Garden Of Eden

[imported_Zeke]

What is the churches teaching on the Garden of Eden? What was its purpose?

[Giuseppe]

The Garden of Eden is where our first parents lived. Because Adam and Eve transgressed this command and partook of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they were cast out from the presence of the Lord. In other words, they experienced spiritual death. They also became mortal—subject to physical death. This spiritual and physical death is called the Fall.

The Fall is an integral part of Heavenly Father's plan of salvation and it has a twofold direction—downward yet forward. In addition to introducing physical and spiritual death, it gave us the opportunity to be born on the earth and to learn and progress. Through our righteous exercise of agency and our sincere repentance when we sin, we can come unto Christ and, through His Atonement, prepare to receive the gift of eternal life. The prophet Lehi taught:

"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."

[imported_Zeke]

Was there no death at all before the fall or only no death for Adam and Eve? I guess I'm asking if the plants and animals in the garden died?

[Pamela]

As I understand it, there was no death in the world of Adama and Eve or for any other living thing as well. Because of the fall, death was brought about, which introduced mortality and what we know know on earth. Isaiah 51:3 and Ezekial 36:35 explains what the earth will return to at the Second Coming of Christ, which is very comforting to me.

[imported_Zeke]

This is very confusing to me.

If the plants and animals did not die in the garden then there could have been no eating going on. Eating a plant surly kills it. There also could have been no such thing as microbes or germs since they live at the expense of a host. And if this were so Adam and Eve could not be considered human because a human’s life depends on a host of microbes and germs to survive.

It seems to me that the ‘fall’ was really a blessing and that a second coming and a return to these conditions would be a disaster.

Or is this is simply a tale told to children to comfort them?

[Giuseppe]

Zeke,

there are things that really don't matter. I personally don't know and don't care too much about certain details, but probably animals were able to eat plants without killing them. However, I am not sure about microbes and germs. I can just think that they were also able to be in people's bodies without killing them because they were not deadly anyway.

[charity]

To be technical, which doesn't really answer the question, eating a peach doesn't kill the tree.

[Daniel]

To be technical, which doesn't really answer the question, eating a peach doesn't kill the tree.

I agree. In the scriptures it tells us that Adam and Eve and the animals in the Garden could use the fruit from the trees as their nourishment. This would not kill the tree.

Gen1:29-30

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

[HiJolly]

This is very confusing to me.

If the plants and animals did not die in the garden then there could have been no eating going on. Eating a plant surly kills it. There also could have been no such thing as microbes or germs since they live at the expense of a host. And if this were so Adam and Eve could not be considered human because a human’s life depends on a host of microbes and germs to survive.

Hi, Zeke.

I'm a science minded saint, and don't always agree with everyone else about these things. I do have some company, but not as much as I'd like...

As Charity said, eating is not precluded in the Garden, particularly if the remaining seed is then planted. As for microbes or germs, I'll grant that the lifespan of a microbe is a bit problematic from what we see in the world around us, but if the Garden were a terrestrial sphere, then all sorts of different laws would exist. Of course, that's all speculation. for that matter, all of this is speculation... It's what mormons do well, I suppose! Germs, on the other hand, don't have to kill anything to exist, and can live a long time, as far as I know.

I also think that life developed and there was life and death etc. on earth at the same time as Adam & Eve were in the Garden with no death present. Simultaneously, if you will. Different circumstances. IMO.

It seems to me that the ‘fall’ was really a blessing and that a second coming and a return to these conditions would be a disaster.

Or is this is simply a tale told to children to comfort them?

I don't suppose the Earth melting with fervent heat is very comforting to anyone, really. And yes, it would indeed be a disaster for the Earth as we know it. But maybe the earth as we know it isn't as good as some other things. What do you think?

HiJolly

[charity]

There's a lot about mortality and this telestial earth we live on that stinks. I am looking forward to something better.

[Doctor Steuss]

What is the churches teaching on the Garden of Eden? What was its purpose?

In a nut-shell:

Ever since the world began,

Woman has tried to rule the man.

She created the first offense

And she’s been after him ever since

G-d created the earth, and He rested then

G-d created man, and He rested again.

Then G-d created woman for man’s defense

And neither G-d, nor man, have rested since.

