The LDS (Mormon) Church, Part 4: The Fall & Original Sin

The topic of Sin, especially the idea of "Original Sin" and "The Fall", is another topic that the LDS church has some unique teachings on. I'll just jump right in. If you're new to this discussion, you can find all my previous "What the LDS Church teaches" posts listed at the bottom of this post.

(Some of the quotes get a bit long, so I've added some emphasis in bold to make for easier reading)

What The LDS (Mormon) Church Teaches About The Fall & Original Sin

"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. 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." (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 2:22-25)

"And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God. And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient." (Book of Mormon, Moses 5:10-11)

Because of the Fall of Adam and Eve, all people live in a fallen condition, separated from God and subject to physical death. However, we are not condemned by what many call the "original sin." In other words, we are not accountable for Adam's transgression in the Garden of Eden. The Prophet Joseph Smith said, "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression" (Articles of Faith 1:2) (LDS.org)

"We all owe a great debt of gratitude to Eve. In the Garden of Eden, she and Adam were instructed not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. However, they were also reminded, “Thou mayest choose for thyself.” The choice was really between a continuation of their comfortable existence in Eden, where they would never progress, or a momentous exit into mortality with its opposites: pain, trials, and physical death in contrast to joy, growth, and the potential for eternal life. In contemplating this choice, we are told, “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, … and a tree to be desired to make her wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and also gave unto her husband with her, and he did eat.” And thus began their earthly probation and parenthood.

After the choice was made, Adam voiced this grateful expression: “Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.”

Eve made an even greater statement of visionary wisdom after leaving the Garden of Eden: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.” If it hadn’t been for Eve, none of us would be here." (What It Means To Be A Daughter of God, President James E. Faust)

"Wherefore, they cannot sin, for power is not given unto Satan to tempt little children, until they begin to become accountable before me;" (D&C 29:47)

Summary of LDS beliefs on this topic:
1. Without the choice to "fall" (or sin by choosing to disobey God's command to not eat the fruit), Adam and Eve would not have been able to have children. If I understand this correctly, it's because they would have "remained innocent", i.e. wouldn't have known how to have sex.

2. Adam and Eve (but it seems the primary blame/credit was Eve's) made the choice to disobey with their "eyes wide open", so to speak. They chose to eat the fruit so that they could have children.

3. Without the Fall, Adam and Eve would have remained in Eden forever, and that would have been a bad thing (no children, no joy, no doing good).

4. Children are sinless until the "age of accountablility" (I believe this age is 8 years).

5. We are not accountable for Adam and Eve's "original sin". We are accountable four our sins.

What The Bible Says About The Fall & Original Sin

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." (Genesis 1:27-28)

The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." (Genesis 2:15-17)

"The serpent deceived me, and I ate" Genesis 3:13

In Genesis 3:14-24, God goes about showing his displeasure...He cursed the serpent, he said he would increase the woman's pain during childbearing, he cursed the ground, he made it so life would be difficult for Adam, and he banished them from Eden.

"Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come." (Romans 5:12-14)

"Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." (Romans 5:18-19)

"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (Psalm 51:5)

Summary of Biblical teachings on this topic:
1. God created man and woman, and he gave them the command to have children.
2. God also commanded Adam and Eve to not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge.
3. Satan deceived Eve, and she ate the fruit. She gave it to her husband, and he also ate.
4. Their choice to disobey God (sin) changed everything. It created separation between God and people. He cast them out of Eden, which was perfect. Illness, death, and suffering entered the world due to our separation from God.
5. We are all of this "fallen" nature, even from birth. We are all separated from God, and we are all subject to the results of sin.

My Thoughts

Okay (deep breath), I'm going to try to set aside my very emotional initial response to the LDS teachings on this topic, and focus on logic.

God gave Adam and Eve two distict commands when he made them:
1. Be fruitful and multiply (have children)
2. Do not eat the fruit of that particular tree

God does not give commands that are impossible for us to obey. If he did, it would be the same as forcing us to sin, which is not God's nature.

The LDS belief that they were unable to have children until after the fall makes no sense. If this were true, then it would also be true that God gave two conflicting commands. To obey one, woud be to disobey the other, and vice versa. He would have put us in the position of HAVING to sin.

No.

We must assume that the two commands God gave them were fully achieveable. They were fully able to have children, and they were fully able to avoid that fruit. There is no reason to assume otherwise.

(A common question I hear from LDS folks is, "Well then, why didn't they have a baby? It must have been because they were too innocent and didn't know how!" My answer to this is, how do you know how long this all took to happen? The Bible is not clear on a timeline. God could have created Adam and Eve, given them the commands, and banished them from Eve after the Fall...all in a matter of days.)

Again, God does not put us in the position of having to make the choice between his commandments.

On to a different point...the LDS belief that humanity could not experience joy unless sin had entered into the world. God created Eden as a perfect dwelling place for his precious creations, man and woman. Adam and Eve had their every need met, they were with God (Genesis 3:8), they had each other, and they had total dominion over all of creation. It was bliss. I can scarcely imaging them feeling anything BUT joy!

On to yet another point, now. This whole idea that the Fall was a good thing is just so...upsetting...for me. Gratitude to Eve for choosing to sin? Not from me. Death, illness, separation from God - it's all so painful! In fact, I'd like to suggest that the idea that joy could only be experienced after the fall is EXACTLY backward. Pain is the only thing that was new after the fall. Pain and suffering and death. All of creation groans under the immense darkness that took over with that one sinful choice.

Let's look at this from a logical standpoint once again. Satan is our enemy, right? Satan is the deceiver, the serpent, in the Biblical story of the Fall. If the Fall was a good thing for humanity, why...WHY...would Satan encourage Eve to eat that fruit? He wouldn't. He seeks to destroy. He does not seek to liberate us from our inability to have children or experience joy. He wants just the opposite.

To say it another way...If you view the Fall as a good thing, and Eve it's heroine, then what of the Serpent? Why not thank him? To put a positive spin on the Fall is to make a hero out of the deceiver, Satan. From the very beginning, it's been God's glory that Satan has been after.

