The Fall – Spiritual and Physical

[faith4]

12 For if there be no faith among the children of men God can do no miracle among them; wherefore, he showed not himself until after their faith.

What about the miracle of childbirth? Atheists give birth to babies, and although they may be amazed at how awesome our bodies are to do such a thing, they in no way credit such a miracle to God, b/c they don't believe in Him. God provides us with miracles every day, sometimes in small, hidden ways, or even large unexplainable ways, which many people who don't have faith, attribute to sheer luck. Gods love us all, even those who turn away and try to hide from Him, He still wishes to draw all souls to Himself so that they may know His love, I'm sure this is something you also believe.

"First of all, then, I ask that supplications, prayers, petitions, and thanksgivings be offered for everyone, for kings and for all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and tranquil life in all devotion and dignity. This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all". (1 Tim 2:1-6)

[Seminarysnoozer]

What about the miracle of childbirth? Atheists give birth to babies, and although they may be amazed at how awesome our bodies are to do such a thing, they in no way credit such a miracle to God, b/c they don't believe in Him. God provides us with miracles every day, sometimes in small, hidden ways, or even large unexplainable ways, which many people who don't have faith, attribute to sheer luck. Gods love us all, even those who turn away and try to hide from Him, He still wishes to draw all souls to Himself so that they may know His love, I'm sure this is something you also believe.

"First of all, then, I ask that supplications, prayers, petitions, and thanksgivings be offered for everyone, for kings and for all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and tranquil life in all devotion and dignity. This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all". (1 Tim 2:1-6)

All who are here passed a test of faith, they kept the first estate in the premortal world. They were given a choice to follow the plan or follow Lucifer. All here chose to stay with God's plan and they made that choice by way of faith having never been out of God's presence. It is a privilege and a blessing any of us have to be born into this world and it is as a result of making a faithful choice.

[faith4]

All who are here passed a test of faith, they kept the first estate in the premortal world. They were given a choice to follow the plan or follow Lucifer. All here chose to stay with God's plan and they made that choice by way of faith having never been out of God's presence. It is a privilege and a blessing any of us have to be born into this world and it is as a result of making a faithful choice.

Yes, a belief we don't share But what does this have to do with the discussion we were having, and how is this relevant to the verse you quoted from the BOM in regards to faith coming before miracles? The verse you quoted makes it clear that a person can not receive miracles from our Father unless they have sufficient faith first, yet there are millions of people who don't have faith and receive miracles from God all the time, they just consider these miracles to be luck rather than give thanks and glory to God. And there are many instances in the bible where miracles occured before faith was shown by the person(s).

So, according to what you believe, all of humanity already passed a test of faith choosing God over Lucifer? Why another test of faith then, espcially when the "test" began by our first parents listening to Lucifer and disobeying God?

[Traveler]

Yes, a belief we don't share But what does this have to do with the discussion we were having, and how is this relevant to the verse you quoted from the BOM in regards to faith coming before miracles? The verse you quoted makes it clear that a person can not receive miracles from our Father unless they have sufficient faith first, yet there are millions of people who don't have faith and receive miracles from God all the time, they just consider these miracles to be luck rather than give thanks and glory to God. And there are many instances in the bible where miracles occured before faith was shown by the person(s).

So, according to what you believe, all of humanity already passed a test of faith choosing God over Lucifer? Why another test of faith then, espcially when the "test" began by our first parents listening to Lucifer and disobeying God?

Sorry not to have been involved in this discussion more. Although LDS "doctrine" differs greatly from Catholic doctrine there are a lot of important fundamental principles that seem to me that are quite similar. But there is one principle that I am both confident and quite adamant about - That is that G-d is just. If a person believes this very simple and fundamental principle there are realities concerning this life experience that are most problematic - especially in light of traditional beliefs.

It can be argued that the fall is just because Adam and Eve rebelled and sinned against G-d. That is rhetorically sound logic that is easily demonstrated by both scripture and empirical observation. What concerns me is not Adam and Eve but everybody else. If we mitigate the human condition as beginning existence with the parameters of the fall; rhetorical logic prohibits justice as an indisputable principle. If fact I contend that a honest person cannot rhetorically argue that the effects of the fall upon the entire human family is the just design of a G-d completely in control of his creation. To say that Adam and Eve being allowed to begin their existence in Eden and to make choice was just but that no other human be allowed such choice in any kind of similar condition? - there is an obvious rhetorical flaw - both in scripture and empirical experience to interpret such unquestionable injustice as just. It concerns me more that a person pretending to believe in a just G-d would even consider mitigating that the fall was not a choice of just Adam and Eve but a choice of free will expression of all that live out their lives under the effects of the fall. This to me is a major flaw of traditional doctrines.

In addition I am also amazed that anyone in this current existence would argue that we are dual beings living in a dual existence (test) of a spiritual paradise and a physical hell. The rhetorical arguments referencing scripture and empirical experience to justify such duality completely befuddle and astound me. I believe the fall to be both physical and spiritual.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

Yes, a belief we don't share But what does this have to do with the discussion we were having, and how is this relevant to the verse you quoted from the BOM in regards to faith coming before miracles? The verse you quoted makes it clear that a person can not receive miracles from our Father unless they have sufficient faith first, yet there are millions of people who don't have faith and receive miracles from God all the time, they just consider these miracles to be luck rather than give thanks and glory to God. And there are many instances in the bible where miracles occured before faith was shown by the person(s).

So, according to what you believe, all of humanity already passed a test of faith choosing God over Lucifer? Why another test of faith then, espcially when the "test" began by our first parents listening to Lucifer and disobeying God?

That is a great question! You are well on your way to understanding the plan of salvation and the plan of happiness.

It has a little to do with the issue that faith without works is dead. We are now in the phase of our test where we have to show that we will do what we said we would. I think of the oath a soldier might take to "leave no soldier behind" while they are in boot camp. That is easy to say in that situation. But when actually faced with the situation where that statement comes into play, not every soldier would risk their own life to save another. That is where the hero is separated from the soldier.

The purpose of this life is not to determine who goes to hell vs heaven. It is a test to stratify those that go to heaven. There are three degrees of glory. This life is a test to separate all those that got an A in the first test.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Sorry not to have been involved in this discussion more. Although LDS "doctrine" differs greatly from Catholic doctrine there are a lot of important fundamental principles that seem to me that are quite similar. But there is one principle that I am both confident and quite adamant about - That is that G-d is just. If a person believes this very simple and fundamental principle there are realities concerning this life experience that are most problematic - especially in light of traditional beliefs.

It can be argued that the fall is just because Adam and Eve rebelled and sinned against G-d. That is rhetorically sound logic that is easily demonstrated by both scripture and empirical observation. What concerns me is not Adam and Eve but everybody else. If we mitigate the human condition as beginning existence with the parameters of the fall; rhetorical logic prohibits justice as an indisputable principle. If fact I contend that a honest person cannot rhetorically argue that the effects of the fall upon the entire human family is the just design of a G-d completely in control of his creation. To say that Adam and Eve being allowed to begin their existence in Eden and to make choice was just but that no other human be allowed such choice in any kind of similar condition? - there is an obvious rhetorical flaw - both in scripture and empirical experience to interpret such unquestionable injustice as just. It concerns me more that a person pretending to believe in a just G-d would even consider mitigating that the fall was not a choice of just Adam and Eve but a choice of free will expression of all that live out their lives under the effects of the fall. This to me is a major flaw of traditional doctrines.

