What is sin?

[Seminarysnoozer]

I wonder then J-Dawg, your statement in reference to this scripture given by Seminary...

You say it is not that Children can't sin....

Yet in scripture we read "they cannot sin." That seems pretty clear children do not and cannot sin.

Thanks Anddenex and Traveler and J-Dawg; I think the discussion is over semantics. Sin is not possible without accountability. The state of not being accountable is called innocence. How the innocence is achieved is through the atonement of Christ, and yes Traveler, I understand that. The atonement makes it so little children are not guilty, which is the same as saying they are innocent. They are innocent because they are not responsible or accountable for the thoughts in their "hearts" that are generated by the brain for which they have not reached an age where they can start to have some measure of control over them via spiritual influence.

I think the issue that makes it difficult to understand is when a person doesn't have a strong testimony about the dual nature of our being here in mortality. We are dual beings of both body and spirit, two separate influences which together at varying degrees drive thought (sometimes designated as heart) and the desire of the heart (spiritual influence of thought). Mortal beings do not have a way of measuring the relative influences of those two forces and therefore we have a hard time talking about them because we want to group them together all the time. If one groups them together all the time then I can see how if a scripture speaks of starting to develop sinful thoughts as a child how they would automatically assume it is their spiritual self. The reason for that assumption is a lack of understanding of our dual nature, both body (brain generating thoughts) and spirit self. The test in which one can be held accountable and for which it is possible to sin only occurs after the age of accountability and likely has to do with the point at which it becomes a fair test between these two aspects of our dual being. Before that time the spirit likely has minimal but linearly increasing influence over the body. Christ has accounted for this pre-test time by the atonement which keeps children innocent (i.e.- not guilty of sin) and therefore they did not sin.

If I prepare for a test by doing some practice tests and I get some of the practice test question wrong it doesn't count as getting them wrong, I wasn't taking the test yet. Is it possible to get a practice test question wrong? sure but it doesn't count as such. Likewise, little children are in the preparatory, developmental stages of this dual being life in which testing is a part of but they are not yet in the test. So, they can get the practice questions wrong, they can have evil influences from the carnal body start to work but are not in the test and therefore do not sin. They are not in the test because the atonement makes it so.

-------

From Bruce Mcconkie, "The Salvation of Little Children"

"Why are we born upon this earth?

We come here to gain bodies, bodies of flesh and blood, bodies which—following the natural death—we will receive back again in immortality. Those of us who arrive at the years of accountability are here to develop and to be tried and tested, to see if we can so live as to regain the state of innocence and purity which we enjoyed as children, and thereby be qualified to go where God and Christ are.

What is original sin?

This is the false doctrine that the sin of Adam passes upon all men and that, therefore, all men—infants included—must be baptized to be saved. It is, however, a fundamental principle of true religion “that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.” (A of F 1:2)

Are children tainted with original sin?

Absolutely not. There is no such thing as original sin as such is defined in the creeds of Christendom. Such a concept denies the efficacy of the atonement. Our revelation says: “Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning”—meaning that spirits started out in a state of purity and innocence in preexistence—“and God having redeemed man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God” (D&C 93:38)—meaning that all children start out their mortal probation in purity and innocence because of the atonement. Our revelations also say, “The Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world.” (Moses 6:54.)

Are children conceived in sin?

Since there is no such thing as original sin, as that expression is used in modern Christendom, it follows that children are not conceived in sin. They do not come into the world with any taint of impurity whatever. When our scriptures say that “children are conceived in sin,” they are using words in an entirely different way than when the same language is recited in the creeds of the world. The scriptural meaning is that they are born into a world of sin so that “when they begin to grow up, sin conceiveth in their hearts, and they taste the bitter, that they may know to prize the good.” (Moses 6:55.)"

[Finrock]

Good afternoon Traveler. I hope you have been doing well! :)

It is my theory - that the reason of the vale in mortality is to protect us from permanent damage of sin to our soul. That our experience in sin is without sufficient knowledge of the choice of sin and therefore not a choice of free will - but rather a choice of agency which allows for a transfer of punitive charges to him that holds our agency (Christ). Thus we can repent - but only while we remain in a state of ignorance.

Outside of our mortal probation the choice to sin is a choice made with knowledge and therefore a choice of freewill - thus our soul is permanently damaged (as was Lucifer and those that followed him in sin) - whereas in mortality the damage of sin may be temporary if someone with the power to do so intercedes according to the law of agency.

The Traveler

I just wanted to point out that there is scriptural support to what you say in this post. Please consider the following:

17 Yea, there are many who do say: If thou wilt show unto us a sign from heaven, then we shall know of a surety; then we shall believe.

18 Now I ask, is this faith? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for if a man knoweth a thing he hath no cause to believe, for he knoweth it.

19 And now, how much more cursed is he that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than he that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression?

Regards,

Finrock

[Everliving]

SIN: Literally, a missing of the mark, according to the Hebrew and Greek Bible texts. God himself sets the "mark" that his intelligent creatures are to reach. Missing that mark is sin, which is also unrighteousness, or lawlessness. (Rom. 3:23; 1 John 5:17; 3:4) Sin is anything not in harmony with God's personality, standards, ways, and will, all of which are holy. It may involve wrong conduct, failure to do what should be done. Ungodly speech, unclean thoughts, or desires or motives that are selfish. God's holy word differentiates between inherited sin and willful sin, between an act of sin over which a person is repentant and the practice of sin.

[Everliving]

Was Adam’s sin part of “God’s plan”? Was it part of his plan for a child to be born as a neonate, brain dead, or malformed?

[Vort]

Was Adam’s sin part of “God’s plan”?

The fall was indisputably a part of God's plan. It is arguable whether willful disobedience was a necessary part; some of us think not.

Was it part of his plan for a child to be born as a neonate, brain dead, or malformed?

Aren't all children born as neonates? I believe the definition of "neonate" is "newborn". Or does the word have another meaning I'm not aware of?

Yes, mortal vicissitudes are a part of God's plan.

[Traveler]

It seems to me that there are many definitions of things that are advanced that no one actually knows or understands. I believe such definitions to at best be circular and indefinable - and of little actual benefit.

For example - what is G-d’s will? What are G-d’s laws or ways? What man knows these things unless another man tells him? But if another man tells him - by what logic is one man’s perception better than another? It can be argued; even using scripture that man does not know or understand G-d’s ways. Therefore, what does it matter what one person thinks over another? How then would any man know what is sin - if we define sin only in G-dly terms - which by definition; man does not and cannot understand or comprehend? If man does not know what sin is - how can a just G-d hold man accountable for such sins?

Should not such sins be the responsibility of whatever being made such circumstance? But is not this the very reason that G-d - through Jesus Christ redeemed (paid for) all sins.

The scriptures tell us - that to him that knows to do good and does not do it - to them it is sin. That definition - every intelligent and responsible person should understand.

The Traveler

[Everliving]

If I were to do something that you wanted me to do, would you condemn me for it?... Then, if Adam’s sin was God’s will, why was Adam driven out of Eden as a sinner? (Gen. 3:17-19, 23, 24) In defense of the True God (יהוה), the answer really involves the kind of person God is. Would it be just or loving to condemn a person for doing something that you yourself planned for him to do? (יהוה) is a God of love. (1 John 4:8) All his ways are just. (Ps. 37:28; Deut. 32:4) It was not God’s will for Adam to sin; he warned Adam against it. (Gen. 2:17) God did allow Adam, as he does us, the freedom to choose what he would do. Perfection did not rule out the exercise of free will to disobey. Adam chose to rebel against God, despite the warning that death would result.

Here is what God set before Adam and Eve.-read (Gen. 1:28; 2:16, 17) would you encourage your children to undertake a project with a marvelous future, knowing from the start that it was doomed to failure? Would you warn them of harm, while knowing that you had planned everything so that they were sure to come to grief? Is it reasonable, then to attribute such to the True God (יהוה)? –Read (Matt. 7:11) If God foreordained and foreknew Adam’s sin and all that would result from this, it would mean that by creating Adam, God deliberately set in motion all the wickedness committed in human history. He would be the source of all the wars, the crime, the immorality, the oppression, the lying, the hypocrisy, the disease, and even the death of infants. But God’s word clearly says: “For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness.” (Ps. 5:4) “Him that loveth violence his soul hateth..” (Ps. 11:5) “God…cannot lie.” (Titus 1:2) “He [the One designated by God as Messianic King] shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and precious shall their blood be in his sight.”(Ps. 72:14) “God is love” (1 John 4:8) “He loveth righteousness and judgment”-(Ps. 33:5) “God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man”! (Jas. 1:13)

Edited January 20, 2013 by Everliving

[Seminarysnoozer]

Here is what God set before Adam and Eve.-read (Gen. 1:28; 2:16, 17) would you encourage your children to undertake a project with a marvelous future, knowing from the start that it was doomed to failure? Would you warn them of harm, while knowing that you had planned everything so that they were sure to come to grief? Is it reasonable, then to attribute such to the True God (יהוה)? –Read (Matt. 7:11)

LDS believe that all are saved from the effects of the fall via Christ overcoming death so I am not sure why you are suggesting that is was "doomed to failure". You must be talking about some other religion.

[Everliving]

All who exercise faith, work in harmony with God’s will, and endure to the end, are saved from the effects of sin and death, that is true. Through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The question that has been brought up, is if it was God’s plan for Adam to sin?

[estradling75]

In the LDS view... this life... this mortality is exactly were God wants us to be. Therefore while its clear that God doesn't want for us to Sin... he has planned for us to do exactly that. That is taken into account in his plan. The whole Christ as Savior and Redeemer attests to that.

We also know that we can't change God's plan, we can follow the plan or cut ourselves off from it but that is it.

Because of this it seems very clear that God also planned on Adam and Eve sinning and accounted for it. Therefore to me the discussion on if Adam and Eve began sinning in the garden or waited until outside it is very hair split-y.

Satan's attempt to derail God's plan failed like it always will and that is the bottom line.

[Traveler]

All who exercise faith, work in harmony with God’s will, and endure to the end, are saved from the effects of sin and death, that is true. Through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The question that has been brought up, is if it was God’s plan for Adam to sin?

That is not really the question because it cannot be completed in any answer. For example we know that through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ that it is (and always was?) the plan of G-d to redeem man from sin? This creates a contradiction. If it was not G-d’s plan for man to sin – how could it possibly be his plan to redeem and ransom man (through Jesus Christ) from sin?

If it was not G-d’s plan then G-d did not foresee that man would sin – but G-d cannot lie and in Isaiah G-d declares that He sees all things from the beginning to the end – therefore he did see and know that man would sin; so it is a lie that he did not plan from the very beginning for man to sin even before the body of Adam was created. And not just for sin to occur as a possibility but since he knew exactly what and where and by who for every sin that would occur according to his knowledge and plan – he either planed for what he knew would be or G-d was forced to change his plan because the initial plan was false (or a lie).

Here is a question that I believe is important. Did G-d force Adam and Eve (and mankind) to be placed into circumstances (life) in which he (being G-d) did know that sin would result – not maybe result but would result without anyone knowing what they were getting themselves into because of their creation or birth according to the plan of G-d?

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

All who exercise faith, work in harmony with God’s will, and endure to the end, are saved from the effects of sin and death, that is true. Through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The question that has been brought up, is if it was God’s plan for Adam to sin?

That is only a partial truth; all who kept their first estate will be saved from the Fall (with the exception of the sons of perdition). Even the lowest individual in the Telestial Kingdom will be at an exponentially higher place than she ever could have been prior to mortality.

If one jumps on the end of a diving board, the energy is stored in the downward movement. At that point, if we take that as the end of the process as if it is the purpose of the jump on the board then I can see how one might call it a "failure". But we know that the reason to jump on the end of a diving board is to jump higher than one could without it. Likewise, mortality that comes as a result of the Fall of Adam allows us to move downward but forward and onward to a position that we could not get to without it.

Bruce R. McConkie explains, "The coming fall would take them downward and forward and onward. Death and procreation had yet to enter the world. Death would be Adam’s gift to man, and the gift of God would be eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Thus, existence came from God; death came by Adam; and immortality and eternal life come through Christ."

Calling the plan of happiness "doomed for failure" occurs from shortsightedness about the purposes of God. Despair about such things has always been one of Satan's greatest tools, to think that we are being punished or wronged in some way by God. That feeling of "doomed" only comes with not having faith in God's plan even though we may not fully understand the mechanisms and every step of the way and the full extend of the way.

[Klein_Helmer]

Serious question, I could use an LDS take on this one.

If two men entered into an agreement, in which one of them would pay the other a sum of money, then proceed to administer a sharp kick to his gut, would either of them be acting in sin?

[Vort]

Serious question, I could use an LDS take on this one.

If two men entered into an agreement, in which one of them would pay the other a sum of money, then proceed to administer a sharp kick to his gut, would either of them be acting in sin?

So you're asking if Muay Thai training is a sin? I say no, but I'm not willing to take a kick to the gut for it.

[Everliving]

I can understand why you may feel that way. Truly I say to you If not for the ransom sacrifice of Jesus, the human family would have been condemned to death (or doomed to die) because the wages sin pays is death, Jesus sacrifice balanced the prefect scales of justice, paid the ransom from that undesirable circumstance. However you say it was a blessing for Adam to sin, since now we will “be exponentially [in a] higher place”, does that seem reasonable? God created Adam and Eve and all their offspring to live forever. What Adam and as a conscience, all of us lost was perfect human life, free from death and suffering. God blessed them, and God said to them, to be fruitful, and multiply, replenish the earth and subdue it, that was his purpose for us (Gen. 1:28; Ps. 37:11, 22, 29). He did not create the earth for nothing (Isa. 45:18). The True God is not a man, that he should plan; he cannot be checkmated or be forced to change his will. He purposes, and no one can check his hand (Isa 55:11; 14:24; Pr. 19:21; Da 4:35). But I say to you Sin did not originate with Adam; sin first broke out in heaven.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Everliving

[Traveler]

I can understand why you may feel that way. Truly I say to you If not for the ransom sacrifice of Jesus, the human family would have been condemned to death (or doomed to die) because the wages sin pays is death, Jesus sacrifice balanced the prefect scales of justice, paid the ransom from that undesirable circumstance. However you say it was a blessing for Adam to sin, since now we will “be exponentially [in a] higher place”, does that seem reasonable? God created Adam and Eve and all their offspring to live forever. What Adam and as a conscience, all of us lost was perfect human life, free from death and suffering. God blessed them, and God said to them, to be fruitful, and multiply, replenish the earth and subdue it, that was his purpose for us (Gen. 1:28; Ps. 37:11, 22, 29). He did not create the earth for nothing (Isa. 45:18). The True God is not a man, that he should plan; he cannot be checkmated or be forced to change his will. He purposes, and no one can check his hand (Isa 55:12; 14:24; Pr. 19:21; Da 4:25). But I say to you Sin did not originate with Adam; sin first broke out in heaven.

I am not sure you have thought this through very well? Was it G-d's plan for man to sin? The answer has to be yes or if the answer is no then the plan of G-d is a failure. But you said he cannot be checkmated or be forced to change his will. But if that was the case it was his will all a long that man sin and that Jesus pay for that sin.

Also if the true G-d is not a man then the scriptures (New Testament) is false because Jesus is the example of G-d and Jesus was a man. Thus Jesus proved that a man can be a G-d. In fact this very discussion took place between Jesus and the Pharisees. Why do you say such a thing is not true when scriptures - even Jesus proved otherwise?

But the question that I asked was if G-d knowing that every one would sin - there G-d forced every man and woman created (born) to live in a circumstance where they would sin and G-d knew they would sin - and that no one would have any choice but be forced by their very existence of creation an birth to sin and suffer death?

The only possible exception is the LDS doctrine that we lived with G-d before we were created and born in the flesh (just as Jesus did) and that we gave our full consent to be born into such a circumstance.

The Traveler

[Everliving]

Have you not read the scriptures? Windy Words without proof ring hollow. Are you suggesting God created sin? Search if you can and I will believe.

[Everliving]

Or do you not know Sin came into existince by the hand of God's enemy. (Isa. 14:12-15)

[Seminarysnoozer]

SIN: Literally, a missing of the mark, according to the Hebrew and Greek Bible texts. God himself sets the "mark" that his intelligent creatures are to reach. Missing that mark is sin, which is also unrighteousness, or lawlessness. (Rom. 3:23; 1 John 5:17; 3:4) Sin is anything not in harmony with God's personality, standards, ways, and will, all of which are holy. It may involve wrong conduct, failure to do what should be done. Ungodly speech, unclean thoughts, or desires or motives that are selfish. God's holy word differentiates between inherited sin and willful sin, between an act of sin over which a person is repentant and the practice of sin.

What is "inherited sin" and "willful sin"?

[Anddenex]

I am not sure I agree with the idea being presented that "it was God's plan for man to sin."

The explanations provided are not sufficient to prove it either. It was God's plan that man would become like unto God knowing good from evil, that we become like unto them.

If it was God's plan for man to sin, and our Lord and Savior being a "man", then by reason Christ would have sinned also, because he was a man, but we know this isn't the case.

Through the knowledge of good and evil, men and women, are provided opportunity to sin, God knowing men and women would choose evil or good, a Savior was provided. A Savior wasn't provided because it was God's plan for man to sin, but that men would rebel by their own volition.

It appears it was God's plan to provide Adam and Eve with a choice. I am more curious about this idea "it was God's plan that man would sin."

It seems it better said, "It is God's plan that Adam and Eve would sin, not that man would sin."

[Vort]

I am not sure I agree with the idea being presented that "it was God's plan for man to sin." ... It seems it better said, "It is God's plan that Adam and Eve would sin, not that man would sin."

I think we could all agree that it was God's plan for man to fall. Some scriptures and teachings seem to suggest that sin was necessary for the Fall, but in my opinion this is not doctrinally well-established.

I rather suspect that we are far too ignorant of the actual events represented in the creation and garden of Eden stories to be able to make a sound judgment on the matter.

[Traveler]

Have you not read the scriptures? Windy Words without proof ring hollow. Are you suggesting God created sin? Search if you can and I will believe.

I am suggestion that it was the plan of G-d that man (including Adam) be placed in an environment where sin was inevitable and that the only redemption from that environment and the circumstances or result of that environment was through the path offered through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

Do you believe that it was the plan of G-d that man would not sin in the environment into which G-d placed man? If so then G-d's plan failed - not just sort of but in every single case. Thus I contend that G-d planned all along that man would sin in the environment provided for the creation of man by the wisdom and foreknowledge of G-d.

If you worship with a congregation that believes the Plan of G-d was frustrated - I suggest you consider searching for somewhere else to worship.

The Traveler

[Everliving]

There happened to be a man who wanted to watch the superbowl, but had to work that night, so he taped it. The following morning who would view the man with malice, if he decided to watch the game from the beginning? He had to power to see the finale, however chose to let things play out.

Likewise, the true God, infinite in power has the ability to foreknow events, but makes selective and discretionary use of that ability, giving to all his intelligent creation due regard for the free will with which he has endowed them. Being matchless in power, he can meet any challenge or emergency that might arise as a result of his intelligent creatures exercising there free will. (Isaiah 40:25, 26; Romans 11:33). The Almighty has no need for a set plan that determines every action of every individual ever born in creation (Proverbs 19:21). Nowhere in the divine record does it state that it was God’s plan for man to fall. Rather than having a plan, the divine one is said to have an eternal purpose (Eph. 3:11).

Edited February 6, 2013 by Everliving
Added scripture

[Traveler]

There happened to be a man who wanted to watch the superbowl, but had to work that night, so he taped it. The following morning who would view the man with malice, if he decided to watch the game from the beginning? He had to power to see the finale, however chose to let things play out.

Likewise, the true God, infinite in power has the ability to foreknow events, but makes selective and discretionary use of that ability, giving to all his intelligent creation due regard for the free will with which he has endowed them. Being matchless in power, he can meet any challenge or emergency that might arise as a result of his intelligent creatures exercising there free will. (Isaiah 40:25, 26; Romans 11:33). The Almighty has no need for a set plan that determines every action of every individual ever born in creation (Proverbs 19:21). Nowhere in the divine record does it state that it was God’s plan for man to fall. Rather than having a plan, the divine one is said to have an eternal purpose (Eph. 3:11).

There is a problem - If man was created by another being (an all knowing G-d) that knew the outcome of that specific creation even before the creation of each and any individual - and if that created individual was forced by creation, to be, without prior choice and without any understanding of the outcome - then to say such a "created" being has free will - is a lie and anyone that believes such a thing; is someone very confused and ignorant concerning what constitutes free will.

The Traveler