Can you see why it's so upsetting to me? The LDS teachings on what happened in that garden turn God into someone who forces us to sin, and Satan into a hero for saving us from the drudgery of being stuck in Eden for all of eternity.

Okay. I guess I've beaten that one half to death. I'll move on now.

My last point (promise)...The idea of "original sin" is not about a particular sinful act committed by an individual. In our state of "origninal sinfulness" we are not punished because Adam at the fruit. Original sin is about our spiritual and physical separation from God as a result of the Fall. We are Adam's offspring, and have inherited his nature. In our fallen nature it is inevetable that we will sin. We are all sinners because of our nature, we are of this nature because of Adam & Eve's "Original Sin".


Some Questions
1. If you believe that God gave two conflicting commands in Eden, then you must also believe that God expects Adam and Eve to disobey one command in order to follow another. How do you choose? How do you decide which of God's commands are to be followed and which are to be dismissed?
2. Do you believe that it was impossible for Adam and Eve to feel joy in Eden before the fall? Why?
3. Are you grateful that Adam and Eve ate that fruit? If so, are you also grateful to Satan for deceiving Eve? Why or why not?



If you're new to this conversation, you might be interested in some previous posts:
1. Introduction & Intent
2. Format
3. Part 1: Joseph Smith
4. Part 2: God and Jesus
5. Part 2: Followup
6. Part 2: Another Followup
7. Part 3: Determining Truth
8. Part 3: Determining Truth Followup

Lindsey  – (9/19/2008 05:49:00 AM)  

Hey there! So glad you stopped by my blog! I would LOVE to give you instructions to make your own button, if you want to just drop me an email, I will email you back with directions and the html you'll need. Or, I can do it for you if you'd rather... just let me know! mommychronicles@hotmail.com

LOVE to know that you go to CCB... it's so fun to meet other CC people! Yay!

Becky  – (9/20/2008 12:58:00 PM)  

As I read this post, I’ve been really interested to see what the follow-up comments would be. I keep checking back, surprised no one has participated in the discussion this time. It inspired me to actually comment instead of being a shy lurker. : )

I think the lack of comments reveal how cut and dry the difference in doctrine is here between Biblical Christianity and the LDS teaching. These two teachings absolutely cannot be compatible. As a Christian, the LDS teaching on this subject is particularly upsetting to me. I submit that they are actually blasphemous teachings.

When God was finished with creation, He said, “It is good!” We were in right relationship with Him, the way He intended it to be, and Adam and Eve enjoyed a companionship with God that all of our hearts long to have again.

As someone who has experienced tragedy over the last four years, I cannot count how many times I have said, “This is not the way it is supposed to be!” That is because our world is not how it is supposed to be. The introduction of sin through the deception from Satan and the willful disobedience of Adam and Eve, led to death and separation from God. The disruption of this relationship is responsible for all of the evils of this world. It is the reason I have had to suffer through the loss of my babies. There is no way to spin this as a positive thing. Applauding Eve for listening to Satan and disobeying God’s direct order is shocking to me.

Also shocking is painting Eden as imperfect or lacking in any way. It is the restoration of what Adam and Eve had in Eden that we are all waiting to experience in Heaven for Eternity. It is the great hope of my life.

I could go on and on about my problems with how our teachings are different, but Daiquiri already did a great job of laying out the differences here. I’m still so curious to hear from the LDS participants in this discussion about their take on this. (LDS Neighbor, Seth, David, Jia…I’ve learned so much from all of you and enjoyed your participation in this discussion. Where are you?)

Wow! Long comment for my first time. : )

Hot Air  – (9/20/2008 01:09:00 PM)  

I always wondered what the line of thinking was there. I am still sincerely admiring the time and effort you are putting into this.

The main thing I see that seems to be causing such a difference of opinion is the fact that you believe that in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve just needed more time to have kids, and we believe they couldn't have them. We believe they knew no joy, because they knew no pain. There was no opposition.

We believe opposition is the whole reason we're here in the first place. Not because we love the pain, but because we know that we need to learn how to deal with it. It sounds like a lot of people wish we all lived in Eden with no troubles, and stupid Adam and Eve messed everything up for us all.

Basically, we believe that our whole experience here on earth is a type and a shadow of our eternal existance. That the family is an eternal concept. We aren't just going to float around like we're on a heroine trip when we die. We'll still be learning, growing, and above all- LOVING. We believe that the greatest privilege we may be granted after this life will be to have a family, just like our Father.

So first- we need to learn to become like Him.

Apparently that involves more than sitting around petting baby sheep and feeling docile lions.

Article- From President Brigham Young we learn: “Some may regret that our first parents sinned. This is nonsense. If we had been there, and they had not sinned, we should have sinned. I will not blame Adam or Eve. Why? Because it was necessary that sin should enter into the world; no man could ever understand the principle of exaltation without its opposite; no one could ever receive an exaltation without being acquainted with its opposite. How did Adam and Eve sin? Did they come out in direct opposition to God and to his government? No. But they transgressed a command of the Lord, and through that transgression sin came into the world. The Lord knew they would do this, and he had designed that they should. Then came the curse upon the fruit, upon the vegetables, and upon our mother earth; and it came upon the creeping things, upon the grain in the field, the fish in the sea, and upon all things pertaining to this earth, through man’s transgression.”

You say that according to our beliefs, Satan is a hero, and Eve is a heroine.

We believe Satan was and still is an evil pawn in Heavenly Father's much grander, unstoppable plan of salvation for His children. We needed oppostion in the world.
I think God was just showing us, that our problems are not a curse He smote us with. That we brought (and still bring) our problems (as a human race) on ourseves. He loves us enough to give us agency. It comes with consequences. Consequences that he can't just magically make disappear.

He wants us to grow! He wants us to become like Him! There are worse things than suffering and death. One of those is eternal seperation from Him. But there's another. Can you imagine if He didn't give us a chance to grow up in the first place? Would you freeze your baby in his ignorant state of baby bliss, well cared for and loved? Or would you like to see him grow up and experience the joy of having his own life- his own children? Joy like that doesn't come free. Which is where this comes in.

I guess in a sense, we believe Eve was a "heroine," although I would use a more serious and reverent word to describe her. "Mother," maybe. Not someone Heavenly Father is ashamed of or disappointed in, that's for sure.

It just makes sense to me- this plan of our Father's. Because we've been living it, whether we recognize it or not.

Hot Air  – (9/20/2008 01:33:00 PM)  

I just read Becky's comment. We come to the same conclusions through completely different theologies- weird.

I should explain my "tardiness." ;) Personally, it took me so long to come back here because the power has been out across the state.

I wish I had read Becky's comment before I posted, because I would have mentioned I'm really feeling for you Becky- of course losing babies makes this life seem so harsh. One of the ladies whose family has been eating over (no power at their house) has lost a few children to Menkes disease, and her two-week-old baby might have it, too. But she believes in the same plan. I think Heavenly Father has given us the gospel and knowledge
we need to comfort us. And of course, He sent the Comforter.

And I agree- LDS Neighbor, Seth, David, Jia, Mormon Soprano- where are you? I'm the worst person to be alone on here. I need your tactful, loving examples- because I can't express my heart very well when I'm not face to face.

Untypically Jia  – (9/20/2008 01:47:00 PM)  

I'm here, I'm here! Sorry, our hallway ceiling caved in this week thanks to a leaky swamp cooler, so I've been slightly preoccupied LOL! (Mostly with Chicken Little jokes)

The thing about this, is that God gave man agency, and without the opportunity to sin, there would be no choice. Satan is no hero, and I believe he's pretty P.Oed about the fact that through his manipulation, something good (we believe) came out of it. Hot Air already said everything that I really wanted to say, and said it beautifully.

As a convert to the Church, I do believe that it was impossible for Adam and Eve to really know joy in the garden because they didn't know pain. I know this, because I've been outside of God's eternal light, and I've also been wrapped in his arms of love. Before I immersed myself in Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, I truly had no joy. Things that used to be "joyful" seemed irrelevant.

I've also gone through periods where I have greatly sinned and become inactive in my Church through my own stupidity really, but now I more appreciate the atonement of Christ and what it's purpose is. I'm closer to Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ because of the pathway back through repentance.

I'm not saying everyone has to sin incredibly so to feel the love of Christ, but in regards to Adam and Eve, they knew no pain . . . so joy wasn't something they could even understand.

Daiquiri  – (9/20/2008 01:52:00 PM)  

Hot Air- Why do you believe that God gave the command to multiply if we couldn't do it? Why would he put us in a position of HAVING to sin before fulfilling one of his commands? It doesn't make sense!

Team Audrey  – (9/20/2008 02:58:00 PM)  

"We believe they knew no joy, because they knew no pain. There was no opposition."

How do you know they could feel no joy because they did not have to suffer pain? Living on earth we have always had the two sides, pain and joy, which is our frame of reference. I've seen pure joy in the face of my baby when we are cuddling or playing together, and she has not suffered pain in order to appreciate true happiness. I don't believe you have to know pain to know true joy.

Dawnita~ –   – (9/20/2008 03:50:00 PM)  

Okay... I have been sitting here reading your post to my hubby and now I just got done reading everyones comments... My husband and I have had quite the conversation! My husband says I am faithful like Abraham but I speak at times like Moses!

So I will say this... I do agree with what Becky wrote and now I will sit here, pray and be still!


In His grace,
Dawnita~

Daiquiri  – (9/20/2008 04:08:00 PM)  

Team Audrey - I completely agree with you. We do not need to feel pain in order to experience joy. Especially if we're in the presence of God Himself! It's what our very souls were made for...relationship with the Lord!

Audra Krell  – (9/20/2008 04:26:00 PM)  

Great discussion here, thanks for the educational article. It is well done and a relevant topic!

Patrick  – (9/20/2008 09:28:00 PM)  

I tryed to follow Dawnita's example and sit and be quiet, but alas, I cannot.

This subject is not a minor difference in theology for me. In fact, as I read it, I was truly angry (the kind of anger Christ had when he cleared the temple). The weird thing is, this was not the first time I'd heard the LDS doctrine on the subject (I was angry the first time as well).

Just so the LDS members in the crowd can understand the Christian perspective clearly, I will state my belief simply: That particular doctrine is nothing less than Blasphemy to me. And from speaking with other Christians, my feeling is not unique.

I'm unable to describe in words the depth to which this strikes me. Imagine the Jews who immediately picked up stones to kill Jesus when he said he was the I AM. No, I don't wish to harm anyone, but my reaction was just as instant as theirs.

And so you know what EXACTLY is so offensive, it's this: To state that God created us with the intention that we will, and we must sin, in order for his plan to work is Blasphemy! To say God desired sin is to call Him evil! To cause, or want, someone to sin is sin & God cannot sin.

The idea that one must know pain in order to know joy is simply not true. God is Love, God is Joy, God is Peace... To walk in the presence of God is to know and feel these things!

Spin as you may, but Daiquiri did a great job pointing out that this doctrine in contradictory to the Bible.

Anonymous –   – (9/20/2008 11:40:00 PM)  

I must take the time to comment that I am disturbed that everyone is saying "what Christians believe".... and so on and so forth, and I am sure that in their minds they are refering to "non-LDS" people. But I would like it to be known that people of the LDS faith are indeed Christians. It is in our very name- The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day Saints. Being Christian means believing in our Savior Jesus Christ.
Please remember that fact in your future postings. We are indeed Christians as well.
Just a different "branch" if you will.

ldsneighbor  – (9/20/2008 11:51:00 PM)  

Daiquiri, another good topic where many do not quite understand our beliefs. Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Under the section "What the LDS Church Teachesabout The Fall", I think that is a pretty fair statement of some of our beliefs on the subject. I would add that the Fall brought a significant change to the world. Adam and Eve before the fall were immortal. After the Fall they became "mortal" (meaning ability to die). Adam was the first man to enter "mortality", and the Fall of Adam has a mortal effect upon the entire earth. Part of the change associated with this mortal state included the ability to have mortal children.

Under your section "What the Bible says", most all of that also is included in LDS beliefs. One glaring exception being your quote: "surely I was sinful at birth". I don't see that in Psalm 51:5 in KJV. That is part of the difficulty and faulty premise with a discussion framed as "what the Bible says". It all depends on which version of the Bible.

Just look into a little baby's eyes and see for yourself... Little children are innocent because 1) they have a natural "child-like" innocence, and 2) they aren't old enough to know better, not old enough to understand the consequence of sin. "Sin" implies choice, implies accountability. Little children are not accountable yet. Here's another Book of Mormon verse on this topic: "For behold he judgeth, and his judgment is just; and the infant perisheth not that dieth in his infancy; but men drink damnation to their own souls except they humble themselves and become as little children, and believe that salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent." (Mosiah 3:18)

Another thing to consider here is that there is a subtle distinction between "sin" and "transgression". This was a transgression of the law, but not a sin. Notice the distinction in our 2nd article of faith: “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression”.

The most important event in all of human history is the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Without the Fall, there would have been no need for the Atonement of Christ, which is central in the Plan of Salvation. Are you suggesting that the Fall should not have happened and this whole thing and the coming of Christ was all just a big mistake?

On the subject of Satan's role in this. He is an enemy to God. He had no good motive in tempting Adam and Eve to transgress the law. He was doing what he always does, and that is opposing God and trying to lead the children of God astray. God turned Satan's efforts against him. He was definitely no hero. No Mormon believes Satan to have a heroic role at all. Daiquiri, your are getting upset over a strawman in this case.

In response to your questions:

1. They chose the one that brought man into the world. "Adam fell that men might be". I am thankful for that choice and not the other, where they would have lived comfortably forever, but without posterity.

2. I think they only felt happiness in the garden. But they didn't fully appreciate it because that's all they knew. As an analogy, someone who has three square meals every day feels satisfied, but there is value in fasting, and food somehow tastes better after a fast. I know that's an imperfect analogy, so please bear with me.

3. I am grateful that Adam and Eve ate the fruit, because without their choice I would not be here and the Plan of Happiness would have been frustrated. I am not grateful to Satan because his motive is always to oppose God. I am grateful that God is smarter than Satan and knows how to frustrate Satan's efforts. For example, Satan fights against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints all the time by trying to stir up opposition against the Lord's true church. But those efforts fail and only serve to raise visibility and interest in the church, which continues to roll forth.

Daiquiri, another good post and good discussion. Looking forward to the next ones.

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 06:13:00 AM)  

About Daiquiri's comment on the last post (I'm responding on here, because it's mostly about this post ;) My husband and I keeping saying how impressed we are that you have done your homework and only misrepresent us a teeny bit in the question and opinion parts. It's better than most people do.

I still think what the Bible says can be two completely different things depending on where you are coming from. Every verse you use to prove your point is also one I could use to prove mine, ha! I hold firmly that interpretation is what we are dealing with here.

The next thing is God's giving two opposite comandments. Without looking anything up, I just have to say, it doesn't seem any different to me than God telling the people of Moses never to kill, and then saying to go to war. And kill people. You asked how do we know which of God's commandments to obey. They do change, according to the situation. Why was David blessed and helped to kill Goliath? We're not supposed to kill, right? (Another reason we need prophets today, not just in Biblical times.) We don't believe he will put us in a position of having to sin. We don't believe he put Adam in that position, either. He still had his agency. We believe that Adam's choice was a transgression, not a sin. (The difference being willfully breaking a commandment you know about.)

Wow- I just read Patrick's comment. There's a difference here- Jesus knew what he was angry about. And I've gotta say- if this discussion is making you angry- I think you should spare yourself and join a discussion somewhere else that uplifts you. Anger over a "strawman," not cool.

And Audrey- I see where you are coming from. You see joy in your baby. But there's a difference in the joy of a baby who isn't choosing yet for themselves, and the joy of someone who knows they can fight the good fight. She's not accountable for anything yet, of course she's a happy camper!! ;)

I guess we believe differently than you about joy and pain. We do believe in opposition. "For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so... 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." 2 Ne 2:11

I have to say- hearing such sincerity from you guys, even Patrick, is really endearing. I love people that care!

And thanks for making me feel welcome, Daiquiri- I needed that.

Zicker  – (9/21/2008 06:59:00 AM)  

I just wanted to add that God gives us commandments to accomplish his designs. Occasionally they may seem contradictory, but in the proper context they can make sense. (ie. God commanding the Israelites to not kill and then kill.) We don't have every last detail available to us. We have the account of the Bible, the Book of Mormon and modern day scripture but details and specifics are missing in all accounts. That is where faith comes in. You may call it "checking your brain at the door." But if you really think about it, Christianity admonishes all of us to believe in something that we have not witnessed firsthand nor do we completely comprehend. "[God's] thoughts are higher than [our] thoughts..." No appeal to logic will ever settle the matter as far as scripture and religion is concerned. Human logic is imperfect logic and our own interpretations of scripture can be imperfect. The only way to settle the matter is to learn of God’s thoughts with a direct appeal to Him; however, if we have already rejected the explanation he has given us and then ask him, it is to no avail.

Big Daddy –   – (9/21/2008 08:46:00 AM)  

Anonymous on 9/20 - Even Satan believes in Christ, so that does not make one a Christian. And a name can be sometimes misrpresent who you are. For example, is the FLDS church an LDS church?

On the subject of being born sinful vs. the example of kids being innocent until the age of accountabilty; my two year old lies to me all the time. Her sinfulness is only limited by her life experiences, not her nature.

Let's use the 'say it outloud test' for the fall. Based on everything we know of the Bible, does it sound ok when we say outloud: 'I am glad Eve was tempted by Satan and disobeyed God, it was a good thing.'

Dawnita~ –   – (9/21/2008 09:07:00 AM)  

I do have to say... Awesome post Patrick and good word Big Daddy!

Still praying and being "still"!!!

In His Grace,
Dawnita~

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 11:49:00 AM)  

"I'm glad Jesus hung on a cross and suffered for my sins." Say it out loud.

?? Just saying "her sinfulness" in regard to a two-year-old sounds ludicrous to me.

