Some questions about 2 Nephi 2


Recommended Posts

I am reading the first part of this chapter and have some difficulty understanding its meaning.  
Rather than break it up into separate threads, it might be easier to group the questions into 
the same thread.
 

#1 - Opposition.

"For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born 
in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither 
holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound 
in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life 
neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor 
insensibility
".

Were Adam and Eve considered dead because they had neither happiness/joy nor misery before 
the Fall?  


#2 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves.

"Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could 
not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other".

Were Adam and Eve able to act for themselves and perform anything God had tasked them with 
and to eat from any of the permitted trees *before* Satan enticed Eve to eat from the forbidden 
tree?  Or could they only act for themselves after being enticed by Satan?


#3 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves is again mentioned in Alma 12:31.

"Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments 
as to things which were temporal, and becoming as gods, knowing good from evil, placing 
themselves in a state to act, or being placed in a state to act according to their wills and 
pleasures, whether to do evil or to do good"

Did they place themselves in a state to act after they ate from the forbidden fruit or were 
they already in a God-given state to act to obey or disobey before the Fall?

What commandments (plural) did they transgress to become as gods?


#4 - Becoming as gods.

Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2022 at 9:50 AM, romans8 said:

...wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life 
neither death...

Were Adam and Eve considered dead because they had neither happiness/joy nor misery before 
the Fall?  

This is surprisingly fresh coming from you. It is a very insightful question.  The answer comes from 

Quote

Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.

-- 1 Ne 1:2

Explanation: To the ancient Jews (of which Nephi was one) the word attributed to "living" human beings referred to animated things (not vegetation, for example).  And the fact that Adam and Eve were able to move around, they were living. 

But Nephi is trying to emphasize that such life has no meaning if there isn't an ability to do something meaningful (duh).  If the only choices they can make are things that don't make a difference, they aren't really alive in the spiritual sense.  So, they simply "exist" as a rock or a tree does.

So, the fundamental difference between Christ's teachings and mainstream Christianity is that of choice.  Christ taught that we can choose between Liberty and Eternal Life or captivity and death.  The ultimate death is to have no choices at all (Hell).

Quote

#2 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves.

"Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could 
not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other".

Were Adam and Eve able to act for themselves and perform anything God had tasked them with 
and to eat from any of the permitted trees *before* Satan enticed Eve to eat from the forbidden 
tree?  Or could they only act for themselves after being enticed by Satan?

You're asking about an inherent ability vs the realization of that ability.  I have the ability to play the piano.  But if I can't find a piano, I can't actually play.

In the case of Adam and Eve, they could have always chosen to disobey God.  But they simply had no motivation to do so.  It was only after Satan put certain thoughts into their hearts that they discovered a motivation to do so.

Quote

#3 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves is again mentioned in Alma 12:31.

"Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments 
as to things which were temporal, and becoming as gods, knowing good from evil, placing 
themselves in a state to act, or being placed in a state to act according to their wills and 
pleasures, whether to do evil or to do good"

Did they place themselves in a state to act after they ate from the forbidden fruit or were 
they already in a God-given state to act to obey or disobey before the Fall?

What commandments (plural) did they transgress to become as gods?

You're misleading now.  Just because something happened after does not mean it was a direct result of (causation vs correlation).

The thing that made them "as gods" (see below) was the fact that they now had the ability to understand the nature of choice between good and evil.  But they only began to understand it after having experienced a real choice between good and evil.

Quote

#4 - Becoming as gods.

Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

What separates us from lower life forms?  Are we any different than apes?  Why?  Think about it.

The Church of Jesus Christ teaches that we were made "a little lower than angels" (Heb 2:9) and that He created man in His OWN IMAGE (Gen 1:27).  So, we share characteristics of divinity.  And one thing we share is our ability to choose between good and evil.

Adam and Eve were as little children.  Do children understand good and evil?  Only on an extremely rudimentary level.  But as we grow and become exposed to the differences, we begin to understand the real nature of good/evil and ability to choose between them. 

Whatever the forbidden fruit was (literal or figurative, doesn't matter) it represents our loss of innocence.  It represents our very real choice between what we know and understand to be good and evil.  Once Adam and Eve went through that process, they had real choices.  And they chose the good over the bad the remainder of their days.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, romans8 said:

#1 Were Adam and Eve considered dead because they had neither happiness/joy nor misery before 
the Fall?  