In addition I am also amazed that anyone in this current existence would argue that we are dual beings living in a dual existence (test) of a spiritual paradise and a physical hell. The rhetorical arguments referencing scripture and empirical experience to justify such duality completely befuddle and astound me. I believe the fall to be both physical and spiritual.

The Traveler

Are you trying to suggest that all of us existed in a state like Eden, with a physical body before being born into the Fall? Otherwise, I am not sure how that situation could have been "similar" in any way. It would have to be done in a state of paradise but with bodies that had physical passions and in a state of innocence and forgetful of the past and yet in the presence of God. When did that occur for everyone else?

[Traveler]

Are you trying to suggest that all of us existed in a state like Eden, with a physical body before being born into the Fall? Otherwise, I am not sure how that situation could have been "similar" in any way. It would have to be done in a state of paradise but with bodies that had physical passions and in a state of innocence and forgetful of the past and yet in the presence of God. When did that occur for everyone else?

I am trying to communicate in every way that I can; that I believe that G-d is no respecter of person and therefore is just; not giving any advantage of one person over another. Therefore I do not believe Adam and Eve were given a different set of circumstances for their choice with the same consequences.

I am assuming from your question that you do not believe G-d to be just and in truth is a respecter of persons – obviously giving an advantage to Adam and Eve (or other individuals) or some disadvantage to others and causing all others to carry the same consequences of the choices of Adam and Eve that you are sure was to some degree of different circumstance.

The Traveler

[faith4]

What concerns me is not Adam and Eve but everybody else. If we mitigate the human condition as beginning existence with the parameters of the fall; rhetorical logic prohibits justice as an indisputable principle. If fact I contend that a honest person cannot rhetorically argue that the effects of the fall upon the entire human family is the just design of a G-d completely in control of his creation. To say that Adam and Eve being allowed to begin their existence in Eden and to make choice was just but that no other human be allowed such choice in any kind of similar condition? - there is an obvious rhetorical flaw - both in scripture and empirical experience to interpret such unquestionable injustice as just ((Sources? Examples? Who else has been in this same circumstance? Are you me? Do you have the same circumstances and opportunities that I have? What about the Jews in Germany during WWII, is God Just in that you never had to be in a concentration camp? Or the people in India living in garbage and slowly starving to death while I am here, in a comfortable home w/plenty of food and clean water and able to provide for my children, is that Just?). It concerns me more that a person pretending to believe in a just G-d would even consider mitigating that the fall was not a choice of just Adam and Eve but a choice of free will expression of all that live out their lives under the effects of the fall. This to me is a major flaw of traditional doctrines. I suggest you read the Bible.

In addition I am also amazed that anyone in this current existence would argue that we are dual beings living in a dual existence (test) of a spiritual paradise and a physical hell. (???) The rhetorical arguments referencing scripture and empirical experience to justify such duality completely befuddle and astound me. I believe the fall to be both physical and spiritual. The fall is both spiritual and physical. Not sure what you mean by dual existance.

The Traveler

The flaw in this logic is yours, my friend. God is Just, and I wholeheartedly believe this and know it to be true :)

I will let St. Paul, once again, answer you:

"Therefore, just as through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all...But death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin after the pattern of the trespass of Adam, who is the type of the one who was to come. But the gift is not like the transgression. For if by that one person's transgression the many died, how much more did the grace of God and the gracious gift of the one person Jesus Christ overflow for the many. And the gift is not like the result of the one person's sinning. For after one sin there was the judgment that brought condemnation; but the gift, after many transgressions, brought acquittal. For if, by the transgression of one person, death came to reign through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of justification come to reign in life through the one person Jesus Christ.

In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all. For just as through the disobedience of one person the many were made sinners, so through the obedience of one the many will be made righteous.The law entered in so that transgression might increase but, where sin increased, grace overflowed all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through justification for eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 5:12-22.

You see Traveler, when Adam disobeyed God, he sinned and ushered in the consequences of that sin, which is death, both spiritual and physical. Spiritually, both himself and Eve lost their supernatural life, their original relationship with God was gone, disordered through sin. Original holiness was ruptured, Adam and Eve were now in a fallen state. Can a rotten tree bear good fruit? No. Through Adam's seed, the consequences of this first sin, through their human nature passed on in the flesh. Original sin is NOT a personal sin, no other human has personally committed this sin b/c no other humans have ever been in the Garden of Eden, in perfect harmony with God where a serpent told them to eat a fruit from a tree forbidden of by God. No one else.

Now, in a disordered state of being, no longer in the right relation to God, Adam is unholy, and unholy things cannot beget holy things. Agreed? Therefore, the entire human race was condemned through this one sin. I find this to be extremely clear in the scriptures.

And we know this to be true, b/c Jesus saves us all by this same rule, and this, my friend, is the Justice of God. Jesus came to us, in our humanity, to condemn sin in the flesh. He took it all upon Himself and remained obedient to God, even when that obedience led to an unjust and cruel death. Where Adam was disobedient, Jesus was obedient, and therefore reversed the consequence of spiritual death (the loss of sanctifying grace, or the supernatural life). We now have the choice to be washed clean of original sin by baptism, and "put on Christ", be made new, and choose to be obedient as best we can to our Father, as Jesus did. And although we are made clean of original sin at our baptism, we still face the consequences of original sin (physical death)...at least until Jesus comes again and defeats death once and for all. And that is why we have hope!!

[Traveler]

The flaw in this logic is yours, my friend. God is Just, and I wholeheartedly believe this and know it to be true :)

I will let St. Paul, once again, answer you:

"Therefore, just as through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all...But death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin after the pattern of the trespass of Adam, who is the type of the one who was to come. But the gift is not like the transgression. For if by that one person's transgression the many died, how much more did the grace of God and the gracious gift of the one person Jesus Christ overflow for the many. And the gift is not like the result of the one person's sinning. For after one sin there was the judgment that brought condemnation; but the gift, after many transgressions, brought acquittal. For if, by the transgression of one person, death came to reign through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of justification come to reign in life through the one person Jesus Christ.

In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all. For just as through the disobedience of one person the many were made sinners, so through the obedience of one the many will be made righteous.The law entered in so that transgression might increase but, where sin increased, grace overflowed all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through justification for eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 5:12-22.

You see Traveler, when Adam disobeyed God, he sinned and ushered in the consequences of that sin, which is death, both spiritual and physical. Spiritually, both himself and Eve lost their supernatural life, their original relationship with God was gone, disordered through sin. Original holiness was ruptured, Adam and Eve were now in a fallen state. Can a rotten tree bear good fruit? No. Through Adam's seed, the consequences of this first sin, through their human nature passed on in the flesh. Original sin is NOT a personal sin, no other human has personally committed this sin b/c no other humans have ever been in the Garden of Eden, in perfect harmony with God where a serpent told them to eat a fruit from a tree forbidden of by God. No one else.