--------------

Seriously though. In regards to death, there are several ways to look at it. I tend to think of death as the seperation of the soul from the body. Do plants and animals have souls? I tend to think they don't (although they do technically have "spirits"). So, plants and animals could "die" but there could have been an absense of "death." Also, keep in mind that there is more than one kind of "death." Physical death wasn't the only kind of death that entered the world with the Fall of Adam and Eve.

PS.

Often my views don't line up with official LDS thought/belief/doctrine. So, take what I say with a grain of salt.

[Pa Pa]

...Garden of Eden? What was its purpose?

To provide a perfect enviroment for man...God can only create perfection.

[imported_Zeke]

I also think that life developed and there was life and death etc. on earth at the same time as Adam & Eve were in the Garden with no death present. Simultaneously, if you will. Different circumstances. IMO.

Are you saying that life and death proceeded outside of the garden but did not occur inside? If so that would allow for natural evolution to take place everywhere but in the garden.

BTW – Did you take your moniker from that famous Quartzsite camel driver?

[imported_Zeke]

To be technical, which doesn't really answer the question, eating a peach doesn't kill the tree.

Yes but eating a peach does kill the individual cells of the peach…

[imported_Zeke]

To provide a perfect enviroment for man...God can only create perfection.

Do you consider yourself perfect?

[imported_Zeke]

Do plants and animals have souls? I tend to think they don't (although they do technically have "spirits").

How do you mean that (…technically have “spirits”). Is there any reason to think that either souls or spirits are real things?

[HiJolly]

Are you saying that life and death proceeded outside of the garden but did not occur inside? If so that would allow for natural evolution to take place everywhere but in the garden.

BTW – Did you take your moniker from that famous Quartzsite camel driver?

Yes, that is my belief (not knowledge). and, yes, Hadji Ali is where I got my moniker from.

HiJolly

[imported_Zeke]

Yes, that is my belief (not knowledge).

HiJolly

But then you have to square the fact that human genes are directly related to other species that were outside the garden. As one of the church leaders said:

"If death has always prevailed in the world, there was no fall of Adam which brought death to all forms of life. If Adam did not fall, there is no need for an atonement. If there was no atonement, there is no salvation, no resurrection, no eternal life, nothing in all of the glorious promises that the Lord has given us. If there is no salvation, there is no God. The fall affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself”. - Bruce R. McConkie

Really makes it hard to follow the logic of the garden.

[poulsenll]

But then you have to square the fact that human genes are directly related to other species that were outside the garden. As one of the church leaders said:

"If death has always prevailed in the world, there was no fall of Adam which brought death to all forms of life. If Adam did not fall, there is no need for an atonement. If there was no atonement, there is no salvation, no resurrection, no eternal life, nothing in all of the glorious promises that the Lord has given us. If there is no salvation, there is no God. The fall affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself”. - Bruce R. McConkie

Really makes it hard to follow the logic of the garden.

Bruce R McConkie and his father in law Joseph Fielding Smith were Bible literalists and sometimes went to great pains to justify this and to extrapolate beyond what was actually written there.

For me the Garden of Eden,s story is an attempt to explain the existance of evil and has woven into it the justification for the mortality of man. I prefer the explanations give in the Book of Mormon.

Adam died that man might be and Man is that he might have joy

and

It is necesary that there be opposition in all things.

Logic and even modern science suggests that the human species originated from a single couple. In the book of Moses we are given to understand that the word adam simply means "many".

34 And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is many

.

The story(history) of the "Garden of Eden" has a profound message for each of us but I personally think it is foolish to try to read into it any implications about the physical world and the nature and extent of mortality either in or out of the garden. The need for a saviour in our personal lives should never be trivialized by second guessing the nature of the fall of Adam.

Larry P

[imported_Zeke]

Bruce R McConkie and his father in law Joseph Fielding Smith were Bible literalists and sometimes went to great pains to justify this and to extrapolate beyond what was actually written there.

Then you are saying that the garden is not a literal truth? That there was never a physical garden?

[Ron Beron]

Then you are saying that the garden is not a literal truth? That there was never a physical garden?

The garden we think of today is not the same garden as mentioned in Genesis. A garden, at least in the OT scheme of things, is a plain that can be used for growing things as opposed to a desert area. The modern sense of garden came from the Persians. If you can picture the Taj Mahal then you can see what they considered the Garden of Eden. The Garden of Eden was probably an actual locale in the Middle East either in the southeast portion of Iraq or northern Iran near Tabriz. Its significance is that is where men began to recognize the presence of God. It may not be where the first physical man came from, but certainly where the first "spiritual" man came from.