C'mon. What are you here for, Big Daddy? To construct or destruct? What do you think your remark just accomplished?

I guess it's expected. But I sincerely don't think looking at this discussion from a right or wrong point of view is going to get anyone anywhere.

I'm not here to convince anyone they're evil, and that I'm righteous. I'm just enjoying hearing testimony from people, and letting the truth strike my heartstrings.

Seriously- this whole "forum" should be a focus on understanding each other- not critisising, or even changing each other. Not one person is going to change their religion based on someone else's "logical explanation" of the gospel. Or snide intimations about how they are the devil. Please. Let's keep it at a 10th grade level, at least?

If this is about something else, I'd like that to be made plain, so I can politely excuse myself and quit wasting my time.

(Feel free to erase both our comments, Daiquiri- since neither is really pertinent- ha!)

Daiquiri  – (9/21/2008 12:26:00 PM)  

Alright folks. I'm not letting it go here.

Some new ground rules...

1. We are not having the "who is a Christian" debate here.
2. We are going to (temporarily) focus our discussion soley on the Fall...NOT on original sin. It's just too inflamatory and distracting...for now.

Got it?

(Yes, I'm playing the big bad boss here. How does it suit me ;)

Daiquiri  – (9/21/2008 12:27:00 PM)  

Can someone clarify for me...

The LDS teaching is that "sin" is different than "transgression"? If so, please elaborate

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 12:35:00 PM)  

If you look up Gospel Topics on the lds.org site you can get definitions for sin and transgression, and additional info..

Transgression:
Violation or breaking of a commandment or law

Sin:
To commit sin is to willfully disobey God's commandments or to fail to act righteously despite a knowledge of the truth (see James 4:17).

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 12:56:00 PM)  

If you click here and then click Church Magazine Articles, you can hear from Apostles of the church, who are usually a little more thorough. ;)

Daiquiri  – (9/21/2008 01:31:00 PM)  

Genesis 2:16-17 "And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Genesis 3:6 "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it."

By the LDS definition of sin, why is eating the fruit not a sin? They willfully chose to eat the fruit even though God clearly commanded them not to.

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 01:31:00 PM)  

One more thing. I thought this explained a bit better. (Sorry- we're home sick today- not a lot else to do. ;)
“… We celebrate Eve’s act and honor her wisdom and courage in the great episode called the Fall. … Elder Joseph Fielding Smith said: ‘I never speak of the part Eve took in this fall as a sin, nor do I accuse Adam of a sin. … This was a transgression of the law, but not a sin.’ This suggested contrast between a sin and a transgression reminds us of the careful wording in the second article of faith: “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression” (italics added). It also echoes a familiar distinction in the law. Some acts, like murder, are crimes because they are inherently wrong. Other acts, like operating without a license, are crimes only because they are legally prohibited. Under these distinctions, the act that produced the Fall was not a sin—inherently wrong—but a transgression—wrong because it was formally prohibited. These words are not always used to denote something different, but this distinction seems meaningful in the circumstances of the Fall”

Daiquiri  – (9/21/2008 01:33:00 PM)  

Still...no one has answered my most burning question:

Why would God give a command that, in order to follow it, a person must disobey another command?

He told them to have kids. He told them to avoid the fruit.

Doesn't it make more sense that BOTH commands were fully attainable, instead of assuming that they'd have to choose which one to obey?

Daiquiri  – (9/21/2008 02:01:00 PM)  

BTW - although I can understand the distinction that the LDS churh teaches between "sin" and "transgression", I lovingly submit that this teaching is not true. The Bible teaches that sin and transgression are the very same.

1 John 3:4
"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."

Also, you can look it up at dictionary.com...sin and transgression are interchangeable.

I also looked into the Greek meaning of the words used in the Bible. Here's Psalm 65:3 (the numbers indicate a translation from the Greek (or Hebrew? not sure)...from the original language).

Psa 65:3 Iniquities1697, 5771 prevail1396 against4480 me: as for our transgressions,6588 thou859 shalt purge them away.3722

And then you can see the orignal word used in the Bible, and how it's translated. Here's #6588 - info on "transgressions" in the above verse:

H6588
פּשׁע
pesha‛
peh'-shah
From H6586; a revolt (national, moral or religious): - rebellion, sin, transgression, trespassive

You can see that sin and transgression are used interchangeably here too.

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 04:13:00 PM)  

It's kind of odd to me to be focused so much on God's intentions. But here's some more of what we do know, that maybe clarifies a teeny bit more?

It's from one of the talks I mentioned.

"After the Lord commanded Adam and Eve to multiply and replenish the earth and commanded them not to partake of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, He said: “Nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Moses 3:17).

There was too much at issue to introduce man into mortality by force. That would contravene the very law essential to the plan. The plan provided that each spirit child of God would receive a mortal body and each would be tested. Adam saw that it must be so and made his choice. “Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy” (2 Ne. 2:25).

Patrick  – (9/21/2008 05:46:00 PM)  

Hot air,
You misunderstand the source of my anger, it's certainly NOT this discussion. It is the doctrine itself. I know exactly what I'm angry about.

If you believe that "this whole "forum" should be a focus on understanding each other-" - then why are you dismissive about what I believe? My post was meant to in fact show the huge difference in our two beliefs. I shared my emotional response to further demonstrate that point. I didn't attack anyone and I certainly didn't make any strawman arguments (which is an overused and often misunderstood logical fallacy).

I simply made a statement about the doctrine, and specified what it was about that particular doctrine I found blasphemous.

Hope we're on the same page now.

Rob  – (9/21/2008 06:14:00 PM)  

I think this is a fascinating series of posts you're doing, Daiquiri. I'm LDS and I have to commend the work you're putting in to dig deep and try to understand our religion.

I have to say too that I think hot air is doing a phenomenal job explaining our church's doctrine and responding to the other comments.

I don't know that I could add much to what has already been said. If you'll permit me, though, I would like to ask a few questions to try to better understand the, for lack of a better phrase, "mainline Christian" understanding of the Fall. I hope none of my questions come across as anything but my sincere attempt to understand your beliefs.

