Recommended Posts

Postmodernism is the original sin. The serpent tells Adam & Eve that if they eat the forbidden fruit they will know/decide good from evil. They will be like God. If you're like God you don't need him. Then all truth becomes subjective. Today's hip philosophy is just the devil's first lie rehashed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course in LDS teaching the Garden of Eden was not the devil's first lie. It was, rather, per our view, the lie in the pre-mortal realm wherein Lucifer claimed he could save all mankind by removing their agency.

That being said, I have had the same-ish thought: today's hip philosophy is a continuation of Satan's first lie. There were two principles in that pre-mortal lie that are common now. 1. No consequence for sin. 2. Equality of outcome. (Which, now that I think about it, are the same thing).

I'm not sure I can accept the thinking, however, that becoming like God makes truth subjective.

In point of fact, we believe that Satan uses and used half-truths in his lies, and the becoming like God part is a half truth of eating the fruit. The fall was a necessary part of the plan of Salvation to us, the end goal, indeed, being to become like God. Of course the fall was also necessary for Satan to achieve his goals of the destruction of mankind's souls, so he was motivated to motivate Adam and Eve, hence the half truths. (The half truth being that A) the implication that they "will" become like God and B) the implication that ALL there is to being like God is knowing good from evil. That is, of course, one aspect of being "like" God, but only one, small, part.)

Edited by The Folk Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Postmodernism is the original sin. The serpent tells Adam & Eve that if they eat the forbidden fruit they will know/decide good from evil. They will be like God. If you're like God you don't need him. Then all truth becomes subjective. Today's hip philosophy is just the devil's first lie rehashed.

Agree completely with the modern philosophy being afindtinuatoon of Satan's lie. But we LDS members have a slightly different take on the Fall of Adam.

1) Satan wasn't lying when he said we could be like God. And we need God to become like him. The notion that we don't need him is, however, one of Satan's lies and was likely his goal when tempting Adam and Eve.

2)The Fall was a part of God's plan for all of his children and it should be celebrated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 5/20/2017 at 0:07 AM, prisonchaplain said:

Postmodernism is the original sin. The serpent tells Adam & Eve that if they eat the forbidden fruit they will know/decide good from evil. They will be like God. If you're like God you don't need him. Then all truth becomes subjective. Today's hip philosophy is just the devil's first lie rehashed.

Doctrinal differences aside yes, we pretty much share that same view. Pride is the primary sin which leads people away from the Lord.

Quote

28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

29 But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God.

2 Ne 9:28-29

It's actually desirable to be well educated.  But so often, we learn something (either formally or informally) and we get the impression that we "now know enough" to pass judgement upon God.  We no longer need Him, or He must not exist.  

For the more faithful, it leads us to create God in our own image instead of recognizing the other way around.  We declare "I can't believe in a God that would do that."  Therefore, God must actually be like X. Then we seek out a God like what we have previously defined rather than trying to discover who He is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
22 hours ago, zil said:

You create the most interesting words.

If you can't spell a word more than one way, you have no imagination.

17 hours ago, SilentOne said:

a fine tuning?

a continuation?

12 hours ago, mordorbund said:

afindtinuatoon.

Words have meaning.

20 hours ago, Fether said:

Not really sure what I was trying to say x)

You were trying to say "something that we find to be a continuation of..."

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

If you can't spell a word more than one way, you have no imagination.

You were trying to say "something that we find to be a continuation of..."

I'm not sure I would have known how to use the word "continuation" in a sentence like that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
2 minutes ago, Fether said:

I'm not sure I would have known how to use the word "continuation" in a sentence like that 

It must have been inspiration.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 7:13 AM, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm not sure I can accept the thinking, however, that becoming like God makes truth subjective.

 

What if the "becoming like God" takes place in mortality, by one who rejects God's council in favor of his/her own wisdom? Would that person's deciding of right and wrong be based, at least primarily, upon that notoriously subjective standard of individual conscience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 8:53 AM, Fether said:

Agree completely with the modern philosophy being afindtinuatoon of Satan's lie. But we LDS members have a slightly different take on the Fall of Adam.

1) Satan wasn't lying when he said we could be like God. And we need God to become like him. The notion that we don't need him is, however, one of Satan's lies and was likely his goal when tempting Adam and Eve.

2)The Fall was a part of God's plan for all of his children and it should be celebrated.

Total agreement with point 1). Point 2) would require my conversion to accept.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Armin your blame of clergy for some of the murders and atrocities of history, while containing a measure of accuracy, misses the real culprit.  Power corrupts.  When churches gain too much political power, they are tempted to forsake their spiritual authority--which is far more meaningful.  As for Eve, it's my understanding that Adam was with her when the Serpent tempted her.  His sin was that of silent acquiescence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 11:07 PM, prisonchaplain said:

Postmodernism is the original sin. The serpent tells Adam & Eve that if they eat the forbidden fruit they will know/decide good from evil. They will be like God. If you're like God you don't need him. Then all truth becomes subjective. Today's hip philosophy is just the devil's first lie rehashed.

