Adam and Eve

[Ruben]

I all, 

Why did Adam and Eve have no offspring before the fall?

[Just_A_Guy]

5 hours ago, Ruben said:

I all, 

Why did Adam and Eve have no offspring before the fall?

We don’t know the biological/mechanical reason.  All we know is what Lehi said (2 Ne 2:23) and what Eve herself said (Moses 5:11) —that if they had stayed in the garden and had not eaten the fruit, they never would have had seed.

[Carborendum]

I personally believe that they had the ability (the biological/mechanical ability) to do so.  But there was something that they were lacking that prevented them from doing so.  

Example:

I tend to chop wood for the winter.  My son was getting of age, so I took him out to show him about how to chop wood.  In the process, I had to instruct him on axe safety.  I walked him through step-by-step on how to do it safely.  He learned.

When he went to chop, I saw how difficult it was for him to combine all the rules I had told him.  But because of those rules, he wasn't able to combine them all and yet have enough strength to make much of a chip in the wood at all.

I took a turn to examine if I was truly using all those safety rules while being able to effectively chop that wood.  I was doing so.  And I was making progress chopping wood.

There was something about his size and mindset on rules that prevented him from properly coordinating all the movements with his full strength.  Thus, he was ineffective.

Obviously, there is a lot that we don't know.  So, it is undoubtedly something much more obscure.  But I don't think I'm too far off as our mortal understanding can allow.

Edited November 22, 2024 by Carborendum

[zil2]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

I think that they were too spiritually and intellectually mature to be able to combine all considerations in a manner that would be successfully mating.

...immature...?

[Carborendum]

9 minutes ago, zil2 said:

...immature...?

I can't think of the appropriate word -- all things considered.  Can you think of a better one?

[zil2]

13 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I can't think of the appropriate word -- all things considered.  Can you think of a better one?

How can one be "too mature" "to be able to combine all considerations in a manner that would be successfully mating." - a mature person should be able to combine all that.  It's an immature person who would not be able.  If you are trying to come up with an idea other than maturity / experience, I don't know what.  Innocence?  Ignorance?  Lack of sex-drive?  I'm lost.  I like @Just_A_Guy's answer.

[Carborendum]

2 minutes ago, zil2 said:

How can one be "too mature" "to be able to combine all considerations in a manner that would be successfully mating." - a mature person should be able to combine all that.  It's an immature person who would not be able.  If you are trying to come up with an idea other than maturity / experience, I don't know what.  Innocence?  Ignorance?  Lack of sex-drive?  I'm lost.  I like @Just_A_Guy's answer.

Oh!  I get it.  Sorry.  I didn't pick up on that.

[CV75]

7 hours ago, Ruben said:

I all, 

Why did Adam and Eve have no offspring before the fall?

Without knowing good and evil, they could only populate Eden with ever more immortal souls lacking moral agency and unable to become like their Heavenly Father. There is no progress in making more Adam and Eves for the sake of making more Adam and Eves. There would be no Christ in the genealogy of a terrestrial/paradisiacal world like that. At some point somebody/everybody would have to partake of the forbidden fruit and fall anyway. Maybe this is what happened, and our scriptures may be a simplification how our first parents and their posterity got here.

[Traveler]

I can only answer @Ruben's question with my belief and understanding of Adam and Eve.  I speculate that the epoch given in scripture of Adam and Eve has two parts.  The first part, I believe, is a scripture reference to all of mankind in the pre-existence.  The ancient meaning of Adam is a meaning of mankind.  That the Eden epoch is a symbolic reference to the choice in the pre-existence to accept the Father’s plan of Salvation which required a fall, a mortal experience, a post mortal experience to complete our agency choice of eternal destiny, an atonement and the resurrection.   None of the non-participants in the plan of salvation would ever, in all eternity, have offspring.

The second part, I believe, is a scripture reference to Adam and Eve’s physical birth and life here on earth to initiate the mortal experience part of all the Father’s children that accepted his Plan of Salvation.

 

The Traveler

[CV75]

9 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

We don’t know the biological/mechanical reason.  All we know is what Lehi said (2 Ne 2:23) and what Eve herself said (Moses 5:11) —that if they had stayed in the garden and had not eaten the fruit, they never would have had seed.

I think the biological/mechanical reason, like the rest of science, answers "how" questions, and the spiritual reason answers "why" questions. Scripture provides the latter.

[laronius]

In the Bible "knowing" can have a sexual connotation. Makes me wonder if the tree of knowledge played a roll in their ability to reproduce. Also, Adam is referred to as being like a child when first created. It was probably the same for Eve. Physical attraction may simply have not been present at this point.

[Vort]

1 hour ago, laronius said:

In the Bible "knowing" can have a sexual connotation. Makes me wonder if the tree of knowledge played a roll in their ability to reproduce. Also, Adam is referred to as being like a child when first created. It was probably the same for Eve. Physical attraction may simply have not been present at this point.

The story of Adam and Eve is very obvious sexual metaphor. For millennia, scholars and lay people alike have connected the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" with sex, just as the "tree of life" must be sex. Adam and Eve, naked and innocent in a beautiful garden, told not to partake but tempted of the serpent (another rather bizarre sexual metaphor) to do so. When they do, they are cast out of paradise and into a hostile world, where they start having children through sexual union. Interestingly, the woman falls first, then the man follows after her. Shades of the old Jewish legends of Lilith.

Yet modern prophets have insisted quite clearly that sex was not "the forbidden fruit". So I'll accept their word. But that doesn't mean that I don't think there is obvious and intentional sexual symbolism.

For example, many of our prophets have condemned, implicitly or at times explicitly, ideas of organic evolution. I have no doubt that at least some of them believed that organic evolution itself was wholly wrong and evil, a Satanic lie. I believe organic evolution to be an undeniable part of our mortal existence, yet I accept prophetic teachings, including their imprecations about evolution.

I believe that society in general—that is, the natural man—uses the process of organic evolution as a sort of allegory or symbol of or excuse for misbehavior. In the 1990s, a popular misuse of science was to assign to President Clinton the role of "alpha" (as if humans are a pack of dogs) and then excuse his marital infidelity and abuse of his office as "just what alphas naturally do". This is a great example of the perversion and misuse of the idea of evolution. Of course, many who insist the loudest on the factuality of organic evolution are raging atheists, and they illogically build their aversion to theism on the foundation (as they lyingly claim) of organic evolution. To one who doesn't understand organic evolution, and frankly even to some who do, this puts evolution firmly in the camp of atheism and antiChristianity.

In the same way, I think that the openly sexually metaphoric nature of the story of Adam and Eve in Eden has been perverted historically to say that women are naturally sexually licentious, or that women drag men down, or that sex is a dirty and disgusting activity that degrades its participants, or that celibacy is a higher and holier way of life than living as a sexually active spouse, or whatever other nonsense has been attached to the story. The prophets recently seem to have taken special pains to point out that the Fall of Man was a blessed event, however it was accomplished, and that we are not to vilify Eve for having partaken of the forbidden fruit. The presentation of the temple endowment itself has been altered to emphasize this. Scripturally, there can be no doubt that Adam rebuffed Satan's temptations and Eve succumbed to them, and that Adam and Eve as a result were cursed by being cast out of Eden; yet for all this, the modern prophets are unanimous in proclaiming Eve as a great woman, the physical and spiritual companion meet for her mighty prophet of a husband, one of the greatest beings ever to tread this earth.

And so we are to honor and exalt our first parents, not vilify or blame them. Since those who have historically accepted the sexual nature of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil have portrayed the act as one of great evil with horrific consequences, it makes sense that modern prophets would correct this falsehood by wholly disclaiming their interpretations. If we're honest and careful about our interpretations, partaking of the forbidden fruit does not necessarily mean engaging in sexual relations. In any case, sex per se is not and never was the issue. (No pun intended.)

@Ruben, Adam and Eve were called to bring forth the hosts of men after they had fallen into a mortal state. The gifts of fertility and reproduction appear not to have been granted them while they were in their paradisiacal, unfallen state. Beyond this, we know nothing of the mechanics of the Fall, so anything else we say would be mere uninformed speculation, useless at best.

PS: Welcome to the board!

Edited November 23, 2024 by Vort

[Ruben]

Thank you all for the interesting answers. 
We don't know how long Adam and Eve lived in the Garden before being expelled but we know that there was no procreation and this also includes the rest of creation, otherwise there would be many immortal beings out there. I particularly liked Iaronius' answer, when he said that probably Adam and Eve still did not show physical attraction between them. 
In short, the most sensible answer to this question is that we don't know. Anyway, thanks.

[Ruben]

If we take into consideration what Iaronius said about the possible lack of physical attraction between Adam and Eve when they were in the immortal state we can reasonably believe that the same characteristics will be present after the resurrection. After all, why would an immortal being need to reproduce himself?

 

 

[laronius]

4 hours ago, Ruben said:

If we take into consideration what Iaronius said about the possible lack of physical attraction between Adam and Eve when they were in the immortal state we can reasonably believe that the same characteristics will be present after the resurrection. After all, why would an immortal being need to reproduce himself?

 

 

We don't know the process by which a self-existing intelligence becomes a son or daughter of God. Clearly, though, there is enough involvement in our Heavenly Parent's parts to form that familial relationship. But the immortal state of Adam and Eve is not equal to the resurrected and glorified state of those who receive exaltation. It might be a closer comparison to those in the Telestial Kingdom. Still not the same but closer.

