romans8

The Fall - Blessings or Punishments?

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

The argument of a closed canon is not just weak it is historically inaccurate upon many points but I will cover just three.  First - the Book of Revelation was not the last Book of the New Testament to be completed - according to tradition.  Second - to assume that if a period of time passes without additional scripture that a pause is proof that scripture has completed and is closed - would negate the entire New Testament.   Third - the idea of canon is from the pagan Greeks (not anywhere in scripture).  There is no Bilabial scripture that indicates what is scripture or how scripture is to be determined.  The creation of a Bible was not foretold or revealed in any Bible scripture. 

The canon scripture was man made - not by divine command.  ...

Our chapel library has volumes of New Testament-era writings that were rejected. Some of them contain recognized heresies, like the Gospel of Thomas (Gnosticism). I remember the term psuedepigrapha,  which referred to false writings. Indeed, none of these have made it into the church's approved writings either. So, while there may be no prooftext, "The LORD declareth that my church leadership shall produced a fixed list of approved writings," it does seem that believers have always accepted that some works were of the Spirit and others were not. Also, while the second argument is humorous, it's a little different when a decade or two pass vs. 1,800 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jonah said:

How?

What gives you the impression Adam met the serpent first or had any concern about
him?  And what kind of warning could he have given her?

What Carb said. ;)

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

This is one of the advantages we have over other sects.  You can accept the fact that you only have one book of scripture and claim it is all you need.  And that is your choice.

But when we read more scriptures we find rich treasures of knowledge that you would reject.  And we know it is from the Lord because the Holy Spirit tells us it is so.

 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2020 at 4:09 PM, prisonchaplain said:

Our chapel library has volumes of New Testament-era writings that were rejected. Some of them contain recognized heresies, like the Gospel of Thomas (Gnosticism). I remember the term psuedepigrapha,  which referred to false writings. Indeed, none of these have made it into the church's approved writings either. So, while there may be no prooftext, "The LORD declareth that my church leadership shall produced a fixed list of approved writings," it does seem that believers have always accepted that some works were of the Spirit and others were not. Also, while the second argument is humorous, it's a little different when a decade or two pass vs. 1,800 years. 

What we all ought to be concerned about is the entire historical context in which the Biblical scriptures were defined and who and under what circumstances - defined sacred texts from which the Bible was created and then evolved into what we have today.  For example, Josephus explained that his purpose in writing the "Traditions of the Jews" was explicitly because of efforts to change and alter those traditions.  Most of the New Testament (and to some extent even the Gospels) were written to prevent the creeping of heresies (especially from the Hellenists - Pagans) into the theology of the "flock", preventing "Unity in the faith".  We know that heresies took firm hold during the era of Charlemagne that was given the title of "Defender of the Faith" for spreading Christianity in northern Europe through the slash and burn method of murdering entire communities that did not completely accept Christianity and allowed anyone to practice paganism.   In fact from the time the Bible was defined and established - for the 1800 years you mentioned - the large majority of the wars fought - were initiated by the same institutions within Christianity that closed the canon of scripture.  

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jonah  One consideration beyond benefit of curse is - was the fall necessary?  Could mankind obtain the knowledge of good and therefor become "good" without the fall?

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Traveler said:

What we all ought to be concerned about is the entire historical context in which the Biblical scriptures were defined and who and under what circumstances - defined sacred texts from which the Bible was created and then evolved into what we have today.  For example, Josephus explained that his purpose in writing the "Traditions of the Jews" was explicitly because of efforts to change and alter those traditions.  Most of the New Testament (and to some extent even the Gospels) were written to prevent the creeping of heresies (especially from the Hellenists - Pagans) into the theology of the "flock", preventing "Unity in the faith".  We know that heresies took firm hold during the era of Charlemagne that was given the title of "Defender of the Faith" for spreading Christianity in northern Europe through the slash and burn method of murdering entire communities that did not completely accept Christianity and allowed anyone to practice paganism.   In fact from the time the Bible was defined and established - for the 1800 years you mentioned - the large majority of the wars fought - were initiated by the same institutions within Christianity that closed the canon of scripture.  