[poulsenll]

Then you are saying that the garden is not a literal truth? That there was never a physical garden?

No, The garden is a literal spiritual truth but not necesarily a physical truth. As Ron points out the ancient concept of a garden is different from today. It may have had some physical actuality but knowing whether it did or not is not critical for our salvation. It is the spiritual aspect and the understanding of our mortal and spiritual need for the sacrifice and atonement of Christ.

The Book of Job is known to be an allegorical drama used by the Hebrews to teach loyalty to God no matter what happens to us here in mortality. Here again, it matters not whether Job ever existed as a real being or not. What matters is the message and its meaning for our spiritual growth and a continueing growth of our relationship and need for our Saviour. The garden may have been real, Job may have been a real man but this is not critical to our spiritual growth and continuing reliance on God's plan for us in his eternal kingdom.

Larry P

[imported_Zeke]

No, The garden is a literal spiritual truth but not necesarily a physical truth.

I understand what you are saying but the official church web site makes it plain that the garden was an actual place. Not a spiritual place but a real, in-this-world place.

http://www.lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menu..._&hideNav=1

The church web site talks about real world things such as 'created a beautiful place on the earth', 'body of flesh and bones', 'able to walk and talk'. These are not spiritual things being described, they are physical.

I can understand how it must be difficult to except the literal meaning of these words but it seems you must.

[Lightbearer]

Yes the Garden of Eden was a "real place" and the fall of Adam was a real occurance not some mythological parable. That it was actually a place is indicated by the following:

(Moses 5:4) "And Adam and Eve, his wife, called upon the name of the Lord, and they heard the voice of the Lord from the way toward the Garden of Eden, speaking unto them, and they saw him not; for they were shut out from his presence."

At least that is how the scripture reads. Also it indicates that the Garden while a real place was on a different plain of existance (Terrestrial as opposed to a Telestial sphere?) The following also indicates the same or why the need for an Angel with a flaming sword?

(Alma 42:2-11) "Now behold, my son, I will explain this thing unto thee. For behold, after the Lord God sent our first parents forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground, from whence they were taken—yea, he drew out the man, and he placed at the east end of the garden of Eden, cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the tree of life—Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—And thus we see, that there was a time granted unto man to repent, yea, a probationary time, a time to repent and serve God. For behold, if Adam had put forth his hand immediately, and partaken of the tree of life, he would have lived forever, according to the word of God, having no space for repentance; yea, and also the word of God would have been void, and the great plan of salvation would have been frustrated. But behold, it was appointed unto man to die—therefore, as they were cut off from the tree of life they should be cut off from the face of the earth—and man became lost forever, yea, they became fallen man. And now, ye see by this that our first parents were cut off both temporally and spiritually from the presence of the Lord; and thus we see they became subjects to follow after their own will. Now behold, it was not expedient that man should be reclaimed from this temporal death, for that would destroy the great plan of happiness. Therefore, as the soul could never die, and the fall had brought upon all mankind a spiritual death as well as a temporal, that is, they were cut off from the presence of the Lord, it was expedient that mankind should be reclaimed from this spiritual death. Therefore, as they had become carnal, sensual, and devilish, by nature, this probationary state became a state for them to prepare; it became a preparatory state."

I can only see these words as being literal or plain as can be made unto our understanding. As for Evolution I am in the McConkie-Joseph Fielding Smith camp, I do not believe it, and I do not think the words the Lord has given us should be understood in a "mythical" or metaphorical way to give place to so-called Scientific theories. I know this is offensive to some but I put my trust first in Prophets and Apostles rather than scholars or theorists. People are free to believe what they will but to me the naturalistic explainations of the origins of man are speculative on the part of scientists.

[Doctor Steuss]

How do you mean that (…technically have “spirits”).

G-d created all things spiritually before they were created physically (hense two creation accounts in the Bible that differ slightly). So, technically all things have "spirits" -- including the very earth itself.

Is there any reason to think that either souls or spirits are real things?

Outside of scripture? IMO, no. In others' opinions, yes. Depends on what your life's experiences are like, and what evidence has been provided to you. Outside of the artist within me that longs for the existence of souls and spirits, I have found nothing outside of the texts of my religion to suggest they exist. However, there are members of my family that have had very strong spiritual experiences that give them excellent reason to believe they “are real things.”