Because of the Fall

[Traveler]

As Latter-day Saints we are given the privilege to know more about the Plan of Salvation and Exaltation of Mankind.  I believe that we are given the understanding of such mysteries of G-d that we may better navigate “The Path” of righteousness (path of covenant with G-d) and assist other in that path.

Perhaps the greatest mystery to me has been the fall of Adam.  Because G-d is a just G-d, it has been difficult for me to understand how it was just that the fall of Adam justly brought about the fall of all mankind.  Another great mystery for me is how a being without sin could justly be brought down low to suffer for the sins of many.

It has been made known to me that justice in the only means through which G-d is able to bring about mercy and forgiveness and that the only way and means to understand the justice of G-d is through the divine councils of G-d, in what has been revealed to the Saints of the Latter-days, as the great events of our pre-existence.

If anyone would like to participate in a discussion of justice preceding mercy – I would like to hear your ideas and share with you my own.  For this post I would focus on a particular scripture in the Book of Job in the Old Testament.  This scripture is in the first chapter of Job – verse 6:

Quote

6 ¶ Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

Initially there are two problems I had with understanding this scripture.  First is that it is my understanding that Satan was exiled from Heaven and the presents of the L-rd.  The second is that in Heaven no unclean thing can endure the presents of the L-rd.  After much prayer, pondering and meditating on this scripture I have surmised much about what is going on here.

I have come to believe that this scripture is not talking about that kingdom of Heaven where G-d the Father resides and presides over with his presents.  Rather I believe that the partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil by Adam and Eve was an event that was participated in by all the children of the Father that exercised their Agency to participate in the Plan of Salvation and exaltation.  That with the fall of Adam and Eve all the spirit children of the Father fell as well and were exiled from that Heaven to a place of exile where Jesus (the L-rd of the exile) reigned as the Mediator G-d of the exiled.  Thus, Satan being an exiled spirit was able to present himself before Christ presiding in rule as the mediator with the Father over the kingdom of the exiled. 

Is anyone interested in discussing this and more as well as how this understanding enhanced our understanding of the path or way of covenants with G-d?

 

The Traveler

[zil2]

Are you sure that this verse in Job, and the accompanying story bits, aren't just a metaphorical way of presenting the idea that Satan's bounds are set by the Lord?

[CV75]

21 hours ago, Traveler said:

As Latter-day Saints we are given the privilege to know more about the Plan of Salvation and Exaltation of Mankind.  I believe that we are given the understanding of such mysteries of G-d that we may better navigate “The Path” of righteousness (path of covenant with G-d) and assist other in that path.

Perhaps the greatest mystery to me has been the fall of Adam.  Because G-d is a just G-d, it has been difficult for me to understand how it was just that the fall of Adam justly brought about the fall of all mankind.  Another great mystery for me is how a being without sin could justly be brought down low to suffer for the sins of many.

It has been made known to me that justice in the only means through which G-d is able to bring about mercy and forgiveness and that the only way and means to understand the justice of G-d is through the divine councils of G-d, in what has been revealed to the Saints of the Latter-days, as the great events of our pre-existence.

If anyone would like to participate in a discussion of justice preceding mercy – I would like to hear your ideas and share with you my own.  For this post I would focus on a particular scripture in the Book of Job in the Old Testament.  This scripture is in the first chapter of Job – verse 6:

Initially there are two problems I had with understanding this scripture.  First is that it is my understanding that Satan was exiled from Heaven and the presents of the L-rd.  The second is that in Heaven no unclean thing can endure the presents of the L-rd.  After much prayer, pondering and meditating on this scripture I have surmised much about what is going on here.

I have come to believe that this scripture is not talking about that kingdom of Heaven where G-d the Father resides and presides over with his presents.  Rather I believe that the partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil by Adam and Eve was an event that was participated in by all the children of the Father that exercised their Agency to participate in the Plan of Salvation and exaltation.  That with the fall of Adam and Eve all the spirit children of the Father fell as well and were exiled from that Heaven to a place of exile where Jesus (the L-rd of the exile) reigned as the Mediator G-d of the exiled.  Thus, Satan being an exiled spirit was able to present himself before Christ presiding in rule as the mediator with the Father over the kingdom of the exiled. 