 

The Traveler

This could turn into a discussion about history and interpretation. However, given the church doctrine of the Great Apostasy, suffice to say that the question of how much the Holy Spirit guided a broken, sin-filled humanity (yes, including church leadership) is something we would answer based on whether we accept that teaching or not. No Protestant, and very few Catholics, would argue that the post-apostolic bishops and cardinals were without sin. Very few deny that some terrible actions were carried out in the name of God. Yet, just as we oppose those who want to define our nation (USA) based primarily on slavery and racial/gender oppression, so we traditionalists would reject church history interpretations that focused primarily on the sins of leadership.

Share this post


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

This could turn into a discussion about history and interpretation. However, given the church doctrine of the Great Apostasy, suffice to say that the question of how much the Holy Spirit guided a broken, sin-filled humanity (yes, including church leadership) is something we would answer based on whether we accept that teaching or not. No Protestant, and very few Catholics, would argue that the post-apostolic bishops and cardinals were without sin. Very few deny that some terrible actions were carried out in the name of God. Yet, just as we oppose those who want to define our nation (USA) based primarily on slavery and racial/gender oppression, so we traditionalists would reject church history interpretations that focused primarily on the sins of leadership.

It is not individuals that concern me but rather institutions.  I realize that individuals make up institutions and individuals can be problematic.   When an individual fails in their responsibility; that is quite different than the failure of a institution.  This is because institutions span generations.  If institutions were reliable - we would all be Catholic.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Traveler said:

It is not individuals that concern me but rather institutions.  I realize that individuals make up institutions and individuals can be problematic.   When an individual fails in their responsibility; that is quite different than the failure of a institution.  This is because institutions span generations.  If institutions were reliable - we would all be Catholic.

 

The Traveler

Institution corruption? Institutional racism? Hmmm. Yes, it happened--at least in the view of non-Catholic Christians. And, it happens. The Salvation Army started because the uptown Methodists struggled too much with accepting the redeemed/recovering alcoholics that were being brought into their churches. Pentecostal churches and denominations formed because the churches of the early 20th century weren't having that kind of religion. Many young ministers that grew up in denominations choose to plant non-denominational churches so they can make changes more quickly, without the impediments that church governance can bring.

Still--I'm conservative, and so slow to cry corruption. Jesus was the last religious revolutionary I want to celebrate. Even Martin Luther was an unfortunate necessity. And, though my Pentecostal forefathers were loathe to form denominations (since they had booted them all out), it is amazing how quickly we formed our own "cooperative fellowships." 🙂

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


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

Institution corruption? Institutional racism? Hmmm. Yes, it happened--at least in the view of non-Catholic Christians. And, it happens. The Salvation Army started because the uptown Methodists struggled too much with accepting the redeemed/recovering alcoholics that were being brought into their churches. Pentecostal churches and denominations formed because the churches of the early 20th century weren't having that kind of religion. Many young ministers that grew up in denominations choose to plant non-denominational churches so they can make changes more quickly, without the impediments that church governance can bring.

Still--I'm conservative, and so slow to cry corruption. Jesus was the last religious revolutionary I want to celebrate. Even Martin Luther was an unfortunate necessity. And, though my Pentecostal forefathers were loathe to form denominations (since they had booted them all out), it is amazing how quickly we formed our own "cooperative fellowships." 🙂

I am grateful for our brutally honest dialog.  Though it seems that we are often on opposite sides of things - I do not believe it so.  It is just that rehashing agreements just do not seem as fun and exciting as differences.  I fully expect that we will meet on the other side of life as better friends than here.  Perhaps one of the most important doctrines (that I believe is not fully understood) is "Repentance" or a change of mind and heart.   I do not know if I'm conservative or liberal concerning repentance.  I believe change is a necessary part of the divine "Path" or "Way".  That success is not falling but rather getting back up with renewed intent from falling.   Sometime success requires failure.  This thread discusses what is called "The Fall".  And we all fall.  

