{"id":42360,"date":"2022-01-04T10:58:03","date_gmt":"2022-01-04T15:58:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.timesandseasons.org\/?p=42360"},"modified":"2022-01-04T09:00:18","modified_gmt":"2022-01-04T14:00:18","slug":"the-contradictory-commands-part-2-the-higher-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/2022\/01\/the-contradictory-commands-part-2-the-higher-law\/","title":{"rendered":"The Contradictory Commands, Part 2: The Higher Law"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part 1 of this series<\/a> discussed the contradictory commands given to Adam and Eve to not partake of the forbidden fruit but to also have children, I discussed the possibility that they would have been resolved in time, but they jumped the gun and listened to Satan rather than God, which is why they were in trouble.\u00a0 In this post, I discuss a more popular resolution in the Church to the contradiction centering on the concepts of the Fortunate Fall and that it wasn’t a full-blown sin to partake of the forbidden fruit.\u00a0 The basis of this idea is that the command to not partake of the forbidden fruit was a lesser commandment compared to the command to multiply and fill the earth. \u00a0In some versions of this theory, the command to not partake of the fruit was more a warning than a command. \u00a0In other versions, the choice to partake of the fruit was still a choice to violate a commandment, but one that was done to obey a more important commandment. \u00a0Most Church leaders who have articulated these positions maintain that partaking of the fruit was not a sin per se<\/em>, but a transgression or lesser infraction in some way.<\/p>\n

As stated, one approach to the two contradictory commandments is to hold that they were indeed contradictory commandments from God, but Eve and Adam chose to follow the command that was more important. \u00a0Elder John Widtsoe expressed this position when he wrote: \u201cIn life all must choose at times. \u00a0Sometimes, two possibilities are good; neither is evil. Usually, however, one is of greater import than the other. \u00a0When in doubt, each must choose that which concerns the good of others\u2014the greater law\u2014rather than which is chiefly benefits ourselves\u2014the lesser law. \u00a0The greater must be chosen … that was the choice made in Eden.\u201d[1]<\/a> \u00a0Eve\u2019s actions were, according to President Dallin H. Oaks, \u201ca planned offense, a formality to serve an eternal purpose. … Her act, whatever its nature, was formally a transgression but eternally a glorious necessity to open the doorway toward eternal life.\u201d[2]<\/a> \u00a0Thus, the choice to partake of the fruit may have been a transgression, but one that served a greater purpose.<\/p>\n

One interpretation to make this work is that the nature of God\u2019s command to partake of the fruit may have also been more a warning than an actual commandment.\u00a0 In the Genesis account, the command is given as follows: \u201cOf every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die\u201d (Genesis 2:16-17, KJV). \u00a0In the Joseph Smith Translation, this command was altered as follows: \u201cOf 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, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it<\/em>, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die\u201d (Moses 3:16-17, emphasis added). \u00a0The change represents a significant softening of the command\u2014Adam is given a choice, but told it is forbidden because of the consequences of partaking of the fruit. \u00a0To paraphrase from Disney\u2019s Pirates of the Caribbean, the command may have been more a guideline than an actual rule.<\/p>\n

Latter-day prophets have noted this distinction, using it to soften God\u2019s command into a warning. \u00a0The Prophet Joseph Smith said that: \u201cAdam did not commit sin in eating the fruits, for God had decreed that he should eat and fall\u2014but in compliance with the decree he should die.\u201d[3]<\/a> \u00a0It wasn\u2019t considered a sin because it was God\u2019s will for them to partake of the fruit, but the consequence thereof would be death. \u00a0Speaking more clearly, President Joseph Fielding Smith said: \u201cNow this is the way I interpret [Moses 3:16\u201317]: The Lord said to Adam, here is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you want to stay here, then you cannot eat of that fruit. If you want to stay here, then I forbid you to eat it. But you may act for yourself, and you may eat of it if you want to. And if you eat it, you will die.\u201d[4]<\/a> \u00a0As such, the command to not partake of the fruit could be seen more as a warning of the consequences of mortality with a choice given to Adam and Eve.\u00a0 President Dallin H. Oaks, ever the legal expert, explained this in greater detail as a technicality between sin and transgression. \u00a0He taught that:<\/p>\n

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\u2014inherently wrong\u2014but a transgression\u2014wrong 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.[5]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As a violation of a lesser command, the Fall was still a violation of law, but not a sin in the full sense.<\/p>\n

The idea that partaking of the fruit was a good thing hinges on the premise of a fortunate Fall. \u00a0Joseph Smith taught: \u201cWhat was the design of the Almighty in making man[?] It was to exalt him to be as God, the scripture says ye are Gods and it cannot be broken.\u201d[6]<\/a> \u00a0Mortality is a necessary part of human progress towards partaking of the divine nature in the form that the Prophet taught. \u00a0President John Taylor stated that it is necessary to \u201cobtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize [our] divine destiny as heirs of eternal life.\u201d[7]<\/a> \u00a0Having a body involves traits, conditions, and limitations that test and enlarge our souls in their progression towards self-mastery. \u00a0President Brigham Young taught that: \u201cDarkness and sin were permitted to come on this earth. Man partook of the forbidden fruit in accordance with a plan devised from eternity, that mankind might be brought in contact with the principles and powers of darkness, that they might know the bitter and the sweet, the good and the evil, and be able to discern between light and darkness, to enable them to receive light continually.\u201d[8]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0By coming into contact with the powers of darkness as a result of the Fall of Adam and Eve, we are able to decide to reject darkness and choose a better way.<\/p>\n

If mortality and bringing children into the world are so necessary, however, the question is raised: Why would God prohibit partaking of the fruit in the first place? \u00a0One answer might be that agency\u2014the ability to choose\u2014is central in the Plan of Salvation as we understand it. \u00a0Moral agency gives us the opportunity to develop the ability to stand on our own two feet and to develop the attributes of Godliness.m As President David O. McKay taught: \u201cFree agency is the impelling source of the soul\u2019s progress. It is the purpose of the Lord that man become like him. In order for man to achieve this it was necessary for the Creator first to make him free.\u201d[9]<\/a> \u00a0Otherwise, we would be \u201cmere puppets in the hands of a dictator, and the purpose of man\u2019s coming to earth would have been frustrated.\u201d[10]<\/a> Thus, choice is a necessary part of humankind\u2019s progression.<\/p>\n

Yet, mortality is also fraught suffering as we come into contact with the powers of darkness. \u00a0The spiritual traces of every thought, word, and action we have ever committed are a part of us (see Alma 12:14). \u00a0Sinfulness is a condition \u201ccontrary to the nature of God\u201d (Alma 41:11). \u00a0Considering that exaltation and eternal life are the end products of partaking of the divine nature and becoming like God, iniquity holds us back because it is \u201ccontrary to that righteousness\u201d which is the at the core of who God is (Helaman 13:38). \u00a0For God to forcefully thrust humankind into a situation where they would be iniquitous would consist of Him going against His very nature as we understand it.\u00a0 As Elder Boyd K. Packer taught that: \u201cThere was too much at issue to introduce man into mortality by force. That would contravene the very law essential to the plan.\u201d[11]<\/a><\/p>\n

To avoid forcing mankind into mortality, the Lord let Adam and Eve choose whether they would fall and become mortal. Elder Orson Pratt taught that: \u201cThe Lord being perfect in goodness, could not, consistently with this great attribute of His nature, inflict pain or misery upon innocent beings, like our first parents.\u201d Therefore, God placed the tree in the garden as enticing option and provided man with a \u201cwarning of the consequences which would follow.\u201d[12]<\/a> \u00a0They were given a choice between staying as they were or moving forward through pain and suffering towards eternal life.<\/p>\n

Latter-day Saints sometimes go even further and offer praise to Eve for choosing to partake of the fruit and Adam for going along with her. \u00a0One nineteenth-century Latter-day Saint (an E.N.B. of Ogden, Utah) wrote that: \u201cWe are taught that Eve was the first to sin. Well, she was simply more progressive than Adam. \u00a0She did not want to live in the beautiful garden for ever, and be nobody\u2014not able even to make her own aprons.\u201d[13]<\/a> \u00a0Hugh Nibley likewise noted that in the story, Eve \u201ctakes the initiative, pursuing the search for ever greater light and knowledge while Adam cautiously holds back. \u00a0Who was the wiser for that?\u201d[14]<\/a> \u00a0Finally, Dallin H. Oaks stated that: \u201cInformed by revelation, we celebrate Eve\u2019s act and honor her wisdom and courage in the great episode called the Fall.\u201d[15]<\/a> \u00a0In each of these statements, Eve is lionized for choosing <\/em>to partake of the fruit because it led humankind into the next phase of existence.<\/p>\n

This approach to explaining the contradictory commandments is the dominant strain of thought in the Church today. To summarize: the two commandments were given as a choice for Adam and Eve\u2014a choice between staying in paradise and entering a mortality that involves pain and suffering, but growth and joy as well. \u00a0God wished for mankind to choose the latter, but would or could not directly thrust them into conditions where they would sin and suffer, so used the commandments to communicate the choice. \u00a0Understanding this, Eve chose to partake of the fruit to move forward towards the divine destiny of humankind and Adam chose to follow her in doing so. \u00a0Because it is a positive thing, violating the command to not partake of the fruit was not a sin in the full sense, but has been called a transgression instead. \u00a0For their transgression, Eve and Adam should be revered and honored by their descendants.<\/p>\n

This belief is not without its difficulties, however. A lot of the praise to Adam and Eve is based on the idea that they chose to partake of the fruit with a full knowledge of the consequences. \u00a0Yet, the scriptures indicate that Satan deceived Eve, that Adam and Eve were ashamed of their choice, and that God was angry with them for partaking of the fruit. \u00a0When God visited them after their transgression, Adam and Eve sought to \u201chide themselves from the presence of the Lord\u201d (Moses 4:14). When it came to light that they had partaken of the fruit, both tried to pass the blame. Adam blamed Eve, stating: \u201cThe woman thou gavest me, and commandest that she should remain with me, she gave me of the fruit of the tree and I did eat\u201d (Moses 4:18). \u00a0Eve, in turn, blamed the serpent: \u201cThe serpent beguiled me, and I did eat\u201d (Moses 4:19).[16]<\/a> \u00a0The Lord, in response, dishes out punishment to the serpent, Eve, and Adam. \u00a0The serpent was cursed to crawn in the dust, the woman to have pain in childbirth and subjection to the man, and the man to toil in sweat and sorrow for food. \u00a0Although we often gloss the statement, \u201ccursed shall be the ground for thy sake<\/em>\u201d to mean that ground being cursed was beneficial, the Hebrew text in the Bible is more accurately rendered: \u201cCursed is the ground because of you.\u201d[17]<\/a> \u00a0These seem to be indications of God being angry and punishing all individuals involved in the Fall. \u00a0In the texts closest to the story of the Fall, none of the people or beings involved seem happy with the consequences at the time.<\/p>\n

Tad R. Callister noted this in his book, The Infinite Atonement<\/em>. He wrote:<\/p>\n

If Adam and Eve had partaken with \u2018full\u2019 knowledge of obeying a higher law as some would suggest, one wonders why the scriptures would have used words and phrases such as \u2018beguiled,\u2019 deceived,\u2019 yielded,\u2019 and even \u2018spiritually dead\u2019 (D&C 29:41), to describe their Edenic conduct and subsequent state of affairs. One also wonders how they could have \u2018full\u2019 knowledge when they lived in a state of innocence, it would not have been possible for them to completely comprehend which choice was good and which was evil. One further wonders why Adam, upon responding to the Lord\u2019s question, \u2018Hast thou eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat … ?\u2019 (Moses 4:17), would shift the \u2018blame\u2019 or responsibility to Eve, and likewise, she would further shift the \u2018blame\u2019 to the Serpent (Moses 4:18-19). If they had proceeded with a full or even partial knowledge of the consequences, this would have been an appropriate moment to respond: \u2018We knowingly broke the lesser law in order to keep a higher one. We understand there will be some harsh consequences for the moment, but in the eternal scale of things, it will be a blessing, not a curse to us and our posterity.\u2019 This would have been a time not of blame, but of explanation as to why the choice had been made.[18]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thus, Brother Callister points out the biggest holes in the theory discussed above\u2014if it was necessary for them to choose to partake of the fruit to enter mortality, they seem to have done so without a full understanding.<\/p>\n

Callister goes on to say that we do not know or understand all the conditions under which the Fall occurred, but that it truly was necessary and fortunate. \u00a0He also points out that it was after Adam and Eve had been informed of the Atonement of Christ that they rejoiced. \u00a0Thus, there are notable concepts be found in the ideas discussed so far, even if they don\u2019t provide perfect answers to the question of why there are contradictory commands. There are, of course, different answers that similarly shed light on important principles and potentially resolve the paradox.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Footnotes:<\/strong><\/p>\n

I am, admittedly, in debt to Terryl Givens for much of how I approach this thread of thought about the Fall.\u00a0 See Wrestling the Angel: The Foundations of Mormon Thought: Cosmos, God, Humanity <\/em>(Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2015), 176-198.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> John A Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations<\/em> (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1947), 2:78.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Dallin H. Oaks, \u201cThe Great Plan of Happiness,\u201d CR. October 1993, https:\/\/www.lds.org\/general-conference\/1993\/10\/the-great-plan-of-happiness?lang=eng<\/a><\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Joseph Smith remarks to the Nauvoo Lyceum, 9 February 1841, McIntire Minute Book.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> \u201cFall\u2014Atonement\u2014Resurrection<\/a>\u2014Sacrament<\/a>,\u201d in\u00a0Charge to Religious Educators,<\/em>\u00a02nd ed. [1982], 124.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Oaks, \u201cGreat Plan.\u201d<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Joseph Smith, The Words of Joseph Smith<\/em>, eds. Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook [Orem, UT: Grandin Book Company, 1991], 247.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> The Family, A Proclamation to the World.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young<\/em> (SLC: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1997), 39.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> David O. McKay, in Conference Report, April 1950, 32.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> David O. McKay, in Conference Report, April 1950, 34-35.<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> Boyd K. Packer, \u201cAtonement, Agency, Accountability,\u201d CR April 1988. https:\/\/www.lds.org\/ensign\/1988\/05\/atonement-agency-accountability?lang=eng&_r=1<\/a><\/p>\n

[12]<\/a> Orson Pratt, The Seer<\/em> 1.6 (June 1853): 84.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> E.N.B., \u201cWomen\u2019s Rights,\u201d Woman\u2019s Exponent<\/em> 3.16 (15 January 1875):122, https:\/\/contentdm.lib.byu.edu\/digital\/collection\/WomansExp\/id\/3530\/rec\/66<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[14]<\/a> Hugh Nibley, \u201cPatriarchy and Matriarchy,\u201d in Old Testament and Related Studies<\/em>, ed. John W. Welch, Gary P. Gillum, and Don E. Norton (Salt Lake City: Deseret and Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1986), 92.<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a> Oaks, \u201cGreat Plan.\u201d<\/p>\n

[16]<\/a> In early Christianity, Paul suggested that Eve was indeed deceived: \u201cThe woman being deceived was in the transgression\u201d (1 Timothy 2:14).<\/p>\n

[17]<\/a> See the New Revised Standard Version, Genesis 3:17. This is discussed in David Bokovoy, Authoring the Old Testament: Genesis\u2014Deuteronomy <\/em>(Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2014), 152-155.<\/p>\n

[18]<\/a> Tad R. Callister, The Infinite Atonement <\/em>(Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2000), 37-38.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Part 1 of this series discussed the contradictory commands given to Adam and Eve to not partake of the forbidden fruit but to also have children, I discussed the possibility that they would have been resolved in time, but they jumped the gun and listened to Satan rather than God, which is why they were in trouble.\u00a0 In this post, I discuss a more popular resolution in the Church to the contradiction centering on the concepts of the Fortunate Fall and that it wasn’t a full-blown sin to partake of the forbidden fruit.\u00a0 The basis of this idea is that the command to not partake of the forbidden fruit was a lesser commandment compared to the command to multiply and fill the earth. \u00a0In some versions of this theory, the command to not partake of the fruit was more a warning than a command. \u00a0In other versions, the choice to partake of the fruit was still a choice to violate a commandment, but one that was done to obey a more important commandment. \u00a0Most Church leaders who have articulated these positions maintain that partaking of the fruit was not a sin per se, but a transgression or lesser infraction in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10397,"featured_media":42366,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general-doctrine","category-scriptures"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/IMG_0008.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42360","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10397"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42360"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42360\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42380,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42360\/revisions\/42380"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/42366"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}