Is anyone interested in discussing this and more as well as how this understanding enhanced our understanding of the path or way of covenants with G-d?

 

The Traveler

Something that helps me with the “order” of the attributes of God is the idea that His course is one eternal round (1 Nephi 10:19 – 21). Not only is He everlastingly consistent in His attributes and ways, meaning He exhibits them all at once. D&C 88 (the parable of the visiting Lord), shows how He passes through “every kingdom in its hour, and in its time, and in its season, even according to the decree which God hath made,” wherein “kingdom” can refer to a person, group, time, place, personal and group attribute, etc. So, from God’s perspective in the center of eternity, He is simultaneously merciful, just and perfect in every other holy attribute. But from our perspective, we must begin somewhere, so sometimes we are taught justice first, sometimes mercy first, but love underlies both. He brought us into mortality with love and takes us into immortality with love. He brought us into the premortal spirit world with love, and sent us into this one with love. We are co-eternal with Him with love; he always loves us, but we may or may not be consistent, hence the graduation or failure between advancing estates.

I too take Job to be a way of illustrating the dynamic of the role of temptation and trial in mortality in light of the atonement of Christ which was established and effective from before the foundation of the world, rendering this fallen world not one of exile but one of testing (Abraham 3: 24 - 26). It also illustrates the role of the adversary which only shows that all things work for our good through the merits and labor of Jesus Christ (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2024/04/25gong?lang=eng).

If we could remember back far enough, we would remember what it was like to be thoroughly infused with the light of Christ and embrace the principles of justice and mercy as forms of love. Of course, we do not remember that far back, and even further back there is a veil, so the point at which we begin in this life to discern between them (and other godly attributes), and learn to practice them, is the point at which we discern the beginning and consciously or knowingly tie it to an eternal principle, but we eventually grow to see that all of them are part of the eternal round.

[HaggisShuu]

On 4/26/2025 at 5:43 PM, Traveler said:

If anyone would like to participate in a discussion of justice preceding mercy – I would like to hear your ideas and share with you my own. 

I like to (jokingly) picture that when we die some kind of angel will hold up to us a geiger counter of sorts, The more we rejected christ in our life, the more radioactive our spirits are. Those who pass the check get to go to spirit paradise, and those who fail fall through a trap door into spirit prison, for decontamination. 
 

These 2 verses of scripture picture the dynamic between justice and mercy nicely.

 

D&C 19:

Quote

16 For behold, I, God, have sufferedthese things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent⁠;

17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink—

If you do not accept Christ, after the way he suffered for you, your punishment is to experience it for yourself. 

D&C 45:

Quote

3 Listen to him who is the advocatewith the Father, who is pleading your cause before him—

4 Saying: Father, behold the sufferingsand death of him who did no sin⁠, in whom thou wast well pleased; behold the blood of thy Son which was shed, the blood of him whom thou gavest that thyself might be glorified⁠;

5 Wherefore, Father, spare these my brethren that believe on my name, that they may come unto me and have everlasting life⁠.

If you have done your best to accept Christ, after the suffering Christ went through, in order to spare our saviour more suffering, God relents. This is the justice and the mercy. Being merciful to us, is being just with his only begotten, as adding on to Christ's suffering by making his atonement pointless, would be very unjust indeed. 
 

As for the fall, I have my own confusions with this topic I'm yet to have a clear explanation for. Why is Eve venerated as brave and righteous? The way I see the story, Eve was tempted, partook, realises she will now be cast out. In order to fulfil the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, Adam now has no choice but to fall. The fall seems avoidable, but due to Eve's choices, Adams fall was necessary. This makes more sense when you consider:

Quote

Adam fell that men might be

The traditional telling of the story is that both were brave and righteous and that their transgression was necessary for the plan of salvation. I just struggle to understand this in all honesty. Perhaps I am just a bit daft. 

Edited Sunday at 07:42 PM by HaggisShuu

[zil2]

11 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

The fall seems avoidable

This can only be true if our existence (mortality, experience, whatever you want to lump into it) could have happened and served its purpose in the garden of Eden. Do you believe that was a viable option?  (Many, perhaps most, Christians think Eve ruined the "everyone could have lived happily ever after in Eden" plan, which is why Christ had to come.)