There is consequence from a fall.  It is obvious to me that G-d could not command or demand a fall even if there was a long (eternal) benefit.  It had to be a choice.  I cannot accept such a choice to be forced upon beings not yet created.  But I am not so worried about the fall as I am the means of getting back up (returning to grace).  Thus the Atonement mitigates all arguments, disagreements, misunderstanding and all else that is not good that could come from the fall.  To me it is obvious why a G-d would create a system or plan with a fall experience.  At least two reasons.  One - to learn to move beyond a fall.  And Two - to have compassion for those that fall.  I believe that both are attributes of G-d - which I understand to be controversial as a learned intelligent trait. 

 

The Traveler 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2020 at 7:52 PM, Carborendum said:

What exactly do you believe "punishment" from God actually means anyway? -- I really need to know where you're coming from here to properly answer your question about Adam and Eve being punished.

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punishment

Suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution
A penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure

I see several of these in the Fall.

- They became mortal (Genesis 2:!7)
- Adam felt fear (Genesis 3:10).
- The relationship between Adam and Eve changed. Adam would rule over Eve. Her desire would be to
  her husband (verse 16). 
- Eve would bring forth children in sorrow (verse 16)
- The ground was cursed and in sorrow would Adam eat of its produce (verse 17)
- Thorns and thistles would mare the earth's produce (verse 17)
- Adam would have to work hard for food (verse 18).
- They were expelled from the garden and God's presence (verses 23-24)

Matteo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, romans8 said:

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punishment

Suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution
A penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure

Good.  That works.  Now, let's go back to your example of missing out on Job A and getting Job B.  You say that you didn't do anything wrong to miss out on Job A.  That may be so in the one case you gave.  But what about others?

For someone who as really fallen far, many who rise from that speak of it as a blessing to have received the punishment.  It woke them up.  They turned themselves around because of that punishment -- that wake up call.  Please see the movie "Unmiracle."https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3300712/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

The concept of a "blessing in disguise" goes much further than your single example in your life.  And if you've never experienced it, don't take this the wrong way, but I feel sorry for you.

Was Jesus punished for doing anything wrong?  To feel all the pains of all our sins  certainly seems like a punishment per your definitions above.  Yet what a blessing to both Him and to the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2020 at 11:47 AM, Traveler said:

@Jonah  One consideration beyond benefit of curse is - was the fall necessary?  Could mankind obtain the knowledge of good and therefor become "good" without the fall?

 

The Traveler

From a previous post, you seem to believe the cause is the Atonement and the effect
is the Fall.  I believe the cause is the Fall and the effect is the need for the Atonement.

Before I can try to answer this question, I need to understand your definition.  What 
exactly do you mean by the *knowledge of good* and how do you believe Adam and
Eve were *not good* before the Fall?

You omitted *evil* from your post.  When do you believe Adam and Eve became evil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jonah said:

From a previous post, you seem to believe the cause is the Atonement and the effect
is the Fall.  I believe the cause is the Fall and the effect is the need for the Atonement.

Neither of those ideas you present are correct.

This Earth and life is how God always intended it & according to His plan.  God never went "oh shoot, they ate the fruit, guess I now need to come up with a backup plan to fix this."

2 hours ago, Jonah said:

Before I can try to answer this question, I need to understand your definition.  What 
exactly do you mean by the *knowledge of good* and how do you believe Adam and
Eve were *not good* before the Fall?

You omitted *evil* from your post.  When do you believe Adam and Eve became evil?

Knowledge of good: knowing what is good, happiness, joy, glory, lawfulness, light, etc. 

Do you believe those can be learned is a person is kept in an environment where there is no bad, they never are hurt or sad, no lawlessness, no darkness, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jonah said:

From a previous post, you seem to believe the cause is the Atonement and the effect
is the Fall.  I believe the cause is the Fall and the effect is the need for the Atonement.

Before I can try to answer this question, I need to understand your definition.  What 
exactly do you mean by the *knowledge of good* and how do you believe Adam and
Eve were *not good* before the Fall?

You omitted *evil* from your post.  When do you believe Adam and Eve became evil?

It is obvious that you and I believe different things.  To answer your question concerning my belief:

1.  I believe G-d is the root cause and that the fall was an effect of the circumstances G-d created in Eden. 

2. The fall enabled death and eternal life - which is the symbolic fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  If you require an explanation - Scripture tells us that the "wages of sin is death".  This is the same symbolism of partaking of the fruit of knowledge of evil but stated with different symbolism.  Thus the fruit of evil is death.  So tasting of the fruit of evil brings about (enables) the experience of death.  Tasting of the good fruit of the Tree is the experience of the Atonement of Christ.  The scriptures tell us that only by the atonement of Christ can we (mankind) be resurrected to eternal life.  There is no other possible way to eternal life except through the atonement of Christ - the scriptures could not be more clear about this point.

3. There is no salvation without eternal life.  G-d is the cause that bring about the effects by which we can enjoy eternal life - which could only come about through partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

4. To enable G-d's plan of salvation there must be a Adam and Eve to sacrifice themselves to fall that man might be - And a Christ (which means "The anointed one") must complete - through sacrifice of himself that man can be resurrected to Eternal Life.

5. Participating in G-d's plan of Salvation - of necessity required a fall and and an atonement.  This is why all mankind will justly taste of death and then kneel and confess that Jesus is the Christ.

 

I have attempted to understand what "other Christians" believe - which is very confusing to me because of all the contradictions which denigrate G-d and deny his wisdom and foresight.

 

The Traveler 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2020 at 2:33 PM, Jane_Doe said:

Knowledge of good: knowing what is good, happiness, joy, glory, lawfulness, light, etc.

According to this church teaching in the Friend magazine back in 1973, Adam and Eve were very
happy in the garden before the Fall.  Poster @romans8 mentioned it earlier.

Adam and Eve were happy in their beautiful home in the Garden of Eden, for they had been given
everything they could want for food and for pleasure. They knew nothing of evil, for their world
was all good.  Often in the cool of early evening the Lord would walk and talk with them, and their
happiness was complete.

They did not need to learn happiness because they were already experiencing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2020 at 12:20 AM, Traveler said:

2. The fall enabled death and eternal life - which is the symbolic fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  If you require an explanation - Scripture tells us that the "wages of sin is death".  This is the same symbolism of partaking of the fruit of knowledge of evil but stated with different symbolism.  Thus the fruit of evil is death.  So tasting of the fruit of evil brings about (enables) the experience of death.  Tasting of the good fruit of the Tree is the experience of the Atonement of Christ.  The scriptures tell us that only by the atonement of Christ can we (mankind) be resurrected to eternal life.  There is no other possible way to eternal life except through the atonement of Christ - the scriptures could not be more clear about this point.

3. There is no salvation without eternal life.  G-d is the cause that bring about the effects by which we can enjoy eternal life - which could only come about through partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

4. To enable G-d's plan of salvation there must be a Adam and Eve to sacrifice themselves to fall that man might be - And a Christ (which means "The anointed one") must complete - through sacrifice of himself that man can be resurrected to Eternal Life.

Do you believe the Fall is the result of eating from a literal tree that was forbidden?  If no, what
are all the trees in the garden symbolic of?

Share this post


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

According to this church teaching in the Friend magazine back in 1973, Adam and Eve were very
happy in the garden before the Fall.  Poster @romans8 mentioned it earlier.

