Eden as Allegory
As the next post in my mini-series on the Garden of Eden story as an allegory, I will respond to an interesting set of questions Tim J. posed in one of my posts over at T&S. He asked:
I think to follow the Fall as an allegory, I would need the allegory to be pretty well spelled-out. What I mean is such things like:
What does the Garden represent?
Is Satan’s role allegorical-if so what is he representing?
Why was Eve first to partake of the fruit?
Why did Adam refuse the fruit (if we are to believe the narrative that he was offered beforehand)?
Is the Atonement (which is inextricably linked w/ the Fall) also purely allegorical, or literal?
Here are some answers.
What does the Garden represent?
The Garden represents our pre-mortal existence in general. We were in the presence of God in “paradise”. All the levels of pre-sentient life forms are represented there from plant life up through pre-sentient humanity.
Is Satan’s role allegorical-if so what is he representing?
Satan in the allegory represents pride, ambition, and acquisitiveness. He represents the ambition common to humanity – the acquisitive nature in humans that manifests itself in greed and the general lust for power, pleasure, and wealth. It also represents our lust for knowledge though. Therefore, God used that aspect in our nature to drive us from pre-sentience into to the full sentience that is humanity. But even though God used that to get us this far, he also knows that the very ambition, pride, and insatiable acquisitiveness that got us this far must be cast out from among us if we are to progress further to become like him (and become one with him).
Why was Eve first to partake of the fruit?
This is a tough one. My guess is that besides representing males and females separately, Adam and Eve could represent aspects of each one of us. That is, we each have aspects of Adam and Eve in us. Maybe it is sort of a left-brain/right-brain thing. It seems that Adam represents the pragmatic side and Eve represents the more intuitive and visionary side. As the visionary, Eve naturally was the side that recognized the upward reaching opportunity and seized it first.
Why did Adam refuse the fruit (if we are to believe the narrative that he was offered beforehand)?
As the pragmatic side, Adam’s character is all about getting the job done in the prescribed way. “I know not save the Lord commanded me” (Moses 5:6) If this left-brain/right-brain analogy is accurate, then Adam was never a candidate to see the bigger picture and take the opportunity presented.
Is the Atonement (which is inextricably linked w/ the Fall) also purely allegorical, or literal?
See my atonement posts here. Specifically, check out my Parable of the Pianist. If my theory is right, the Fall represents our move into sentience. The Atonement is all about our move from human-level sentience to the next level of intelligence and glory. It is literally the description of God’s process of helping us become “at one” with him.
Some other questions that might come up…
What does the tree of life represent?
I assume it represents the same thing it did for Lehi and Nephi – the love of God. Specifically, it represents unity with God in a perfectly loving relationship. We cannot have it without taking the steps to build that perfect relationship. The cherubim and flaming sword set to guard it sound very much like the angels that stand as sentinels guarding the way to the presence of the Father as described by Brigham Young to me.
Why is Satan described as a serpent?
Pride is the great sin (according to President Benson). It is among the most subtle of sins too.
What is the coat of skins God gave them?
Human mortal bodies.
Anyway, it seems to all fit pretty well to me. What do you think?
[Associated radio.blog song: Fishbone -Ma and Pa. The post is about Adam and Eve right? Plus this is one of my favorite Fishbone songs.]
RB suggestion? They Built This Garden For Us by Lenny Kravitz :-)
You know, I don’t have anything profound to add right now, but I just want to reiterate how much I love these thought-provoking and intelligent posts. Thank you.
Comment by meems — January 26, 2006 @ 8:06 pm
In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida (Translation: In the Garden of Eden) – Iron Butterfly
If the garden was figurative, what about Adam, is he but a figure as well?
Comment by Ian M. Cook — January 26, 2006 @ 8:32 pm
Good stuff Geoff. I particularly like your musings as to why Eve partook of the fruit first.
I also like your idea that the fall represents humanity’s move from pre-sentient to sentient beings. It is very Kierkegaardan.
I think it may also symbolize humanity’s move from childhood into adulthood. Adam (who “is like a little child”) and Eve are first children. They are innocent of being naked and are not yet sexualized. They fall through an adolescence in which they question the rules of their parents This happens first for Eve, as girls mature faster than boys (especially as it pertains to romantic attraction). Adam and Eve then lose their innocence and become adults who now have to bear the adult responsibilities of work and child rearing.
A couple of other things to consider……anciently the serpent was a symbol of wisdom and knowledge, which would go along nicely with your idea that Satan symbolizes our desire for those things. Also the tree and fruit anciently were symbols of procreation and the continuance of life. So that is interesting within the Fall context.
Comment by Katie — January 26, 2006 @ 9:29 pm
Truth and Soul, I don’t think that I have heard that in 15 years. I love that album.
Comment by Russ J — January 26, 2006 @ 10:51 pm
Sorry, but your answer to why Satan was a serpent seems a bit of a non sequetor. Could you expand somewhat?
Comment by Clark — January 26, 2006 @ 11:07 pm
I think Ian askes a good question. How does this allegorical theory translate into practical reality? There eventually needs to be some type of physical creation right? I have previously liked the garden story because it provides this transition – sort of. So where does the physical ‘play’ of life begin?
Comment by Eric — January 27, 2006 @ 6:40 am
Meems – Good idea for a song. I think I was putting this song up just as you commented
Ian – I think we can still have a literal Adam here on earth. I am specificaly talking about the Adam and Eve in the Garden here. Earth is represented by the world they enter after receiving a “coat of skins” and being sent out of paradise.
Katie – Thanks for the excellent input. I think that you are right that the symbolism works on several different levels. Also, I started a Kierkegaard book recently but got sidetracked — you’ve inspired me to pick it up again.
Russ – Me too
Clark – Good point. I was thinking specifically of the scriptural comment that “the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which I, the Lord God, had made.”
Eric – For now I think it will suffice to say that I think a literal Adam on earth is not jeopardized by calling the Garden narrative an allegory. I’ll explore the Adam idea more in future posts. As I posted at T&S though, I think the literal creation of the earth is described in Moses 2 and that the allegorical Eden story starts in Moses 3.
Comment by Geoff J — January 27, 2006 @ 9:17 am
Geoff,
Thanks for the post, I’ll respond (debate) more this evening if time allows. You make some excellent posts though. I appreciate you doing this.
Comment by Tim J — January 27, 2006 @ 1:06 pm
How does the “Garden as Allegory” fit in with Joseph’s declaration of Adam-on-di-Ahman, and Misouri as the actual location of the Garden?
Comment by Hyrum — January 27, 2006 @ 2:44 pm
Hyrum – Not well.
I suppose we’d have to file that idea under the “Zelph” category if my theory is right…
Comment by Geoff J — January 27, 2006 @ 2:56 pm
The only problem with that, is that Zelph does not appear in scripture, Adam-ondi-Ahman does.
Another question I asked before that you may have (conveniently) forgotten:
When does the allegory end and the literal narrative begin?
With Cain and Abel?
With Noah and the flood?
Abraham and Isaac?
Comment by Tim J — January 27, 2006 @ 3:00 pm
Geoff,
This is great stuff! My favorite religion teacher taught this idea…kind of, and it REALLY opened my eyes in understanding the Fall. Personally, my take on it being allegorical is partial. I think Adam and Eve were SOMEwhere physically participating in all these actual events somehow to bring about the Fall, BUT whether they actually ate physical fruit, talked to an actual Satan-being, or actually made fig-leaf aprons is up for debate. They could just be means by which God helps us understand the Fall.
Also, the whole story could be literal and made to happen by God the way it did so we could apply it allegorically, too; just like so many other stories in the Bible (Noah, Joseph, Abraham and Isaac in Genesis 22, etc.)
In regards to Eve taking the fruit and Adam refusing it, one way we could look at it is that Satan did a poorer job of convincing Adam than he did of convincing Eve. He tried Adam first, failed, regrouped and thought up some new ideas to try on Eve and succeeded. Maybe the same would have happened if he had gone to Eve first and then Adam and Adam would have partaken of the fruit. Who knows?
Comment by Bret — January 27, 2006 @ 3:19 pm
Tim ,
As I mentioned to Ian, I’d say the pure allegory ends after Adam and Eve receive a “coat of skins” and enter our world. I think there were a literal Adam and Eve here on earth. (Though I suspect the account we have of them probably also has non-literal/allegorical aspects to it — something I’ll sketch out in later posts.)
Adam-ondi-ahman is the name of the place where the great meeting will happen in connection with the Second Coming of Christ. The Garden of Eden need not be literal for the prophecies relating to Adam-ondi-Ahman to be fulfilled. (Missouri as the location of a literal Garden of Eden is not scriptural — unless I’ve been looking in the wrong places…)
Comment by Geoff J — January 27, 2006 @ 3:19 pm
Geoff,
Why did God command them to not partake of the fruit (gain sentience)?
Comment by Tim J. — January 28, 2006 @ 8:25 am
Tim,
See my last post called “Happiness and The Fall“. I answered that question there.
Comment by Geoff J — January 28, 2006 @ 9:08 am
Why was Adam created first?
Why was Eve not created at the same time as Adam?
Why is “gain sentience” called a Fall – seems more like a step up?
Why wasn’t Satan smart enough to grab fruit from both the tree of life and the tree of knowledge and have Adam and/or Eve eat both?
What did Satan bother with the excuse about doing the same things as been done in other words?
Comment by ed — February 1, 2006 @ 10:08 pm
Ed,
Why was Adam created first? Why was Eve not created at the same time as Adam?
Eve wasn’t created ex nihilo. The record makes it sound like the original “Adam” in the narrative (as in “the Lord called their name Adam”) was a literal union of both a male and female part. So it appears that the male and female versions of Adam were created at the same time to me.
Why is “gain sentience” called a Fall – seems more like a step up?
See my last post on why gaining sentience would be called a fall.
Why wasn’t Satan smart enough to grab fruit from both the tree of life and the tree of knowledge and have Adam and/or Eve eat both?
Satan represents the ambition/greed/pride within Adam and Eve. See the post again for that answer… I think I already addressed this part. (Perhaps I am misunderstanding your question though..)
What did Satan bother with the excuse about doing the same things as been done in other words?
It is a teaching moment in the narrative explaining that this applies to children of God on every world/probation (and is a support for the MMP notion in my opinion).
Comment by Geoff J — February 1, 2006 @ 10:36 pm
The record (both scripture and temple) makes it sound like Adam (Man) was created first and then slept and woke up with a missing rib and was presented with the woman (which he later named eve) – and then they were called Adam.
Didn’t Adam name the animals BEFORE he was kicked out? If the story was allegorical why would it matter if he named them before or after?
Comment by Ed — February 2, 2006 @ 7:58 pm
I agree that Adam (Man) was first — as long as “Man” represents something seperate from the later male human Adam… Whatever that original Adam represents, it had both the male and female in it. Eve wasn’t created out of nothing after all.
As for naming the animals, that is a good question. I’m not sure what that is symbolic of but it sure seems like it must mean something important — why else would that seemingly random detail be in the record when thousands of other details are not?. I’ll give it some thought and research and if I come up with anything I’ll post it here… (Anyone else have ideas of what the naming of the animals might represent?)
Comment by Geoff J — February 2, 2006 @ 10:53 pm
If Eden is an allegory, can we go back to believing partaking of the fruit is having sex?
Why else can’t you replenish the earth without tasting the forbidden fruit?
Also, don’t make the coats of skin mortal, human bodies. The coats of skin come from a sacrificed animal, showing that naked guilt is covered by scapegoating or sacrifice or the prefigured atonement, from the beginning.
Music suggestion: “These are the Days” then “Eden” from the 10,000 Maniac’s album _Our Time in Eden_
Comment by Johnna Cornett — February 3, 2006 @ 12:27 am
I think the idea of partaking the fruit as sexual relations is equally untenable – an echo of the Greek-influenced belief that the most virtuous were the unmarried – that sexual relations were dirty and degrading.
My position is that the Garden of Eden story as we know it today, the Genesis 2-3 part is not even a good allegory, but rather a product some Yahwist scribe’s wild imagination (cf. the Documentary Hypothesis).
Anything that takes more work to explain away that it provides in support for fundamental principles isn’t even worth propagating as fiction.
That said, it seems to me that Adam and Eve were likely real individuals, on this world, or some other world, and not just metaphors for men and women generally. The post-Garden account is just fine, as is the account of Lucifer in the war in heaven.
Comment by Mark Butler — May 20, 2006 @ 1:36 am
Im thankful for the blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.
Comment by Annalisa — January 9, 2012 @ 1:39 am
Geoff, it’s six years since you posted origianlly so I would assume some of your views on this have changed, but with respect to why Eve ate first, how would you react to the suggestion that in a narrative about how the world got so screwed up (which seems to be a major function of the garden story when it was written), it was convenient to blame the woman.
Comment by Jacob J — January 9, 2012 @ 11:25 am
That certainly make some sense from a purely naturalistic point of view Jacob.
It looks like I was still leaning toward a spirit atomism model back when I wrote this post. Most of my ideas in the post only hold water if some form of spirit atomism were true. I tend to reject spirit atomism now in favor of a “whole cloth” version of intelligences/spirits.
Comment by Geoff J — January 9, 2012 @ 11:33 am
Geoff, are you sure you read the right post? How does this have anything to do with spirit atomism?
Comment by Jacob J — January 12, 2012 @ 5:04 pm
Yeah the problem was I was being pretty generic and cryptic in the post. But I can see all the signs there that I was trying to craft a spirit-atomism friendly model that worked for the Eden story.
The basic assumption I was working with at the time was that our spirits are unions of who knows how many “intelligences”. Basically the Orson Pratt model. The idea being that as more intelligences joined the union the higher level of intelligence the spirit would be.
Thus I was using phrases like “pre-sentient life” etc to signify less intelligent spirits and humans represented the quasi graduates I guess.
Anyhow I no longer lean toward that model at all mostly because it seems too ludicrous. But I can see in the post I was trying to make the explanations there work with that model.
Comment by Geoff J — January 13, 2012 @ 1:46 pm