Sign in to follow this  
prisonchaplain

God made me this way!

Recommended Posts

Perhaps the best answer to those who choose to live in sin, and loudly proclaim, "God made me this way!" is to ask, "Which is more important to ask, how you were made or WHO made you?" If the latter, then instead of insisting that our current status is optimal, maybe we should look to the Maker's "original factory settings?" Those can be found in The Instructions. And yes--they are included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the best answer to those who choose to live in sin, and loudly proclaim, "God made me this way!" is to ask, "Which is more important to ask, how you were made or WHO made you?" If the latter, then instead of insisting that our current status is optimal, maybe we should look to the Maker's "original factory settings?" Those can be found in The Instructions. And yes--they are included.

 

In most models, the batteries are included, too.  So there really is no excuse.

 

I once had a friend who happened to be gay.  His email signature was very interesting: "God made me the way I am.  God does not makes mistakes.  God is not Fiat."

 

(And I note that Consumer Reports has named the Fiat 500 L the "least reliable car on sale today."  These cars are reportedly manufactured at the same factory in Serbia that made Yugos.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the best answer to those who choose to live in sin, and loudly proclaim, "God made me this way!" is to ask, "Which is more important to ask, how you were made or WHO made you?" If the latter, then instead of insisting that our current status is optimal, maybe we should look to the Maker's "original factory settings?" Those can be found in The Instructions. And yes--they are included.

In LDS gospel we believe that there are two "me"s, so it depends on which "me" you are talking about when you say "God made me this way".  Are you talking about the physical temporary body or our mostly hidden spiritual self?  

 

The effect of the Fall is what made our body.  The corruption from the original creation, the thousands of mutations and alterations over the many years and being exposed to the corruption of the world is what makes our bodies what they are. The spirit self is a child of God that has spent eons in the presence of God, desiring to be more like Him and gleaning all we could from His direct teaching.  What breaks through more loudly in this life is the make up of the body, that is the default setting or what we call the natural man.  The "factory settings" of the physical body should not be acceptable to us and we try to modify them as much as we can.  We wash them in baptism, we take on the body of Christ in Sacrament, we go through the ordinances in the temple, we live by the word of wisdom etc all to keep at bay and to modify the "factory settings" of the body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ether 12:27 And if men come unto me I will show unto them theirweakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.

 28 Behold, I will show unto the Gentiles their weakness, and I will show unto them that faith, hope and charity bringeth unto me—the fountain of all righteousness.

 29 And I, Moroni, having heard these words, was comforted, and said: O Lord, thy righteous will be done, for I know that thou workest unto the children of men according to their faith

 

If we had no weakness, would we still sin? If we sin because of our weakness, do we humble ourselves and come unto Christ? And if we were not weak, of what would we have to humble ourselves? Would we still look to Christ in our fallen state? How often did the Nephites boast in their own strength? What ultimately happened to them? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the best answer to those who choose to live in sin, and loudly proclaim, "God made me this way!" is to ask, "Which is more important to ask, how you were made or WHO made you?" If the latter, then instead of insisting that our current status is optimal, maybe we should look to the Maker's "original factory settings?" Those can be found in The Instructions. And yes--they are included.

 

If one believes in or accepts the premise of creation ex nihilo then this is not just a very good argument but it is 100% completely rhetorically sound.  Keep in mind ex nihilo means that any and all variable parameters for any individual's creation was 100% the responsibility of the creator and a direct result of his creation.  Not only is the argument sound for the aspect of creation but there is another logical conundrum that must be dealt with.  That is - that G-d knew with certainty exactly how each and every creation would turn out.  If G-d was not 100% okay with the result - why then did he create such individuals with known flawed parameters? 

 

It is this specific failure of every other religion I have studied that has left me in awe and wonderment of the singular consistency of LDS doctrine.  I am also astonished that otherwise good and principled individuals are so willing to swallow this flagrantly obviously flawed doctrine of creation - without honestly seeking a reasonable solution - in order to justify their chosen religion and belief for eternal blessing for them while others burn in hell for being created in a manner in which they have no choice what-so-ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could remember the Country-Western singer who once quipped, "I just don't think God made men to be monogamous."  Sure, he was joking.  Yet, perhaps only half. 