Is it your belief that God intended for Adam, Eve and all future humanity to live in Eden forever?

If we would have continued to live in Eden, would the tree of knowledge also continue to be there with each of us all subject to the same commandment not to eat its fruit with the attendant punishment if we did? I assume this would be the case since God gave the commandment not to eat the fruit before Eve was created, but she clearly understood that the commandment applied to her as well. Is that right?

How do you view the current world we live in in relation to God's plan for us? What I mean is, is this world our punishment only or did God have any other purpose for putting us in this world? (Not sure if those questions make sense. Sorry. If they don't, just ignore them.)

I think that's enough from me for now :-)

Again, I really appreciate what you're doing and how open you're being about this whole process. I'm looking forward to your future posts.

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 06:51:00 PM)  

Patrick,

We're not, and can never really be on the same page. Your "statement" about doctrine was actually a conjecture, "inflammatory and distracting," at that.

I was dismissive about what you believe, because of the title of these posts. If you are so curious about what I think of your beliefs, read this. It sums it up for me nicely.

Honestly, if this was called "What the Evangelical or Methodist or Baptist Church teaches," I wouldn't be here. I'm not here to convince, or to be convinced. I'm here for a discussion of the LDS church; to contribute, clarify, bear my testimony, and strengthen that testimony.

We've got to get something straight. There is absolutely nothing you or any person on this earth can say that will erase the knowledge God has given me. I don't talk about my spiritual experiences to great length in places like this. You want more- I've got to feel some humble in the room. I'm not the only LDS person who feels this way, so we might as well realize what we're dealing with here. I'm done worrying about what I should believe. I'm seriously too busy focusing on who I am becoming.

Hot Air  – (9/21/2008 06:54:00 PM)  

This is my last thought for the day. Quoting the original post: "Pain is the only thing that was new after the fall. Pain and suffering and death. All of creation groans under the immense darkness that took over with that one sinful choice."

Well, first- pain, suffering and death weren't the only things that came with the Fall. Sin came, too. I think God planned this choice to be necessary because He wasn't going to be the one who put sin in the world. He wasn't just going to give us these consequences without a reason. How else could sin have been introduced, if Adam and Eve had stayed in that perfect state?

Why did sin need to be introduced? So we could be free to make wrong (and right)choices. And learn from them.

Say Adam and Eve were already mortals, and thus had the ability to have children (we don't believe they simply didn't know how- we believe they didn't have the keys to have immortal (spirit) children- only God has those keys.) Say they had kids and they were all in the presence of God, and nobody had any problems.

What is the point? No choices, no learning, no Savior, no atonement, no repentance, no growth. Is that the alternative you had in mind? Do you really detest this life, and God's plan, so much that you want to play the "coulda, woulda, shoulda" game with it? Are you really second guessing our whole existance? Is it so hard to believe that maybe God knew what he was doing?

Which attitude lends itself toward obedience to and love for God- disdain for His plan, or gratitude for it?

Patrick  – (9/21/2008 09:08:00 PM)  

Hot air,
When I said I hope we're on the same page, I meant I hoped I'd clarified my post enough so you could understand my point of view. Obviously we don't share the same beliefs or we both wouldn't be here.

At the risk of repeating myself, I spoke directly to the doctrine being discussed. You apparently didn't understand why something I consider blasphemous would make me angry. Blasphemy is a serious issue to me & I hope to others as well.

I'm sorry you didn't understand what the purpose of the discussion was. Thanks for stopping by. The discussion was to "state clearly what the Bible teaches compared to what the LDS church teaches." (that's a quote from Daiquiri's original post). Since you don't care to have a respectful dialog (yes, I consider your last post to me disrespectful), I suspect you won't be back.

Since my post was a re-affirmation of what the Bible teaches, and was on topic in reference to "The Fall" then I believe it was appropriate.

Daiquiri  – (9/21/2008 09:37:00 PM)  

There is a question on the table that I thought I'd try to answer.

The question: "What's the point?" (Hot Air), or "Is it your belief that God intended for Adam, Eve and all future humanity to live in Eden forever?" (Rob)

BTW...welcome, Rob. Glad to have you join us :)

The short answer to Rob's question is, "Yes".

(Before I launch into the long answer, I want to let you know that this will be a future post topic and I'll do a better job of backing my beliefs up with scripture.)

First, I should say that it is not only our belief about what God intended for our existence that makes our faiths different. We believe different things all together about the nature of God, the nature of man, and why we are here.

"Mainstream Christianitiy" does not believe that we are here to learn and grow and progress. We also do not believe that it is our ultimate goal to become like God (to become gods). Nor do we believe that God was once a man and progressed to godhood.

So why DID God create us? I don't presume to know and understand all the intricate details. But the general idea is that God did NOT make us for our benefit. He made us for HIS benefit. He made us for his pleasure. He made us to have a loving relationship with him.

Yes, we believe that God intended for us to live in bliss with Him forever in Eden. For us to have a loving relationship with him.

So the tree? Yep, that would have been there too. Without our ability to *choose* God, we could not have a true & free will choice to be with God.

God's a gentleman, so to speak :) He didn't want to force himself on us, so he gives us free will. The opportunity to choose to obey and do things on God's terms, and have him. OR the choice to disobey, try to go at it our way (pride), and be separated from God both physically and spiritually.

God, knowing all things as he does, knew what our choice would ultimately be. As a result, he planned away to save us. (Salvation will be another post too). He planned a way for our salvation because of our choice to sin...very different from the LDS belief that the sin had to happen so that the plan of salvation could happen. (chicken or egg?)

I'm continually surprised (and disturbed) by how PRECISELY BACKWARD from one another our faiths are!

I hope this clears up the "Mainstream Christian" belief. I'm not sure if I did it justice. But hey, it's late and my brain it toast. I gave it my best shot :)

Melissa  – (9/21/2008 10:18:00 PM)  

I’ve always said it and I see it here. The most difficult thing about writing is the ability to convey tone and intent. Hot air and Patrick, I can see how both of you may have misread each other’s tone, and both may have misinterpreted each other’s intent. Please don’t go. I appreciate your perspectives.

