LDS Women's Conference - Eve's transgression: courageous and wise?

In the 2014 LDS Women’s Conference, Presdient Henry B. Eyring of the LDS First Presidency gave a talk entitled ‘Daughters in the Covenent’. My ears picked up when he said:

"Consider Eve, the mother of all living. Elder Russell M. Nelson said this of Eve: “We and all mankind are forever blessed because of Eve’s great courage and wisdom. By partaking of the fruit first, she did what needed to be done. Adam was wise enough to do likewise.”…

We don’t know all the help Eve was to Adam and to their family. But we do know of one great gift that she gave, which each of you can also give: she helped her family see the path home when the way ahead seemed hard. “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.”6

You have her example to follow.

By revelation, Eve recognized the way home to God. She knew that the Atonement of Jesus Christ made eternal life possible in families. She was sure, as you can be, that as she kept her covenants with her Heavenly Father, the Redeemer and the Holy Ghost would see her and her family through whatever sorrows and disappointments would come. She knew she could trust in Them."

So, Eve was “courageous” and showed “great wisdom” in disobeying God’s commandment not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? So, women of the LDS church “have her example to follow”? So Eve “kept her covenants with her Heavenly Father”?

I think that talks like this are enlightening. Do LDS members sit down and think about what was said? Or because it was a “prophet” who said it, you do not think, just accept? Is he really saying that women can disobey God’s commandments when they think that it is for the best.

Any thoughts.

God bless,


Years ago I was gifted a book by a group of Mormons, “Eve, and the Choice Made in Eden”. I was at the time an atheist and feminist. So, this book was aimed at showing me how much the LDS church values women.

This talk has the same purpose, in the context of LDS women who are insisting women in Mormonism are second class, the same argument is rolled out to them that was given to me.

The argument being made is that the power of women is found in obedience to a hierarchy of men, even when that obedience seems counter intuitive and cries out to your soul to RUN.

But yes, theologically, it is one of the most damaging lies that Mormonism has. Both in terms of blinding people to what is going on with Adam and Eve’s disobedience, and the idea that God places a double bind on people, where He WANTS them to “courageously” disobey in order to be obedient.

It’s this type of stuff that led me out of Mormonism to be begin with. So convoluted and demeaning.

Amen, Rebecca.

Interesting idea.:eek: I would rather still be in Paradise and not know about evil. Some favor she did for us, and that goes for Adam too.:frowning:

Huh? Eve did us a favor for disobeying God and commiting a sin? Really??

I think everyone need to really go back and read what you wrote and pray they can then see how absurd it is.

What I got out of it, was you can disobey God! Not the teaching of God that’s for sure.

Mormons do not believe in Original Sin. The LDS church teaches that Heavenly Father gave Adam and Eve two commandments - to multiply and replenish the earth and to not partake of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. They also teach that Adam and Eve were not able to have children prior to the Fall. So basically, Heavenly Father put them in a bind. They had to break one commandment in order to obey the other. They believe the Fall was necessary for our “eternal progression” to become like Heavenly Father and that Eve was “courageous” for choosing the Fall. The Fall is frequently referred to as a “fall forward”.

The LDS church exalts Eve and her choice to bring about the Fall and devalues Mary and her choice to be the mother of Jesus Christ, our Salvation. The LDS church doesn’t believe Eve really said “no” so there is nothing special about Mary’s “yes”.



I see you are “converting” … welcome. Will it be this easter ? I myself took many years to finally convert …

So the immeasurable pain in childbirth is progress :stuck_out_tongue: All kidding aside, it is fascinating to learn what people of other faiths believe.

Yes, I did know this, but thanks for the refresh. I have a number of LDS friends, and they love trying to convert me. They have been trying for over 40 years now.:smiley:

Yes, I will be baptized this Easter Vigil. God’s been working on me for about 20 years since I was a teenager. It was almost a year and a half ago that I finally listened and ran into the loving arms of Jesus and Mary.

This is another place where Mormon teachings contradict Mormon scriptures. If the revelations and teachings of the Church must be in harmony with the standard works, and if one of those standard works is the Book of Mormon, then the only conclusion Mormons can rationally come to is: Eve was a fool.

The LDS don’t believe in the Original Sin in as far as the action was actually sinful, rather it was a “transgression” of an inherently unjust law that Heavenly Father truly wanted Adam to transgress against. In so doing, Adam endowed his progeny with free will (what the LDS call our free agency).

I’m currently reading up on the Easter Vigil in the Catholic Church. This year will be the first I’ll have ever gone to. In particular I have a question about the Exultet. What does the liturgy mean when it goes on to laud the Original Sin of Adam as “necessary” and something which paradoxically brings about our happiness in Christ? How is this reconcilable with the Catholic doctrine of the Original Sin, and more importantly how does this differ from the LDS understanding of Adam’s Transgression?

Do you have a way of explaining this in greater depth? Not necessarily how you might have interpreted it, but how the Mormons would have explained it to you?

What justification or evidence do they use to support this idea (that Adam & Eve were unable to have children)? I’m unaware of Catholic teaching/opinion regarding this, so the concept is new to me.

Thanks Brandon, I was going to bring up the same thing. My limited understanding is that, had sin never entered the world, there would be no need for Christ’s saving Passion. Without Christ’s passion, we would never have been inherited his son-ship, basically just remaining as God’s creations (admittedly, the pinnacle of his creation, but still just creatures on this earth) rather than entering into union with him in Heaven through Christ’s death and resurrection.

And so, Adam and Eve’s sin was indeed sin, but it opened the door for Christ’s Passion and Resurrection which in turn opened the door to heaven itself. The ends don’t justify the means (it was still sin, still bad to do), but God brought about an amazing thing from their sin.

Hopefully some others can correct/refine/clarify anything I’ve said, and speak more to the relationship between this Catholic understanding of it all and how the LDS think about it.

As I understand it in Catholic theology, God foresaw that Adam and Eve would sin. God after all stands outside of time. He always “is”, no past, no future, just an eternal present.

So He did not set up Adam and Eve to break a commandment. They had the choice not to, but decided to do so. God had to prompt them to sin by giving them opposing commandments.

As far as I remember correctly, they did not know about sexual relations until they partook of the fruit of the tree. I suppose at that point to LDS they learned about conception and could have children. If they didn’t partake of the fruit, no knowledge, no sexual relations, no children.

An odd doctrine. An even odder god!!


In 2 Nephi 2:23 in the Book of Mormon, it states that before the Fall, Adam and Eve could not have children.

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.

In Doctrine and Covenants 130:22, it states that Heavenly Father and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone.

The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

When I was LDS, I speculated, along with others, that Adam and Eve did not have blood so they could not have children. Honestly, I don’t remember where we got that idea or if there is any support from LDS scripture or statements from previous prophets and apostles.

The LDS belief is that Adam and Eve could not have children because they were childlike and innocent and simply didn’t know how to have children. There may have also been physical impediments to being able to have children that were removed with the Fall.

When Eve disobeyed God, Mormonism rationalizes it as she seeking wisdom.

And Mormonism is about exaltation and eternal progression to become a god. So that is where Eve’s seeking wisdom was all about…becoming a god someday.

And to become a god in Mormonism is the greatest blessing and their aim, all following Joseph Smith. Christ is used as a great teacher and example, and to draw on His godness to become one as well some day.

Catholics believe our baptism makes us adopted sons and daughters of the Lord. Ours is a dying to self and through grace in Word and Sacraments through life in the Church we seek first and foremost, life in the Holy Trinity. We seek communion with the Lord. We become the Lord’s servants in every day life. We accept the Cross. The other aim is to serve the poor and alleviate their suffering.

Thank you.

I’m so excited for the Easter Vigil that I can hardly stand it. The Exsultet is sung by a men’s choir at our parish, and it strikes my soul every time. So beautiful.

Oh happy fault, is an expression that recognizes God’s Mercy, in the Person of Jesus Christ. It is also expresses the Catholic teaching that God can and does use sin, and its resulting suffering, for good. It does not express that sin is desired by God.

St. Paul says it well in Romans 5 (the whole chapter).

From the CCC:

412 But why did God not prevent the first man from sinning? St. Leo the Great responds, “Christ’s inexpressible grace gave us blessings better than those the demon’s envy had taken away.” And St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, “There is nothing to prevent human nature’s being raised up to something greater, even after sin; God permits evil in order to draw forth some greater good. Thus St. Paul says, ‘Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more’; and the Exsultet sings, ‘O happy fault,. . . which gained for us so great a Redeemer!’”

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit