Emotion before the fall?


SpiritDragon
 Share

Recommended Posts

The thing that goes hand in hand with the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil is agency as well as its associated accountability. 

 

Just like one does not have to lose to be a winner but one has to have the chance for losing to be a winner, in the same way, one has to be put in a situation where sin is possible to be described as righteous.  The purposes of this life being to receive a body and to be tested to see if we will do what we are told to do and follow the will of God are not so separate.  The body we are given in this life allows us to have internal opposition but we do not want that opposition forever, just during the testing phase.

 

In taking a final exam, the chalk board is covered (if they even use those nowadays), the text books are closed and then the test takes place.  But the testing conditions were never intended to be permanent.  Similarly, God, in His wisdom, allows for a testing situation that was never intended to be permanent, thus death is needed.  Spiritual death is like the closing of the books etc, and the physical death is the way to not make the testing situation permanent.  The knowledge of the good and evil is like having false answers on a test with multiple choices.  The test requires those false options. Exposure to the false answer doesn't mean that someone is permanently affected by being exposed to it.  So the issue of God having knowledge of evil to me is not a problem at all.  In the same way that we can live in the world without being of the world.

 

Thank you for your post!!!!  I love it that you take exception and make extra comments.

 

On your post - I do not believe that our final exam will be closed anything - in fact quite the opposit.  I believe it will be open everything.  As to those that choose evil?  I think the only ones that really qualify are what are called the sons of perdition.   And for them it is not a matter of a closed book test but rather an open book and complete access to all truth testified to by the Holy Ghost.  I also believe that for one to exercize agency they must have knowledge of what they are doing.  I would of thought this kind of went along the lines you express concerning not reaching the age of accountability.  Only when someone knows what they are doing are they held accountable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes there were emotions prior to the fall - see Job 38:4-7 (in particular verse 7). 

 

I personally take this passage to refer to the pre-mortal state and not the garden, but you are right that the question asked is answered here. The correct question is did emotion exist in the garden of Eden AND was it the same as after?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your post!!!!  I love it that you take exception and make extra comments.

 

On your post - I do not believe that our final exam will be closed anything - in fact quite the opposit.  I believe it will be open everything.  As to those that choose evil?  I think the only ones that really qualify are what are called the sons of perdition.   And for them it is not a matter of a closed book test but rather an open book and complete access to all truth testified to by the Holy Ghost.  I also believe that for one to exercize agency they must have knowledge of what they are doing.  I would of thought this kind of went along the lines you express concerning not reaching the age of accountability.  Only when someone knows what they are doing are they held accountable?

 

Why doesn't "open everything" describe the first estate test to you?  To me, that was "open everything".  That was the pick your major, where are trying to go with this type of decision.  We had the testimony of God which was more direct than what the Holy Ghost can do while we are here behind the veil. 

 

I think we are held accountable for our character.  Our choices in life, whether they be carnally minded or spiritually minded outline a form of character testing from which God can justify our final designated Kingdom.  The final judgement is not just based in our desire but our capability as well, it is, at least in part, based on a character exam. 

 

Like when my husband was accepted to medical school, not only did he have to do well on the MCAT but he also had to do well in the interview and show through his various volunteering and work that he was desirous to become a doctor all along.  This life is more like the interview process, the knowledge part of the testing is done, the first estate test.  We all here did well on the first estate test. Now we are being "interviewed" as to our integrity and moral character.   Part of the moral character is based in intelligence, so that cannot be separated from the test altogether but it is more than that alone, it is a test of our true nature while we are limited.

 

I know I have used this metaphor before but I liken it to the difference between the soldier who in boot camp says "I will never leave a fallen soldier behind" vs the one who in the heat of the battle actually goes in despite risk to his own life and saves the fallen soldier.  Not everyone who intellectually agrees with the plan (passing the first estate test) will have the moral character to actually carry through with it despite being in the "heat of the battle".  We are in the part of the test where we don't have all of our faculties available, like when morter explosions are crashing all around the soldier going back for his fallen companions, is his integrity strong enough to withstand those drives or does he value the life of his fellow soldier more than the desire to get out of harms way to save himself.  This is a test of character, knowledge is part of the character but may not include wisdom or spirituality.

 

We are told to bring up our kids in truth and light.  Truth are the facts, light is the ability to discern the truth between different choices while in a state of darkness.  Light is the executive functioning, the character.  We already had the test of truth, now the focus is the light. Bringing it back to the OP, part of the test of character is emotion, computer like intelligence doesn't concern itself with emotional influences whereas the removal of those drives (under the veil) allows for a more specific test of emotion, of character.  This is why the greatest commandments have to do with the emotions of love and empathy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was there emotion before the fall? Yes. But when society reaches a certain state of progression they do not deal with the sorrow and pain they once did. In such a state further growth is slow. They are effectively impeded in their progression. Thus a new and more difficult challenge must be offered. With this new challenge comes deeper pain but also a greater joy.

 

The garden is the zenith of progression for a society in its current state. In such a state a new challenge must be offered, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This new challenge and opportunity represents a step up in progression. When an individual partakes of this new more difficult challenge he inevitably falls. His work is then to overcome his current fallen condition. In so doing he is lifted up to a new state with deeper joys, greater love, and a more complete happiness.

 

Christ is the great prototype. Having descended below all is now the greatest of all. Having suffered greater contradictions than man can suffer he is filled with deeper joy and love.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why doesn't "open everything" describe the first estate test to you?  To me, that was "open everything".  That was the pick your major, where are trying to go with this type of decision.  We had the testimony of God which was more direct than what the Holy Ghost can do while we are here behind the veil. 

 

 

Obviously anything physical, carnal or as you have otherwise defined the natural man was 100% closed to any consideration or possibility.  I would remind you that it is your stand that our spirit was and still is incapable of any such tendencies, conditions or possibilities – that such things come only by the carnal physical mind.  

 

 

I think we are held accountable for our character.  Our choices in life, whether they be carnally minded or spiritually minded outline a form of character testing from which God can justify our final designated Kingdom.  The final judgement is not just based in our desire but our capability as well, it is, at least in part, based on a character exam. 

 

 

I do not agree - I believe every son and daughter of G-d is capable and possesses all the character or characteristics to be a celestial being or something else.  I believe we become what we are becoming.  I believe that we started on a path in the pre-existence that we continue after death to add upon and continue to become what we are becoming.

 

 

Like when my husband was accepted to medical school, not only did he have to do well on the MCAT but he also had to do well in the interview and show through his various volunteering and work that he was desirous to become a doctor all along.  This life is more like the interview process, the knowledge part of the testing is done, the first estate test.  We all here did well on the first estate test. Now we are being "interviewed" as to our integrity and moral character.   Part of the moral character is based in intelligence, so that cannot be separated from the test altogether but it is more than that alone, it is a test of our true nature while we are limited.

 

I know I have used this metaphor before but I liken it to the difference between the soldier who in boot camp says "I will never leave a fallen soldier behind" vs the one who in the heat of the battle actually goes in despite risk to his own life and saves the fallen soldier.  Not everyone who intellectually agrees with the plan (passing the first estate test) will have the moral character to actually carry through with it despite being in the "heat of the battle".  We are in the part of the test where we don't have all of our faculties available, like when morter explosions are crashing all around the soldier going back for his fallen companions, is his integrity strong enough to withstand those drives or does he value the life of his fellow soldier more than the desire to get out of harms way to save himself.  This is a test of character, knowledge is part of the character but may not include wisdom or spirituality.

 

 

 

I have had enough experience in life to realize that it is not wise to use examples that we ourselves have not experienced and therefore do not fully understand.  I am not inclined to believe or agree with your understanding that all things can be learned by association with information.  I am not one that believe such a notion.  I believe that some things (like being shot at) can only be understood by experience.  I believe that some things have to be learned by relevant experience. 

 

We are told to bring up our kids in truth and light.  Truth are the facts, light is the ability to discern the truth between different choices while in a state of darkness.  Light is the executive functioning, the character.  We already had the test of truth, now the focus is the light. Bringing it back to the OP, part of the test of character is emotion, computer like intelligence doesn't concern itself with emotional influences whereas the removal of those drives (under the veil) allows for a more specific test of emotion, of character.  This is why the greatest commandments have to do with the emotions of love and empathy.

I am not sure what you are trying to say - I believe that light cannot be discerned while in darkness.  When in darkness all we will discern is darkness.  We must be in light to discern light.  Perhaps I am a sociopath because I do not understand or comprehend love as an unguided emotion but rather a rational very controllable intelligent (even brilliant) understanding and belief (or knowledge) in others.  For me love is not a feeling or fleeting thought or a conditional emotion but a cognitively learned behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was there emotion before the fall? Yes. But when society reaches a certain state of progression they do not deal with the sorrow and pain they once did. In such a state further growth is slow. They are effectively impeded in their progression. Thus a new and more difficult challenge must be offered. With this new challenge comes deeper pain but also a greater joy.

 

The garden is the zenith of progression for a society in its current state. In such a state a new challenge must be offered, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This new challenge and opportunity represents a step up in progression. When an individual partakes of this new more difficult challenge he inevitably falls. His work is then to overcome his current fallen condition. In so doing he is lifted up to a new state with deeper joys, greater love, and a more complete happiness.

 

Christ is the great prototype. Having descended below all is now the greatest of all. Having suffered greater contradictions than man can suffer he is filled with deeper joy and love.  

 

I believe that individual progress as well as social progress occurs when we learn to transcend beyond our own pain and sorrows to emphasize with the pain and sorrows of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously anything physical, carnal or as you have otherwise defined the natural man was 100% closed to any consideration or possibility.  I would remind you that it is your stand that our spirit was and still is incapable of any such tendencies, conditions or possibilities – that such things come only by the carnal physical mind.  

 

 

I do not agree - I believe every son and daughter of G-d is capable and possesses all the character or characteristics to be a celestial being or something else.  I believe we become what we are becoming.  I believe that we started on a path in the pre-existence that we continue after death to add upon and continue to become what we are becoming.

 

 

I have had enough experience in life to realize that it is not wise to use examples that we ourselves have not experienced and therefore do not fully understand.  I am not inclined to believe or agree with your understanding that all things can be learned by association with information.  I am not one that believe such a notion.  I believe that some things (like being shot at) can only be understood by experience.  I believe that some things have to be learned by relevant experience. 

I am not sure what you are trying to say - I believe that light cannot be discerned while in darkness.  When in darkness all we will discern is darkness.  We must be in light to discern light.  Perhaps I am a sociopath because I do not understand or comprehend love as an unguided emotion but rather a rational very controllable intelligent (even brilliant) understanding and belief (or knowledge) in others.  For me love is not a feeling or fleeting thought or a conditional emotion but a cognitively learned behavior.

You have to believe in learning by association with information, that is how Christ taught and how He lived His life.

 

One of the great lessons of this life is empathy.  This is why one of the most important commandments is to love thy neighbor as thyself.  If one truly has that much love as if the neighbor is self then mourning with those that mourn etc, takes on a new meaning.  The experience becomes a vicarious one.  Christ suffered for our sins vicariously.  Do you think Christ actually experienced the sin or that His empathy and love is strong enough to "experience" it as if He was there?  In the end there is no difference.  You want to believe there is a difference but when it comes to Christ and His suffering the vicarious experience is equal to the actual.  We do believe that is possible not impossible. 

 

As we become more and more Christlike we take on that characteristic which makes our joy endless.  It is endless and eternal because it doesn't just end with what we personally experience.  If all joy was limited to personal experience and proprietary experience, that could not be shared with anyone else, then joy is limited.  Endless and eternal happiness is predicated on the principle of loving God with all our heart and loving our neighbor as self.  When we reach that level of empathy then we can share vicarious experience and receive eternal and endless joy.  Just like when my child gets an A in school I feel it stronger than any other child getting an A in school.  Why is that?  It has to do with the level of connectedness I have with my child, the amount of pure love I have with her. 

 

The capacity for that kind of love must have something to do with the body.  That hasn't been revealed but I ponder the possibility that one of the limitations of the spirit alone is empathy, to put ourselves in someone else' shoes and to feel what they feel.  If thought of that way one can see why Christ needed the one type of body that was capable of such a thing at that level, an only begotten body.   To me, that empathy is the knowledge of good and evil that has to do with how we relate to each other, either in an inclusive way - good, or a proprietary selfish way - evil.   To desire proprietary experience or exclusive experience, to me, is evil.  It is a form of selfishness to think that the only way to advance is through personal and solo steps where credit cannot be given to anyone else but self.  When credit is given to others for advancement that is good.  To understand that and realize that is the knowledge of good and evil.  The direction of evil is like the stars one separate from the other whereas the sun is bright because it is one and synergistically shared. Our whole goal in this life is to become one with God. Understanding that and why is the knowledge of good an evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to believe in learning by association with information, that is how Christ taught and how He lived His life.

 

One of the great lessons of this life is empathy.  This is why one of the most important commandments is to love thy neighbor as thyself.  If one truly has that much love as if the neighbor is self then mourning with those that mourn etc, takes on a new meaning.  The experience becomes a vicarious one.  Christ suffered for our sins vicariously.  Do you think Christ actually experienced the sin or that His empathy and love is strong enough to "experience" it as if He was there?  In the end there is no difference.  You want to believe there is a difference but when it comes to Christ and His suffering the vicarious experience is equal to the actual.  We do believe that is possible not impossible. 

 

As we become more and more Christlike we take on that characteristic which makes our joy endless.  It is endless and eternal because it doesn't just end with what we personally experience.  If all joy was limited to personal experience and proprietary experience, that could not be shared with anyone else, then joy is limited.  Endless and eternal happiness is predicated on the principle of loving God with all our heart and loving our neighbor as self.  When we reach that level of empathy then we can share vicarious experience and receive eternal and endless joy.  Just like when my child gets an A in school I feel it stronger than any other child getting an A in school.  Why is that?  It has to do with the level of connectedness I have with my child, the amount of pure love I have with her. 

 

The capacity for that kind of love must have something to do with the body.  That hasn't been revealed but I ponder the possibility that one of the limitations of the spirit alone is empathy, to put ourselves in someone else' shoes and to feel what they feel.  If thought of that way one can see why Christ needed the one type of body that was capable of such a thing at that level, an only begotten body.   To me, that empathy is the knowledge of good and evil that has to do with how we relate to each other, either in an inclusive way - good, or a proprietary selfish way - evil.   To desire proprietary experience or exclusive experience, to me, is evil.  It is a form of selfishness to think that the only way to advance is through personal and solo steps where credit cannot be given to anyone else but self.  When credit is given to others for advancement that is good.  To understand that and realize that is the knowledge of good and evil.  The direction of evil is like the stars one separate from the other whereas the sun is bright because it is one and synergistically shared. Our whole goal in this life is to become one with God. Understanding that and why is the knowledge of good an evil.

 

Sorry - I do not follow your logic.  For example - I do not believe for a second that Jesus suffered death vicariously.  I believe he suffered actual (not a pretend vicarious or empathic) death for the sins of mankind.  I think your argument is sick and wrong.  :eek:   I agree that some lessons can be learned through the accumulation of data - but for some (specific) knowledge - I believe experience only counts.  I do not care how well or poorly a medical student did in school - If I am in need of a doctor - I want a doctor with successful experience.  The more successful experience they have, the more I trust and have faith in them.  But this is me – Beside you, I would be interested in how anyone else thinks – If anyone else ever reads our debates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  But this is me – Beside you, I would be interested in how anyone else thinks – If anyone else ever reads our debates.

 

I sometimes read your debates. I feel as though I have a certain propensity for instigating them, but they do tend to get longer than I have time to fully go through.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sometimes read your debates. I feel as though I have a certain propensity for instigating them, but they do tend to get longer than I have time to fully go through.  :)

 

I try to instigate thinking and consideration of all possible options - not so just to argue but to promote clarity.  Seminary is one of the rare individuals that does not see such efforts as a personal affront.  You seem to be a thinker that catches on quickly.  Though I would like to go deeper with you on subjects sometime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try to instigate thinking and consideration of all possible options - not so just to argue but to promote clarity.  Seminary is one of the rare individuals that does not see such efforts as a personal affront.  You seem to be a thinker that catches on quickly.  Though I would like to go deeper with you on subjects sometime.

 

Thank you. I've been told by others that I'm too philosophical in my thinking. It is nice to hear that you appreciate it. I would also love to go deeper in topics at times, but I rarely have that long to read everything said and give a suitable reply, especially when it involves extra research and linking to reference material, yet this is one of the reasons I like the forums here because they can force me study and think about topics in a way I likely wouldn't otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you. I've been told by others that I'm too philosophical in my thinking. It is nice to hear that you appreciate it. I would also love to go deeper in topics at times, but I rarely have that long to read everything said and give a suitable reply, especially when it involves extra research and linking to reference material, yet this is one of the reasons I like the forums here because they can force me study and think about topics in a way I likely wouldn't otherwise.

 

This is one thing I like about this forum - the forum is so slow I can take 2 or 3 days to respond.  BTW - I do not think that you are philosophical; just willing to go deeper into what is being discussed.  To be honest, serface thinkers bug me somewhat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry - I do not follow your logic.  For example - I do not believe for a second that Jesus suffered death vicariously.  I believe he suffered actual (not a pretend vicarious or empathic) death for the sins of mankind.  I think your argument is sick and wrong.  :eek:   I agree that some lessons can be learned through the accumulation of data - but for some (specific) knowledge - I believe experience only counts.  I do not care how well or poorly a medical student did in school - If I am in need of a doctor - I want a doctor with successful experience.  The more successful experience they have, the more I trust and have faith in them.  But this is me – Beside you, I would be interested in how anyone else thinks – If anyone else ever reads our debates.

That is not what vicarious suffering means. "Vicarious" does not preclude actual.  No wonder you can't follow that if that is what you think.  Christ suffered the pains of all men, vicariously.  He really and actually suffered for us (not pretend).  2 Nephi 9 ; " 21 And he cometh into the world that he may save all men if they will hearken unto his voice; for behold, he suffereth the pains of all men, yea, the pains of every living creature, both men, women, and children, who belong to the family of Adam."

 

Vicarious does not mean "pretend" and "pretend" does not equate to empathetic.  I am not following your explanation for why you don't understand.  Maybe you are relating this to when a husband has empathetic labor pains for his wife or something like that.  Even if you suggest that that is what you are considering the meaning of those empathetic pains, those are also real, they are not pretend.  How are they not real? 

 

How are we to mourn with those that mourn? 

 

Under the definition of "love" at LDS.org; "We manifest our love for Heavenly Father by keeping His commandments and serving His children. Our expressions of love for others may include being kind to them, listening to them, mourning with them, comforting them, serving them, praying for them, sharing the gospel with them, and being their friend."

 

And we know that charity is the pure love of Christ.  To be christlike requires love, which requires mourning with those that mourn which requires empathy.  Sorry, can't get away from empathy if one wants to be like Christ.  ... do you not understand that logic?

 

I can mourn with a fellow sister who has lost her husband even if I have not lost my husband.  You don't think that mourning is real?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I have had enough experience in life to realize that it is not wise to use examples that we ourselves have not experienced and therefore do not fully understand.  I am not inclined to believe or agree with your understanding that all things can be learned by association with information.  I am not one that believe such a notion.  I believe that some things (like being shot at) can only be understood by experience.  I believe that some things have to be learned by relevant experience. 

 

 

Of course you leave yourself an escape hatch by saying "some things" and not specifying what those things are (other than being shot at) but again one would have to ask whether there was anything that was too heinous that Christ could not feel by way of the atonement?  Was there anything He couldn't take on?  If you say "no" then it is possible to have an experience vicariously.

 

Alma 7; " 12 And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities."

 

So long as it is "according to the flesh" it can be done.

 

Neal A. Maxwell; "In Isaiah the sufferings of the Savior are described with eloquence—how he bore our sins, and did it so that we might be redeemed and have life everlasting and so forth. In Alma 7:12, the only place in scriptures, to my knowledge, that it appears, there seems to have been yet another purpose of the Atonement, speaking again of the Savior and his suffering, ‘And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to his flesh, that he may know according to the flesh, how to succor his people according to their infirmities.’ Have you ever thought that there was no way that Jesus could know the suffering which we undergo as a result of our stupidity and sin (because he was sinless) except he bear those sins of ours in what I call the awful arithmetic of the Atonement? And according to this prophet, Jesus now knows, according to the flesh, how to succor us and how to help us as a result of that suffering, which knowledge could have come in no other way.”

 

Which other way could it not have come?  By Him sinning and having the "actual" experience.  So, there is more than one way to have the experience.  There is a way to experience the suffering of sin and still be sinless.  We believe in the atonement of Christ.  We therefore believe there is a way to understand things vicariously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you leave yourself an escape hatch by saying "some things" and not specifying what those things are (other than being shot at) but again one would have to ask whether there was anything that was too heinous that Christ could not feel by way of the atonement?  Was there anything He couldn't take on?  If you say "no" then it is possible to have an experience vicariously.

 

Alma 7; " 12 And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities."

 

So long as it is "according to the flesh" it can be done.

 

Neal A. Maxwell; "In Isaiah the sufferings of the Savior are described with eloquence—how he bore our sins, and did it so that we might be redeemed and have life everlasting and so forth. In Alma 7:12, the only place in scriptures, to my knowledge, that it appears, there seems to have been yet another purpose of the Atonement, speaking again of the Savior and his suffering, ‘And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to his flesh, that he may know according to the flesh, how to succor his people according to their infirmities.’ Have you ever thought that there was no way that Jesus could know the suffering which we undergo as a result of our stupidity and sin (because he was sinless) except he bear those sins of ours in what I call the awful arithmetic of the Atonement? And according to this prophet, Jesus now knows, according to the flesh, how to succor us and how to help us as a result of that suffering, which knowledge could have come in no other way.”

 

Which other way could it not have come?  By Him sinning and having the "actual" experience.  So, there is more than one way to have the experience.  There is a way to experience the suffering of sin and still be sinless.  We believe in the atonement of Christ.  We therefore believe there is a way to understand things vicariously.

 

The problem I think I am having with what you are saying it that it contradicts so many other principles that I believe to be more pervasive and overriding.  For example I believe we are created in the image and likeness of G-d.  In short, I believe we are his children and in essence the same species and essence (very much different than the traditional Christian crowd.) 

 

I believe that Christ is our example and we follow him.  Thus I believe through simple rhetorical logic that we follow him by following him.  If Jesus learned eternal principles vicariously – that is the correct way to learn divine principles.  I honestly do not believe that the Father or Jesus, his Son, expect us to learn or grow in manners or principles unlike how they learned or grew.  I do not believe in a G-d that expects us to follow a path so different from his own.

 

I can understand myself by better understanding G-d and I can better understand G-d by understanding myself.  Those that believe G-d is so much above us and different from us that we can never understand such a being – I do not believe understand the truth of themselves or G-d.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem I think I am having with what you are saying it that it contradicts so many other principles that I believe to be more pervasive and overriding.  For example I believe we are created in the image and likeness of G-d.  In short, I believe we are his children and in essence the same species and essence (very much different than the traditional Christian crowd.) 

 

I believe that Christ is our example and we follow him.  Thus I believe through simple rhetorical logic that we follow him by following him.  If Jesus learned eternal principles vicariously – that is the correct way to learn divine principles.  I honestly do not believe that the Father or Jesus, his Son, expect us to learn or grow in manners or principles unlike how they learned or grew.  I do not believe in a G-d that expects us to follow a path so different from his own.

 

I can understand myself by better understanding G-d and I can better understand G-d by understanding myself.  Those that believe G-d is so much above us and different from us that we can never understand such a being – I do not believe understand the truth of themselves or G-d.  

I think there is a difference between learning eternal principles and knowledge.  I also think that you place way to much emphasis on the learning as a major purpose of this life.  The two main reasons to come here are to gain a body and to be tested.  Learning anything is a secondary purpose.  It is not necessary.

 

For example, the baby that dies on day number one did not learn much.  I know we have talked about this before and you pointed out that there has to be some learning even though both you and I cannot remember anything about our first day of life.  I don't see how there was much learned if anything by the baby who dies on day number one but I could be wrong.  I think for those that die before the age of 8 and are kept from the effects of evil in this world, they certainly do not experience evil personally even though they can learn of good and evil. 

 

How is that possible?  We can be in the world without being of the world.  We can learn from those around us and what we are exposed to without having to experience it ourselves.  I don't have to experience running down the freeway to know that that is a bad idea, I don't even have to watch clips of it on youtube to know that it is a bad idea.  By me witnessing it first hand there is nothing more that I have learned about it. 

 

We learn all the time from someone else experience.  When I pick up a text book and look at the information, believing it to be true, I can learn without having to run through all the trial and error it took to get to that point.  When I learned the English language I took it from my parents who took it from their parents without having to develop a new language on their own each time.  Most of what we learn in life is from someone else' experience and work.  That is how it is in the next life too.  If one had to say to their Kindergarten teacher, "I don't believe 2 plus 2 equals 4 until I prove it for myself, in fact I don't even know if the word "equals" is the correct word to use in this situation" then that child would be forever stuck in kindergarten because it would take a lifetime to have enough "experiences" to even speak the language. 

 

Christ grew in stature amongst God and Man.  He did that by learning from others.  His learning was not all by personal experience. Where did He learn to be a Carpenter? 