Now, in a disordered state of being, no longer in the right relation to God, Adam is unholy, and unholy things cannot beget holy things. Agreed? Therefore, the entire human race was condemned through this one sin. I find this to be extremely clear in the scriptures.

And we know this to be true, b/c Jesus saves us all by this same rule, and this, my friend, is the Justice of God. Jesus came to us, in our humanity, to condemn sin in the flesh. He took it all upon Himself and remained obedient to God, even when that obedience led to an unjust and cruel death. Where Adam was disobedient, Jesus was obedient, and therefore reversed the consequence of spiritual death (the loss of sanctifying grace, or the supernatural life). We now have the choice to be washed clean of original sin by baptism, and "put on Christ", be made new, and choose to be obedient as best we can to our Father, as Jesus did. And although we are made clean of original sin at our baptism, we still face the consequences of original sin (physical death)...at least until Jesus comes again and defeats death once and for all. And that is why we have hope!!

I would suggest that you be very careful with your logic. Your assumption that I have not read the Bible is incorrect and proves that you easily come to wrong and incorrect conclusions. It may not concern you - but it does indicate you are capable not only of coming to a wrong conclusion but falsely accusing someone you do not understand - a direct violation of a sacred commandment of G-d to his followers.

You are correct that the scriptures indicate that Adam made a choice that brought about death. LDS teach that there are two deaths - the first is a physical death which is the separation of the spirit from the physical body. When a spirit no longer gives life to a body it is dead. The second death is called a spiritual death. This is defined by LDS as a spiritual state of being cast out from the presents of the Father. In the "Bible" (in particular the Book of Genesis) this spiritual death is symbolically represented by Adam and Eve being cast from the garden.

As I posted I have no problem that this was a just result to the choice made by Adam and Eve. If you are to review the resulting justice it was because of a choice made by Adam and Eve. Again I stated as clearly as I could that I do not disagree with that result as being just.

Where I disagree, I think, with you; is your claim that it is justice that you me and everybody else be forced into the identical circumstance of death with Adam and Eve and that you were not allowed to make the choice.

I submit that if you insist that G-d planned to "punish" and did punish everyone with death because Adam and Eve messed up and rebelled that you worship a G-d that is not just. I also believe that you can choose to interpret what you read in the "Bible" to argue for points that you want desperately to believe. What I am suggesting is another possibility. That possibility is that G-d allowed all that are born and suffer death that they be presented with the exact same choice under the exact same circumstance as our first parents. I am suggesting that your life is just and that you "JUSTLY" have the same opportunity to experience death (death being the knowledge of evil) and that you chose to partake of that knowledge just as Adam and Eve did. I also suggest that you chose to come to experience the atonement of Christ (the atonement of Christ being the knowledge of good).

The difference as it seems to me - between your opinion and my opinion - is that you choose to believe that G-d is not just and choose to make all kinds of excuses for that choice - being that you choose to believe that you (and everybody but Adam and Eve) were born to circumstance of some misfortune without any choice in the matter. I choose to believe otherwise; that you and I and everyone else made a choice be be born and thus to partake of the symbolic tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; therefore G-d for me is in every possibility of understanding - a just G-d. So obviously I must understand and interpert the scriptures (including the Bible) that I study very differently than you do. We are both making a choice - and because we are making a very different choice - we are coming to very different conclusions.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

I am trying to communicate in every way that I can; that I believe that G-d is no respecter of person and therefore is just; not giving any advantage of one person over another. Therefore I do not believe Adam and Eve were given a different set of circumstances for their choice with the same consequences.

I am assuming from your question that you do not believe G-d to be just and in truth is a respecter of persons – obviously giving an advantage to Adam and Eve (or other individuals) or some disadvantage to others and causing all others to carry the same consequences of the choices of Adam and Eve that you are sure was to some degree of different circumstance.

The Traveler

I think we need to review the Articles of Faith.

" 2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel."

It seems to me that you are trying to say that we are all punished for Adam's transgression. You keep going back to that. So, how do you justify your view that we all faced the same choice and yet we are not punished for the transgression of Adam, which signifies how his choice affected us. Obviously, this is an article of faith because some might erroneously believe that we all face what Adam faced by committing the same transgression that Adam did. Adam did it for us. Adam fell that men might be (2 Nephi). Did Adam fall for just himself or for all mankind? You can't have it both ways. Either he fell for himself only or for all mankind, which is it? If Adam fell for all mankind, then we do not have to make the same choice in the same setting. He did it for us. In the same way, I don't have to be crucified. We do believe in vicarious acts.

If God is no respector of persons in the way that you are suggesting, that everyone has to do the thing for their self, then you would not believe in a Savior. The whole concept of a Savior is an individual doing something for us so that we do not have to pay the price our self, as this is a price we cannot pay.

God is not a respector of persons as it is stated in the third article of faith. All are welcome to listen to the commandments and obey them, God will not turn any away because of their outward man (i.e.-their physical body), their race, or station in life, because God is not a respector of physical persons but is a respector of the spirit. God can separate our individual circumstances and understands "where much is given much is required." As Jesus taught Luke; "48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

Do you really believe that Adam did not Fall for us as the scripture states, that we have to each be Adam and Eve? Isn't that what Satan wanted, that we each do it for ourselves not requiring a Savior or giving the glory to someone else or having to give praise for someone else deed such as Adam. Lucifer never understood the concept of shared glory and sharing in the happiness of someone else success. We shouted for joy for Adam's deed for us.

D&C 70; " 9 Behold, this is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man."

In other words, every man's stewardship is different but God can and will determine what is required of each based in their individual and varied stewardship. Would you call that a respector of persons? No, because all are welcome to fulfill their individual stewardship even though they are varied.

[Guest]

I think we need to review the Articles of Faith.

" 2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel."

It seems to me that you are trying to say that we are all punished for Adam's transgression. You keep going back to that. So, how do you justify your view that we all faced the same choice and yet we are not punished for the transgression of Adam, which signifies how his choice affected us. Obviously, this is an article of faith because some might erroneously believe that we all face what Adam faced by committing the same transgression that Adam did. Adam did it for us. Adam fell that men might be (2 Nephi). Did Adam fall for just himself or for all mankind? You can't have it both ways. Either he fell for himself only or for all mankind, which is it? If Adam fell for all mankind, then we do not have to make the same choice in the same setting. He did it for us. In the same way, I don't have to be crucified. We do believe in vicarious acts.

If God is no respector of persons in the way that you are suggesting, that everyone has to do the thing for their self, then you would not believe in a Savior. The whole concept of a Savior is an individual doing something for us so that we do not have to pay the price our self, as this is a price we cannot pay.

God is not a respector of persons as it is stated in the third article of faith. All are welcome to listen to the commandments and obey them, God will not turn any away because of their outward man (i.e.-their physical body), their race, or station in life, because God is not a respector of physical persons but is a respector of the spirit. God can separate our individual circumstances and understands "where much is given much is required." As Jesus taught Luke; "48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

Do you really believe that Adam did not Fall for us as the scripture states, that we have to each be Adam and Eve? Isn't that what Satan wanted, that we each do it for ourselves not requiring a Savior or giving the glory to someone else or having to give praise for someone else deed such as Adam. Lucifer never understood the concept of shared glory and sharing in the happiness of someone else success. We shouted for joy for Adam's deed for us.

D&C 70; " 9 Behold, this is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man."

In other words, every man's stewardship is different but God can and will determine what is required of each based in their individual and varied stewardship. Would you call that a respector of persons? No, because all are welcome to fulfill their individual stewardship even though they are varied.

Let me just interject here for a moment.

I understand Traveler's points and there is a logic in it that makes a lot of sense. I also see what you're trying to say which also makes sense.

But, I do not think that Adam's Fall and Christ's Atonement is in any way related merely because of the fact that Christ is God while Adam is not. Christ, as God - thereby being perfect, is the only one qualified to stand for us. Adam is not God, therefore, he cannot do for us things required for our salvation that Christ can. But, like the prophets have done - from Adam to Moses to Nephi to Joseph Smith - they can pave the way for us. So, I can see how Traveler sees the Genesis story as symbolic of the leap from our Pre-Mortal Existence to our second estate with Adam being the first to make the choice and pave the way for all of us to make the same.

[Guest]

The flaw in this logic is yours, my friend. God is Just, and I wholeheartedly believe this and know it to be true :)

I will let St. Paul, once again, answer you:

"Therefore, just as through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all...But death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin after the pattern of the trespass of Adam, who is the type of the one who was to come. But the gift is not like the transgression. For if by that one person's transgression the many died, how much more did the grace of God and the gracious gift of the one person Jesus Christ overflow for the many. And the gift is not like the result of the one person's sinning. For after one sin there was the judgment that brought condemnation; but the gift, after many transgressions, brought acquittal. For if, by the transgression of one person, death came to reign through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of justification come to reign in life through the one person Jesus Christ.

In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all. For just as through the disobedience of one person the many were made sinners, so through the obedience of one the many will be made righteous.The law entered in so that transgression might increase but, where sin increased, grace overflowed all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through justification for eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 5:12-22.

You see Traveler, when Adam disobeyed God, he sinned and ushered in the consequences of that sin, which is death, both spiritual and physical. Spiritually, both himself and Eve lost their supernatural life, their original relationship with God was gone, disordered through sin. Original holiness was ruptured, Adam and Eve were now in a fallen state. Can a rotten tree bear good fruit? No. Through Adam's seed, the consequences of this first sin, through their human nature passed on in the flesh. Original sin is NOT a personal sin, no other human has personally committed this sin b/c no other humans have ever been in the Garden of Eden, in perfect harmony with God where a serpent told them to eat a fruit from a tree forbidden of by God. No one else.

Now, in a disordered state of being, no longer in the right relation to God, Adam is unholy, and unholy things cannot beget holy things. Agreed? Therefore, the entire human race was condemned through this one sin. I find this to be extremely clear in the scriptures.

And we know this to be true, b/c Jesus saves us all by this same rule, and this, my friend, is the Justice of God. Jesus came to us, in our humanity, to condemn sin in the flesh. He took it all upon Himself and remained obedient to God, even when that obedience led to an unjust and cruel death. Where Adam was disobedient, Jesus was obedient, and therefore reversed the consequence of spiritual death (the loss of sanctifying grace, or the supernatural life). We now have the choice to be washed clean of original sin by baptism, and "put on Christ", be made new, and choose to be obedient as best we can to our Father, as Jesus did. And although we are made clean of original sin at our baptism, we still face the consequences of original sin (physical death)...at least until Jesus comes again and defeats death once and for all. And that is why we have hope!!

Faith, there is a divide here between you and Traveler that can't be bridged by both of your understanding of St. Paul's letter to the Romans.

The doctrine of Pre-Mortal existence that is missing from Catholic teaching makes the Catholic dinstinction between Spiritual and Physical death very limited.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Let me just interject here for a moment.

I understand Traveler's points and there is a logic in it that makes a lot of sense. I also see what you're trying to say which also makes sense.

But, I do not think that Adam's Fall and Christ's Atonement is in any way related merely because of the fact that Christ is God while Adam is not. Christ, as God - thereby being perfect, is the only one qualified to stand for us. Adam is not God, therefore, he cannot do for us things required for our salvation that Christ can. But, like the prophets have done - from Adam to Moses to Nephi to Joseph Smith - they can pave the way for us. So, I can see how Traveler sees the Genesis story as symbolic of the leap from our Pre-Mortal Existence to our second estate with Adam being the first to make the choice and pave the way for all of us to make the same.

Of course, and I didn't mean to imply that. All I was referring to was the idea that we accept vicarious acts with which we don't have to perform them for ourselves individually in the same way. Although, I agree, there usually is some method or symbol to show that we accept the act. I suspect the accepting of Adams fall was by way of passing the first estate test. I am sure that was what the war in heaven was about, why fall?

As another example, we have but a few prophets, seers and revelators that carry the keys of the priesthood for our time. We don't all have to carry all the keys and yet we benefit from being directed by a prophet and apostles.

Through Adam the door was opened for us to come here but that doesn't mean that we each had to open the door, it was opened for us. We still have to choose to walk through it. Those that didn't want to come here made that choice by following Lucifer in the war in Heaven or as part of the first estate test. But, the important thing to know is that passing the first estate test was not a transgression in the way Adam's act was.

[Traveler]

I think we need to review the Articles of Faith.

" 2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel."

It seems to me that you are trying to say that we are all punished for Adam's transgression. You keep going back to that. So, how do you justify your view that we all faced the same choice and yet we are not punished for the transgression of Adam, which signifies how his choice affected us.

Please reference in which post I even remotely suggested that we are punished for Adam's transgression?

But let me review where I think you are creating a misunderstanding.

The first point is directly related to "The Fall" I will call it the fall of man rather than the fall of Adam. This is because I believe that the term "Adam" used in scripture can also be interpreted to be a title that is symbolic of all man kind and that every person in trying to interpret the scriptures in relation to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden should think of themselves as respectively - Adam and Eve.

Second point - relates to our condition and circumstance in this life - I really do not care if you think of this life as punishment or opportunity. What I suggest is that our being born into the fallen condition of man is justly the result of our free will choice to do so before we were born.

Third point - if we suffer both spiritual and physical death by the experience of this life without having a choice - I contend that for a G-d to force such a condition without a free choice - such a G-d is not just.

Obviously, this is an article of faith because some might erroneously believe that we all face what Adam faced by committing the same transgression that Adam did. Adam did it for us. Adam fell that men might be (2 Nephi). Did Adam fall for just himself or for all mankind? You can't have it both ways. Either he fell for himself only or for all mankind, which is it? If Adam fell for all mankind, then we do not have to make the same choice in the same setting. He did it for us. In the same way, I don't have to be crucified. We do believe in vicarious acts.