 

Which is harder, trying to minister to the one who thinks chastity is a joke, or the one who insists that God made us to be unchaste, and seriously believes that?

 

Or, maybe we could answer them with loving kindness, trying to understand why they feel the way they feel.  Both seem like good options, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could remember the Country-Western singer who once quipped, "I just don't think God made men to be monogamous."  Sure, he was joking.  Yet, perhaps only half. 

 

Which is harder, trying to minister to the one who thinks chastity is a joke, or the one who insists that God made us to be unchaste, and seriously believes that?

 

Both will listen better to a sincere attempt to understand and love them than a sarcastic remark about factory settings and how life came with a manual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I am coming from a position of less "certainty" about these things than the rest of you. I also find it an interesting argument/allegation/discussion, but maybe for different reasons and conclusions.

 

Perhaps I'll frame it like SeminarySnoozer did -- in terms of God's "perfect" creation vs. the effects of the fall of Adam. How do I know what parts of me are part of God's perfect creation, and how do I discern which parts of me are the result of Adam's fall? Some seem obvious. I think most of us would agree that illness/injury/disabilities are a result of the fall of Adam. Without Adam's fall, there would be no illness, sickness, disability, etc. However, we are all subject to these effects of the fall of Adam -- God permitted the fall and these effects to continue down through all of Adam's posterity and the world that we inhabit. We presume that God allows these things to allow us to experience physical limitations because they contribute to our growth and progression -- if we respond with faith and endurance.

 

Some things don't seem as obvious to me. Issues around sexuality might be the most challenging. Is my sexuality (hetero) a part of God's "perfect" creation of me, or is it a part of my fallen nature? I expect that it is mixed, but I am reminded of a recent discussion on another LDS forum, a woman (presumably LDS) argued that everything about our sexual nature is from Adam's fall, and that our "perfect" creation (and, by extension, God Himself) was essentially asexual (not without gender -- just did not have a sexual nature). If I (heterosexual male) am not sure how much of my sexual nature is part of my perfect "spiritual" creation, how do I discern what parts of those with minority sexual orientations are part of their spiritual creation and how much is a result of Adam's fall?

 

Beyond that, is the next question (I think it is the essence of what PC's response would suggest) is "in either case, what does God expect me to do about it?" Am I supposed to accept/embrace my created/fallen nature? Am I supposed to tolerate it? Suppress it? Ignore it? With physical illnesses/disabilities, I will either choose to seek healing from the illness, or I will learn to tolerate it. Is it acceptable to embrace disability? I am reminded of a documentary about deaf people where two deaf parents would have a hearing child and how the parents somehow, sometimes would feel "betrayed" by the hearing child because the child could not or would not fully embrace the deaf community/culture because they did not have the same disability. I am also reminded of a person who once told me that he/she was not "Christian" enough to be forgiving or tolerant of some her neighbor's faults, and seemed to be disinterested in developing such a Christian virtue. And, of course, the question around sexuality/sexual orientation. Whether our sexuality (whether hetero or homo or other) is directly created by God, or the effect of the fall, what does God expect us to do about it -- embrace it? change it? tolerate it?

 

In many ways, I am reminded of the parable of the talents. God has "given" us (whether directly or through the fall) certain tendencies towards righteousness and wickedness. I often think that much of the challenge and purpose of our mortal existence is trying to figure out what God expects us to do with these strengths and wickedness to prove that we are good stewards over what few things He has given us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The traditional doctrine of the Fall is that when Adam and Eve sinned nature became corrupt.  Weeds, natural disasters, diseases, and mutations entered the world.  We're told 10% of Americans are genetically predisposed to alcoholism (this doesn't HAVE to only be about LBGT).  God did not create us that way.  It's not the original factory specifications.  Instead, genetic predispositions are mutations--they are a result of the Fall.

 

It may be that LDS teaching about premortal existence and the eternal nature of matter raise different responses, but creation-soley-from-God's-Word is not unable to answer the accusations of determined sinners.

 

If one believes in or accepts the premise of creation ex nihilo then this is not just a very good argument but it is 100% completely rhetorically sound.  Keep in mind ex nihilo means that any and all variable parameters for any individual's creation was 100% the responsibility of the creator and a direct result of his creation.  Not only is the argument sound for the aspect of creation but there is another logical conundrum that must be dealt with.  That is - that G-d knew with certainty exactly how each and every creation would turn out.  If G-d was not 100% okay with the result - why then did he create such individuals with known flawed parameters? 

 

It is this specific failure of every other religion I have studied that has left me in awe and wonderment of the singular consistency of LDS doctrine.  I am also astonished that otherwise good and principled individuals are so willing to swallow this flagrantly obviously flawed doctrine of creation - without honestly seeking a reasonable solution - in order to justify their chosen religion and belief for eternal blessing for them while others burn in hell for being created in a manner in which they have no choice what-so-ever.

 

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

 

Which is harder, trying to minister to the one who thinks chastity is a joke, or the one who insists that God made us to be unchaste, and seriously believes that?

 

You are now changing the question.  If creation was ex nihilo then where did un-chastity come from?  And why would one person be chaste and another unchaste if G-d did not create it so.  Did not G-d create you as an individual essence different from everyone else?  And does not that difference account for the differences?

 

The only way there can be choice is if the essence of your choice is something that G-d did not create.  There are only two possibilities - One - G-d created it to be so - and you really have no choice and what you are is his and his alone choice.  Or G-d did not create it to be so.  If G-d did not create it to be so - from where did it come?  This possibility is only real if the essence of everyone that is an individual, from where such choice comes, is independent of G-d and that G-d did not create that essence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The traditional doctrine of the Fall is that when Adam and Eve sinned nature became corrupt.  Weeds, natural disasters, diseases, and mutations entered the world.  We're told 10% of Americans are genetically predisposed to alcoholism (this doesn't HAVE to only be about LBGT).  God did not create us that way.  It's not the original factory specifications.  Instead, genetic predispositions are mutations--they are a result of the Fall.

 

It may be that LDS teaching about premortal existence and the eternal nature of matter raise different responses, but creation-soley-from-God's-Word is not unable to answer the accusations of determined sinners.

 

From experience I have learned that anyone can make an excuse to justify anything and actually believe it.  But my question is - What is the rhetorical logic that proves that such questions are answered?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joseph Smith affirmed the doctrine of free will.  He refined it, using the term agency.  Nevertheless, he agreed with those of us who reject the doctrine of predestination.  God did not hardwire us to sin, but he did create us with the capacity to choose good or evil.  Adam and Eve had a real choice to make.  I would also affirm the doctrine of foreknowledge--that God knows which way each of us will go.  Nevertheless, the responsiblity is ours.

 

You are now changing the question.  If creation was ex nihilo then where did un-chastity come from?  And why would one person be chaste and another unchaste if G-d did not create it so.  Did not G-d create you as an individual essence different from everyone else?  And does not that difference account for the differences?

 

The only way there can be choice is if the essence of your choice is something that G-d did not create.  There are only two possibilities - One - G-d created it to be so - and you really have no choice and what you are is his and his alone choice.  Or G-d did not create it to be so.  If G-d did not create it to be so - from where did it come?  This possibility is only real if the essence of everyone that is an individual, from where such choice comes, is independent of G-d and that G-d did not create that essence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I am coming from a position of less "certainty" about these things than the rest of you. I also find it an interesting argument/allegation/discussion, but maybe for different reasons and conclusions.

 

Perhaps I'll frame it like SeminarySnoozer did -- in terms of God's "perfect" creation vs. the effects of the fall of Adam. How do I know what parts of me are part of God's perfect creation, and how do I discern which parts of me are the result of Adam's fall? Some seem obvious. I think most of us would agree that illness/injury/disabilities are a result of the fall of Adam. Without Adam's fall, there would be no illness, sickness, disability, etc. However, we are all subject to these effects of the fall of Adam -- God permitted the fall and these effects to continue down through all of Adam's posterity and the world that we inhabit. We presume that God allows these things to allow us to experience physical limitations because they contribute to our growth and progression -- if we respond with faith and endurance.

 

Some things don't seem as obvious to me. Issues around sexuality might be the most challenging. Is my sexuality (hetero) a part of God's "perfect" creation of me, or is it a part of my fallen nature? I expect that it is mixed, but I am reminded of a recent discussion on another LDS forum, a woman (presumably LDS) argued that everything about our sexual nature is from Adam's fall, and that our "perfect" creation (and, by extension, God Himself) was essentially asexual (not without gender -- just did not have a sexual nature). If I (heterosexual male) am not sure how much of my sexual nature is part of my perfect "spiritual" creation, how do I discern what parts of those with minority sexual orientations are part of their spiritual creation and how much is a result of Adam's fall?

 

Beyond that, is the next question (I think it is the essence of what PC's response would suggest) is "in either case, what does God expect me to do about it?" Am I supposed to accept/embrace my created/fallen nature? Am I supposed to tolerate it? Suppress it? Ignore it? With physical illnesses/disabilities, I will either choose to seek healing from the illness, or I will learn to tolerate it. Is it acceptable to embrace disability? I am reminded of a documentary about deaf people where two deaf parents would have a hearing child and how the parents somehow, sometimes would feel "betrayed" by the hearing child because the child could not or would not fully embrace the deaf community/culture because they did not have the same disability. I am also reminded of a person who once told me that he/she was not "Christian" enough to be forgiving or tolerant of some her neighbor's faults, and seemed to be disinterested in developing such a Christian virtue. And, of course, the question around sexuality/sexual orientation. Whether our sexuality (whether hetero or homo or other) is directly created by God, or the effect of the fall, what does God expect us to do about it -- embrace it? change it? tolerate it?

 

In many ways, I am reminded of the parable of the talents. God has "given" us (whether directly or through the fall) certain tendencies towards righteousness and wickedness. I often think that much of the challenge and purpose of our mortal existence is trying to figure out what God expects us to do with these strengths and wickedness to prove that we are good stewards over what few things He has given us.

Right on!

 

I think it is easy to push aside exactly how far we have fallen because we don't maintain any rememberance of our previous life and knowledge.  I think any bit of understanding of how far we have fallen in this existence would result in what Moses said when he saw the bigger picture, that man is nothing.

 

My feeling about what is us vs what is "given" as a stewardship is that we are given a tiny portion of ourselves here.  I think the difference would be similar to how one is now vs how they are when they under the effects of anesthesia.  The magnitude of difference between spirit self and mortal self are probably that great.  One only has to think about how intelligent would a being be if they could spend eons in the presence of God without the weaknesses and limitations of the physical body.  We matured before coming  here.  We learned all we could about everything save the experience of having a body and its effects.  The test we face now is one of character in a situation where we are not ourselves.  Its kind of like how a soldier performs in the heat of the battle when adrenaline is pumping, maybe losing blood from an injury, emotions are high etc .. then the true test of character and instinct comes out.  What does a person do in that situation.  That is what this life is like.  When we are low, who do we turn to, who do we trust, who do we express faith in? 

 

God made the test, gave us stewardships that are underneath our true status of a child of God.  We are all fallen.  It takes a lot of effort to remember that we are all children of God and will receive a degree of glory that is indescribably magnitudes greater compared to this existence once this stage of development is over.   Who we are is not this being, this being is a temporary existence, a temporary stewardship.  The test is about recognizing that and not choosing the temporary reward of self (claiming this is who I am) over the real self; child-of-God self.  I think sometimes professional atheletes get it right when they win the game and they thank Jesus as their gift is temporary, it is a stewardship on loan, like the parable of the ten talents. 

 

Going back to the OP, How you were made is far better the question as it is, I think, the least understood and pertains to the purpose and the temporary nature of this state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joseph Smith affirmed the doctrine of free will.  He refined it, using the term agency.  Nevertheless, he agreed with those of us who reject the doctrine of predestination.  God did not hardwire us to sin, but he did create us with the capacity to choose good or evil.  Adam and Eve had a real choice to make.  I would also affirm the doctrine of foreknowledge--that God knows which way each of us will go.  Nevertheless, the responsiblity is ours.