 

We all have been given different assignments in this life.  We have not all been given the same assignments.  There was only one called to be Our Savior and therefore He was made the Only Begotten, the only one who could be our Savior.  Noone else could do it without being called to do that job and receiving the foreordination to do it as well as all the other tools and keys needed to do it.  Likewise there are many other assignments in this world that certain people have to accomplish including the job Adam and Eve had, and Joseph Smith and Abraham etc.  We can all benefit from their work though.  The eye cannot say to the hand that I have no need for you as we are all one body.  When we are one body there is no differentiation that way, we are one and share all as one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is a difference between learning eternal principles and knowledge.  I also think that you place way to much emphasis on the learning as a major purpose of this life.  The two main reasons to come here are to gain a body and to be tested.  Learning anything is a secondary purpose.  It is not necessary.

 

 

Not true – Jesus said that we do not know Him (G-d) unless we live the commandments.  He even went farther by saying – If someone says that they can get to know G-d vicariously by studying information and not by the experience of keeping the commandments that they are a liar.  That is a very definitive concept that keeping the commandments as opposed to learning from others that keep the commandments for you.

 

 

For example, the baby that dies on day number one did not learn much.  I know we have talked about this before and you pointed out that there has to be some learning even though both you and I cannot remember anything about our first day of life.  I don't see how there was much learned if anything by the baby who dies on day number one but I could be wrong.  I think for those that die before the age of 8 and are kept from the effects of evil in this world, they certainly do not experience evil personally even though they can learn of good and evil. 

 

 

You are wrong on more than one account.  Children that die before the age of 8 are not kept for the effects of evil in this world.  You own words provide the contradiction.  Death is the effect of evil in this world.  And as you have given witness in your own words – Children suffer the effects of evil in this world when they die.  Because they die their experience gives them knowledge of evil.  What I cannot figure out from your theories concerning this matter is why your believe that there is justice that does not prevent children from dying (suffering the effects of evil).

 

 

How is that possible?  We can be in the world without being of the world.  We can learn from those around us and what we are exposed to without having to experience it ourselves.  I don't have to experience running down the freeway to know that that is a bad idea, I don't even have to watch clips of it on youtube to know that it is a bad idea.  By me witnessing it first hand there is nothing more that I have learned about it. 

 

We learn all the time from someone else experience.  When I pick up a text book and look at the information, believing it to be true, I can learn without having to run through all the trial and error it took to get to that point.  When I learned the English language I took it from my parents who took it from their parents without having to develop a new language on their own each time.  Most of what we learn in life is from someone else' experience and work.  That is how it is in the next life too.  If one had to say to their Kindergarten teacher, "I don't believe 2 plus 2 equals 4 until I prove it for myself, in fact I don't even know if the word "equals" is the correct word to use in this situation" then that child would be forever stuck in kindergarten because it would take a lifetime to have enough "experiences" to even speak the language.

 

You may think you learned English from your parents.  But you learned English from your experiences in using words to communicate.  You use words to communicate common experience.  I contend that if you never had the experience of using English word to communicate you would not be communicating in English with me now.

 

 

 

Christ grew in stature amongst God and Man.  He did that by learning from others.  His learning was not all by personal experience. Where did He learn to be a Carpenter? 

 

 

 

The scriptures also tell us that Jesus learned obedience by the things that he suffered.  Would you explain that statement – Did Jesus suffer because he was disobedient?

 

 

We all have been given different assignments in this life.  We have not all been given the same assignments.  There was only one called to be Our Savior and therefore He was made the Only Begotten, the only one who could be our Savior.  Noone else could do it without being called to do that job and receiving the foreordination to do it as well as all the other tools and keys needed to do it.  Likewise there are many other assignments in this world that certain people have to accomplish including the job Adam and Eve had, and Joseph Smith and Abraham etc.  We can all benefit from their work though.  The eye cannot say to the hand that I have no need for you as we are all one body.  When we are one body there is no differentiation that way, we are one and share all as one.

 

We have been given different assignments?  Is this your definition of Agency?  Are you sure we not get to choose our assignments?  For example, a child that dies before the age of 8?  Just wondering if this is part of your considerations to determine a paradigm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true – Jesus said that we do not know Him (G-d) unless we live the commandments.  He even went farther by saying – If someone says that they can get to know G-d vicariously by studying information and not by the experience of keeping the commandments that they are a liar.  That is a very definitive concept that keeping the commandments as opposed to learning from others that keep the commandments for you.

 

 

You are wrong on more than one account.  Children that die before the age of 8 are not kept for the effects of evil in this world.  You own words provide the contradiction.  Death is the effect of evil in this world.  And as you have given witness in your own words – Children suffer the effects of evil in this world when they die.  Because they die their experience gives them knowledge of evil.  What I cannot figure out from your theories concerning this matter is why your believe that there is justice that does not prevent children from dying (suffering the effects of evil).

 

 

 

You may think you learned English from your parents.  But you learned English from your experiences in using words to communicate.  You use words to communicate common experience.  I contend that if you never had the experience of using English word to communicate you would not be communicating in English with me now.

 

 

 

The scriptures also tell us that Jesus learned obedience by the things that he suffered.  Would you explain that statement – Did Jesus suffer because he was disobedient?

 

 

We have been given different assignments?  Is this your definition of Agency?  Are you sure we not get to choose our assignments?  For example, a child that dies before the age of 8?  Just wondering if this is part of your considerations to determine a paradigm.