[HaggisShuu]

8 minutes ago, zil2 said:

This can only be true if our existence (mortality, experience, whatever you want to lump into it) could have happened and served its purpose in the garden of Eden. Do you believe that was a viable option?  (Many, perhaps most, Christians think Eve ruined the "everyone could have lived happily ever after in Eden" plan, which is why Christ had to come.)

I think Satan ruined it, I know I sin loads, and I am not in a position to judge Eve for transgressing.
 But from what I remember last time I went to the temple, the wording is like "and if they Sin I will then provide a saviour". If the saviour was more a precautionary measure, then it seems like staying in the garden could have been viable. 
The fall to me therefore seems like more of a tragedy, than a necessity. 

[HaggisShuu]

Just now, HaggisShuu said:

I think Satan ruined it, I know I sin loads, and I am not in a position to judge Eve for transgressing.
 But from what I remember last time I went to the temple, the wording is like "and if they Sin I will then provide a saviour". If the saviour was more a precautionary measure, then it seems like staying in the garden could have been viable. 
The fall to me therefore seems like more of a tragedy, than a necessity. 

I will admit, I likely only see it this way, as I am missing a part of the puzzle. I'm just trying to the find the piece which makes it make sense. 

[zil2]

26 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

I think Satan ruined it, I know I sin loads, and I am not in a position to judge Eve for transgressing.
 But from what I remember last time I went to the temple, the wording is like "and if they Sin I will then provide a saviour". If the saviour was more a precautionary measure, then it seems like staying in the garden could have been viable. 
The fall to me therefore seems like more of a tragedy, than a necessity. 

This isn't what I asked.  Adam and Eve were there and presumably could have stayed eternally.  The rest of us were not there.

Do you think the rest of us could have been there?  Do you think Adam and Eve could have birthed the human family in Eden?  Do you think they could have raised their children there and we all could have lived happily ever after as immortal terrestrial beings in Eden?

[HaggisShuu]

9 minutes ago, zil2 said:

This isn't what I asked.  Adam and Eve were there and presumably could have stayed eternally.  The rest of us were not there.

Do you think the rest of us could have been there?  Do you think Adam and Eve could have birthed the human family in Eden?  Do you think they could have raised their children there and we all could have lived happily ever after as immortal terrestrial beings in Eden?

I think I see where you are leading. 
An eternity in Eden would mean exaltation would not be possible, frustrating the plan.  

[zil2]

1 hour ago, HaggisShuu said:

I think I see where you are leading. 
An eternity in Eden would mean exaltation would not be possible, frustrating the plan.  

Quote

2 Nephi 2:22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

23 And they would have had no children; 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.

24 But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.

Note the use of "they" in v23.  It's not just that Adam could have stayed alone in Eden. It's teaching that even if they'd both stayed in Eden, in a state of innocence, they'd have had no joy.

The fall into mortality had to happen, and whether that happened by sin or some other way¹, once you get a few billion people on the planet, it's 100% certain someone's gonna sin, and once one person's done it, others are gonna wanna try it, so we're gonna need a Savior.

¹I'm not saying there is another way.  I'm also not saying there isn't. I'm just pointing out that the Savior was guaranteed to be needed sooner or later.

[zil2]

1 hour ago, HaggisShuu said:

An eternity in Eden would mean exaltation would not be possible, frustrating the plan.  

An eternity in Eden would have consisted of Adam and Eve. No children. (Per 2 Nephi 2, which I already quoted.)  So no matter how you slice it - just the two of them, or all of us eternally terrestrial, the plan would have been stuck in a "terminal loop" (so to speak).

[HaggisShuu]

5 minutes ago, zil2 said:

An eternity in Eden would have consisted of Adam and Eve. No children. (Per 2 Nephi 2, which I already quoted.)  So no matter how you slice it - just the two of them, or all of us eternally terrestrial, the plan would have been stuck in a "terminal loop" (so to speak).

Thank you, that's cleared alot up for me. 