 

I always follow @prisonchaplain's posts – especially those he starts.  I honor and respect his content because if his unusual valor of love, kindness and compassion.  However, there are some serious doctrine issues presented that I believe are at best very careless concerning sacred things for which more care should be taken; or at worse a horrible doctrinal heresy that misleads and blind the unsuspected and point them away from G-d. 

Often the worse and most insidious lies are not in the words spoken or presented but in that which is deliberately and carefully left out or specifically ignored.   Satan being the expert of lies and especially the art of leaving out critical truths in order to perpetrate a conceptual lie embedded in carefully crafted ignorance.

The first problem is the narrative presented by PC is the notion of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  It is contrary to the mercy of G-d to hold those incapable of distinguishing good from evil; accountable – and thus worthy of “punishments” or rebellion against law.    Obviously one might think or argue that G-d possesses knowledge of Good and evil.   No doubt G-d is knowledgeable of all things good but to claim G-d is the master of evil can carry misleading insinuations.   The partial truth that Satan crafts as a lie is that that knowing good and evil will result in Adam and Eve being like G-d.  The truth is that without knowledge of good and evil no one can be like G-d or can they be loyal to G-d, obedient to his laws and will, or one with him.  The lie is the insinuation that this (partaking of the fruit of the tree) is all that is necessary.  This little fact is the first problem with PC’s post.

The second great lie of this post is that being like G-d ends our need for him.  This is one of the grand demonic lies of the Great Apostasy of Traditional Christianity – and I will prove the flagrant error of this hideous doctrine.   Mastery of the ability of someone else does not detour our need and dependence on them.  If someone is a master of love and compassion – so much so that they are also able to teach us to master love and compassion ourselves – The declaration that with such knowledge and ability, we are no longer are in need of anyone else also capable of love and compassion is too great a lie for me to ignore.   No!  The truth is that the more me master love and compassion the more we are tied to and dependent on those that unite with us in love and compassion. 

The reason I chose love as the proof of the lie that being like G-d ends our need and dependency on him and his love is not an accident – for we know, by divine decree, that “G-d is Love”!  No one, regardless of their knowledge and abilities is void of the need of love.  Those that love most benefit the most in being loved.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 8:39 AM, Carborendum said:

If you can't spell a word more than one way, you have no imagination.

If you were making an attempt to quote me – my actual quote is:

Quote

“If you only know one way to spell a word – you are uneducated.”

 

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
17 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

What if the "becoming like God" takes place in mortality, by one who rejects God's council in favor of his/her own wisdom? Would that person's deciding of right and wrong be based, at least primarily, upon that notoriously subjective standard of individual conscience?

I believe you and FP are talking about two different things.  At least I hope so.

Quote

3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed acherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—

4 And thus we see, that there was a atime granted unto man to repent, yea, a bprobationary time, a time to repent and serve God.

Alma 42: 3-4

As you can see, Alma gives a commentary on the Genesis story.  The bolded portion is something that is a part of LDS theology.  This does not mean we were gods at that point.  it does not mean we were perfected.  It simply means we obtained ONE characteristic that was similar to an characteristic of God.  And even then, just like many traits we fallible humans have, it may not be consistent or at least not consistently applied.

We have the trait of charity or mercy at times -- traist like unto God.  But are we charitable all the time?  Are we merciful at all times?  For either trait are we perfectly charitable or merciful?

In the same way, when we recognize the difference between good and evil, right and wrong, we obtain a characteristic of God.  Animals don't have such a characteristic.  When we don't know right from wrong or good and evil, we're no different than animals.  But when we listen to that conscience and are able to discern such a thing, then...

Quote
It is twice blessed:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest. It becomes
The thronèd monarch better than his crown.
His scepter shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings,
But mercy is above this sceptered sway.
It is enthronèd in the hearts of kings.
It is an attribute to God himself.
And earthly power doth then show likest God’s
-- Merchant of Venice Act 5, Sc 1

I don't see how obtaining such characteristics "like God" necessarily means we're going to fall into pride.  On the contrary, I believe such characteristics would make us more humble for we truly know our right place in relation to God -- that we are His children, not His maker.  

The problem is that Satan has his counterfeits to everything good that comes from God.  When we know good from evil, that is a blessing.  When believe we can make up our own idea of good and evil, that is a curse, and is the very definition of pride.  In fact, that is exactly the crime that caused Lucifer to fall.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Armin I would be way out of my depth to weigh out whether the benefits package you described is reasonable or extravagant to grant bishops (whom I understand to be overseers of pastors/bishops, perhaps most similar to a full-time Stake President, in LDS church governance).  In our prison system, the "bishops" would probably be equivalent to our program administrators, and would rank GS13 or GS 14, on the government scale.  Given the education, experience, and skill sets required, our civil service system ranked them at that level. I believe it is somewhat similar (fewer extra benefits, but more base salary).  All that to say, I can't comment on countries that government-sponsor entire denominations. It is very contrary to the American experience, even though our founders were predominantly motivated by religion. However, my gut-level response to your words is that your government may be generous, but I'm not sure it rises to the level of ostentation.