[CV75]

7 hours ago, Ruben said:

Thank you all for the interesting answers. 
We don't know how long Adam and Eve lived in the Garden before being expelled but we know that there was no procreation and this also includes the rest of creation, otherwise there would be many immortal beings out there. I particularly liked Iaronius' answer, when he said that probably Adam and Eve still did not show physical attraction between them. 
In short, the most sensible answer to this question is that we don't know. Anyway, thanks.

I would take exception to the lack of physical attraction, as they were man and wife. Why would they not engage in sexual relations, even if they failed to reproduce more immortal offspring like themselves? I think they did not fail to fulfil the command to replenish the earth due to lack of sexual feelings (even children have these) or a willingness to engage in sexual intercourse as a result, but as a matter of paradisaical regulation (regulation in all respects) and a lack of understanding that a knowledge of good and evil was prerequisite for bringing forth beings that could bring forth, eventually in time, the Christ through a mortal mother. Eve eventually made this connection, then Adam followed suit. Their transgression pushed them out of (or from) paradisaical regulation into mortal regulation, the only path to obtaining celestial regulation through Christ. What we do know is that things changed according to God's wisdom and plan!  

[CV75]

5 hours ago, Ruben said:

If we take into consideration what Iaronius said about the possible lack of physical attraction between Adam and Eve when they were in the immortal state we can reasonably believe that the same characteristics will be present after the resurrection. After all, why would an immortal being need to reproduce himself?

 

 

Unlike Adam and Eve, God is an immortal being who has the highest level of knowledge of good and evil that comes from having passed through all estates worthily. Spirits can only come from people who have this level of knowledge (and the attendant keys to life / the tree of life), just as mortals can only come from first parents who have attained the level of moral knowledge Adam and Eve did. Even today, bad people have children but not matter how fallen they may be, retain a measure of the light of Christ in them.

[JohnsonJones]

We don't know, but there are several ideas, some of which the thread has explored.

1.  Knowledge.  Though they had the physical bodies, they did not have the knowledge to reproduce.  They lacked knowledge, thus obtaining knowledge may have been what triggered the ability to have children.

2.  Those who gain telestial bodies will not have the ability to reproduce.  Adam and Eve started with Telestial bodies.  These were perfect Telestial bodies.  If it follows the same trend as those who are resurrected with perfect Telestial bodies, they will not be able to have children.  There must be some sort of change in order to enable it.

3.  Brigham Young's explanation.  This indicates that the story of Adam and Eve is highly symbolic in relation to us.  The actual even was that Adam and Eve were Celestial beings already.  Adam came down and consumed Telestial material, or the products of this world.  This infused his body with mortal elements and thus they could have mortal children.  In this, Adam is literally physically also a Child of our Father (though with a Celestial body rather than a half mortal, half deific body), and we are literally their descendants. 

4.  There are many other explanation as well.  To say we don't know exactly which one is correct is probably an understatement. 

[zil2]

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

2.  Those who gain telestial bodies will not have the ability to reproduce.  Adam and Eve started with Telestial bodies.  These were perfect Telestial bodies.  If it follows the same trend as those who are resurrected with perfect Telestial bodies, they will not be able to have children.  There must be some sort of change in order to enable it.

Adam and Eve in the garden would have had Terrestrial bodies (in theory), and when they fell, their bodies would have become Telestial.  (The descending sequence is: Celestial - Terrestrial - Telestial - perdition.  Yes, hard to remember since this planet is often referred to as "terrestrial".)

In the resurrection, only those in the Celestial kingdom will be able to have children (potentially only those in its highest degree - that's hard to say either way).

[Maverick]

On 11/22/2024 at 1:35 AM, Ruben said:

I all, 

Why did Adam and Eve have no offspring before the fall?

Adam and Eve had immortal resurrected bodies when they entered the garden of Eden. The fall was necessary so they could become mortal and produce mortal offspring, as resurrected immortal beings are unable to produce mortal children in their immortal state. 

[Maverick]

On 11/26/2024 at 6:51 AM, JohnsonJones said:

We don't know, but there are several ideas, some of which the thread has explored.

1.  Knowledge.  Though they had the physical bodies, they did not have the knowledge to reproduce.  They lacked knowledge, thus obtaining knowledge may have been what triggered the ability to have children.

2.  Those who gain telestial bodies will not have the ability to reproduce.  Adam and Eve started with Telestial bodies.  These were perfect Telestial bodies.  If it follows the same trend as those who are resurrected with perfect Telestial bodies, they will not be able to have children.  There must be some sort of change in order to enable it.

3.  Brigham Young's explanation.  This indicates that the story of Adam and Eve is highly symbolic in relation to us.  The actual even was that Adam and Eve were Celestial beings already.  Adam came down and consumed Telestial material, or the products of this world.  This infused his body with mortal elements and thus they could have mortal children.  In this, Adam is literally physically also a Child of our Father (though with a Celestial body rather than a half mortal, half deific body), and we are literally their descendants. 

4.  There are many other explanation as well.  To say we don't know exactly which one is correct is probably an understatement. 

Number 3