Anonymous –   – (9/21/2008 11:05:00 PM)  

Interesting, I didn't realize how different our faiths are. I can't imagine a father in heaven that would create us solely for his own pleasure. I believe there must be a purpose for us, or why would He bother with teaching us and blessing us? And if we are not here to learn and progress, why do we feel the need to?

I also read your post about the carrots growing in your garden. Why do you think God finds it necessary to thin us out? If I am here only for his pleasure, why does he want to change or improve me? What is his motivation?

I also don't understand why there is a belief that Adam and Eve ruined it for the rest of us. If they had never eaten the fruit, I think someone would have eventually. So wasn't it inevitable?
-Amy

Hot Air  – (9/22/2008 06:48:00 AM)  
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hot Air  – (9/22/2008 07:06:00 AM)  

Wow. It really is interesting how we have such different views, huh?

Is it true that while LDS people believe God accomplished His designs and we know His plan for us, "mainstreamers" believe He didn't get his way, and we don't know why we're here?

You already know how sad that sounds to me. Why doesn't that sound sad to you? It makes us His playthings instead of His children!

I wonder if anyone else thinks the whole point of this discussion is moot. For people who say they only rely on the Bible- there sure are a lot of assumptions filling in the blanks. I've already mentioned it- God gave us the Book of Mormon for a reason. So we don't have to make up our own theories to fill in the blanks.

As long as we sit here discussing man-made-opinion-pseudo doctrine, what are we accomplishing?

You like pseudo doctrine- try this on for size. What if Adam and Eve weren't the only people in the garden? What if they are our first parents because they are the ones that partook and got kicked out? Maybe God does have some people still running around in the garden! Ha! We might as well get a few atheists in here to mix things up real good. Ohhhh- sorry. Maybe this isn't the right place to joke around. ;)

Stop reading here if you don't want to get a little personal.

You know the kind of person that tackles a job and finishes it- creatively and usually with a favorable outcome? That's me, stubborness and all. But now I have three little kids to look after, and frankly- to get to the end of this job I would have to put my life on hold. I might even consider sticking around and clarifying each of your "strawman" theories about our beliefs, but I sense a lack of sincerity and constructivity in the motives of uh- certain people. ;) (Remember, Daiquiri, the prayer you put in italics at the end of that post? The one where you said you wanted to know God, even if it meant finding out that it involved a change of opinion? I thought that was genuine. I didn't expect you to change your beliefs, but I actually thought you were sincere. I stopped thinking that a few posts back.)

Although I've kind of lost some of my enthusiasm for this place, ("Haters" definitely helped- I just can't seem to enjoy devoting time to that) I think I'll keep coming here intermittently, because I've enjoyed hearing from other LDS people and feel I should give and not just take.

People like Patrick can stay as "righteously angry" as they want. (What was up with that, anyway- so mad you could stone Jesus? Ha! Come up with a different analogy, bud. Yes- I am disrespectful of stuff like that. Some things deserve respect, some don't. Why do you think my screen name is Hot Air? It's not just because my name was Summer Gale. ;D We take ourselves too seriously.)

Keep it up, brothers and sisters!! You're doing a great job. I think I'm going to devote some more time to people who actually want what I have to give: my knowledge and testimony of a plan of happiness. Don't worry- ;) I'll be around.

Daiquiri  – (9/22/2008 09:07:00 AM)  

Okay, well I guess I can't say I'm terribly surprised.

When a reader begins to question my heart for all of this, then where else is there to go? It's tough to have respectful dialogue when such...attitude...comes to the table.

For the record, Hot Air (if you're reading this), unless you can avoid calling my faith "pseudo-doctrine" and "sad"...frankly, you're not welcome here.

Also, for the record, I can not find where Patrick said he'd like to stone Jesus. He was using that story from the Bible as an illustration to make a point. I submit that putting words in another person's mouth in the way that you did...THAT is hateful.

I beleive I was clear from the very begining. I am not Mormon. I do not plan to become Mormon. I have done (and continue to do) my homework. I am doing my very best to fairly and accurately describe the LDS teachings on various topics. I welcome and encourage input from the LDS community because I want to understand this better, and because I want the "checks and balances"...if I misunderstand, I want to be corrected.

But let's give each other the benefit of the doubt, shall we? Let's assume that everyone here takes their faith seriously, has a good reason to believe what they believe, and holds their faith near to their heart as something precious to them. Let's also remember that, regardless of "mainstream" or LDS, we are all called to be loving and respectful. Choose your words carefully, please.

If we can do that, then let's get back to it...

Daiquiri

Anonymous –   – (9/22/2008 09:33:00 AM)  

I hope that a respectful dialogue can continue! I'm just starting to learn about your point of view Daiquiri. I really do want to understand where you're coming from. -Amy

ldsneighbor  – (9/22/2008 10:03:00 AM)  

Daiquiri, I don't question your heart and I respect your faith. I feel a kinship with you, even though I "coincidentally" stumbled upon your blog. Actually, I had the growing impression this morning that it was not just a coincidence that I stumbled upon it. I felt moved to start to search blogs for LDS references with a desire to help clarify misunderstandings, starting right about 27 Aug. That was on or just before the very day you posted your first posting entitled "Can We Talk About This, My LDS Friends?". Even though you may not have realized I was one of your LDS friends at the time (and neither did I), it was a very very timely start. I was pondering on that this morning, and I see that it was the Holy Ghost guiding me to find your blog right when I did. I hope I can contribute to this discussion in a constructive, kind, and respectful way. I am thankful for this opportunity that God has given me in at least a small way to help dispel some misconceptions about our beliefs and to develop new friendships with good people like you all.

I do feel that you respect my beliefs, even though it is obvious that the purpose of these series of posts is to try to show LDS folks the errors of their ways. I understand that you have no intention of joining the LDS church. But Paul didn't have any intention of joining that "evil cult" of 1st century Christianity either. So, I'm not giving up on you yet, sister. :-) In any case, I think there is value in us all understanding each other better and being friends. I personally appreciate diversity, and I love the principle of freedom of religion enshrined in our Constitution. That is also an article of faith in our religion: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." I cherish being able to have these discussions with people of different faiths without a spirit of contention. Sometimes the temptation for contention and pride crops up from time to time, but I think we are doing a good job of reigning it in when it does. I appreciate all of you and the generally kind tone.

