having a savior was plan B? What hope was there for Plan A of us somehow not needing a savior?

My mission President ( the one I agreed with in case anyone follows my threads) said once that back up plans are just as important, the Atonement was a back up plan. Is this correct?

thanks

I need opinions please.. these questions kill me lol.

thanks

we have no idea if there were more than the 2 plans presented that we know about. All we know is that adam and eve did partake of the tree, from which one of the consequences meant that we would need a redeemer. We have no idea if there was a plan for in case they did not take the fruit if there wasn't some force in place to pull them away from God.

anyways hope my rambling opinion makes some sense.

[SteveVH]

I will speak to my understanding as LDS. I believe that Jesus had a mortal mother who was Marry. This gave Jesus many traits of man but Jesus' Father is G-d the Father and as such had power over death that he could suffer and sacrifice himself in death but power of resurrection to physically reunite his life and never again suffer death.

The LDS view goes to before this mortal existence to a time that we all lived as the spiritual offspring of G-d the Father. As spiritual offspring our destiny is to become like the Father. So in essence Jesus is our brother the "first Born" and most like the Father of all the Father's children. Because of his love of the Father and his spiritual siblings he offered himself to be sacrificed for our sins. This he did of his own free will and choice. There was a great disturbance in the society of heaven and part of heaven rebelled against G-d the Father and His first born - Jesus Christ.

All of us that are born of Adam and Eve come to earth and live out our fallen circumstance of our own free will and choice as a personal sacrifice to support the divine plan of the Father to come to know good from evil.

The difference is that we come to earth stripped of our divine heritage with no power to over come death. Unlike us Jesus comes to earth only partially stripped of his divinity in order that he can suffer the wages of sin for all mankind - which is death. But because he is not fully 100% human he has power over death to free us.

It may be semanticists to some but for me it is honesty and truth at the very core. Not a pretend but cold hard truth - in plain simple terms that are accurate and believable. This my point is that if we intend to use logic - we use it honestly without exaggeration.

The Traveler

Thank you. It seems that I am not allowed to question these beliefs (using another set of beliefs as the basis for those questions), so I guess we'll just have to call it good. Thanks for giving me your understanding of the LDS position. That is pretty much what I've heard.

God bless.

[Vort]

Thank you. It seems that I am not allowed to question these beliefs (using another set of beliefs as the basis for those questions), so I guess we'll just have to call it good. Thanks for giving me your understanding of the LDS position. That is pretty much what I've heard.

God bless.

Speaking for myself, I don't see anything wrong with questioning beliefs, I just don't think that it's appropriate for the LDS Gospel Discussion forum.

[estradling75]

(Is there a place for inter-faith discussions? I guess I should get to know all the different places over here better, sorry!)

There is... right here on LDS.net. Its called the Christian Beliefs Board - LDS Social Network Forums

We keep telling people this but they keep wanting to you the LDS Gospel Discussion or the General Discussions and we really don't know how to make this any clearer

[Traveler]

Thank you. It seems that I am not allowed to question these beliefs (using another set of beliefs as the basis for those questions), so I guess we'll just have to call it good. Thanks for giving me your understanding of the LDS position. That is pretty much what I've heard.

God bless.

If you would like to question my LDS position - I would be glad to take our conversation to e-mail - which has some advantages. BTW - it is my personal observation that among Christian denominations that there seem to me to be more similarities between LDS and Catholics than between LDS and other denominations.

The Traveler

[estradling75]

If you would like to question my LDS position - I would be glad to take our conversation to e-mail - which has some advantages. BTW - it is my personal observation that among Christian denominations that there seem to me to be more similarities between LDS and Catholics than between LDS and other denominations.

The Traveler

StephenVH is incorrect. He was told that if he wanted to share Catholic believes he could do so in the Christian Beliefs Board - LDS Social Network Forums

He was told that he can not do so in the LDS Gospel Discussion - LDS Social Network Forums For the reason that it was dedicated to (crazily enough) to LDS Gospel Discussion. If you want to take it to email you can, but don't do so under the misunderstanding that it can't be done here in the proper sub forum.

[SteveVH]

StephenVH is incorrect. He was told that if he wanted to share Catholic believes he could do so in the Christian Beliefs Board - LDS Social Network Forums

He was told that he can not do so in the LDS Gospel Discussion - LDS Social Network Forums For the reason that it was dedicated to (crazily enough) to LDS Gospel Discussion. If you want to take it to email you can, but don't do so under the misunderstanding that it can't be done here in the proper sub forum.

My apologies. Can you please tell me when you informed me of this? Somehow I missed this or just didn't remember. In any case, thanks for pointing me to the correct forum.

[SteveVH]

Here, I created a thread:

http://www.lds.net/forums/christian-beliefs-board/48452-ex-nihlo-creationism-thread.html#post694267

Thanks!

Thank you, Changed. I'll check it out.

[SteveVH]

If you would like to question my LDS position - I would be glad to take our conversation to e-mail - which has some advantages. BTW - it is my personal observation that among Christian denominations that there seem to me to be more similarities between LDS and Catholics than between LDS and other denominations.

The Traveler

I appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue. I think it would be best if we did this on the new thread created by Changed on the LDS Gospel Discussion - LDS Social Network Forum. That way others can participate if they choose. It seems like the last time this happened I was instructed to go to another site altogether. Guess I wasn't paying attention.

Steve

[estradling75]

My apologies. Can you please tell me when you informed me of this? Somehow I missed this or just didn't remember. In any case, thanks for pointing me to the correct forum.

It turns out I am the one that needs to say I am sorry.

I remembered posting this http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/46952-apostasy-4.html#post677884

I thought it was in response to you directly, but it turns out I was wrong about to whom I was talking.

Sorry about that.

[Seminarysnoozer]

How did God know that Lucifer would do it? My theory is that time doesn't exist to God.. that He knows things from beginning to end and how it'll all play out. That isn't him messing with people's free agency whatsoever. He just lives in a dimension where it's all happened already.. aah! My brain is going to explode! We're mortal and our brains can't take it in.

.

I agree with the rest of your post (just so I don't come across as being too confrontational here).

The theory of timelessness is a man made concept. The reason it can't be taken in, in part, is because it is made up. There is nothing revealed, at least that I can find about God being in a timeless "dimension where it's all happened." That directly opposes one thing that we do know about God and His nature, that His work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Focus on the "bring to pass" part of that phrase. His work is to bring things to pass, specifically the Eternal life and immortality of man. If He lives in a dimension where all has happened, as your theory suggests then His work and glory has ended for Him, as if it has already happened, then His work would not be endless.

This does not say that His perception of time is different or His eternal view is different than ours. All I am saying is that God has to experience the passage of time to be able to have as part of His work and glory, "bringing to pass" anything. Who He is, at least the way we see Him, depends on that feature. There has to be a present, a past and a future, therefore the passage of time.

That doesn't mean that He can't see it all, He could still see all the past and the present and the future. But in order to bring anything to pass He has to have a past, present and future and there has to be significance in accomplishing something, not just in saying that it will be done. There is value to Him in having things realized, not just planned. In fact, we are now participating in a test of doing, not just planning to do what is right. This is a feature of our own plan of happiness that we would not want to take out of the bigger picture, there is value in the doing and realization of planned events. To be able to say "it was done", or "job well done" is of added value than just knowing that it will be done.

[missionary0204]

Love the questions!

When I was a missionary, I struggled with the same question - "Did God create evil?" Over the years, my understanding of the plan of salvation has improved greatly.

1. Evil: I would argue that God did not create evil. Evil has always existed.

2 Nephi 2:11

11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.

2 Nephi 2:15

15 And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man, after he had created our first parents, and the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and in fine, all things which are created, it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.

If there was no evil, God could not have existed in the first place. The following points will shed some light on the subject.

2. Intelligence: Before we were spirits, we wer called intelligence or light. All intelligences are eternal and have no beginning and no end. Some intelligences are more noble and great than others. Think of it like having a group of people in a room. Are not some people going to be more diligent in obeying the laws/commandments than others? Some people only do enough to get by while others will work as hard as they can until the end. The point is, that not all intelligence is the same. The old memorized missionary discussions said that we were unique individuals before we came here. Abraham was told by the Lord that he was among the noble and great ones. Abraham said that he saw intelligences become spirits.

Doctrine and Covenants 93:29

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

Abraham 3:21-23

21 I dwell in the midst of them all; I now, therefore, have come down unto thee to declare unto thee the aworks which my hands have made, wherein my bwisdom excelleth them all, for I crule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen.

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the aintelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the bnoble and great ones;

23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast achosen before thou wast born.

3. Spirit Body: Our heavenly parents created a perfect spirit body. Our intelligence was placed into that spirit body giving it life. It is no different than your spirit being placed into your physcial body to give it life ("For as the body without the spirit is dead,..." James 2:26) One way to look at a mortal man would be the concept of a tri-entity. We are intelligence, spirit, and mortal flesh-one day to become immortal flesh.

King Follet Discourse: Joseph spoke of this

God made a tabernacle and put a spirit into it, and it became a living soul. (Refers to the Bible.) How does it read in the Hebrew? It does not say in the Hebrew that God created the spirit of man. It says, “God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam’s spirit, and so became a living body.”

… that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself.

Conclusion: In the end, God never created our intelligence, and evil has always existed. God is the most intelligent of all, and set laws to help you and I progress as much as we allow ourselves. "All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement. Joseph Smith-King Follett Discourse." The laws are in place, and all you and I have to do is learn the first law of heaven-obedience. Through our obedience, we can become "joint heirs with Christ" and inherit all that the Father has.

I wrote this on my lunch break to help answer the origional question. I haven't even proof read it because I am out of time. There are many more scriptures and quotes that can be added to this, and many of my comments only touch on one part of the meaning of a scripture. Please enjoy and ask away. I hope this helps!

[missionary0204]

One point I missed, Joseph Smith is referring to the intelligence of man when he says, "...that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all." He is saying that we have always existed. He did not break it down to intelligences, probably because he was talking to a group of 20,000 people and he was trying to prove a different point.

[Traveler]

I agree with the rest of your post (just so I don't come across as being too confrontational here).

The theory of timelessness is a man made concept. The reason it can't be taken in, in part, is because it is made up. There is nothing revealed, at least that I can find about God being in a timeless "dimension where it's all happened." That directly opposes one thing that we do know about God and His nature, that His work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Focus on the "bring to pass" part of that phrase. His work is to bring things to pass, specifically the Eternal life and immortality of man. If He lives in a dimension where all has happened, as your theory suggests then His work and glory has ended for Him, as if it has already happened, then His work would not be endless.

This does not say that His perception of time is different or His eternal view is different than ours. All I am saying is that God has to experience the passage of time to be able to have as part of His work and glory, "bringing to pass" anything. Who He is, at least the way we see Him, depends on that feature. There has to be a present, a past and a future, therefore the passage of time.

That doesn't mean that He can't see it all, He could still see all the past and the present and the future. But in order to bring anything to pass He has to have a past, present and future and there has to be significance in accomplishing something, not just in saying that it will be done. There is value to Him in having things realized, not just planned. In fact, we are now participating in a test of doing, not just planning to do what is right. This is a feature of our own plan of happiness that we would not want to take out of the bigger picture, there is value in the doing and realization of planned events. To be able to say "it was done", or "job well done" is of added value than just knowing that it will be done.

People are concerned that if G-d knows what we will do - we do not have free will. I would like to take that entire concept a different direction. I believe that we also knew (as G-d did) our entire life before we came to earth. All we are doing is playing our the plan (choices) we already made and both us and G-d knew. This is the only way I can see that free will can be justified. If we came to this life not knowing the outcome - I do not believe we can say it was a choice of free will.

If anyone has any other ideas that explain free will better - I would like to consider it.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

People are concerned that if G-d knows what we will do - we do not have free will. I would like to take that entire concept a different direction. I believe that we also knew (as G-d did) our entire life before we came to earth. All we are doing is playing our the plan (choices) we already made and both us and G-d knew. This is the only way I can see that free will can be justified. If we came to this life not knowing the outcome - I do not believe we can say it was a choice of free will.

If anyone has any other ideas that explain free will better - I would like to consider it.

The Traveler

We are told that the noble and great ones before this life were those who had exceedingly great faith. How can faith and knowing all exist together?

I would think that what we are being tested on right now is different than what was being tested previously, otherwise why have a first estate and a second estate. Why isn't this all one estate, like you are suggesting.

It is not all one estate because the tests of faith are different. Before it was a test of faith without deceptions or misinformation. Now it is a test with deceptions and misinformation but with a light that tells us where to find truth. Now we show what we prefer, to follow the light or follow the deceptions.

It is possible to pass the first estate and not the second. In fact it is possible to pass the first estate with flying colors, to be a noble and great one and still not pass the second estate. How is that possible? The tests are different with different circumstances. There must be a reason for that, to be tested of one's faith amongst misinformation. There has to be some value to that and not just a playing out of the previous test. Remember too that there are some who participated in the first estate test who don't even get to take part in the second estate test. Why aren't they playing out their own free will here then?

[searching_questioner]

I think evil came into existence as a by produce of God's actions, so to some extent, it can be validly said that God is responsible for the existence of evil. Evil is nothing more than doing that which is opposed to God's will, so if God's will does not exist, there is no evil. The creation of evil was an unavoidable outcome of deciding what is good. Evil is simply that which is not good, so by creating the good, you also bring into existence the possibility of evil. Evil is not something that exists on its own, it only exists in relation to, and as a result of, and in opposition to, and in dependence on, good. If you took away the good, there would be no such thing as evil. Satan did not create evil, he only tempts people to be evil.

Edited September 2, 2012 by searching_questioner

[Sicily510]

I think evil came into existence as a by produce of God's actions, so to some extent, it can be validly said that God is responsible for the existence of evil. Evil is nothing more than doing that which is opposed to God's will, so if God's will does not exist, there is no evil. The creation of evil was an unavoidable outcome of deciding what is good. Evil is simply that which is not good, so by creating the good, you also bring into existence the possibility of evil. Evil is not something that exists on its own, it only exists in relation to, and as a result of, and in opposition to, and in dependence on, good. If you took away the good, there would be no such thing as evil. Satan did not create evil, he only tempts people to be evil.

Satan

Satan, also called the adversary or the devil, is the enemy of all righteousness and of those who seek to follow God. He is a spirit son of God who was once an angel "in authority in the presence of God" (D&C 76:25; see also Isaiah 14:12; D&C 76:26–27). But in the premortal Council in Heaven, Lucifer, as Satan was then called, rebelled against God. Since that time, he has sought to destroy the children of God on the earth and to make them miserable.

_________________________________________________________________________________

One primary issue in the conflict between God and Satan is agency. Agency is a precious gift from God; it is essential to His plan for His children. In Satan's rebellion against God, Satan "sought to destroy the agency of man" (Moses 4:3). He said: "I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor" (Moses 4:1).

Satan persuaded "a third part of the hosts of heaven" to turn away from the Father (D&C 29:36). As a result of this rebellion, Satan and his followers were cut off from God's presence and denied the blessing of receiving a physical body (see Revelation 12:9).

Heavenly Father allows Satan and Satan's followers to tempt us as part of our experience in mortality (see 2 Nephi 2:11–14; D&C 29:39). Because Satan "seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself" (2 Nephi 2:27), he and his followers try to lead us away from righteousness. He directs his most strenuous opposition at the most important aspects of Heavenly Father's plan of happiness. For example, he seeks to discredit the Savior and the priesthood, to cast doubt on the power of the Atonement, to counterfeit revelation, to distract us from the truth, and to contradict individual accountability. He attempts to undermine the family by confusing gender, promoting sexual relations outside of marriage, ridiculing marriage, and discouraging childbearing by married adults who would otherwise raise children in righteousness.

Individuals do not have to give in to Satan's temptations. Each person has the power to choose good over evil, and the Lord has promised to help all who seek Him through sincere prayer and faithfulness.

See also Agency; Sin; Temptation

_________________________________________________________________________________

[Seminarysnoozer]

I think evil came into existence as a by produce of God's actions, so to some extent, it can be validly said that God is responsible for the existence of evil. Evil is nothing more than doing that which is opposed to God's will, so if God's will does not exist, there is no evil. The creation of evil was an unavoidable outcome of deciding what is good. Evil is simply that which is not good, so by creating the good, you also bring into existence the possibility of evil. Evil is not something that exists on its own, it only exists in relation to, and as a result of, and in opposition to, and in dependence on, good. If you took away the good, there would be no such thing as evil. Satan did not create evil, he only tempts people to be evil.

I agree, I think this is a better definition of "evil" just like someone would define any eternal law. The problem is people use it interchangeable with what a person becomes when they are not obedient or following God's plan. It is like using 'gravity' interchangeable with 'fallen'. It would be like saying "I have 'gravitied' out and can't get up", instead of saying 'fallen'.

If it is an eternal law, then God didn't really create it, it has always been there co-existence. But I think there are times during these rounds of cycles the eternal plan goes through in which there is no "evil" at play. Just like the physics surrounding a black hole really don't have any immediate effect on my life right now, (maybe it does and I don't know it) but at least it is away from my immediate existence.