06 Jun
The Fall of Adam and Eve
I’ve really been looking forward to writing this post because the LDS viewpoint of the role Adam and Eve played on the earth can be rather different than is often taught by other denominations of Christianity.
God presented the Plan of Salvation, created the earth, and chose Adam and Eve to be the first spirit children to be placed on the earth and set that plan in motion. We as a body of spirit children in heaven had agreed that we wanted to follow the Father’s plan and come down to earth and gain a body to be tested, and Adam and Eve were going to be the first to do so. They would be the earthly parents of all mortals. Who else would God choose for such an important task but two of his noblest children? In the premortal life Adam was known as Michael, the archangel. His wife, Eve, would forever be known as the “mother of all living.” They were given to each other because God decreed that it was not good that the man should be alone, and they were going to share their great responsibilities in the garden and throughout life. While living in the garden, for how long we don’t know, they were taught the principles of the gospel by God. They were married and sealed under the priesthood. They were like unto little children in their ability to sin, but they were not uneducated in the truthfulness of the gospel.
The Garden of Eden was paradise, filled with everything they could possibly desire. With one small caveat: the Book of Mormon teaches us that they could not have children. How were the rest of us going to get to the earth to be tested? They were alive both physically (they had physical bodies) and spiritually (they walked in the presence of God), and could not die. A change needed to happen for the Plan of Salvation to be set in motion.
God commanded them to have children. He said, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over … every living thing that moveth upon the earth” (Moses 2:28). God told them they could freely eat of every tree in the garden except one, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Of that tree God said, “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Moses 3:17).
This is where things can get confusing. He told them not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but they couldn’t have children until they did so. If they did eat, they would die. I had a professor at BYU once who explained it like this:
If they wanted to stay in the garden forever and live spiritually (walk in the presence of God), they should not eat of the fruit.
They were free to eat of any tree except the tree of knowledge of fruit and evil, if they chose to eat of that tree they would experience the consequences of their actions and suffer a spiritual death, and they would eventually suffer a physical death as well. The command wasn’t not to eat the fruit, it was not to remain in the garden if they ate of it.
Certainly Satan came and tempted Eve, in fact telling her the truth! He told her that eating the fruit would make her wise like unto her Father in Heaven. He assured her that she and Adam would not die (he was right,she certainly wouldn’t experience physical death right at that moment), but that they would “be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Moses 4:11). Eve made the hard choice, to eat the fruit and be cast from the garden. She took some fruit to Adam and asked him to make the same choice, for it was not good for man to be alone.
Once Adam and Even had partaken of the fruit, they were sent from the Garden. The physical condition of their bodies changed and they were able to have children. A Savior would come to make recompense for the sins of Adam and Even and the sins of their children. The Plan of Salvation could progress and Satan had not triumphed after all.
The prophet Lehi explained:
“And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen [been cut off from the presence of God], 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 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.
“But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.
“Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy” (2 Nephi 2:22–25).
We can look toward the actions of our first parents with gratitude for the choice they made to do the hard thing. They chose to leave the garden and suffer the pains of mortal life that we might live. The Fall was a necessary and intended step in the Plan.
Also:
I'm a farm-raised almost-crunchy stroller-pushing picture-taking lifestyle-blog-writing gastronomy-obsessed divine-seeking thrift-store-combing cheese-inhaling pavement-pounding laughter-sprinkling lover of individuality and taking chances.
Thanks for writing this post, Jenna. I’m a non LDS Christian, so it was interesting reading the LDS perspective of the fall of Adam and Eve, and now I can better understand your religion.
1Well done. This subject is a hard one to articulate sometimes because we have a different perspective on the events that occured - we don’t “blame” Eve in the traditional sense that others do. Of all the Gospel topics and perspectives, the Fall is one I’m STILL learning and haven’t quite grasped enough to explain it perfectly well - so good job.
2Beautiful
3Wonderful dearie.
Sometimes I feel as though the cultural aspects of blaming Eve run into our church as well. As in, the world has blamed Eve and used it as a way to put women down for centuries. LDS cultures and others are having a hard time rising above perceptions.
4as a mormon, i like it a lot better when you explain LDS concepts by sticking to scriptures. i’ll admit, i think some of your interpretatations (especially in the comments on your sahm post) are kind of nuts.
so there’s a backwards compliment if i ever saw one…:)
Jenna Reply:
June 6th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
I believe that my SAHM post related exactly what the prophets and apostles have related to us over the years. Their message has been unchanging. I always try to present my views of LDS theology based on revelation provided through the scriptures and modern day revelation. I would appreciate it if LDS members would stop beating around the bush on this topic and present some evidence to the contrary of what I have presented (aka, concrete statements from apostles and prophets that provide an alternative viewpoint.)
My dad always explained to me that Eve was presented with two laws, and she was wise enough (and probably very spiritually in tune) to choose the higher law. Sometimes we may be faced with the same predicament; good, better or best. I’ve always looked up to Eve for being brave enough to make a hard choice. Not to mention grateful that I can be here for my chance in mortality!
The scripture that says; ““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” at first had me thinking, so sex and baby-making is the sin?! But then I realized that that is the GOOD talked about in the scripture, procreating and loving your spouse. The sin is what has happened in our world when people abuse and misuse these gifts and sacred rights (almost immediately in the bible, Cain, right?).
I love the scripture, “Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy” (2 Nephi 2:22–25), because our free agency and choosing God’s will can give us joy, as well as having children and being with our families. I think there are so many principles in this story that we couldn’t begin to touch on.
Thanks for this post, Jenna. It was on my mind and lifted me up!
6Hi jenna. Two questions from a Protestant.
If Adam and Eve were unable to bear children, why is this fact not included in the Genesis account of creation?
Jesus studied and learned the Old Testament scriptures so that he could grow in wisdom and in stature, with favor of God and man. Why would the Lord God have his Son study incorrect or incomplete scriptures while on earth?
Thanks, Jenna!
Jenna Reply:
June 7th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Claire,
One of the tenets of our faith is that we believe the Bible to be true “as far as it is translated correctly”. Over hundreds and hundreds of years before the printing press the copies of the bible were made by hand, and some doctrine was lost due to human error. I don’t know why God wouldn’t permit this from happening, but I do know that I believe He always had a plan in place to restore the truths that were lost, through the records kept by people who left the middle east to come to the Americas, and that those records were preserved through time for Joseph Smith to be led to.
I’ve never had anyone connect Christ studying the scriptures with the idea that the Gospel was diluted by human error over time. Interesting! I’m not sure if there is an exact answer to your question. Maybe most of the changes were made after Christ’s time on earth? Or, maybe because Christ is the Lord of the Old Testament He already knew what was true and what wasn’t? I’m not sure I have a perfect answer to that question.
claire Reply:
June 7th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
thanks for your answer, Jenna.
It just seems that there is a bit of a contradiction to say that the Bible was not preserved in its entirety due to human error, but the Book of Mormon was preserved in its entirety with no human error. No?
Claire
Jenna Reply:
June 7th, 2010 at 5:38 pm
Just a difference in opinion regarding authority. We believe the records of the BOM were handed down from prophet to prophet with no break in that authority. The Bible records however, were transcribed by many priests (and maybe regular men as well, I don’t know). Thus the Lord was able to protect records and inspire the men He had writing in and keeping watch over the BOM records (as those men were prophets like Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc), but the men who translated and transcribed the Biblical records were not always. It’s very important that the authority that the men who worked on the BOM records held was unbroken.
Ellie Reply:
June 8th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
From a legal perspective, I totally buy this. It’s pure chain-of-custody, which is how some evidence gets admitted and some doesn’t. Evidence where you can establish a chain of custody is seen as infinitely more reliable.
From a religious perspective, I agree with the LDS church that the bible lost a LOT in translation. I, being a Unitarian, go a little further and sometimes wonder if it was all just written by power-hungry men who saw religion as a tool to control the masses. (I had to read a book in college to that effect - the Bible Unearthed.) It presents an interesting argument that the bible, or at least parts of it, were written or translated as a way of controlling people. The same way that we embellish stories of things that have happened to us to paint ourselves in a good light or others in a bad light, so to did the translators and authors.
Molly Reply:
June 11th, 2010 at 2:10 am
As a Jew, I often come across examples of how translation impacts our knowledge. Here’s one: in Hebrew, the first line of Genesis can be read as “in A beginning,” as opposed to “in THE beginning”- an extremely small grammatical change that could lead to quite a lot of debate in meaning….
I know very little about Christianity (I never knew there were two Marys until I watched Monty Python’s Life of Brian), so I really enjoy these posts for giving me a glimpse into different interpretations and beliefs.
Very enlightening post, Jenna! I haven’t brushed on my Bible reading in many years, but it’s interesting to see how the LDS version deviates from the lessons of Adam and Eve I was brought up on. (Raised a Lutheran.)
Fascinating, as always, to get a peek at your beliefs.
8I always appreciate your sunday posts and all the other posts for that matter, but I really don’t picture Adam and Eve as being blonde/fair-skinned! (Or having 80s hair for that matter.)
stephanie Reply:
June 8th, 2010 at 9:31 am
Me too! I enjoy your Sunday posts, but the picture is kind of goofy. I had the same thought a few posts back when you posted on the Grand Council and everyone looked quite Caucasian. I’ve definitely known people of color who are Mormons, but to be honest these kinds of pictures bother me a little as a non-Mormon person of color, particularly because of the LDS church’s kinda rocky relationship with race in the past. Thoughts? (P.S. Not trying to be antagonistic at all-genuinely curious!) Thanks
Jenna Reply:
June 10th, 2010 at 4:41 pm
If you read studies on race, caucasions tend to favor those of their own race, blacks theirs, etc. I would imagine that the art looks this way because the Church used to be predominantly caucasion and thus it is easiest for members to identify with Adam and Eve when they look like them. I think this is why some African American churches will use representations of a “black Jesus”. They want to have that multi-faceted connection, you know?
Wow, this explains a LOT. I wish I had read this post before any of your other Sunday posts, because this is so HUGELY different from what Protestants believe. I have to say, it really makes zero sense to me that God should give them two commands that they couldn’t keep at the same time… it seems like he is setting them up for failure. Could you explain further?
10I think rather than ‘setting them up for failure’, God was giving them freedom of choice. Since having freedom to choose right from wrong is basically the whole point of being on this earth in the first place.
11hi. it is me again. i realized my first comment was snarky and i feel bad. i apologize for being rude. i wanted to respond to your response, but like you, i’ve always struggled with “tone.” i’m either blunt/snarky, or in my efforts not to be, i’m just vague and without a point. and, i’m afraid, not very succint.
i’ve been thinking about this alot, and i wanted to share some thoughts. mostly for me, because i’m a bit obsessive. but also because i really enjoy your blog, and how it makes me think like this.
you asked that mormons who disagree with you “stop beating around the bush” and offer “concrete statements.” and in the case of the sahm post (not the post itself, it was your comments in the post that i diagreed with most,) you simply didn’t get any because people spoke from their heart, shared personal stories of inspiration, and didn’t have an apostle quote to back it.
i think what i was most weirded out by was how dismissive you seemed of their stories, and while i didn’t read all the guest comments, i did read most of yours (and stephanie’s because i have been a long time reader of both of you, and liked the discussion, but anyway) and my impression was that MOST of the time, you see personal revelation/promprings of the spirit as simply a means for people to get out of following the “rules.”
for a minute, let’s flip the argument of “people who say they recieved a prompting to do something like work outside the home are just rationalizing bad behavior” argument.
i.e. “people who dismiss personal revelation just want to take the easy way out. they assume that if they just follow all the “rules” they don’t have to develop a personal relationship with god, and don’t have to ask the hard spiritual questions.”
that sounds silly, doesn’t it? i think both arguments are a little silly.
i did find one quote that i think fits a “counter argument” it’s from Boyd K. Packer and was in last week’s YW lesson on revelation.
“Rules and regulations and commandments are valuable protection. Should we stand in need of revealed instruction to alter our course, it will be waiting along the way as we arrive at the point of need” (“The Candle of the Lord,” Ensign, Jan. 1983, p. 54).
for most of us, we will spend the rest of our lives following the “rules and regulations” or our church with little need for alteration, and for you, that includes being a sahm. but i believe Elder Packer is saying that there are some instances in which revelation allows some people to alter their course, in fact, they have a “NEED” to alter the course, and for some, like a few of your commenters who are working LDS moms, that may mean keeping their job.
also, i really liked this quote by President Romney from the same lesson: “I know when and how the Lord answers my prayers by the way I feel.”
revelation isn’t concrete. it is a feeling. it can’t be backed by a quote. it can be used as an excuse by some to make bad choices, but for all of those commenters who truly did recieve it, it is just as valid as any scripture or quote.
i don’t believe that the counsel from apostles have changed, i simply believe there are many interpretations.
sigh. i tried to be brief, but i also tried to be thorough, and i truly tried to watch my tone. i think that resulted in the longest comment ever. i hope you don’t mind.
-kallie.
12