#2 Were Adam and Eve able to act for themselves and perform anything God had tasked them with 
and to eat from any of the permitted trees *before* Satan enticed Eve to eat from the forbidden 
tree?  Or could they only act for themselves after being enticed by Satan?

#3 Did they place themselves in a state to act after they ate from the forbidden fruit or were 
they already in a God-given state to act to obey or disobey before the Fall?

What commandments (plural) did they transgress to become as gods?

#4 Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

#1 Adam and Eve did not come into being when they were placed in the Garden of Eden. They lived, along with all of us, with God in the spirit world where opposition did exist. When they were placed in the Garden their environment, for a time, was pretty sterile. So I guess we could say that the environment was potentially "as dead" in that initially progress was restricted. Whether it was completely dead or just mostly dead (shoutout to Princess Bride fans) we may not know as I will talk about in my answer to question 2.

#2 While Satan was definitely a catalyst to make things happen in the Garden that doesn't necessarily mean there was no temptation before his involvement. Moses 4:12 tells us "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it became pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make her wise, she took of the fruit thereof..." While Satan definitely enticed Eve to partake of the fruit it is still possible that there was some enticement taking place before that, just apparently not enough to get Eve to partake of the fruit. Perhaps though Adam and Eve were sufficiently ignorant as to not find the fruit appealing at all prior to Satan. But it's very presence in the Garden makes me think that out of curiosity if nothing else Adam and Eve had to have experienced some enticement to partake of it. But that's just a guess.

#3 Adam and Eve's act is labeled a transgression and not a sin. A law was broken but in ignorance, meaning their childlike state did not allow them to fully understand the consequences of their choice. Once they experienced the consequences they started to gain the knowledge that would allow them to make informed decisions. Man cannot be condemned or saved in ignorance. They must know what they are choosing between and the breaking of any law further drives home that point.

#4 I think it's a true statement either way. I'm guessing they were only trying to get back to the original with that change but that's only a guess. Generally the capital G version refers to the Godhead whereas the lower case version refers to man's potential to become like them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, romans8 said:

I am reading the first part of this chapter and have some difficulty understanding its meaning.  
Rather than break it up into separate threads, it might be easier to group the questions into 
the same thread.
 

#1 - Opposition.

"For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born 
in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither 
holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound 
in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life 
neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor 
insensibility
".

Were Adam and Eve considered dead because they had neither happiness/joy nor misery before 
the Fall?  


#2 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves.

"Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could 
not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other".

Were Adam and Eve able to act for themselves and perform anything God had tasked them with 
and to eat from any of the permitted trees *before* Satan enticed Eve to eat from the forbidden 
tree?  Or could they only act for themselves after being enticed by Satan?


#3 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves is again mentioned in Alma 12:31.

"Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments 
as to things which were temporal, and becoming as gods, knowing good from evil, placing 
themselves in a state to act, or being placed in a state to act according to their wills and 
pleasures, whether to do evil or to do good"

Did they place themselves in a state to act after they ate from the forbidden fruit or were 
they already in a God-given state to act to obey or disobey before the Fall?

What commandments (plural) did they transgress to become as gods?


#4 - Becoming as gods.

Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

I believe you are getting into some very deep stuff - and shows critical thinking.  There are some posts before this one that are very good - I will try to add some thoughts.

Death is not a singular thing - The scriptures mention a "second" death and this makes death plural and not singular.  Anciently the term Hell meant death so in essence death is synonymous with hell.  We can assume then that when individual no longer to evolve (which is synonymous with change and repentance) they suffer a death and become bound.  The scientific definition of intelligence is the ability to learn and modify behavior.  Which is another view into being dead or no longer learning.

Obviously we did not have "knowledge" of good or evil prior to the fall.  We gain knowledge of evil through death - both the physical death (separated from the physical) and a spiritual death (which is being separated from G-d).  We gain knowledge of Good through the resurrection - both the physical resurrection (reinstated to the physical) and a spiritual resurrection where we are brought back to G-d for what is called the final judgement.

I would also say something about choice.  We cannot make a "True" choice unless we have knowledge of the possibilities.  If we are given a choice for what is behind door "A" or door "B" or door "C" - that is not a true choice but rather a guess.  I would also point out that a "change of mind" means that the initial choice was not a true choice and with the additional information our mind is changed.  I have attempted to explain this concept with agency - that if we do not know what we are doing or choosing - it cannot be and expression of agency.  Under such circumstance it is both merciful and just that we somehow be forgiven.    But if we choose in the full light of truth there can be no forgiveness - in LDS theology this is what happens with a "son of perdition". 