Again I contend that Adam fell because he chose to pursue knowledge of good and evil - that the fall was the result of that specific choice - I am stating that if G-d forced the rest of us to gain a knowledge of Good and Evil with allowing us that same choice - that G-d is unjust. Please tell me how G-d would be just if we did not also have that same choice?

If God is no respector of persons in the way that you are suggesting, that everyone has to do the thing for their self, then you would not believe in a Savior. The whole concept of a Savior is an individual doing something for us so that we do not have to pay the price our self, as this is a price we cannot pay.

I am saying there is no justice unless we make a choice. Please tell me how there can be justice without a choice.

God is not a respector of persons as it is stated in the third article of faith. All are welcome to listen to the commandments and obey them, God will not turn any away because of their outward man (i.e.-their physical body), their race, or station in life, because God is not a respector of physical persons but is a respector of the spirit. God can separate our individual circumstances and understands "where much is given much is required." As Jesus taught Luke; "48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

Do you really believe that Adam did not Fall for us as the scripture states, that we have to each be Adam and Eve? Isn't that what Satan wanted, that we each do it for ourselves not requiring a Savior or giving the glory to someone else or having to give praise for someone else deed such as Adam. Lucifer never understood the concept of shared glory and sharing in the happiness of someone else success. We shouted for joy for Adam's deed for us.

D&C 70; " 9 Behold, this is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man."

In other words, every man's stewardship is different but God can and will determine what is required of each based in their individual and varied stewardship. Would you call that a respector of persons? No, because all are welcome to fulfill their individual stewardship even though they are varied.

I contend that if G-d determines for us - that he is unjust and as stated is a respecter of persons - that if G-d allows us to choose - then our choice is just and G-d is just for allowing us to choose. All that I am saying is if we have circumstance that results from something other than our choice that that circumstance is not just and if G-d is responsible or allows such circumstance without allowing our choice - that such a G-d is not just.

I am saying if you believe G-d forces circumstance without choice - I understand and recognize that you therefore believe in a unjust G-d. Please tell me how there is justice without choice. In LDS doctrine we call this agency - please explain to me why you call yourself LDS and do not believe in agency or choice concerning the fall.

The Traveler

[faith4]

I would suggest that you be very careful with your logic. Your assumption that I have not read the Bible is incorrect and proves that you easily come to wrong and incorrect conclusions. It may not concern you - but it does indicate you are capable not only of coming to a wrong conclusion but falsely accusing someone you do not understand - a direct violation of a sacred commandment of G-d to his followers.

I submit that if you insist that G-d planned to "punish" and did punish everyone with death because Adam and Eve messed up and rebelled that you worship a G-d that is not just. I also believe that you can choose to interpret what you read in the "Bible" to argue for points that you want desperately to believe. What I am suggesting is another possibility. That possibility is that G-d allowed all that are born and suffer death that they be presented with the exact same choice under the exact same circumstance as our first parents. I am suggesting that your life is just and that you "JUSTLY" have the same opportunity to experience death (death being the knowledge of evil) and that you chose to partake of that knowledge just as Adam and Eve did. I also suggest that you chose to come to experience the atonement of Christ (the atonement of Christ being the knowledge of good).

The difference as it seems to me - between your opinion and my opinion - is that you choose to believe that G-d is not just and choose to make all kinds of excuses for that choice - being that you choose to believe that you (and everybody but Adam and Eve) were born to circumstance of some misfortune without any choice in the matter. ("I would suggest that you be very careful with your logic. It may not concern you - but it does indicate you are capable not only of coming to a wrong conclusion but falsely accusing someone you do not understand - a direct violation of a sacred commandment of G-d to his followers."...Hmmm, interesting...) I choose to believe otherwise; that you and I and everyone else made a choice be be born and thus to partake of the symbolic tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; therefore G-d for me is in every possibility of understanding - a just G-d.

The Traveler

It proves nothing of the sort. I never said you have never read the Bible, my point was that the "traditional beliefs" can be found in the Bible, if you feel that there's a "flaw" in the logic, then read the Bible. And you're right, I am not concerned by your words, b/c your judgement doesn't bother me, there is only one who judges me, and that is God. :)

If you feel like I've overstepped and wrongly judged you, then please accept my sincere apology, that was never my intention.

I have never insisted that God has planned to "punish" everyone, what I have said, is that we are all facing the consequences of that one sin, which is death. Through that one sin, death came to all). See previous bible quotes.

Desperate to believe? I have a peace in my very heart and soul that no one can take away from me, lol, try as you might to make it seem otherwise! I assure you, I am not "desperate" to believe anything! I am very content in the love of God, I pray for peace my friend :)

I understand what you mean now, but I don't believe in a pre-mortal existance, therefore I don't believe God "forced" anyone to live in the consequence of sin and death.

I believe in a Just God, who is Love Itself and all-merciful. The difference in our opinions is simply different theology. I recognize the difference and I respect your beliefs, please do the same for mine. :)

[faith4]

But, I do not think that Adam's Fall and Christ's Atonement is in any way related merely because of the fact that Christ is God while Adam is not. Christ, as God - thereby being perfect, is the only one qualified to stand for us. Adam is not God, therefore, he cannot do for us things required for our salvation that Christ can. But, like the prophets have done - from Adam to Moses to Nephi to Joseph Smith - they can pave the way for us. So, I can see how Traveler sees the Genesis story as symbolic of the leap from our Pre-Mortal Existence to our second estate with Adam being the first to make the choice and pave the way for all of us to make the same.

Adam was a "type of the one who was to come" (Jesus)(Rom 5:14). Do you understand what is meant by "type"? It means that Adam prefigured Jesus.

Type (theology) - Definition | WordIQ.com

We are all unified in the human race, through procreation, we are all of the same design and flesh (human). When Adam fell, he was no longer who he was created to be, he was no longer whole. In this instance, he could not produce "whole" children, Adam could not give his children what he no longer had to give. Once the relationship was ruptured, it could not be fixed by man, b/c he was now fallen; sinful. He did not have to be God to break the relationship, he chose disobdience even when God warned him of the consequence.

Christ, as God, was the only one who could fix this rupture, but He had to do this as a human so that, as a human, in the flesh, he could break the bonds of sin through obedience. He was the only one who could redeem us, make us at-one again with God (at-one-ment, atonement).

[Seminarysnoozer]

Please reference in which post I even remotely suggested that we are punished for Adam's transgression?

But let me review where I think you are creating a misunderstanding.

The first point is directly related to "The Fall" I will call it the fall of man rather than the fall of Adam. This is because I believe that the term "Adam" used in scripture can also be interpreted to be a title that is symbolic of all man kind and that every person in trying to interpret the scriptures in relation to the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden should think of themselves as respectively - Adam and Eve.

Second point - relates to our condition and circumstance in this life - I really do not care if you think of this life as punishment or opportunity. What I suggest is that our being born into the fallen condition of man is justly the result of our free will choice to do so before we were born.

Third point - if we suffer both spiritual and physical death by the experience of this life without having a choice - I contend that for a G-d to force such a condition without a free choice - such a G-d is not just.

Again I contend that Adam fell because he chose to pursue knowledge of good and evil - that the fall was the result of that specific choice - I am stating that if G-d forced the rest of us to gain a knowledge of Good and Evil with allowing us that same choice - that G-d is unjust. Please tell me how G-d would be just if we did not also have that same choice?

I am saying there is no justice unless we make a choice. Please tell me how there can be justice without a choice.

I contend that if G-d determines for us - that he is unjust and as stated is a respecter of persons - that if G-d allows us to choose - then our choice is just and G-d is just for allowing us to choose. All that I am saying is if we have circumstance that results from something other than our choice that that circumstance is not just and if G-d is responsible or allows such circumstance without allowing our choice - that such a G-d is not just.

I am saying if you believe G-d forces circumstance without choice - I understand and recognize that you therefore believe in a unjust G-d. Please tell me how there is justice without choice. In LDS doctrine we call this agency - please explain to me why you call yourself LDS and do not believe in agency or choice concerning the fall.

The Traveler

This is what you said; "I am trying to communicate in every way that I can; that I believe that G-d is no respecter of person and therefore is just; not giving any advantage of one person over another. Therefore I do not believe Adam and Eve were given a different set of circumstances for their choice with the same consequences.

I am assuming from your question that you do not believe G-d to be just and in truth is a respecter of persons – obviously giving an advantage to Adam and Eve (or other individuals) or some disadvantage to others and causing all others to carry the same consequences of the choices of Adam and Eve that you are sure was to some degree of different circumstance."

I was responding to that highlighted. I agree with God not giving an advantage one person over another. I said that. But I don't agree with your conclusion that "Therefore I do not believe Adam and Eve were given a different set of circumstances for their choice with the same consequences." The reason I don't agree with your conclusion is because I think that is accounted for in the statement that where "much is given much is required". God is just while we all have different circumstances because He can take those into account. We do not have to perform the same acts, we only have to do what God would have us do in our life. For some, that is nothing, those that die before the age of 8. This, of course, I am referring to the things that took place after making the first estate choice.

This concept is explained in Matthew 20 with the parable of the workers in the vineyard; " 11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,

12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.

13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?

14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.

15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen."

They had the same consequences even though the workers had different conditions. What do you have to say about that? "Is thine eye evil, because He is good?"

[faith4]

You believe in pre-mortal existance and that we agreed to Gods plan of salvation, which required that we come here (at least those that chose to) and progress to exaltation. According to your theology, correct me if I'm wrong please, God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply...yet, they were unable to do as he commanded. God also commanded that they do not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge, otherwise the consequence would be death. But, if they did eat it, they would be able to now fulfill the first command and have children, and they would know joy. So...live forever in the garden not knowing joy (even though they knew God, who is Love) and being unable to have children, or eat the fruit and experience death but begin the plan of salvation.

And all those in the pre-mortal world who did not wish to come here and experience death and sin did not have to come, but then they could never receive a body and progress to exaltation. Is this correct?

So, what happens to all those spirits who don't want to experience sin and death, and therefore do not spiritually progress? Are they in some sort of heaven or do they remain forever in the spirit world (not sure what that is)?

Do you believe that heaven was closed (b/c of the fall) to all the departed souls until Jesus came and opened it?

[Guest]

Adam was a "type of the one who was to come" (Jesus)(Rom 5:14). Do you understand what is meant by "type"? It means that Adam prefigured Jesus.

Type (theology) - Definition | WordIQ.com

We are all unified in the human race, through procreation, we are all of the same design and flesh (human). When Adam fell, he was no longer who he was created to be, he was no longer whole. In this instance, he could not produce "whole" children, Adam could not give his children what he no longer had to give. Once the relationship was ruptured, it could not be fixed by man, b/c he was now fallen; sinful. He did not have to be God to break the relationship, he chose disobdience even when God warned him of the consequence. Christ, as God, was the only one who could fix this rupture, but He had to do this as a human so that, as a human, in the flesh, he could break the bonds of sin through obedience. He was the only one who could redeem us, make us at-one again with God (at-one-ment, atonement).

I understand completely the Catholic viewpoint. Unfortunately, it is lacking so it cripples the discussion under LDS doctrine because a lot of the things you say above we also say in the same words but it means something else in the light of the restored gospel. The bolded line above, for example, is not even close to what my post to Seminarysnoozer was discussing. And the atonement holds a deeper meaning in the light of the Plan of Salvation and the balance of Justice and Mercy.

[Guest]

You believe in pre-mortal existance and that we agreed to Gods plan of salvation, which required that we come here (at least those that chose to) and progress to exaltation. According to your theology, correct me if I'm wrong please, God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply...yet, they were unable to do as he commanded. God also commanded that they do not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge, otherwise the consequence would be death. But, if they did eat it, they would be able to now fulfill the first command and have children, and they would know joy. So...live forever in the garden not knowing joy (even though they knew God, who is Love) and being unable to have children, or eat the fruit and experience death but begin the plan of salvation.

And all those in the pre-mortal world who did not wish to come here and experience death and sin did not have to come, but then they could never receive a body and progress to exaltation. Is this correct?

So, what happens to all those spirits who don't want to experience sin and death, and therefore do not spiritually progress? Are they in some sort of heaven or do they remain forever in the spirit world (not sure what that is)?

Do you believe that heaven was closed (b/c of the fall) to all the departed souls until Jesus came and opened it?

We also have a different understanding of HEAVEN. Everybody from Adam to the Second Coming of Christ are in the Spirit World. Which is a temporay estate until the Resurection. The criminal on the cross with Jesus, for example, is in Paradise - Spirit Paradise as opposed to Spirit Prison. It is not until the Resurrection that everybody in the Spirit World will be resurrected and judged and exalted according to that judgement.

This is a big difference from the Catholic viewpoint of Heaven.

[Traveler]

It proves nothing of the sort. I never said you have never read the Bible, my point was that the "traditional beliefs" can be found in the Bible, if you feel that there's a "flaw" in the logic, then read the Bible. And you're right, I am not concerned by your words, b/c your judgement doesn't bother me, there is only one who judges me, and that is God. :)

If you feel like I've overstepped and wrongly judged you, then please accept my sincere apology, that was never my intention.

I have never insisted that God has planned to "punish" everyone, what I have said, is that we are all facing the consequences of that one sin, which is death. Through that one sin, death came to all). See previous bible quotes.

Desperate to believe? I have a peace in my very heart and soul that no one can take away from me, lol, try as you might to make it seem otherwise! I assure you, I am not "desperate" to believe anything! I am very content in the love of God, I pray for peace my friend :)

I understand what you mean now, but I don't believe in a pre-mortal existance, therefore I don't believe God "forced" anyone to live in the consequence of sin and death.

I believe in a Just God, who is Love Itself and all-merciful. The difference in our opinions is simply different theology. I recognize the difference and I respect your beliefs, please do the same for mine. :)

Lets take a careful look. According to Genesis G-d placed Adam and Eve in the garden and allowed them to make a choice. I think that we all agree that to do so is just. I believe it is just because G-d gave Adam and Eve a choice. That choice (to seek knowledge of good and evil) had consequences. If you read Genesis - and I am sure you do you will see that G-d is just with Adam and Eve because not only does G-d give them a choice - he also gives the understanding of the consequence. That I believe to be a very good example of justice.

I interpret Genesis to demonstrate G-d is just because Adam and Eve were given a choice and understood the consequence. Therefore we know that G-d can and does create circumstance where justice is possible because he did so for Adam and Eve. Where I differ from you has nothing to do with theology - but rather straight forward rhetorical logic. I do not believe a just G-d can allow other to received the same consequences as Adam and Eve and not be allowed to make the same choice.

To me it is like someone standing in the light of noon day and declaring it night. -- That it would be the same as to say children are born into the circumstance of justice from a choice made by someone else. That is a contradiction. The only reason that I can possibly fathom that you cannot realize the blatent contradiction of justice - is because, like seeing the light of noon day - you just falsely say it is night claiming it to be perfect logic.

So here is my straight forward rhetorical logic - If someone must make a choice to receive a consequence (good or bad) and someone else can reap the same consequence (good or bad) having not made a choice - that proves to me that injustice has occurred. If G-d is involved in such a thing - then that G-d is unjust. If someone tries to interpret because of their religious background - it does not matter - just like Adam and Eve they are given a choice and they get to decide what it is that they believe. I believe that the True G-d gives us all the choice to personally interpret what it is we want to believe. I also believe that ever person will make an account of what they want to believe to that very G-d. A thing I plan to do - make my own account to G-d as to what I believe to be just. BTW did you know that Satan loves to quote scriptures before G-d to create his version of how things should be understood?

Perhaps you can clarify what kind of justice you want to believe in - if you disagree with my logic.

The Traveler

[faith4]

So here is my straight forward rhetorical logic - If someone must make a choice to receive a consequence (good or bad) and someone else can reap the same consequence (good or bad) having not made a choice - that proves to me that injustice has occurred. If G-d is involved in such a thing - then that G-d is unjust. If someone tries to interpret because of their religious background - it does not matter - just like Adam and Eve they are given a choice and they get to decide what it is that they believe. I believe that the True G-d gives us all the choice to personally interpret what it is we want to believe. I also believe that ever person will make an account of what they want to believe to that very G-d. A thing I plan to do - make my own account to G-d as to what I believe to be just. BTW did you know that Satan loves to quote scriptures before G-d to create his version of how things should be understood?

Perhaps you can clarify what kind of justice you want to believe in - if you disagree with my logic.

The Traveler

So now I am satan? No worries, as I mentioned earlier, God is my only judge, and I know He takes my words and actions into account, as He does yours as well. :)

I believe in God, my righteousness, Hope, Love, Salvation and Justice. I do not seek to discover a different version that I feel better suits the whims of man online, God is my Light, and it is His Truth I seek, not yours.

We see injustice recorded throughout human history, no one can rightfully argue that justice has been a balanced virtue in every human heart, b/c it hasn't. But it's our choice. That doesn't mean God isn't Just, it means we have free will and He does not step in every time an injustice occurs, to stop it. He is our Justice. He is our Hope through the suffering in this life. Was Jesus' own death justified by the Pharisees? No, they wanted Him dead b/c of envy, and He paid the price for their choice. An injustice was done to Jesus, and He is God, therefore is God unjust? No, b/c it was through that injustice we were redeemed. And injustice is part of our fallen human nature. Something we must personally choose to overcome if we want to follow in Christ's footsteps.

"What then are we to say? Is there injustice on the part of God? Of course not! For He says to Moses: "I will show mercy to whom I will, I will take pity on whom I will." So it depends not upon a person's will or exertion, but upon God, who shows mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, "This is why I raised you up, to show my power through you that my name may be proclaimed throughout the earth." Consequently, he has mercy upon whom he wills, and he hardens whom he wills. You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can oppose his will?" But who indeed are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Will what is made say to its maker, "Why have you created me so?" Or does not the potter have a right over the lcay, to make the same lump one vessel for a noble purpose and another for an ignoble one?" (Rom 9:14-21).

So, I agree w/you, God does give us a choice, we can continue in sin, or we can choose the path less traveled b/c it is usually ridden w/persecution and suffering in humility and love. Instead of getting angry at insults, we learn to turn the other cheek and pray for those persons. The Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) are Jesus' teachings on how to act in times of injustice and suffering.

I will no longer comment on this thread, although your thinly veiled insults at my beliefs and faith will not cause me to lose any sleep, I know I can have a more meaningful discussion w/someone more tolerant of a different perspective.

"When ridiculed we bless; when persecuted, we endure, when slandered, we respond gently" (1 Cor 4:12).

God bless Traveler, I continue to pray for your mother, and for you as well.

[Traveler]

So now I am satan? No worries, as I mentioned earlier, God is my only judge, and I know He takes my words and actions into account, as He does yours as well. :)

I believe in God, my righteousness, Hope, Love, Salvation and Justice. I do not seek to discover a different version that I feel better suits the whims of man online, God is my Light, and it is His Truth I seek, not yours.

We see injustice recorded throughout human history, no one can rightfully argue that justice has been a balanced virtue in every human heart, b/c it hasn't. But it's our choice. That doesn't mean God isn't Just, it means we have free will and He does not step in every time an injustice occurs, to stop it. He is our Justice. He is our Hope through the suffering in this life. Was Jesus' own death justified by the Pharisees? No, they wanted Him dead b/c of envy, and He paid the price for their choice. An injustice was done to Jesus, and He is God, therefore is God unjust? No, b/c it was through that injustice we were redeemed. And injustice is part of our fallen human nature. Something we must personally choose to overcome if we want to follow in Christ's footsteps.

"What then are we to say? Is there injustice on the part of God? Of course not! For He says to Moses: "I will show mercy to whom I will, I will take pity on whom I will." So it depends not upon a person's will or exertion, but upon God, who shows mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, "This is why I raised you up, to show my power through you that my name may be proclaimed throughout the earth." Consequently, he has mercy upon whom he wills, and he hardens whom he wills. You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can oppose his will?" But who indeed are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Will what is made say to its maker, "Why have you created me so?" Or does not the potter have a right over the lcay, to make the same lump one vessel for a noble purpose and another for an ignoble one?" (Rom 9:14-21).

So, I agree w/you, God does give us a choice, we can continue in sin, or we can choose the path less traveled b/c it is usually ridden w/persecution and suffering in humility and love. Instead of getting angry at insults, we learn to turn the other cheek and pray for those persons. The Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) are Jesus' teachings on how to act in times of injustice and suffering.

I will no longer comment on this thread, although your thinly veiled insults at my beliefs and faith will not cause me to lose any sleep, I know I can have a more meaningful discussion w/someone more tolerant of a different perspective.

"When ridiculed we bless; when persecuted, we endure, when slandered, we respond gently" (1 Cor 4:12).

