Garden of Eden: FIGURATIVE OR LITERAL?

[SLC2002GOLD]

Joseph Fielding McConkie wrote a very warm biography..."The Bruce R McConkie Story"....what a truly touching look at a very great man. A favorite quote of the late Elder McConkie seems to still apply, " Tell them to warm up the tar, I'm coming to speak"

I too enjoyed JFM's bio on his Father. It seems easy to attack those wwho are no longer around to defend themselves. Bruce R. McConkie spoke with the conviction and the spirit of our Lord and Savior. I've often found his words to be uncomfortable only to those who feel/felt like they were above the his counsel.

When I'm feeling down (which lately is more often than not) I listen to President McConkie's last address in Conference before he returned to HF. That talk alone offers so much in moral and spiritual support...

[Moksha]

Moksha, theologically Adam and Christ are inseparabely tied. To make Adam a myth is to make Christ a myth.

"Therefor these are real cards and thus made into a real house". In truth the creation story can be allegory and not affect the message of Jesus. For me, it would lessen the message to insist it be tied directly to an allegorical creation, since that would make it harder for the distinctly profound message of Jesus to rise above allegorical status itself. Much better to consider the symbolic meanings of the garden story separately.

:)

[Seminarysnoozer]

Just because he knew at that point he would have children, or "Seed," doesn't mean he knew how it was going to happen. :)

I realize that but at the same time he wasn't a naive infant either. Also, to say that he "knew at that point he would have children" is saying a lot. Who named Eve and when? This forum is probably not the most appropriate place to answer that question but I am just throwing that out there as another thing to ponder about what Adam really knew before partaking of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Moksha, theologically Adam and Christ are inseparabely tied. To make Adam a myth is to make Christ a myth. This is something Joseph McConkie, his father Bruce R McConkie, and his grandfather Joseph Fielding Smith have all passionately defended.

Sorry, if my post sounds angry, I just really love this man and consider him the greatest teacher I have ever had. I don't mind people disagreeing with him but I do not appreciate people misrepresenting him.

Talk about misrepresenting .... Moksha didn't say 'myth' I think you are the only one using the word myth. Moksha used the word allegory which is different than myth. We use allegory all the time in our religion, real life allegory. When I partake of the sacrament I am not really eating Jesus' flesh or drinking His blood even though I literally ate the bread and water. When we get baptized the water doesn't literally scrub our spirits clean even though we were literally baptized. I think the people can be real and yet what they went through could be allegorical just like if someone were to describe a whole congregation eating the flesh of Christ.

[Hemidakota]

Don't get me wrong. I love the work of the late Apostle Bruce R. McConkie. Unfortunately, I never had the opportunity to be in his presence. I have a second edition Mormon Doctrine that I have read and marked up many times over. The cover is taped and falling apart. I read the Messiah series as well. And his final testimony... amazing. The man was a giant.

Perhaps I had unfair expectations for his son.

Apostle McConkie was not always right with the past, some doctrinal issues, and his approach of those considered a prodigal son/daughter. However, his work alone brought much aid to our days and will be credited and bless for it.

In his book, the Mormon Doctrine, what was asked to remove, was correct. Being blunt again, no matter which brethren stated other wise. Even if the writing style of being blunt, pointing fingers, he somewhat correct. In finding the truth for ourselves, it is a matter asking GOD and seeing it for yourself, with coming to his defense.