Adam and Eve were happy in their beautiful home in the Garden of Eden, for they had been given
everything they could want for food and for pleasure. They knew nothing of evil, for their world
was all good.  Often in the cool of early evening the Lord would walk and talk with them, and their
happiness was complete.

They did not need to learn happiness because they were already experiencing it.

@Jonah, rather than actually addressing my post and questions (you know actually having a theological discussion), you've completely ignored me to instead focus on a 50 year old printing of a children's magazine.  

I'm sorry, but such is incredibly disrespectful, disregarding me, showing that you've no interest in real Christian study or behavior, and is downright trolling. 

Edited by Jane_Doe

Share this post


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

Do you believe the Fall is the result of eating from a literal tree that was forbidden?  If no, what
are all the trees in the garden symbolic of?

OK, now we're back to trolling.

If one tree (THE one tree) was symbolic then ALL the trees in the garden must have some symbolic meaning even though they were not named, and barely even mentioned.  Yup. They MUST have some symbolic meaning or else the ENTIRE interpretation is suspect.

Boy, I'm sold.

So, that must mean that you also believe in the plurality of gods. Luke 15:6.  If everything has a symbolic meaning in every story, then who were the Lord's neighbors and friends?  It can't be us (His children because we are the sheep).  So, who are they?

Who are the hired servants in Luke 15:19?  The prodigal son was one of his sons.  Servants were who?  The son was willing to be one of them. What of the other men in the story?  Who were they?  Random men, hired servants, sons, animals... you've got a lot of symbols to figure out, don't you?  What about the fatted calf?  It was raised and fatted, killed, consumed, and was no more.  Gone.  Bye-bye.  What is that symbolic of?  What is its importance?

I understand that you're reading the Adam and Eve story as nothing but literal.  No symbolism at all.  Nothing to learn here.  Just a historical record.  Then why read it?  What do we gain from it?  What lesson is there if it is nothing more than a literal recitation of history?  Satan bad. God good.  Adam and Eve sinned.  They were punished.

Woo-hoo.  OK.  Very inspiring.  Very edifying.  Really educational.  Thanks for that.  Moving on.

No, when reading anything (whether parables, or literal histories) there are lessons.  How often does the Lord use parables, analogies, symbols?  How about all the time?  But interpreting such can be done by individuals and they ALL get different ideas for the interpretation thereof.  How do you know yours is right?  I can read the same passage in the Bible -- the exact same words -- and I'll get a different interpretation than you.  What is your justification for believing you're right?

Edited by Carborendum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jonah said:

According to this church teaching in the Friend magazine back in 1973, Adam and Eve were very
happy in the garden before the Fall.  Poster @romans8 mentioned it earlier.

Adam and Eve were happy in their beautiful home in the Garden of Eden, for they had been given
everything they could want for food and for pleasure. They knew nothing of evil, for their world
was all good.  Often in the cool of early evening the Lord would walk and talk with them, and their
happiness was complete.

They did not need to learn happiness because they were already experiencing it.

And now we're back to cutting and pasting excerpts as specifically pointed out by your anti-Mormon sources.  Yes, from the Church website.  But specifically couched in context that doesn't actually say what you purport that it says.

That was written in a CHILREN'S MAGAZINE.  Written to a childish audience with a child's understanding.  But that seems to be what you agree with.  News for you:  There's more to learn from the story.  Let's see what the Book of Mormon says:

Quote

...Wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One hath given, unto the inflicting of the punishment which is affixed, which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement—

For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my firstborn in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad...

...it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter...

...wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

  --  2 Ne 2: 10,11,15, & 23

Now, if your goal is to be "as a little child" then be meek, humble, and innocent.  But if your intent is to be a brattish know-it-all who won't listen to anyone, who tries to prove everyone else wrong... I don't believe that was what Jesus was talking about.

Edited by Carborendum

Share this post


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

Do you believe the Fall is the result of eating from a literal tree that was forbidden?  If no, what
are all the trees in the garden symbolic of?