[Carborendum]

On 4/26/2025 at 11:43 AM, Traveler said:

Perhaps the greatest mystery to me has been the fall of Adam.  Because G-d is a just G-d, it has been difficult for me to understand how it was just that the fall of Adam justly brought about the fall of all mankind.

It's not about "being just."  It is about what is available.  Is it just that we don't have free kim chee every day?  Of course not.  Everyone should have free kim chee all the time.

 ... But seriously, folks...

I'm reminded of the exchange in Labyrinth: 

Quote

Sara: That's not fair!

Jareth: You keep saying that.  I wonder what your basis for comparison is.

First, keep in mind that this is a unique event with unique consequences in unique circumstances.  And it is written in metaphor.  So, it is difficult to really glean the "facts of the matter."  How much was literally true?  How much was imagery?  I doubt anyone alive knows without revelation.

But since you submitted the topic for discussion, I'll give some theories.

I believe:

• We need to read it first as if it were literal, so we can see the overall picture.  Then we move on to seeing what the metaphors are and how they fit in the overall picture.
• After the fall, they had mortal, telestial bodies that could produce physical bodies for the purpose of housing spirits.  Think about specific wording of threats from Lucifer in the temple ceremony about bodies.  In that moment, Adam and Eve are emblematic of all of us.
• Being mortal-telestial themselves, the bodies they produced were also mortal-telestial.
• Since those were the bodies available, that is what we all had access to (for our births on earth).

This was not a "punishment".  So it is not a matter of "just" or "unjust".  It is what is available.  That is the only way for us to obtain bodies.  We must go through the mortal experience as part of growing up.

Do we complain that we have to start as helpless infants before we can learn and grow into meaningful adults to raise a family?

Do we complain that we have to learn things in our tabula rasa before we can have a family to teach and raise, or to contribute to both society and the great adventure that life is?

Does this really have to do with just or unjust?  No, it is simply the only path forward.  Thus, having mortal bodies is not a punishment.  it is a necessary part of Eternal Progression.

On 4/26/2025 at 11:43 AM, Traveler said:

Another great mystery for me is how a being without sin could justly be brought down low to suffer for the sins of many.

Justice requires that a price is paid for a crime committed.  Yet those who sin have no currency with which to pay for the crime.  Thus we would remain in hell forever.

Only one without sin has the wherewithal to provide the currency to pay for the crimes.

Jesus, as the only sinless person, was in the unique position to pay for our sins.  And he chose to do so.  Why?  Because to complete his sinless life, He needed to give His Atonement for us.  Without doing so would not allow Him to become perfect.

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

It's not about "being just."  It is about what is available.  Is it just that we don't have free kim chee every day?  Of course not.  Everyone should have free kim chee all the time.

 .....

Justice requires that a price is paid for a crime committed.  Yet those who sin have no currency with which to pay for the crime.  Thus we would remain in hell forever.

Only one without sin has the wherewithal to provide the currency to pay for the crimes.

Jesus, as the only sinless person, was in the unique position to pay for our sins.  And he chose to do so.  Why?  Because to complete his sinless life, He needed to give His Atonement for us.  Without doing so would not allow Him to become perfect.

You have a view of justice that makes no sense to me - more of an excuse than an explanation.  It appears to me, from what you have implied, that Jesus as not the only possibility to meet the demands of justice.  G-d the Father could easily have done so himself, because he is greater than and more able to pay for sins?????

My understanding is that justice demands more than payment for sins - justice also demands those involved with the sin (even from a distance) are affected by the consequences.   It also demands that anyone innocent and not involved not be made to suffer and restored or paid for any inconvenience. If a sinner does not understand the consequences, then who was in charge of the suitution, allowing the failure justly should shares in the responsibility.  Kind of like a babysitter that allows the children to play with a deadly snake that would bite the them and cause their death.  If justice is fulfilled the person responsible for the childrem that would allow the them to be bitten by the snake (though unbitten themself) could and should be involved with the payment that justice requires.  But for someone that had nothing to do with anything involving the childrem being bitten to suffer, that is completely innocent in any involvement - I do not see justice in such thinking. 

 

The Traveler

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

You have a view of justice that makes no sense to me - more of an excuse than an explanation.

Do the scriptures make no sense to you?

Quote

But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed, and God would cease to be God.

But God ceaseth not to be God, and mercy claimeth the penitent, and mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice.

Perhaps a mortal example might be appropriate:

If you were sent to the hospital for several months of very expensive procedures, there would be no way for you to pay for all the bills.  You'd forever be in debt to the hospital.  If you had to pay for it yourself, it would take hundreds of years for you to pay back.  That would be impossible.  You simply couldn't do it.

But because you have insurance, the insurance company pays for your bills.  You are only responsible for the deductibles as much as you can pay, once you are out of the hospital.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

It appears to me, from what you have implied, that Jesus as not the only possibility to meet the demands of justice.  G-d the Father could easily have done so himself, because he is greater than and more able to pay for sins?????

I am struggling to figure out how you interpreted that from what I wrote.

• Jesus had a mortal body.  The Father did not.  Christ's death was also required as payment.
• Jesus suffered both body and spirit. 
  • The Father could not suffer because He had an Exalted body. 
  • The Father cannot feel pain except for sorrow for the sins of man. 
• No other being with a mortal body could have done so.  Only Jesus.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

My understanding is that justice demands more than payment for sins ...  It also demands that anyone innocent and not involved not be made to suffer and restored or paid for any inconvenience.

  (ellipsis added)

I believe you're invoking the principle of restitution.  I don't see how that is different than a form of payment.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

justice also demands those involved with the sin (even from a distance) are affected by the consequences. 

And we are affected -- in the form of repentance, which includes things like remorse, accepting responsibility for sin, restitution as far as we are capable, etc.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

If a sinner does not understand the consequences,

That's why repentance is required -- showing that they do understand the sin and the consequences.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

then who was in charge of the suitution, allowing the failure justly should shares in the responsibility. 

I have no idea what this sentence means.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

Kind of like a babysitter that allows the children to play with a deadly snake that would bite the them and cause their death.  If justice is fulfilled the person responsible for the childrem that would allow the them to be bitten by the snake (though unbitten themself) could and should be involved with the payment that justice requires. 

Are you arguing that God causes all sin?  It could easily be argued that this is exactly what He does.  According to Calvinist theology, there really is no way to refute it.

I don't subscribe to that philosophy.

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

But for someone that had nothing to do with anything involving the children being bitten to suffer, that is completely innocent in any involvement - I do not see justice in such thinking. 

You're forgetting that part of the Atonement bringing justice with His mercy includes the fact that He heals us.  He heals the sinner.  He heals the victim.

Perhaps, you're looking at it as if it were a linear equation.  But consider it a multivariate equation.  You need to include the following:

• Law
• Crime
• Justice
• Restitution
• Mercy
• Repentance
• The requirement for us to be tried and tested.  Pushed beyond our limits -- both on the receiving end of someone else's sin as well as being tempted so that we can sin.

All these variables work in ways that need to balance out.  Otherwise, all of us would be consigned to an endless state of misery, and God would cease to be God.

We have been placed in a world where injustice exists so that we can understand what justice truly is.  There must needs be an opposition in all things.  And we understand that balance most completely under the principle of justice as outlined by the word of God, and the principle of mercy which is available through the Atonement of Christ.

Edited Monday at 05:49 PM by Carborendum

[CV75]

On 4/27/2025 at 4:14 PM, HaggisShuu said:

I think Satan ruined it, I know I sin loads, and I am not in a position to judge Eve for transgressing.
 But from what I remember last time I went to the temple, the wording is like "and if they Sin I will then provide a saviour". If the saviour was more a precautionary measure, then it seems like staying in the garden could have been viable. 
The fall to me therefore seems like more of a tragedy, than a necessity. 

The sin comes after the Fall. The anticipated and prerequisite transgression was not a tragedy, but opened the way to probation where many would sin (but Christ and the unaccountable would not). That is where the "if" comes in; it is their choice. There are two sets of Adam and Eve: the original couple (our first parents), and us. The tragedy is refusing to repent sufficiently to obtain a fulness.

Edited 10 hours ago by CV75