I agree that in an LDS context makes looking at the Garden of Eden as a myth a unique problem. This by the way is something that has been on my mind recently. LDS face a unique problem in assimilating these archaeological finds, it’s a very different problem than other Christians and Jews have.

For the most part this post is self diagnosis, hopefully of my past not my present. I have done lots of reading, listening, and thinking about religious studies, philosophy of religion, and biblical studies over the past few years. In a sense this post is the present me diagnosing the past me. I hope this gets people thinking about themselves, but I am not sure the me of the past would have even understood what the me of the present is saying.

I do plan on writing another post or two about some ideas and methods that have worked for me over these past years. I pretty much stumbled onto them by sheer dumb luck. If I had to give the short version of my stumbling into being less biased (hopefully) is would be 1) Take the Bible seriously and 2) Be curious.

I’m not saying Eden isn’t mythic or allegorical. Just that I think those who think otherwise aren’t being irrational. (Myself, as I indicated, I think it just a reference to a celestial sphere which is how I read D&C 27 as well – I think the claims of Eden in Missouri are confused with where Adam dwelt after he was cast to earth)

Thanks for the support. I think the reason it surprises me is because there are zero biblical scholars or archaeologists who would consider anything before Genesis 12 to be anything other than mythical. I guess in that way I am biased.

Not that it helps, but I was on the same page as you when it comes to the Garden of Eden. I thought it was meant to be a myth (though informative one) and not history.

Now one can say some aspects have been falsified. (Say the no death before the fall interpretation) But say the interpretation that the garden of eden was literally a terrestrial or celestial world out of which Adam was cast to earth seems pretty unfalsifiable by archaeology.

Even the commonly believe but at best only indirect (and late) attributions of Eden as being in Missouri according to Joseph seem hard to falsify. (I think these are problematic on their own, but that’s an other issue) At best one can say that the altar Joseph talked about in Spring Hill probably was just an indian one from the mound builder era.

I pretty much agree with your larger points. I just think that one problem one finds is the old “absent of evidence = evidence of absence” bias.

My only suggestion is to do what I say. Find the best context for the scriptures you read. And how are you going to know you have found the best context if you have not seriously looked at a wide variety of options? If going down that path interests you, I would imagine at some point you end up seeing and perhaps even agreeing with some of my points. A good place to start would be to read a wide variety of histories of the Ancient Near East and take a look at the archaeological data supporting them. If you are not interested in contextualizing the scriptures then there is really nothing I can say to convince you of anything. I’m not here to prove anything to you.

As for the fundamentalist issue, I was thinking not in terms of Mormon fundamentalism, but a more generic fundamentalism which would include Christian fundamentalists.

“A fundamentalist will be uncomfortable when they finally realize that the garden of Eden is a myth and will have to reconfigure their worldview.

With respect, you seem to be using watered-down mainstream Church doctrine instead of fundamentalist beliefs. Fundamentalist doctrine accepts the Adam-God doctrine…IOW that Adam (MIchael) came here with a celestialized body bringing one of His wives (Eve) with him….that the fossil record is the remnants of a former creation…that the Garden of Eden was exactly where Joseph Smith said it was…etc.

Just exactly how are we supposed to “finally realize” that the Garden of Eden is a “myth”?

Heck, I even accept the much-more-far-fetched idea that Jesus Christ rose from the dead…that’s re-animation of dead tissue. Nope, I can’t prove it in a secular laboratory…does that make it false?