As typical with our discussions, you take what I say as an all or nothing statement, as a black and white, one precludes the other statement.  I made no such claims.  I am not saying one is over the other or one is without the other like you think I am saying.  Not sure why we can't get beyond that.

 

Your arguments agains mine are always in the form of giving one example of something outside of what I said as if what I said was refering to the whole therefore what I said is not true. 

 

Experience is the context.  Especially as in this life we are tested in doing what we are asked, it is in the doing.  Children who die before the age don't need to take that test.  They will do what they are asked to do.  They do not need to learn to do what they are asked to do like the rest of us.  All those above the age of 8 and who are made accountable have been given an opportunity to show that we will do what we are asked to do and if not to use experience to work through that issue, we are given a time to learn that skill.  But not everybody has to learn that skill. Those that die before the age of 8 have already learned to do what they are told by Father and will not deviate from it, they do not need to be tested in that skill. They have already done enough to pass that thing that the rest of us are trying to work through.  So, in those cases it is not a necessary thing to learn, it came naturally.

 

Our overall assignment is to follow the will of God.  God has called us to different assignments.  If one is trying to group that into one thing then I suppose one could say that the unifying assignment is to follow the will of God for each of us that may have come in the form of foreordination or promptings from the Holy Ghost while here or just in the form of scriptures and the light of Christ, etc.

 

I know you don't buy this but I will express it for others.  To let down a corrupted body, to not be eternally connected to corruption, i.e. - to die physically separating the spirit from a corrupted body, is not evil.  The body serving its purpose, to allow for mortality and then ending when it is supposed to end, is not evil.   This is part of the plan, to pass through mortality.  Satan would make those claims that the process was evil and 'don't do it'.   We all agreed that it was not evil, that is was important for our salvation and growth to die.  We were excited and happy about such a prospect.  Maybe after here we changed our opinion about it but before we were excited and happy that we should have such an opportunity even if it was for a short time.  I am not sure where you are getting this idea of letting dust return to dust is evil.

 

As far as learning various things go, including English, it is more of a process of accepting it.   It is not like learning how to walk or learning how to make sounds.  I am talking about learning all the rules of grammer etc, all the man made things of this world are a matter of accepting and internalizing them.  They are not learned by process of proprietary discovery in a bubble.  And that is not how the next world will work either.  We inherit knowledge from those that have gone before.  Just like our Father inherited all that His Father had, and that is what makes a person eternal.  If knowledge just started with self than it would be as finite as self.  It is passed on and shared.  This is what makes society.  We believe in a social God, not an isolated, learned everything in and of Himself without any social interaction.  God could not become God by Himself.  We do not believe that is possible.  We should not believe that is possible for us either, like you are suggesting.  It has to be done by sharing of experience and knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As typical with our discussions, you take what I say as an all or nothing statement, as a black and white, one precludes the other statement.  I made no such claims.  I am not saying one is over the other or one is without the other like you think I am saying.  Not sure why we can't get beyond that.

 

Your arguments agains mine are always in the form of giving one example of something outside of what I said as if what I said was refering to the whole therefore what I said is not true. 

 

Experience is the context.  Especially as in this life we are tested in doing what we are asked, it is in the doing.  Children who die before the age don't need to take that test.  They will do what they are asked to do.  They do not need to learn to do what they are asked to do like the rest of us.  All those above the age of 8 and who are made accountable have been given an opportunity to show that we will do what we are asked to do and if not to use experience to work through that issue, we are given a time to learn that skill.  But not everybody has to learn that skill. Those that die before the age of 8 have already learned to do what they are told by Father and will not deviate from it, they do not need to be tested in that skill. They have already done enough to pass that thing that the rest of us are trying to work through.  So, in those cases it is not a necessary thing to learn, it came naturally.

 

Our overall assignment is to follow the will of God.  God has called us to different assignments.  If one is trying to group that into one thing then I suppose one could say that the unifying assignment is to follow the will of God for each of us that may have come in the form of foreordination or promptings from the Holy Ghost while here or just in the form of scriptures and the light of Christ, etc.

 

I know you don't buy this but I will express it for others.  To let down a corrupted body, to not be eternally connected to corruption, i.e. - to die physically separating the spirit from a corrupted body, is not evil.  The body serving its purpose, to allow for mortality and then ending when it is supposed to end, is not evil.   This is part of the plan, to pass through mortality.  Satan would make those claims that the process was evil and 'don't do it'.   We all agreed that it was not evil, that is was important for our salvation and growth to die.  We were excited and happy about such a prospect.  Maybe after here we changed our opinion about it but before we were excited and happy that we should have such an opportunity even if it was for a short time.  I am not sure where you are getting this idea of letting dust return to dust is evil.

 

As far as learning various things go, including English, it is more of a process of accepting it.   It is not like learning how to walk or learning how to make sounds.  I am talking about learning all the rules of grammer etc, all the man made things of this world are a matter of accepting and internalizing them.  They are not learned by process of proprietary discovery in a bubble.  And that is not how the next world will work either.  We inherit knowledge from those that have gone before.  Just like our Father inherited all that His Father had, and that is what makes a person eternal.  If knowledge just started with self than it would be as finite as self.  It is passed on and shared.  This is what makes society.  We believe in a social God, not an isolated, learned everything in and of Himself without any social interaction.  God could not become God by Himself.  We do not believe that is possible.  We should not believe that is possible for us either, like you are suggesting.  It has to be done by sharing of experience and knowledge.