I personally believe that because man fell without the knowledge of good and evil that it became possible that man could repent and be forgiven.  This makes sense to me and as I understand - Jesus Christ being our proctor in the fall became the means by which we could repent - be forgiven and through his resurrection - death was overcome.

For me the LDS understanding and doctrine of a pre-existence, agency, the fall, and atonement, repentance, covenants and resurrection are the only religious understanding and doctrine that makes sense as I consider all that mortal life offers.  Without all the pieces - too much is missing and such becomes illogical to me.  This is a primary reason I have remained a covenant member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

The Traveler

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, romans8 said:

I am reading the first part of this chapter and have some difficulty understanding its meaning.  
Rather than break it up into separate threads, it might be easier to group the questions into 
the same thread.
 

#1 - Opposition.

"For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born 
in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither 
holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound 
in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life 
neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor 
insensibility
".

Were Adam and Eve considered dead because they had neither happiness/joy nor misery before 
the Fall?  

No. They were as dead, not dead. They were living beings, but for reasons that have not been fully explained, they apparently were not in full possession of their agency. (This is my interpretation of Church doctrine, and not itself Church doctrine.)

Quote

#2 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves.

"Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could 
not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other".

Were Adam and Eve able to act for themselves and perform anything God had tasked them with 
and to eat from any of the permitted trees *before* Satan enticed Eve to eat from the forbidden 
tree?  Or could they only act for themselves after being enticed by Satan?

See answer to #1 above. My understanding is that they were innocent, like children, and thus, perhaps, not fully in possession of their God-given agency. Again, this is my unofficial interpretation of LDS doctrine, nothing more.

Quote

#3 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves is again mentioned in Alma 12:31.

"Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments 
as to things which were temporal, and becoming as gods, knowing good from evil, placing 
themselves in a state to act, or being placed in a state to act according to their wills and 
pleasures, whether to do evil or to do good"

Did they place themselves in a state to act after they ate from the forbidden fruit or were 
they already in a God-given state to act to obey or disobey before the Fall?

Again, my understanding rather than official Church doctrine:

They clearly were placed in a state to obey or disobey when God gave them commandments. The Fall came as a result of their freely chosen transgression. Answering your unasked but apparently implicit question: Does this mean they were guilty of sin in a moral sense? I am not sure. Prophets have taught that they were not guilty of sin, but of breaking a law that resulted in natural consequences (like a child touching a hot oven that they were told not to touch). This is complicated by God's proclamation to Adam, "Behold I have forgiven thee thy transgression in the Garden of Eden." (Moses 6:53) God forgives sin, so this might seem to indicate that Adam and Eve sinned in transgressing God's explicit commandment.

On the other hand, we are not told that (for example) little children cannot transgress God's commandments; clearly, they can. Rather, we are told that they need not account for their actions to God. This removes the moral, but not the spiritual or physical, consequences of the transgression. Perhaps such was the case with our first parents. In any case, what we can be sure of is that Adam was one of the greatest prophets who ever lived and the father of the human race, and Eve, the mother of all living, was a woman who was specifically fitted to him.

Quote

What commandments (plural) did they transgress to become as gods?

Genesis 3:3 "But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."

Quote

#4 - Becoming as gods.

Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

No.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, romans8 said:


#4 - Becoming as gods.

Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

The printer’s manuscript of the Book of a Mormon has it capitalized.  As you probably already know, at that time both spelling and capitalization were largely subjective.

I would *guess* that the 1981 edition renders the term capitalized due to sheer inertia.  At least in modern LDS writing, a capitalized “God” typically refers specifically to God the Father, God the Son, or God the Holy Ghost; whereas a lower-case “god” is typically used when we are taking about either a human’s ability to attain exaltation or when folks are hypothesizing about other universes run by other exalted beings.  The online version seems to reflect this stylistic usage and also comports better with KJV Genesis 3:5, which the “as gods” verbiage seems to deliberately echo and which also uses the lower case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2022 at 10:50 AM, romans8 said:

I am reading the first part of this chapter and have some difficulty understanding its meaning.  
Rather than break it up into separate threads, it might be easier to group the questions into 
the same thread.
 

#1 - Opposition.

"For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born 
in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither 
holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound 
in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life 
neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor 
insensibility
".

Were Adam and Eve considered dead because they had neither happiness/joy nor misery before 
the Fall?  


#2 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves.

"Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could 
not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other".