Our bodies are hardwired to sin.  Our spirit is not.  The test is over which one will win out in this dual body experience.  We believe that the natural man is an enemy to God.  Elder Bednar explained that the elements which make up our body are from this fallen world and therefore pull us towards sin.  Therefore the test is between which influence do we listen to the most, brain, hormone, animal instinct etc. or spirit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could remember the Country-Western singer who once quipped, "I just don't think God made men to be monogamous."  Sure, he was joking.  Yet, perhaps only half. 

 

I was curious about that, so I tried to Google "I don't think God made man to be monog..." and the search box helpfully autocompleted my search terms by predicting "...monogrammed."  Perhaps that was the singer's original quip, and you are remembering it incorrectly? 

 

In any case, I did read somewhere that the males of all animal species are ready for physical intimacy 24x7 unless they're sick (and even then I bet a lot of them would try to press ahead anyway). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our bodies are hardwired to sin.  Our spirit is not.  The test is over which one will win out in this dual body experience.  We believe that the natural man is an enemy to God.  Elder Bednar explained that the elements which make up our body are from this fallen world and therefore pull us towards sin.  Therefore the test is between which influence do we listen to the most, brain, hormone, animal instinct etc. or spirit.

ok so "the spirit is willing but the body is weak."

 

I have heard that the addictions we develop here on earth will follow us to the afterlife, if our spirits are pure in the pre-mortal and then we inherent a sinful body temporarily here on earth wont the spirit be free from the sinful body at the time of mortal death and become pure again when it is on its own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When a sinner insists that God made him/her to sin that one is speaking from something other than recognition and repentence.  Is the person accusing God?  Perhaps blaming the church?  Certainly there is the implication that their sin is NOT sin.  So yes, the answer is that God made them better than that.  That the original creation was not corrupt, and that they way we are to live is found in the scriptures.  To answer a defensiveness of sin, or an accusation against God/church with mild humor (no sarcasm--I mean what I said) is to defuse, not inflame.

 

Both will listen better to a sincere attempt to understand and love them than a sarcastic remark about factory settings and how life came with a manual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree we have a fallen nature, and that we are prone to sin.  However, we were not made that way.  Both our theologies teach that we shall ultimately have glorified bodies.  Perhaps it is even accurate to say these will be restored bodies. 

 

We're on the same page, perhaps just looking at different paragraphs.  :cool:

Our bodies are hardwired to sin.  Our spirit is not.  The test is over which one will win out in this dual body experience.  We believe that the natural man is an enemy to God.  Elder Bednar explained that the elements which make up our body are from this fallen world and therefore pull us towards sin.  Therefore the test is between which influence do we listen to the most, brain, hormone, animal instinct etc. or spirit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a school of thought among the early Church fathers that we should go ahead and sin a lot, because then more grace could flow down from heaven and fill the earth to abundance?  Or maybe I'm remembering a part of a made-for-TV movie about the Branch Davidians (seriously).

 

When I studied Spanish in college, my Spanish professor (who was from South America) claimed with a straight face that the period between Good Friday and Easter morning was celebrated in some South American cultures with riotous, nonstop sin.  The rationale was that Christ was dead and in the tomb and wouldn't be watching, or something insane like that.  He also claimed that many children were conceived on Good Friday for that reason, and that they were actually named "Friday" (or "Viernes," I guess) as a cachet.  I've tried for many years to verify this strange claim, but I haven't found a shred of evidence.

 

Anyway, when it comes to humans rationalizing sin, the sky's the limit. 

Edited by PolarVortex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so "the spirit is willing but the body is weak."

 

I have heard that the addictions we develop here on earth will follow us to the afterlife, if our spirits are pure in the pre-mortal and then we inherent a sinful body temporarily here on earth wont the spirit be free from the sinful body at the time of mortal death and become pure again when it is on its own?

Yes, that is what I believe.  The spirit has to take it in.  It has to accept it as it's own for it to be carried with the person to the next life. Another way of saying "accepting" it is to say it becomes a "desire of the heart".  If it is one's heart desire then, yes, it will continue.  If it is not one's heart desire then it will not. Some people make it their "heart's desire" by identifying with the condition.  They call their self an "alcoholic", this is the way I am, God made me this way.  To me that is a form of making it one's heart's desire. It is better to proclaim, this is not who I am but something I have to endure while in this life.  If I endure it well then it will pass and I can enter into Christ' rest.

 

D&C 137; " For I, the Lord, will judge all men according to their works, according to the desire of their hearts."

 

In Alma, we learn that in order to potentially have it "stick" to your spirit one has to understand the difference or at least have the potential to understand the difference between life (spirit) and death (the body) as the body dies, all things of the earth will turn back to dust from which it came; " I ought not to harrow up in my desires the firm decree of a just God, for I know that he granteth unto men according to their desire, whether it be unto death or unto life; yea, I know that he allotteth unto men, yea, decreeth unto them decrees which are unalterable, according to their wills, whether they be unto salvation or unto destruction.

 Yea, and I know that good and evil have come before all men; he that knoweth not good from evil is blameless; but he that knoweth good and evil, to him it is given according to his desires, whether he desireth good or evil, life or death, joy or remorse of conscience."

 

In other words, the opposite is true too, in order for the good to "stick" with our spirit we have to know it as good, this is why works that are not done with an eye single to the glory of God, if we don't do it for the right reason, then it means nothing.  Like the Pharisee who prayed in front of everyone in Luke 18, " 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted."

 

"Humbling" oneself entails realizing that even the good gifts are just temporary in nature as well.  One should not, like the Pharisee, claim that they are better than someone else because they have certain privileges in this life, such as intelligence, certain skills or even physical attributes - height, strength etc.  All of which are temporary stewardships and not self.

 

Consider someone with Down's syndrome.  Are those features carried with the person to the next life?  How about someone with Tourrette's syndrome who uncontrolably lets out explitives, maybe even in the middle of church, is that carried with them to the next life?  How about Paul's thorn in the flesh, was that carried with his spirit to the next life?

 

These are for but a short time and if we endure them well then ours will be the reward.  There is a reason we have to endure. Enduring is differnt than getting rid of the thing.  Someone may have a genetic predisposition for whatever thing, alcoholism, anger, etc.  If they are endured well, resisted and not taken in by the spirit, then the person will be received unto Jesus' rest.   Rest from what?  Rest from the battle they have been enduring while in this life.  "Rest" does not mean they will stop advancing in their growth but that they will not have to face these kinds of battles between selfs, the "thorn's in the flesh" battle or "according to the flesh" type battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree we have a fallen nature, and that we are prone to sin.  However, we were not made that way.  Both our theologies teach that we shall ultimately have glorified bodies.  Perhaps it is even accurate to say these will be restored bodies. 

 

We're on the same page, perhaps just looking at different paragraphs.  :cool:

Again, it depends on which "we" you are talking about, the spirit or the body.  Our current bodies are made that way, subject to the effects of the Fall. Our spirit is not subject to those things unless we allow it so by choosing to follow those influences more than spiritual ones. 

 

One of our presiding leaders, Elder Bednar said; "As sons and daughters of God, we have inherited divine capacities from Him. But we presently live in a fallen world. The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).

The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, it depends on which "we" you are talking about, the spirit or the body.  Our current bodies are made that way, subject to the effects of the Fall. Our spirit is not subject to those things unless we allow it so by choosing to follow those influences more than spiritual ones. 

 

One of our presiding leaders, Elder Bednar said; "As sons and daughters of God, we have inherited divine capacities from Him. But we presently live in a fallen world. The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).

The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh."

 

I believe the error of our argument is the assumption that our spirit is not also subject to the fall.  I would point out that spirits have a proclivity to sin - even in a perfect spiritual state - which is why and how Lucifer fell and drew with him a one third part of the most spiritually advanced and enlightened society ever assembled (that we know about).  Note that this spiritually advanced society had not even a "smidgeon" of physical temptation or draw.   To completely ignore spiritual temptations to sin is to ignore perhaps to the most difficult dangers on the path of eternal life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this