 

If you understood rhetorical logic better you would realize that a single contrary example disproves a definitive conclusion.  That is why I always try to give a contrary example when you seem to have made a definitive conclusion.

 

I think there is more involved in why we came to earth than being tested and gaining a body.  For example as a contrary example - I believe that knowledge of good and evil is part of our experience and this concept plays out a very important roll in the Plan of Salvation.  We know that Michael was next to Jesus in the pre-existance.  Yet he had a mortal experience well past the age of accountability.   Therefore I believe we have a single example that disproves the notion that if someone passes certain tests in the pre-existance they do not have the test of accountability in this life.

 

I have said before that I do not believe the test of the justice of G-d begins at birth and ends in death also that I believe it is foolish to think that this life is the great end all test of anything.   I agree that children that die before the age of accountability are not excluded from any blessings - however, I believe that any eternal blessing must come through obedience to the eternal laws, covenants and principles upon which such blessing are predicated.  I believe this is a definitive conclusion and I do not believe there is a single example that disproves that conclusion - including children that die before the age of accountability. 

 

We are told in scripture that there is only "one way".  The idea of way implies experience to me.  There is a great criticism of Christianity that compares Christians to geese that live out the weeks of their lives waddling around in the mud.  But once a week these "religious" geese waddle through the mud to get together on Sundays to talk about flying.  After they have talked much about flying they waddle home through the mud.

 

My point is that we learn nothing talking about flying in such a manner of studying and talking.  We learn of flying by flying not studying and talking about flying.  Two things Isaiah says that I believe applies.  "Ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth".  I believe this is exactly what I am suggesting.  We gain a knowledge of truth - not from studying but by experience.  The second is "They draw near me with their mouths and with their lips honor me but their heart is far from me".   As I understand our heart is used here not as our emotions but as our center and core of who we are and how what we do defines us.

 

Now let me ask a question - is the purpose of a divine test; to determine what yet a person ought to learn or is the purpose of a divine test to condemn a person as a failure?  I remember Jesus saying once to a woman that he did not condemn her failure.  I find that to be interesting insight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you understood rhetorical logic better you would realize that a single contrary example disproves a definitive conclusion.  That is why I always try to give a contrary example when you seem to have made a definitive conclusion.

 

I think there is more involved in why we came to earth than being tested and gaining a body.  For example as a contrary example - I believe that knowledge of good and evil is part of our experience and this concept plays out a very important roll in the Plan of Salvation.  We know that Michael was next to Jesus in the pre-existance.  Yet he had a mortal experience well past the age of accountability.   Therefore I believe we have a single example that disproves the notion that if someone passes certain tests in the pre-existance they do not have the test of accountability in this life.

 

I have said before that I do not believe the test of the justice of G-d begins at birth and ends in death also that I believe it is foolish to think that this life is the great end all test of anything.   I agree that children that die before the age of accountability are not excluded from any blessings - however, I believe that any eternal blessing must come through obedience to the eternal laws, covenants and principles upon which such blessing are predicated.  I believe this is a definitive conclusion and I do not believe there is a single example that disproves that conclusion - including children that die before the age of accountability. 

 

We are told in scripture that there is only "one way".  The idea of way implies experience to me.  There is a great criticism of Christianity that compares Christians to geese that live out the weeks of their lives waddling around in the mud.  But once a week these "religious" geese waddle through the mud to get together on Sundays to talk about flying.  After they have talked much about flying they waddle home through the mud.

 

My point is that we learn nothing talking about flying in such a manner of studying and talking.  We learn of flying by flying not studying and talking about flying.  Two things Isaiah says that I believe applies.  "Ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth".  I believe this is exactly what I am suggesting.  We gain a knowledge of truth - not from studying but by experience.  The second is "They draw near me with their mouths and with their lips honor me but their heart is far from me".   As I understand our heart is used here not as our emotions but as our center and core of who we are and how what we do defines us.

 

Now let me ask a question - is the purpose of a divine test; to determine what yet a person ought to learn or is the purpose of a divine test to condemn a person as a failure?  I remember Jesus saying once to a woman that he did not condemn her failure.  I find that to be interesting insight.

I don't disagree with most of what you are saying but the thing you are talking around and not directly at is the idea that one could have a shared "experience". 

 

What about the idea that the shared experience is experience still the same?    Did Christ suffer for our suffering in lesser amounts than we would have had we done it ourselves?   If that is deemed equivalent or greater then we do indeed believe in vicarioius experience.

 

The purpose of the test we face here is to determine what track we are forever placed in, a Celestial one, a Terrestrial one or a Telestial one.  Once on that track it cannot be derailed or changed even though the track still moves forward beyond this life.  The test is one that pertains to character not how far up the ladder one has climbed.  But it does pertain how far up the ladder one has climbed in relationship to how much Father expects us to climb.  That is different for everyone.  The tests and challenges we face in this life are different for everyone and ranges.  Only God knows what is specifically required for each person, where much is given much is required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share