As I express my beliefs - I would stress that I am most motivated by logic but I realize that we live in mortality and that there is an "event horizon"  of our knowledge prior to birth and following death such that our beliefs rely greatly on subjections of faith.  Thus, if I can encounter better explanations (which I am always seeking understanding and spiritual confirmation) I will most happily modify my beliefs.  If I seem to reject various notions - it is because I have previously considered them and have not been able to reconcile contradictions.  

I am inclined to interpret the Eden epoch as greatly symbolic.  For example, most often names recorded in ancient scripture are titles designating a person's destiny.  It is not unusual for a person to be given divine guidance at birth as to what name they should be given (examples are John the Baptist and Jesus).  On other occasions a person's name may be changed by divine decree upon establishing a covenant with G-d (examples Abraham and Israel).  The names of Adam and Eve both carry important symbolism.  The name or title Adam is a symbolic expression of all mankind.   The name or title Eve is a symbolic expression of "the mother of all living".

Because of my science background - there is a preponderance of evidence that this earth has been inhabited for millions of years with a wide variety of evolving creatures.  In addition there is a preponderance of evidence that modern man has existed for many thousands of years greater that what can be accounted for with a literal interpretation of the Eden epoch.  I find it untenable to claim that a G-d of truth would create a young world to have so much empirical evidence of being magnitudes older.

As to trees in Eden there are only two trees that are interesting.  The two trees are first: the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the second: the Tree of Life.  If it is not obvious to you that the Tree of Life is symbolic of the Atonement of Christ - you ought to consider it and I would be interested in why you believe there is a literal tree that nullifies the need to accept the atonement of Christ and simply partake of that fruit.  If the Tree of Life is symbolic - it is difficult to insist that the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is literal.

I do believe it is more important to understand why a person believes something to be true than it is what they believe to be true.

I hope you will share what you believe about the Eden epoch and why you believe it.  I also hope you will not be upset if I ask questions concerning your beliefs to help me understand what you have honestly considered.

 

The Traveler

 

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2020 at 10:06 AM, Carborendum said:

Good.  That works.

What about my list on the punishments upon Adam and Eve did you agree or disagree on?

 

Quote

Now, let's go back to your example of missing out on Job A and getting Job B.  You 
say that you didn't do anything wrong to miss out on Job A.  That may be so in the one case you gave.  
But what about others?

If you list some others, then I can comment.

 

Quote

For someone who as really fallen far, many who rise from that speak of it as a blessing to have 
received the punishment.  It woke them up.  They turned themselves around because of that punishment -- 
that wake up call.  Please see the movie "Unmiracle."https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3300712/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2

Upon eating from the forbidden tree, I see that Adam refused to take responsibility for his action. He 
indirectly blamed God for giving him the woman and directly blamed Eve for giving him the fruit. Eve also
refused to take responsibility and put the blame on the serpent.

When do you believe Adam and Eve awoke themselves and turned themselves around because of their punishment?
What exactly was their first punishment and what brought it about?

I have been punished for disobedience to God.  But I have never looked back and said I was happy to have 
disobeyed God because I learned from my mistake.  Take for example driving a car.  Driving a car in Zermatt is 
not permitted.  It's against the law.  Now suppose I drive my car there and receive a $200 Franc fine.  I have 
to go to court, fill in some paper work, and eventually pay the fine to the clerk.  I gained  some knowledge and
experience - I learn where the court is located - I learn how to fill in the paper work - I learn how to get 
myself off the record so I had nothing outstanding against me - and I learn that in some cases I can do this
over the Internet instead of visiting the court personally.

In hindsight, it would have been better if I followed the law and not broken it.  The knowledge that I gained 
by my disobedience were not blessings from God.  It was just the result of my learning what happens when I do 
what I am not supposed to do.  I think in the United States this is referred to something like going to the 
school of hard knocks. 

 

Quote

The concept of a "blessing in disguise" goes much further than your single example in your life.  And 
if you've never experienced it, don't take this the wrong way, but I feel sorry for you.

Would you give me one example when God blessed you for disobeying Him?

If my parents tell me not to touch the hot stove because I will get burned/hurt and I touch it and get 
burned/hurt, am I blessed by my parents for learning not to touch a hot stove in the future?  I would say 
no.  Should I also disobey my parents on the handling of hot water, pour that on my hand, so that I can
get experience of what it feels like to get burned and to learn the lesson not to do that again? I would
say no.

 

Quote

Was Jesus punished for doing anything wrong?  To feel all the pains of all our sins  certainly seems 
like a punishment per your definitions above.  Yet what a blessing to both Him and to the world

Jesus took our place.  He was punished (bruised) for our transgressions so that we would not experience the wrath 
of God on us for sin. Jesus was not doing anything wrong. Was this a blessing?  Yes. For Christ's obedience; not 
for our disobedience.

Was this a blessing in disguise?   Not in the sense of an Atonement based on our wilfull disobedience. I could 
answer that question with another similar one.  Should I sin more so that I can get more knowledge and experience 
so that God can cleanse more of my sin by His Atonement?  No.

Here is something that I would consider a blessing in disguise.  I apply for a job that I really like. I am
competing with about 20 other applicants and I don't get the job.  A week later I apply for another job,
which ends up being better than the first job that I failed to get. This is what I see as a blessing in disguise.
Was it based on obedience?  No.  On disobedience?  No.  On God knowing what is better for me?  Yes.

 

Edited by romans8
forgot some things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2020 at 7:14 AM, romans8 said:

Jesus took our place.  He was punished (bruised) for our transgressions so that we would not experience the wrath 
of God on us for sin. Jesus was not doing anything wrong. Was this a blessing?  Yes. For Christ's obedience; not 
for our disobedience.

How can a honest and just G-d punish Jesus for our transgressions?  Now is it justice, truth and honesty for Jesus to take our place?

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@romans8 here is a link that might give further insight into our beliefs on the matter.  I think this is a subject where even members misinterpret some times. This is from Bro Ludlow a scholar so while not an actual general authority from our Church I think his remarks have a lot of substance.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/1973/09/q-and-a-questions-and-answers/why-did-the-lord-command-adam-and-eve-to-multiply-in-the-garden-of-eden-when-they-could-not-have-children-before-the-fall?lang=eng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2020 at 8:14 AM, romans8 said:

When do you believe Adam and Eve awoke themselves and turned themselves around because of their punishment?

I would hope that you wouldn't deliberately misquote me in order to make your point.  That gives the impression that you're not really trying to get at the truth, but simply win an argument.

On 10/17/2020 at 9:06 AM, Carborendum said:

It woke them up.  They turned themselves around because of that punishment -- that wake up call. 

Don't twist other people's words and you'll find it easier to understand them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2020 at 11:31 AM, Carborendum said:

I would hope that you wouldn't deliberately misquote me in order to make your point.  That gives the impression that you're not really trying to get at the truth, but simply win an argument.

Don't twist other people's words and you'll find it easier to understand them.

Sorry to have misquoted you.  That was not my intention.   Based on the definition of punishment
that I mentioned earlier, which parts of my list did you agree or disagree with?

Matteo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2020 at 3:50 PM, laronius said:

@romans8 here is a link that might give further insight into our beliefs on the matter.  I think this is a subject where even members misinterpret some times. This is from Bro Ludlow a scholar so while not an actual general authority from our Church I think his remarks have a lot of substance.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/1973/09/q-and-a-questions-and-answers/why-did-the-lord-command-adam-and-eve-to-multiply-in-the-garden-of-eden-when-they-could-not-have-children-before-the-fall?lang=eng

Thank you Laronius. 

To prevent members from misinterpreting, are there teachings by leaders which clarify the punishments upon Adam 
and Eve in the episode of the Fall?

Matteo

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