Daiquiri  – (9/22/2008 11:17:00 AM)  

Oh, my dear LDS Neighbor :)

I don't believe that we found each other by coincidence either. I beleive it was nothing less than a "Divine Appointment". I am so thankful for you!

I appreciate the heart with which you say that you're still holding out hope for me (knowing that it is not my intent to become LDS). I hope you know that I feel the same way...I still "have hope" for you too ;)

In the mean time, let's keep talking. Let's keep praying. And let's all be open to God moving in our lives, showing us who He is.

Peace, my friend. Peace and Truth.

Becky  – (9/22/2008 11:24:00 AM)  

I'm so glad this conversation continues. I live in a community where 1 in 4 people are LDS. We NEED to have this discussion. If we live with one another, shouldn't we understand each other better?

This very discussion is an example of the value of it. Before reading this post, I had no idea that this was a doctrine of the LDS faith. It was new to me (yes and shocking) but through the comments, I've learned more why my LDS neighbors believe this doctrine although I continue to disagree.

On the flip side, did all of the LDS readers of this post understand the depth of emotion felt by the mainstreamers in response to this teaching? (Patrick's point of view) Did you know that we feel so strongly about it, enough to call it blasphemy?

I agree with Melissa. It is so hard to convey tone and heart and intention in typing. Daiquiri is my best friend. I can vouch for her heart of love and for how seriously she has taken the responsibility of doing this right. I've seen her cry over it. She has good intentions.

Hot Air you are right...nothing said here could convince either of us to change our religion, although if we were all honest we would agree that we both belong to religions that are commanded to get the truth out. If Daiquiri became a Mormon tomorrow, you would celebrate. If anyone reading this blog felt compelled to change to a Bible only approach to Christianity, I would celebrate. But more than anything, we are learning from each other, clarifying one another, and it shouldn't make either of us defensive.

I believe that what I believe is absolute TRUTH, so it is open to scrutiny. I believe it will stand every time so it is possible to welcome challenge to my faith. It makes it stronger and makes me find the answers.

This discussion is very valuable and I hope will continue.

: ) Becky

ldsneighbor  – (9/22/2008 11:36:00 AM)  

Daiquiri, thank you for those kind words and for your Christ-like love for all of God's children. I truly appreciate that. If anyone ever tried to tell me you weren't Christian, I would definitely stand up and defend you, for your kindness and generosity of spirit tell me that you do strive to follow Jesus Christ, and that is wonderful to see and feel.

By the way, I just came across a new video today from Seth Adam Smith that has touched my heart deeply and speaks the feelings of my heart about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Savior and Redeemer of the world. In an earlier thread, we were talking about "feelings" and about recognizing when the Holy Ghost communicates with us about the truthfulness of things. Watch this and notice the feelings that the Holy Ghost places in your heart and what He testifies to you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhbrR2FtP1o

Hot Air  – (9/22/2008 12:18:00 PM)  

An apology is definitely in order. Before I make the actual apology, first I will try to soften the words that came across with such attitude (which prideful attitude I'm constantly battling) with an explanation.

When I said sad, I wasn't referring to your faith, just that particular idea. (Your faith actually puts me in awe, because if I believed what you believed, I personally would feel sad, but you are a pretty happy gal!) What makes me happy is just different. It makes me happy to think of growth after this life. I'm sorry it sounded so much like calling your religion or faith sad.

When I said pseudo doctrine it was mostly in reference to consistent opinions used in place of scripture- like this: "We must assume that the two commands God gave them were fully achieveable. They were fully able to have children, and they were fully able to avoid that fruit. There is no reason to assume otherwise." Because I don't believe we must assume the same things, and I do believe there is reason to assume otherwise...

But I realize my joking around isn't funny here, and that I needed to be more patient and respectful of your thoughts, and Patrick's analogies. You pegged me perfectly with the word "attitude." (You could have said "pride," and I would have agreed just as wholeheartedly ;)

I truly admire the intellect and patience and fortitude being displayed from all religions, and am definitely not going to stand as a stumbling block any longer.

I like how you said "Please choose your words carefully." That is reason I almost didn't read thses posts in the first place- because I knew that in this season of my life, it's pretty much impossible for me to do much of anything carefully! I've been typing these disjointed thoughts of mine with sick, whiny babies on my lap, and a rambunctious toddler testing the limits of "okay behavior." While none of that is an excuse for hurting feelings, I hope it helps dissuade bad feelings.

And Daiquiri- I agree- you are doing your best, and I thank you for that. You'd be surprised, but this "forum" has actually made for some really nice moments over at our house- and I have you to thank for starting that.

Alrighty. Again- I'm most sorry. Mostly because I have the same hope you and LDS neighbor were talking about, and seem unable to express it.

Off I go, to change diapers, where I belong!

Good luck, you guys!! XO's!

ldsneighbor  – (9/22/2008 12:45:00 PM)  

hot air, I really appreciate you too. You have added so much to this conversation with what you have already said. I know what you mean about pride. I struggle with that too. I think we all do, since pride is the universal sin. I also want to say thank you for the wonderful job you are doing being a mother and raising your kids. That is the most important job in all the world. We all owe a great debt of gratitude and respect for mothers. God bless you, sister.

Becky  – (9/22/2008 12:47:00 PM)  

Hot Air,
I totally understand. That is why I was a lurker for so long. I knew my mommy duties wouldn't let me be as involved as I would want to be and wouldn't give me enough time to proof read everything to death like I would want. Hope your babies feel better and your toddler cooperates. : )

Daiquiri  – (9/22/2008 05:28:00 PM)  

Summer,
Thank you for the gracious and heart-felt apology. It takes class to say 'sorry' the way you did, and I appreciate it.

I forgive you.

Now let's move on :)

Daiquiri

PS. I'm really glad you decided to come back. I would have missed you.

Post a Comment

  © Blogger template Shush by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP