4

Joseph Fielding Smith wrote ( https://www.lds.org/study/ensign/1998/01/in-the-beginning-a-latter-day-perspective?lang=eng):

In contrast to most readers of the Bible, we believe that Adam and Eve both should be commended for what they did to bring about the Fall.

The Genesis account clearly shows God commanding the man not to eat of the fruit of one particular tree and assigning consequences for disobedience to this singular command:

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - Genesis 2:16-17

Later, when Adam and Eve are interrogated by God regarding their violation of God's command, God does not commend them in any way but rather pronounces curses:

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. - Genesis 3:16-19

There is no biblical passage which commends Adam and Eve for disobeying the command of God. In 1 Timothy 2:14 Paul indicates that Eve was deceived and Adam was not, thus placing responsibility for the Fall upon the man but there is no commendation in Paul's theology of the Fall. Additionally, there is no biblical passage which commends any disobedience of God anywhere, ever.

How can Joseph Fielding Smith's statement of commendation for Adam's disobedience be reconciled with the overwhelming testimony of the Bible pronouncing condemnation and not commendation for disobeying God?

Hold To The Rod
  • 12,999
  • 1
  • 12
  • 48
Mike Borden
  • 16,820
  • 2
  • 18
  • 50
  • 3
    The Church of Jesus Christ believe in additional scripture, such as the Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price, which is referenced in the article cited and also in modern prophets, one of which who is quoted. – depperm Sep 23 '22 at 12:41
  • 2
    I'm not sure combining LDS & Biblical basis will lead to effective questions. It would be akin to asking Protestants to argue their views without using the epistles of Paul. Since the church accepts modern revelation to be as authoritative as ancient revelation, the church doesn't restrict its teachings to only a subset of what God has said. A careful study of the Gospels convinces me that there are things Jesus taught that were not preserved in the New Testament. – Hold To The Rod Sep 23 '22 at 20:04
  • 1
    @depperm I understand that LDS also claims that these additional scriptures and prophetic utterances do not contradict the biblical revelation but, rather, expand on it so there should be some biblical basis for commending Adam's disobedience, right? – Mike Borden Sep 24 '22 at 12:18
  • @HoldToTheRod There are other LDS/Biblical-basis questions on the stack. I've spent plenty of time defending the gospel with "christians" who reject Paul as antichrist (Jesus Words Only, etc.) and proclaim Torah keeping is what Jesus taught. There are certain Biblical books (not just Paul) which they outright reject and I do not use those books in my defense because Paul was not making up something contradictory to Biblical revelation and that can be demonstrated. Likewise, is commending Adam for his disobedience something that can be Biblically demonstrated as non-contradictory? – Mike Borden Sep 24 '22 at 12:30
  • 2
    @MikeBorden I was only able to find a handful of LDS/Biblical basis questions on the site (tags aside, I looked at what the questions were actually asking); they all are essentially versions of this question. My answer to that question shares essentially the same thoughts I would offer to any LDS/Biblical basis question. I would be genuinely interested in reading a Protestant theology of grace derived only from the Gospels or a Catholic view on apostolic succession from only the OT. – Hold To The Rod Sep 24 '22 at 20:10
  • 1
    @HoldToTheRod That answer clearly shows that doctrines need not appear in all of the revelations and I understand that point. This question has more to do with contradiction as the Bible is not silent on Adam's disobedience, i.e. how can Joseph Smith's commendation of Adam's disobedience be reconciled with the Bible's condemnation of same. – Mike Borden Sep 26 '22 at 12:01
  • 1
    @MikeBorden the next sentence of the first quote answers on specifically why they should be commended We understand that without the Fall none of us could have come to the earth and the whole plan of salvation would have been frustrated...Thus, by being required to leave the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve caused the great plan of happiness to go forward. Mortality came to all living things; – depperm Sep 29 '22 at 11:46
  • 1
    @depperm The question asks for the biblical basis for commending Adam's disobedience. The Bible is not silent regarding the Fall (his offense brought judgement and condemnation to all (Romans 5:18))... where in the bible is Adam's disobedient act anything other than condemned? – Mike Borden Sep 30 '22 at 12:04
  • 1
    @MikeBorden if you're asking how LDS would respond to what you perceive as a contradiction vs the Bible I think that can be readily answered. I propose there's a distinction between a) This teaching is not explicit in the Bible & b) This teaching contradicts the Bible. Are you looking for a or b? – Hold To The Rod Sep 30 '22 at 17:38
  • 1
    @HoldToTheRod I don't know that I'm looking for one or the other. The Bible is not silent regarding Adam's culpability. Do you think the Bible does anything other than clearly condemn Adam's disobedience? – Mike Borden Oct 03 '22 at 12:31
  • @MikeBorden Robert Millet described the Fall as a step downward and forward. I see in both Romans 5 & 1 Cor. 15 Paul's belief in the forward part as well. Without the Fall there would be no atonement. I don't mean to blow off your question - as it is written I don't see that it is answerable. I do not believe the Book of Mormon teachings on the Fall contradict the Bible and would be happy to write such an answer, if you are okay with my making an edit to your question. – Hold To The Rod Oct 04 '22 at 01:20
  • @HoldToTheRod "Without the Fall there would be no atonement." Correct. The death of God's Son would not have been necessary if there were no Fall because there would have been nothing to redeem, no sin to cover. Christ died for us when we were enemies of God ... the result of the Fall. This doesn't commend the Fall any more than the folks who actually crucified Jesus are commended. Just because God can bring good out of evil does not mean He commends the evildoer or the evil act. You are most welcome to suggest an edit. – Mike Borden Oct 04 '22 at 12:55

2 Answers2

2

I believe there is a slight misinterpretation (missing the point) of Joseph Fielding Smith's quote

In contrast to most readers of the Bible, we believe that Adam and Eve both should be commended for what they did to bring about the Fall.

This comment does not end at ...commended for what they did (sin/transgress, which is condemned by God/bible), it continues on to explain exactly what they should be commended for exactly (bringing about the Fall, moving God's plan forward).

The Church of Jesus Christ believe (from 2 Nephi 2:15-16)

15 And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man, after he had created our first parents, and the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and in fine, all things which are created, it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.

16 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.

Later on (2 Nephi 2:22-25) (see also Luke 23:34, 1 Tim 1:13, referencing accountability tied knowledge)

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.

25 Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

So even though Adam transgressed1, it was part of God's plan (agency and future necessary atonement) and without the transgression progress for all of mankind would've been halted/frozen/stuck there in the Garden.

From FAIR (unofficial LDS apologist site)

LDS doctrine does not praise the decision to disobey. However, it acknowledges that God anticipated their disobedience, and that this eventual disobedience was part of God's plan. God had prepared the atonement of His Son to permit us the benefits which came from Adam and Eve's disobedience, without requiring that they or we suffer forever because of it. Because of the atonement and God's plan of happiness, LDS doctrine does not see the Fall as unalloyed tragedy.

All emphasis mine

1 Articles of Faith, by James E Talmage or this SE answer

depperm
  • 9,271
  • 1
  • 29
  • 43
  • I believe that God foreknew Adam's disobedience. Does LDS believe that God, by creating with this foreknowledge, actually desired it to occur? – Mike Borden Oct 08 '22 at 12:53
  • 1
    yes? in that he wanted us to have our agency. He also wants us to be obedient – depperm Oct 08 '22 at 19:14
  • Exactly. He wanted Adam to obey. In fact, Adam was created to obey and God wanted him to choose obedience. Knowing Adam would not obey does not commend the choice since it is not what God wanted. – Mike Borden Oct 09 '22 at 16:47
  • @MikeBorden He wants all his children to come to earth, which did require Adam to eat of the fruit of the tree. This does not negate his desire for our obedience. He also commanded them to be fruitful and multiply, which could not be done while innocent in the garden – depperm Oct 09 '22 at 18:49
  • If Adam had not sinned they couldn't have procreated and brought God's kids to earth? – Mike Borden Oct 10 '22 at 12:30
  • @MikeBorden yes, they were in a state of innocence (compare Gen 2:25 and then Gen 3:6-7, while not explicit does imply the difference before and after eating of the fruit) – depperm Oct 10 '22 at 12:33
  • So many people think naked and unashamed vs. naked and afraid has to do with sexual activity. Were Adam and Eve not given in marriage by God? Where is the shame in the marriage bed. – Mike Borden Oct 11 '22 at 12:34
  • @MikeBorden they were given in marriage, where does it say they had sexual activity before eating of the fruit (no children, no reference to knowing each other etc- you are correlating marriage to sexual activity) – depperm Oct 11 '22 at 14:01
1

Orson Pratt answered your question back in June 1853.

"The Lord God said, Behold the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." (Gen 3:22) God and the heavenly host had attained to the knowledge of good and evil, and therefore they were capable of enjoying happiness and judging righteously according to the principles of right and wrong, justice and mercy. Adam, by his transgression, had become like one of the Gods to know good and evil. Now can it be supposed, for a moment, that the Lord did not wish Adam to become like himself? Was He not desirous that he should learn how to distinguish between that which was good, and that which was evil? Or did He design that man should forever be deprived of that information which alone could give him joy? Was not the only Begotten Son willing, even before the world was made, to be sent forth in the meridian of time to suffer and die, in order to atone for a transgression which would place Adam in the same condition as the Gods in respect to good and evil? The Son did not consider death to be too great a sacrifice, in order that man might be raised from the very depths of ignorance and be placed on an equal footing with the Gods, as far as it regards good and evil and all their accompanying consequences.

  • Orson Pratt, "The Pre-Existence of Man" (June 1853)
mzen
  • 11
  • 1
  • Welcome to Christianity.SE! and thank you for your contribution. When you get a chance, please take the [tour] to understand how the site works and how it is different than others. – agarza Feb 15 '23 at 14:08
  • @mzen This answer doesn't explain how Adam could transgress by doing what God ultimately wanted him to do. Adam could, in fact, discern that which was good and that which was evil through obeying God. What he chose to do was to decide for Himself. He did what God did not want him to do. He transgressed. He kicked God to the curb and died, killing us all. The Son didn't die to make us equal to God in knowledge. He died to return us to obedience. – Mike Borden Feb 15 '23 at 20:50
  • My answer gives the Biblical basis for commending Adam's decision. Genesis 3:22 shows God Himself commends Adam's decision. Partaking of the fruit made Adam as "one of [the Gods]." And since God wants us to become like Him (Matthew 5:48), Adam ultimately did what God wanted him to do. – mzen Feb 16 '23 at 05:01