Were Adam and Eve able to act for themselves and perform anything God had tasked them with 
and to eat from any of the permitted trees *before* Satan enticed Eve to eat from the forbidden 
tree?  Or could they only act for themselves after being enticed by Satan?


#3 - The timing of their ability to act for themselves is again mentioned in Alma 12:31.

"Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments 
as to things which were temporal, and becoming as gods, knowing good from evil, placing 
themselves in a state to act, or being placed in a state to act according to their wills and 
pleasures, whether to do evil or to do good"

Did they place themselves in a state to act after they ate from the forbidden fruit or were 
they already in a God-given state to act to obey or disobey before the Fall?

What commandments (plural) did they transgress to become as gods?


#4 - Becoming as gods.

Is there a difference in doctrine by translating it "as Gods" in Alma 12:31 (1981 Book 
of Mormon which I have) versus the current "as gods" (in the online version)?

#1, yes, dead in a manner of speaking (“as dead”) in that they were not “as one of us [the Gods].”

#2, the were enticed, in some manner, to partake already since one was sweet and the other bitter (verse 15).

#3, the timing is after the fall in which case they are now able to choose good and evil (spiritual), not just sweet and bitter (temporal). They are placed in advancing realms, estates or kingdoms, and in this way, God gives them advancing agency with advancing consequences.

#4, I see no difference in meaning/intent. The newer the edition, the more accurate it is in conforming  to the original manuscript.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/12/2022 at 9:41 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

The printer’s manuscript of the Book of a Mormon has it capitalized.  As you probably already know, at that time both spelling and capitalization were largely subjective.

I would *guess* that the 1981 edition renders the term capitalized due to sheer inertia.  At least in modern LDS writing, a capitalized “God” typically refers specifically to God the Father, God the Son, or God the Holy Ghost; whereas a lower-case “god” is typically used when we are taking about either a human’s ability to attain exaltation or when folks are hypothesizing about other universes run by other exalted beings.  The online version seems to reflect this stylistic usage and also comports better with KJV Genesis 3:5, which the “as gods” verbiage seems to deliberately echo and which also uses the lower case.

This was my conclusion as well.  (I got a copy of the original manuscript too.  Kinda cool, huh?)  It's really nice to see the evolution of understanding of the words.

They were on their way to standardizing spelling, thanks to Webster.  The 1828 Dictionary was just recently published (-- uhmm... in 1828... in Kayse itt was n't Obviouse). :D

Apparently there were centuries where only the first letter of a paragraph or book or chapter were capitalized.  All other letters were lower case.
It was some time after the Elizabethan period where people began using capital letters for all nouns.  For example, you can't find much evidence in Shakespearean original folios where they used capital letters at all.  After that period, it began to catch on.

Here was something I found when researching for Sunday School a few months back.

Quote

At which Time he prov'd himself the Noah's Dove, that finding himself no Rest anywhere, was receiv'd again into his own Ark, and brought a peaceable Olive-Leaf in his mouth.

 -- Titus Britannicus: an Essay of History Royal (1685)

I wasn't able to find why it began around then. I'm going to guess it has something to do with Old English being a Germanic language. Modern German capitalizes all nouns.  But I don't really know when the Germans (or Prussians) began the practice either.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/11/2022 at 11:27 AM, Carborendum said:

Whatever the forbidden fruit was (literal or figurative, doesn't matter) it represents our loss of innocence

What are the attempts by Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness with the fig leaves
representative of?  Are the aspects of nakedness and fig leaves literal or figurative?

Edited by romans8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2022 at 11:27 AM, Carborendum said:

But Nephi is trying to emphasize that such life has no meaning if there isn't an ability to do something meaningful (duh).  If the only choices they can make are things that don't make a difference, they aren't really alive in the spiritual sense.  So, they simply "exist" as a rock or a tree does.

Do you believe Adam and Eve had meaning and joy in their fellowship with each other and
God (through worship) in the Garden before the Fall and with what God had initially tasked
them with?  For the later, I refer to Genesis 1:26,28 and 2:15,18 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, romans8 said:

Do you believe Adam and Eve had meaning and joy in their fellowship with each other and
God (through worship) in the Garden before the Fall and with what God had initially tasked
them with?  For the later, I refer to Genesis 1:26,28 and 2:15,18 

As much meaning an joy as two toddler have living in a home together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, romans8 said:

What are the attempts by Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness with the fig leaves
representative of?  Are the aspects of nakedness and fig leaves literal or figurative?

I'm inclined to think of the fig leaves as figurative. "Covering our nakedness with fig leaves" is symbolic of our common, human tendency to try to hide, cover, ignore, deny, etc our sins and shortcomings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2022 at 8:48 AM, romans8 said:

What are the attempts by Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness with the fig leaves
representative of?  Are the aspects of nakedness and fig leaves literal or figurative?

I believe you probably already know the answer to this question.  I have a childhood friend who is a Methodist minister who shared with me her views on the topic.  And it was surprisingly in line with ours.  She pointed me to several websites that had similar takes on the topic.

If you already know, why are you asking the question?  Why wouldn't you use this opportunity to share that concordant belief instead of point out differences?

On 6/18/2022 at 8:59 AM, romans8 said:

Do you believe Adam and Eve had meaning and joy in their fellowship with each other and
God (through worship) in the Garden before the Fall and with what God had initially tasked
them with?  For the later, I refer to Genesis 1:26,28 and 2:15,18 

You're assuming they had such a fellowship.  The verses you point to indicate similarity and familiarity.

You're stretching quite a bit to infer fellowship from those verses.  But you're a master at stretching meaning out of Scripture that simply isn't there.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/18/2022 at 6:11 PM, Carborendum said:

You're stretching quite a bit to infer fellowship from those verses.

I do not believe I was stretching.  I believe it is reasonable to assume they were enjoying
their fellowship with God and each other in the marriage relationship.

As for narrative, what are your thoughts on these LDS teachings on the Garden of Eden.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/genesis-3-the-fall?lang=eng

The accounts in both Moses and Genesis state only that Satan approached Eve, but 
latter-day revelation records that he first approached Adam and was refused. Eve, 
however, was deceived by Satan and partook. Knowing that she would be driven out 
and separated from him, Adam then partook. Paul the Apostle wrote of the Fall, "And 
Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" (1 
Timothy 2:14).

I could not find LDS revelations which record:

- Satan first approached Adam and was refused.
- Adam knew Eve would be driven out from the Garden of Eden.
 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-stories-2022/adam-and-eve?lang=eng

God our Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ visited them and talked to them.

God let them eat the fruit of every tree but one. If they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, 
they would have to leave the garden and would eventually die.

God and the Lord visited them, but Adam and Eve were afraid and hid. God asked if they had eaten the fruit 
of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Adam and Eve promised to obey all of God’s commandments.


I am not aware of a scripture which says:

- Heavenly Father and Jesus visited them in the Garden before the Fall.
- They were pre-warned about having to leave the Garden if they ate from the forbidden tree.
- Heavenly Father and Jesus visited them in the Garden after they realized they were naked.
- Adam and Eve made such a promise.

Edited by romans8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, romans8 said:

I could not find LDS revelations which record:

- Satan first approached Adam and was refused.
- Adam knew Eve would be driven out from the Garden of Eden.

You may not be able to find such revelations, but rest assured, they are there, available to all sincere seekers who covenant with God to hold sacred the teachings they receive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, romans8 said:

I do not believe I was stretching.  I believe it is reasonable to assume they were enjoying
their fellowship with God and each other in the marriage relationship.

As for narrative, what are your thoughts on these LDS teachings on the Garden of Eden.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/genesis-3-the-fall?lang=eng

The accounts in both Moses and Genesis state only that Satan approached Eve, but 
latter-day revelation records that he first approached Adam and was refused. Eve, 
however, was deceived by Satan and partook. Knowing that she would be driven out 
and separated from him, Adam then partook. Paul the Apostle wrote of the Fall, "And 
Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" (1 
Timothy 2:14).

I could not find LDS revelations which record:

- Satan first approached Adam and was refused.
- Adam knew Eve would be driven out from the Garden of Eden.
 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-stories-2022/adam-and-eve?lang=eng

God our Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ visited them and talked to them.

God let them eat the fruit of every tree but one. If they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, 
they would have to leave the garden and would eventually die.

God and the Lord visited them, but Adam and Eve were afraid and hid. God asked if they had eaten the fruit 
of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Adam and Eve promised to obey all of God’s commandments.


I am not aware of a scripture which says:

- Heavenly Father and Jesus visited them in the Garden before the Fall.
- They were pre-warned about having to leave the Garden if they ate from the forbidden tree.
- Heavenly Father and Jesus visited them in the Garden after they realized they were naked.
- Adam and Eve made such a promise.

Some of these ideas come up in various LDS liturgies that we don’t specifically cite to outside of the temple but which we believe were given by revelation.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
 Share