The Garden of Eden Part 2: The Tree of Knowledge

Photo by Aman Aman on Unsplash

Have you ever wished that you could live in the Garden of Eden and enjoy a happy, carefree life? I have once or twice.

Fortunately, having everyone live happily ever after in a beautiful garden wasn't part of God's plan for us. In fact, it wasn't even possible. Adam and Eve could not have lived in bliss forever and still become the parents of all mankind.

It just couldn't work that way. Thanks to the Book of Mormon, we have a pretty clear idea of why. In 2 Nephi 2, it says, 

22 And now, behold, 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. 

23 Any they would have had no children. . . .

From this, we know that if Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, they would have never been able to raise children. Instead, they would have remained as children themselves—forever.

I've always understood that point. But there is one thing that continued to confuse me. In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we teach that both Adam and Eve are heroic exemplars, because they chose to bring life into the world even though it required disobeying God. Eve is praised for her foresight and courage; Adam is praised for his loyalty and reasoning.

But neither Adam nor Eve had knowledge of good and evil until after they ate the fruit. They were children, knowing the what of the commandments but not the why.

If Adam and Eve were truly like children, innocent and unlearned, how could they have understood the magnitude of their decision to partake of the fruit? There's no way that Eve would have been reaching for that fruit with the full realization of what that action meant for her future.

That's what I never understood. Why did we praise Adam and Eve so much for their foresight and reasoning, when they really couldn't have known the significance of their partaking of the fruit?

But then I got to thinking about it as I read in Moses chapter 4, when the serpent is tempting Eve.

10 And the serpent said unto the woman: Ye shall not surely die; 

11 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. 

12 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it became pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make her wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and also gave unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

We don't know how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, but I wonder how many months must Eve have been walking through the Garden, pondering the two commandments that God had given her and realizing that she did not have the knowledge to keep the first commandment? How long had she already been gazing at the tree of knowledge, wanting to be fruitful and multiply but not knowing how?

I imagine that Eve would have already worked out for herself that she needed to have more knowledge if she and Adam were going to keep the first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth (Genesis 1:28). So when Satan did come in, promising knowledge like unto the gods, partaking of the fruit might not have been so foreign an idea to her.

I don't know whether or not Eve fully understood before she ate the fruit that she had to fall in order to bring salvation to her offspring. Perhaps she did, perhaps she didn't. Either way, her act was valiant and praiseworthy.

I will say, however, that I don't believe that Adam or Eve fully understood their role in God's plan until after they partook of the fruit. Indeed, in both scriptural accounts of the creation, Adam is not said to have given Eve her name until their eyes have already been opened. Only after their reprimand from God do they say that Adam called her Eve, the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20; Moses 4:26).

I love to think of the moment when Adam must have turned to "the woman" with such love in his eyes and tenderly called her "Eve" for the very first time. Having just been told that the earth would be cursed for their sake and that they were destined to return to the dust, I can imagine him saying, "Eve... My wife and my companion, we will make it. We can and will bring life into this world, together."

And they did. They brought you and me into this world to make decisions of our own, and they showed us that even with a minuscule understanding of God's plan, we can still make the right decision. Sometimes, if not always, our knowledge of the why behind God's commandments will only come after we take the step of faith. We are all like Adam and Eve, for aren't we all little children when compared to God? And like in the Garden of Eden, God will always allow us to make mistakes so that we may learn and grow closer to Him. 

The Role of a Canon in Later-day Revelation

When I think of a canon, the first one that comes to mind is that of great literature, with books like A Tale of Two Cities, The Odyssey, Little Women, or Macbeth--books that have stood the test of time and made it into a list of "classics." I've always known that there are similar canons for most types of art, like movies, paintings, or music.

What I didn't realize about the word "canon" is that it also refers to an authoritative list of scriptures. But the thing is, not every religion has the same canon, even among Christians! I guess I had never thought about it, but with so many translations of the Bible and other ancient texts not included in the Bible, it's no wonder that there is a disagreement about what the scriptural canon should include.

It's the same with any canon, really. The books listed in a literary canon have been studied by scholars because of their timelessness and depth, but how does a text gets into the canon? When is it finally timeless, and who gets to decide how deep a text is? That's a question that causes debates like crazy.

How cool would it be if there was a way to know exactly which books were supposed to be on that list? No debate, just . . . divine guidance? Maybe there's nothing like that with classical literature, but after reading on the scriptural canon in the Bible Dictionary, I realized that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints doesn't have to debate about what is scripture. We have more than just scholarly knowledge to tell us; we have latter-day revelation, which is exactly what has given us the four main texts we consider authoritative scripture: the Bible (Old and New Testament), the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants.

That's awesome. The LDS scriptural canon is built on revelation! And what's more, the part of the Bible Dictionary entry that caught my attention most was this:

"Although the decisions were made in the past as to which writings are authoritative, that does not mean that the canon of scripture is complete and that no more can be added. True prophets and apostles will continue to receive new revelation, and from time to time the legal authorities of the Church will see fit to formally add to the collection of scripture."