@Traveler Probably one of our biggest disagreements is whether Adam & Eve were culpable in their choice. The Bible account leads me to believe they were. God told them what the rule was and what the consequences were. He held them accountable when they chose disobedience. Given God's inherent justice, their punishment was fair.  As for seeking to be like God, I can agree that when we do so "under God" we find blessing, but when we do so apart from God we find failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

I believe you and FP are talking about two different things.  At least I hope so.

 

I believe our meanings are different. The OP was originally put on LInkedIn and Facebook, and did not refer to LDS theology.  I debated within myself whether I should post this in General, but felt the implications were to theological.  The "becoming like God" I have in mind is more along the lines of Postmodernism--I know right and wrong for me, and I don't need a church, a book, or a spiritual leader telling me what to do.  I will do what's right for me.  After all, there is no ultimate truth--just my truth and your truth.

Ironically, the LDS view of exaltation, while something we traditionalists reject, at least falls in line with our expectation to live forever, rule with God, and gain "glorified bodies." Also, the route to your exaltation is certainly NOT to embrace postmodernism as a means of practicing. Rather, at least two posts in this string of have stated that it comes through allegiance with God and dependence on him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

 

@Traveler Probably one of our biggest disagreements is whether Adam & Eve were culpable in their choice. The Bible account leads me to believe they were. God told them what the rule was and what the consequences were. He held them accountable when they chose disobedience. Given God's inherent justice, their punishment was fair.  As for seeking to be like God, I can agree that when we do so "under God" we find blessing, but when we do so apart from God we find failure.

 

I would submit that Adam and Eve are no more culpable than you or me.  My main point is the misunderstanding of the symbolic meaning of the Tree of life – including the fruit of the tree – and what choice was made concerning the tree and your complicity (as also mine) that requires us (with Adam and Eve) to depend on the Messiah – Jesus (as we call Christ).

Perhaps we have some agreement of “becoming like G-d”.  From scripture, we are given to understand that the only true or actual way to become like G-d is through Jesus Christ.  That the mission is to present us (he being our advocate) to G-d the Father to be one with both the Father and himself.  Or as the scriptures testify – to be like Him. 

That it is possible to be like G-d by following Satan is a lie – including Satan’s attempt to be like G-d is a lie.  He never desired any such thing – he has, from the beginning, wanted to destroy G-d and G-d’s kingdom and all that would be like G-d - including his efforts to prevent anyone becoming one with G-d.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

What if the "becoming like God" takes place in mortality, by one who rejects God's council in favor of his/her own wisdom? Would that person's deciding of right and wrong be based, at least primarily, upon that notoriously subjective standard of individual conscience?

You could become a law unto yourself.  This is not becoming like God.  The statement is somewhat of an oxymoron.

God walks on the razor's edge of stable creation.  Perfect in mercy and justice, which grants him the trust and love of creation.  The only way to rule over beings with free will is to have their devotion and for them to grant unto you their voluntary obedience.

Someone who is a law unto himself and wishes the long term allegiance of beings with free-will, to grant unto him dominion, will find the balance difficult to achieve outside of God's system or one like unto it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things of interests in LDS traditions (rather than actual doctrine) is that we should celebrate the fall.  This is actually kind of mysterious.

In Nephi, It discusses Eve being happy because due to the events of what happened in the fall, they were able to have children together, and because they were able to have children together, they were able to have joy.

The BIG question that comes up is...why couldn't they have had children in the Garden of Eden?  What was there preventing them.  Unless having marital relations is somehow evil in it's action (in which case, that brings up a whole new slew of questions), then what reason is there that they could not have children?

Now it is obvious, if Eve took the fruit, she would have been cast out and Adam would not have been.  Without her there it would be impossible for Adam to have children on his own.  In that instance, if they wished to have children, he had to follow her.  However, prior to that, what prevented them?

It does not say.

Secondly, The fall came about perhaps due to mistrust in the Lord and trust in someone else.  IF Adam and Eve had kept the commandment of the Lord to not partake of the Fruit, what would have happened?  Is it possible that the Lord already had a plan, and this plan was the primary and original plan.  That IF Adam and Eve fell, it was a back up...a what if...and that backup (because the Lord plans for all possibilities) is the plan we are now on?

We know that the Lord always has backups of backups of backups (for example, Saul, and then David).

So, why couldn't the plan have gone forward without the fall?  I do not recall reading anywhere in the scriptures that the fall was necessary, only that because of the fall a Savior is necessary to save or redeem men from it.

Many LDS say we should celebrate the fall of Adam, but is this scripturally sound doctrine?

The thing is, we do not know what the plan was if Adam had been completely obedient without any transgression.  It is very possible that the Lord had a plan already, and Adam needed not to transgress in order for the plan to progress.

Otherwise, it would seem that obedience is punished, while disobedience is rewarded.  That seems a tad off. 

This is more of some thoughts I've had regarding these things, rather than my opinions, beliefs, or anything else.  It is when I read the scriptures, I don't see anything that states the fall was necessary or mandatory.  I see that Eve got joy from some of the results of it later on (in the book of Mormon), but I do not see anything that says the plan would have failed because Adam was obedient rather than transgressing.

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