- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I much rather prefer the Adam and Lillith story 
Have you read the descriptions of Lilith in Jewish tradition? I get the impression that Adam only had his way with her because it was an open field. Could I make a few observations about the topic and hopefully try to end some of the “confusion”. The point wayfarer made about the pre 1990 endowment concerning “this being only figurative” was not refering to the creation of earth it was speaking about the organisation of Adam and Eve’s bodies.
Adam and Eve did not sin in the garden, they did not know how to, sin had not entered the world at that point, Moses 5 tells us that this did not happen until at least 3 generations of Adam’s posterity were living.
What is referred to as “original sin” was actually the transgression of the law for staying in the garden, this they had to do, it was all part of the plan and had been anticipated, but they had to do this of their own volition.
Our Heavenly Father knew this would have to happen so that the creation of bodies for His children could commence, this had been anticipated because even before the organisation of the earth took place a Saviour had been provided.
Satan’s role in the garden concerning temption of Eve was done in ignorance, because as Mos 4:6 tells us he knew not the mind of God, he thought he was frustrating the plan, what he did though was to expidite it.
President’s Joseph Smith and Brigham Young have lots to teach us concerning this subject.. Jeff Walsh
Thanks for joining the conversation, Jeff. To be honest, I don’t find the information in your post helps clear up confusion, I have heard those things in Sunday School, and some add to confusion. Don’t get me wrong…I respect your position, and am glad to have you joined the conversation, and look forward to reading more of your posts and ideas that we share openly here. But I think what you’ll find on this site is some of us are trying to take what we’ve heard in Church and some things that clash against reason or additional information we arent taught in Church, and find ways to either reconcile that, or be comfortable dismissing some things, so we can reduce stress with our Mormon culture.
For example:
jeffwalshgen wrote:Satan’s role in the garden concerning temption of Eve was done in ignorance, because as Mos 4:6 tells us he knew not the mind of God, he thought he was frustrating the plan, what he did though was to expidite it.
President’s Joseph Smith and Brigham Young have lots to teach us concerning this subject.. Jeff Walsh
This is a confusing teaching for me. When Satan is asked by God what he is doing, he states he is doing that which has been done on other worlds, giving the fruit to Adam and Eve. So, if Satan knows it is part of the plan as was done before, why is he participating? He might not know the mind of God, but it paints him as a goof to think he’s trying to frustrate Adam and Eve staying in the Garden forever as the plan. In the pre-existence, he was intelligent and powerful up there with Christ. So it is confusing to me why he wouldn’t just sit and watch, and by doing nothing, frustrate the plan more than by pulling a Homer Simpson, get Eve to transgress, and then say, “Doh! That’s what God wanted. Dangit. I’ll get them next time and keep trying to make everyone miserable like me. Doh! I did it again!”
Thanks Heber31, I am new to the site so thanks for the info about the site and the perameters that need to be understood I have not read anywhere in the scriptures that Satan had a full knowledge of what would happen and how God would bring about the fall, the only information we have is his statement that other Satan’s had tempted Eve to partake of the fruit, he told Eve that she would not surely die and does not tell her of any other consequences. The only information about the extent of his knowledge was when we are told that he knew not the mind of God. On this reasoning he could not do a Homer Simpson, he did not have the knowledge and further he will not have another opportunity do try and get them next time. As far as his intelligence is concerned he must have been very ignorant to expect our Heavenly Father to let him take the place of the First Born and be given the honour and glory that goes with the office
I think sometimes we have to ignore the philsophies of men and just have sufficient humility to accept the our Heavenly Father has more knowledge than we have and accept that what we learn in the temple does not always have a hidden meaning. By the way Brigham young tells us that there was not a universal Satan so he could not have goofed again. Jeff
Quote:I think sometimes we have to ignore the philsophies of men and just have sufficient humility
Just a friendly word of caution, Jeff (and I truly mean it to be friendly):
People who are trying to figure out exactly what they personally believe are going to have a hard time if they feel like someone is telling them to quit trying to figure it out and just accept what other people tell them. Pretty much everyone here is here out of a sincere desire to find a way to understand in such a way that they can, in good faith, believe enough to “StayLDS”. Being told to be more humble as the answer is being told they are proud, arrogant apostates – and we don’t do that here. We’re not trying to get everyone to see things the same way; we’re trying to help everyone find a way to see things that feels “true” or “right” or “good” to them.
I accept Brigham Young as a prophet –
but he said some things that the Church flat-out does not teach now. The same is true of many other early apostles and Prophets. We don’t teach prophetic infallibility in the LDS Church, so telling everyone that the answer simply is to believe what one of them said about it isn’t going to fly here. I just want you to know that upfront, so we can avoid the heartache and clash/tension that I’m afraid will arise unavoidably if “just ignore others and be more humble” gets repeated.
Thanks Ray, you will have to put this down to my ignorance of the guidelines , I will repent and be more careful in future sorry if I sounded unsympathetic. Jeff It’s cool, Jeff. We walk a fine line here in some cases, since we also want to be a place where those who are NOT struggling in some way can read and interact without feeling ganged up on or attacked. We really are a unique site in that regard, I think, and it’s hard for lots of people who come here to understand how we operate initially. For some, it actually seems to be too “faithful” or “naive”; for others, it appears too “liberal” or even “apostate”. That’s due, in large part, to the fact that there are all kinds of opinions expressed here. The only real bedrock rule is that we respect each other and don’t make accusations about righteousness or anything else – that we don’t make things personal and try to convince anyone else that they have to see things the way we see things.
I think you’ll fit in fine, as long as you read some of the threads, see how we roll and can respect it.
Really, it’s fine – and I appreciate your response, fwiw.
jeffwalshgen wrote:I think sometimes we have to ignore the philsophies of men and just have sufficient humility to accept the our Heavenly Father has more knowledge than we have and accept that what we learn in the temple does not always have a hidden meaning. By the way Brigham young tells us that there was not a universal Satan so he could not have goofed again. Jeff
I’m not investing a lot of time in this, and ray has already commented on this.How do you know what you are saying is true? If you are accepting what JS and BY said about the temple ceremony, and yet if that has significantly morphed over time, and yet you also say that BY might have goofed: please tell me by what means you obtain knowledge of that which you speak?
To me, the key of knowledge is to study it out in one’s mind, then to seek through inspiration and receive answers to one’s mind and to one’s heart. Since the church’s positions have changed, ultimately, we are faced with a need to understand what is normative for us. And in this way, the concept to ‘liken scripture to ourselves becomes the absolute imperative for seeking meaning.
Much of the ‘knowledge’ to which you speak has very little relevance to daily life. When church leaders at all levels push forward a given speculation about some specific literal event in the past, and if that literal event is not only unlikely, but demonstrably false from a factual point of view, why do we need to accept such literalism? Am I better off thinking that Adam and Eve lived 6014 years ago? What does it really matter?
I find that when I think I have all the answers, I’m probably wrong.
Anyway, welcome here, and I hope you find happiness in your journey.
Hi Wayfarer, Thank you for your welcome, you have been forthright in your reply to me, and I welcome that, but I think that you have not really followed the dialogue I was having with heber13, we were discussing the extent of the knowledge that Satan had, and I pointed out that the scriptures say that he knew not the mind of God, so it would be reasonable to me to asume that he did not know the whole plan or the method our Heavenly Father would use to initiate the fall. If you read the posts carefully I never said the Brigham Young had goofed, I said that President Young had taught that there is not a universal Satan but each earth has its Satan, heber13 implied that Satan had goofed in doing that which he had done on other earths. How do I know what I am saying is true? I have documentry proof, (and if you are sufficiently interested I can give you chapter and verse) which says that when the first endowments were performed in the Red Brick Store in Nauvoo it was evident that Joseph had not been given the whole ceremony, he received it as most other revelations are given that is line upon line. Following the completion of the ordinances Joseph said to Brigham, this is not arranged perfectly but we have done the best we can under the circumstances, I wish you to take this matter in hand and organise and systematise all these ceremonies. And this is what President Young did in the Nauvoo Temple and the other temples which were completed in the valley.
As for the temple endowment being “substantially morphed over time” I guess that depends on whether we accept that the prophets of the Church receive revelation from the Lord, after all it is His Church and he can change things at His will.
I wasn’t going to refer further on the comments about the philosophies of men etc because of the comments made by Ray. but as you have referred to this knowledge I think that it would be well for me to point out that this was a point I was making to Heber13 that sometimes we can be influenced by so called Higher Thinkers who have ulterior motives. Do not forget the answer that Satan gave when he was asked what he was teaching.
The last part of your post is difficult for me to understand, could you be specific in what you mean about “church leaders pushing forward speculation about specific events in the past” I am a little confused about what you mean especially when you say the “Knowledge which I speak of has very little relevance to daily life ”
If you are referring to the dumming down of the things were are taught in lessons today I do have problems also with this. I have been a student of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young for the last 40 years and I think that even though they never said that they were infallable many of their teachings about the omniscience of Heavenly Father, the location of the lost ten tribes, their teachings concerning the creation of the earth and of Adam etc are as relevent today as they were in their day all of this is needed for us to have so that we can come more nearly to a correct understanding of the God who we worship, Have a good day Jeff Walsh
I haven’t followed this thread entirely…but I did leap in here on the subject of the philosophies of men and humility…etcetera. If this is a tangent, then please just ignore me… I just want to say that in my 30 years as a member of the Church, for much of it, I simply ignored the philosophies of men, as well as many of the latent concerns or questions for which the Church does not give satisfactory answers. At many times, I just did what the leaders in the Church told me….and taking that advice blindly, or simply believing everything wholesale, is part of what made me miserable as a temple-recommend-holding Church member, former full time missionary, and leader in the Ward and Stake for many years…I found that the words of the prophets are not always going to necessarily be the rigth thing in your own personal circumstances. You have to run everything through your own personal clock, after seriously considering what they say — for your own well-being. This may mean you end up living the gospel in ways that are rather unorthodox in the eyes of many LDS people, but are actually right in your own circumstances. I’m not talkinga about naked disobedience to the basic commandments, but to other advice that I now believe to be a matter of judgment.
I think the philosophies of men can come in downright handy when the advice received at Church isn’t accurate, or when there are matters when the former prophets are silent, or their comments only applicable to the time they lived.
jeffwalshgen wrote:Do not forget the answer that Satan gave when he was asked what he was teaching.
The problem that crops up is that it seems modern day prophets do the same thing…
I’m not saying that to dismiss their teachings, but to put some perspective in the notion of placing all our trust in the arm of flesh. Prophets called of God are still made out of meat. All calls to such authority end up at the bottom of the same rabbit hole.
jeffwalshgen wrote:How do I know what I am saying is true? I have documentry proof…
…
The last part of your post is difficult for me to understand, could you be specific in what you mean about “church leaders pushing forward speculation about specific events in the past” I am a little confused about what you mean especially when you say the “Knowledge which I speak of has very little relevance to daily life ”
…
If you are referring to the dumming down of the things were are taught in lessons today I do have problems also with this. I have been a student of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young for the last 40 years…
jeff, your cup is too full for us to have a meaningful dialogue.Chuang Tzu wrote:Nets are for catching fish; after one gets the fish, one forgets the net. Traps are for catching rabbits; after one gets the rabbit, one forgets the trap. Words are for getting meaning; after one gets the meaning, one forgets the words. Where can I find someone who has forgotten words, so I can have a word with him?
JS’s and BY’s words pointed to marvellous thinks to be sure. they, and their teachings, are full of defects, as humans and words are. no amount of studying their words can replace the transcendental spiritual experience to which they point. once having that experience, it is time to move on to the direct relationship with the Being to which they point. the human expression is then set aside.the garden of eden story is purely mythical and allegorical. no amount of parsing of words in the story can help with meaning, once one has experienced the pure conversation the spirit has with us behind the story. to literalize is to feast upon a dead carcase.
when you have forgotten the words, then let’s talk.
i hope you find joy in your journey.
Just a point of clarification, I should have been more clear, but I didn’t mean to imply Satan as the universal Satan, but as a very diligent, anxiously engaged Satan on this earth that goofs by helping the plan, not knowing the mind of God, but then continues to act in this way throughout the scriptures. It’s a curious thing to take his actions as told to us in the scriptures and literally believe them, in my opinion. But it does bring up an interesting question. I have often heard that there are many worlds created, and God is the God of all of them, and Christ is the Savior for all of them, and this is the only planet that would kill the Savior.
But I have never heard any teachings on how those planets would start the human family. Are we to believe an Adam and Eve type couple also starts the plan on those planets? That would mean God probably starts it the same way with a Garden, right? And that would mean a Satan figure would need to be in each of those Gardens, right?
That brings me back to the same question…why do these foolish characters hope to thwart Gods plan, only to be so critical in helping to put it in motion? They seem to have a pretty critical role, and play it so willingly. Doh!
I might add to what Brian said — that I think we can view the words of many members of our Church, and even some leaders as the “the philosophies of men, mingled with revelation”…what matters is the the INDIVIDUAL’S personal revelation recieved about theSE men’s revelations that really matters…it can be just as hard to decipher what to believe about the prophets through the ages as it is to decipher between truth and the philosophies of secular men, in my view.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.