This, I think, is a foundational concept. Basically, what this passage is saying is that (1) the Bible is not and should not be the only sacred text in a canon (and thus the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants have every right to be a part of it, as long as they are revealed as authoritative), and (2) what books we have now are not the only scriptures that can be part of the canon. More can be added! God still isn't done, and neither should we be.

Learning about the canon in this way taught me that we need to continue with open minds and search for those texts that truly are lasting and authoritative, and cause us to come closer to the Lord.

Just like how a literary, cinematic, or artistic canon will continue to add new works to their list, so too can our scriptural canon continue to grow.

Time Travel- What Could Be Done?

I watched one of the best movies last night, as far as being emotional, action-packed, thought-provoking, sci-fi, romantic, etc. You must watch this movie! Here's the trailer, though I don't think it does the film justice.

Deja Vu is seriously worth two hours of your life, if not more. My mind was completely blown by the whole idea. I'll try not to give the whole story away, but the main theme is based around time travel.

That's where I want to go with today's post. Time travel-- is it possible? Okay, so maybe I won't start with that question, because honestly nobody knows. There are so many different stories incorporating this interesting fantasy. Why is it so attractive to our minds? The idea that we can change our past, or change our future. The chance that what we do is not set in concrete, forever unchangeable.

The idea that rather than be accountable, we can make mistakes and then go back and do it again. Something that all of us wish were possible. And yet this goes directly against the point of life: to live and learn. If we could go back and change our mistakes, would we learn from it? Perhaps in the moment we would understand why it was a mistake, but in the long-run, the consequences are what teaches the strongest lesson.

However, in the case of Deja Vu, it is using time travel as a way to prevent catastrophes. So what about these situations? If time travel is used, not for personal gain, but for others? This is where I'm open to anything. It could be the same, what's done is done. But it's saving lives, while capturing the bad guy. What could be wrong about that?

I've got no answer for this, so if you do then I would love to hear it! Time travel is one of the most interesting fantastical notions.. Another story that I enjoyed with time travel was the book Ben Franklin and the Chamber of Time. Cool stuff!

Nature's Gift

“Four [trees] who reach and do not forget to reach. Four whose only reason is to be and be.” (Cisneros 75)

My favorite chapter from The House on Mango Street was “Four Skinny Trees.” This short description of four trees that are in her neighborhood: “four who do not belong here but are here.”  Every single sentence in this section struck me as an important statement describing Esperanza’s life, feelings, and maturity.

The description of these four lone trees and comparison to herself encouraged me to think about the nature that surrounds me. What can I see that connects to my own soul and personality? I wonder, what is it that draws us to nature? Why do humans feel so connected to it? I just barely read in my other class a letter written by the poet Petrarch, in which he described his journey up a mountain. When he reached the top, his journey and the view both contributed to inspiration on his life and his purpose. Just as he found out new things about himself, Esperanza found out new things from those four trees that she walked by probably every day. When she is feeling down, those trees show her what is possible and perhaps desired, “to be and be.”

I love the quote that I began with, because I do feel as if this should be a goal that we can strive for. To always be reaching for something, never letting ourselves become just a stump, without progression. I want to be something, and continue to be something even after I’m gone. I want to be and be, reaching for something better until I've become it.

Have you ever seen a creature, a plant, a landscape, and realized something about yourself? I imagine there are few who haven’t. What was it for you? What gives you the most inspiration?

In the Past

This semester in Latin American Humanities was fantastic! I loved all of the works that we read, but there were definitely some that I enjoyed more than others. My favorite movie was Black Orpheus, while I also really enjoyed reading Bless Me, Ultima.

The reason I enjoyed Black Orpheus the most is because not only was it a great story, but I loved what the director did with the fact that it wasn’t just a new version of Orpheus, but instead that story still existed. The symbolism was very interesting, and fun to look for. Also, while other people may not have liked how slowly the story went, with so much dancing and moments without any movement in the story-line  I enjoyed it! It did a great job of showing the atmosphere of the festival, as well as the lifestyles that the people lived every other day of their life as well.

In Bless Me Ultima, the comparisons with Jesus Christ were very obvious. The only way a reader wouldn’t have noticed is if they didn’t know the story of Christ’s crucifixion. The story itself was a great example of author’s life, but whenever a reference to Christ’s story appeared, I wasn’t sure whether to consider it a good thing, or sacriligious. Other symbolism throughout the story was not so easy to see. Ultima, the owl, the river, it seems as if everything and everyone in the story could have a hidden meaning. But I wasn’t able to pick up on them so well. I’m still trying to figure it out. However, that didn’t make me enjoy the book any less.

I’m also very excited for the things we are doing the rest of the class. Like watching the Prisoner of Askaban. I’m curious to see what differences I can see between the Harry Potter that was written by a Latin American director. Will it be obvious?