God bless Traveler, I continue to pray for your mother, and for you as well.

My comments are never meant to insult - not a person nor any religion. My entire efforts is to cause a person to think, even to carefully reread scripture they have studied and provide reason for G-d to touch a "willing" to learn heart. I have said many times that I would change my opinion and even my religion in a heart beat if there was a better way. And that is my commitment - both to my self (even in my profession as a consulting engineer) and to those with whom I associate. I had hoped that you would look deep into your heart rather than into shallow one-sided prefab answers given to you - even by well meaning mortals.

The apostle Paul said in essence that if we have hope (understanding) of Christ with a perspective of this life alone - we are of all men most miserable. If we attempt to measure justice beginning at birth - we will very sadly misunderstand a great many things. If we believe that human lot begins at birth and moves on - even for a very long time we will only come to realize that birth is a blatant injustice.

I submit that the "Fall" is a perhaps the most misunderstood principle in scripture and in all religion. I believe it is misunderstood because it is also not appreciated. The mission of the fall is the knowledge of good and evil. The opportunity that such knowledge brings is the purpose for which you and everyone else were born - and I believe - that without which, any "salvation" would be worthless. Yes birth is an injustice - and without that understanding we will never consider why - and if we cannot realize why - we will, as Paul said - be miserable. Why, because we will never understand that it was not just our choice before we were born but the hope of G-d for those he loved most from the beginning and the reason that G-d sacrificed so much for creation.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

My comments are never meant to insult - not a person nor any religion. My entire efforts is to cause a person to think, even to carefully reread scripture they have studied and provide reason for G-d to touch a "willing" to learn heart. I have said many times that I would change my opinion and even my religion in a heart beat if there was a better way. And that is my commitment - both to my self (even in my profession as a consulting engineer) and to those with whom I associate. I had hoped that you would look deep into your heart rather than into shallow one-sided prefab answers given to you - even by well meaning mortals.

The apostle Paul said in essence that if we have hope (understanding) of Christ with a perspective of this life alone - we are of all men most miserable. If we attempt to measure justice beginning at birth - we will very sadly misunderstand a great many things. If we believe that human lot begins at birth and moves on - even for a very long time we will only come to realize that birth is a blatant injustice.

I submit that the "Fall" is a perhaps the most misunderstood principle in scripture and in all religion. I believe it is misunderstood because it is also not appreciated. The mission of the fall is the knowledge of good and evil. The opportunity that such knowledge brings is the purpose for which you and everyone else were born - and I believe - that without which, any "salvation" would be worthless. Yes birth is an injustice - and without that understanding we will never consider why - and if we cannot realize why - we will, as Paul said - be miserable. Why, because we will never understand that it was not just our choice before we were born but the hope of G-d for those he loved most from the beginning and the reason that G-d sacrificed so much for creation.

The Traveler

How much "misery" does a baby that lives 5 minutes experience?

In other words, does a 5 minute old infant comprehend "misery" such that she has satisfied your definition of the supreme goal of this life?

Or what about a child with anencephalie (born without the part of the brain that allows for cognition - they cannot perceive anything) that lives 5 minutes?

One of Satan's deceptions to Adam and Eve (Eve in particular) was that the tree of Death (tree of knowledge of good and evil) would provide them with knowledge of good and evil automatically. The issue not understood by Satan is that it is simply the door to pass through to have the opportunity to be like our Heavenly Father, to know good and evil. They didn't receive all information but started to understand or see things through a different perspective, little by little. Adam, at first, did not know why he had to perform sacrifices other than being told to do so. Having full knowledge is not a goal of this life and therefore knowing misery is not requisite but having the capacity to know is, which will come as a result of having passed through this life. After this life we will have an opportunity to learn all.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Seminarysnoozer

[Traveler]

How much "misery" does a baby that lives 5 minutes experience?

In other words, does a 5 minute old infant comprehend "misery" such that she has satisfied your definition of the supreme goal of this life?

Or what about a child with anencephalie (born without the part of the brain that allows for cognition - they cannot perceive anything) that lives 5 minutes?

The scriptures tell us that misery is a spiritual condition - not a physical condition. For example we are told that Satan wants all to be miserable as he is miserable. Once we understand misery as a spiritual condition we can explore what is meant by spiritual misery. I hope this is obvious; it is the state of spiritual death or as the scriptures are understood by LDS as the second death – which is spiritual separation from G-d the Father.

You are making an assumption that separation from the Father is initiated at birth. I am not as sure as you (if you believe it) that such is the case. It seems to be and I believe that we were all spiritually separated from the Father together as symbolically represented in scripture as the Garden epoch and the Fall of man.

The final point is that time (as we are also told in scripture) is not that meaningful to G-d. Thus it does not matter how long an individual experiences death (physical or spiritual) they still have experience from which they obtain knowledge.

One of Satan's deceptions to Adam and Eve (Eve in particular) was that the tree of Death (tree of knowledge of good and evil) would provide them with knowledge of good and evil automatically. The issue not understood by Satan is that it is simply the door to pass through to have the opportunity to be like our Heavenly Father, to know good and evil. They didn't receive all information but started to understand or see things through a different perspective, little by little. Adam, at first, did not know why he had to perform sacrifices other than being told to do so. Having full knowledge is not a goal of this life and therefore knowing misery is not requisite but having the capacity to know is, which will come as a result of having passed through this life. After this life we will have an opportunity to learn all.

I am not sure what you are trying to say. As I understand the sacrifices that Adam was told to do were intended to point to the atonement of Christ and his sacrifice. I have stated many times that I believe the knowledge of good is the knowledge of the sacrificial atonement of Christ. You seem to have grasped the understanding that knowledge is not the just the accumulation of information. I think this is a most important concept. Until we receive the power of the resurrection the concept of the atonement is a matter of faith. But once the resurrection has occurred it will no longer be a matter of faith but knowledge. Thus the mission of mortality and our choice to participate in G-d plan to gain knowledge of good and evil is complete. I am not sure if there is another rational way to consider these things and still come to the conclusion that G-d is just.

It appears to me that a person can believe and say anything but like Paul indicates – we need to prove all things and hold fast to that which is true. As I understand prove – at least as a minimum we ought to be able to respond (search and prove) to the most difficult questions. But it has been my experience that those that fear scrutiny do so for good reason - the reason being that their beliefs are shallow and cannot stand scrutiny. Let alone provide a path or way to eternity that meets divine standards.

This in part could be a purpose of a forum like this. Where we can test out our ideas in a field where we can learn from other. Especially those that have considered something we have not. At least this is one reason I post - not so much to convince someone of any particular possibility but to see if someone has considered something I have left out. I realize some think I am arrogant to argue certain points – my purpose is not so much to argue against a particular as it is to say I have considered that possibility and found it incomplete for reason I state – as in this thread I find many traditional ideas contradictory to justice – so I try to ask question that seem some are not considering – to see if they have considered such things or if their thinking is shallow or worth considering again in case I missed something.

The Traveler

Edited March 26, 2014 by Traveler