Innocent until Guilty

“My father had tried to keep his land holy and pure, but perhaps it was impossible. Perhaps the llano was like me, as I grew the innocence was gone, and so too the land changed.” (Anaya 167-168)

The concept of losing one’s innocence throughout the book Bless Me, Ultima really interests me. When I was thinking about what stories were written about a young boy’s journey to becoming a man, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn came to mind. I thought it very interesting that both main characters, Antonio and Huck, had a black and white view on the world. Antonio was a completely pure child, just as all start out as, until he began to witness what the world did to people: rage, death, and carnal desire. And yet, even after witnessing these, he’s still innocent, although he doesn't see himself so. He believed either you were completely innocent, or you were doomed to destruction: a completely black and white view.

Like Antonio, Huck Finn also viewed the world similarly, but from a contrasting perspective. Huck is much older than Antonio, and has seen a lot more sin, in a sense raised by it. Yet, he’s still innocent, because his knowledge of right from wrong was a child’s. He had no religious education until his foster mother taught him. But everything about religion made little sense to him, resulting in this passage suggesting men are either completely clean or damned:

“…I would take up wickedness… for a starter I would go to work and steal Jim out of slavery again; and if I could think up anything worse, I would do that, too; because as long as I was in, and in for good, I might as well go the whole hog. (Twain 26)

Why, even coming from completely different mindsets—one knowing he was “wicked” and the other wanting to stay innocent—do these two boys see only the black and white? What does this say about childhood? Does there even need to be a grey? 

Pursuit for Greatness

“But man's greatness consists in the very fact of wanting to be better than he is. “ (Carpentier, Kingdom of this World)

The book that this quote is taken from, Kingdom of this World, was a hard book to get through— not only because of the wording and style of writing, but also because of the actual subject material. The confusing story-line was full of base actions, tyranny, and horror. And yet in the middle of all the chaos, there’s this line, speaking of man’s greatness. Man, great? After all they've done and are doing? Yes, even after all of the sin. This book attributes greatness not to actions of the past, but to those that are planned for the future.

Often, a man’s life is analyzed by his actions, who he affected, etc. If he didn't know too many people, touch anyone, or accomplish anything great, then he is often deemed a failure. However, "The Pursuit of Happiness" with Will Smith is a great example of how untrue this is. The main character had an honest life, but it was unsuccessful. His wife left him for hopeless and he was stuck trying to take care of his kid without a job. According to the quote by Carpentier, this does not matter. The fact that this man wanted so badly to take care of his son and be a better father made him a great person.

And yet, is merely wanting to be better enough? I certainly can want to do a lot of things, but until I put desires to action, how can it count toward anything? I can think that someone is exceptional, desire for them to know it, and yet if I don’t tell them so, they can never feel the confidence-boost.

So, what makes a human great? Man’s greatness is more than a desire, it’s when we work toward our better self. Should we be looking at our past actions for judgment or just for guidance?

Up until Forever

“The deeper the root in the earth, the harder it is to withdraw the plant. Each step Iracema takes on the road of farewell is a root which she plants in the heart of her guest.” (Iracema 57)

This quote is a wonderful representation of the longing that accompanies goodbyes. As Iracema travels with Martim to the end of her land he declares this, trying to get her to turn back, to let him go on alone with Pato. The longer Iracema was with them, the harder it was for Martim to say goodbye to her.

Another quote that shows this heartfelt longing to stay together is in The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks: 

“The reason it hurts so much to separate is because our souls are connected.”

This has the same idea that one person is attached to the other, whether it be by roots in the heart or their souls, it all is the same.

So why is this a fantastic way of viewing love? All of us have felt this in some way. Our most valued friend has planted their roots inside of us with each word, each act—even just their presence has been another tendril growing, making it harder for their presence to be completely removed from our life. When saying goodbye to someone we care deeply about, a question that many have is whether they would want a quick goodbye, or a long one? Martim, when speaking to Iracema, realized that prolonging the inevitable was only making it harder. Everything she did and said pierced his heart with a new root.

Goodbyes are never easy, and the more roots that are connecting two souls together make pulling the tree out much harder. Thus, cutting the trunk is often the only way to say goodbye—an abrupt end. But the roots still remain with the memories and the feelings. A part of their soul remains in your own. 

Living in a Memory

Here are words spoken by a man full of guilt and regret for allowing a beautiful people and their Catholic priests to be massacred:

Altamirano: "So, your Holiness, now your priests are dead, and I am left alive. But in truth it is I who am dead, and they who live. For as always, your Holiness, the spirit of the dead will survive in the memory of the living." (The Mission 1986)

This statement stuck me as something that I had heard before, an echo that is heard repeatedly in works throughout history. This sorrowful declaration is full of truth, truth that may be hidden in the back of the mind, until it is brought to the surface when reminded.

The spirit of the dead survives in the living. Humans are full of memories. That is how we learn, that is how we live. And that is how we die. Using the past as a guide for our future, whether it be our own or the past of others, is how we become the best we can be—the ideal human. We live to give others an impression, to leave our mark on the world. We live to put our own memories into another. And we cannot feel completely ready to die until we know that we will be remembered – that we will go on living in another’s mind.

Altamirano’s thought also requires a closer look at the speaker himself. "It is I who am dead” may show that this man truly felt remorse for what he did, that he would not feel alive again until he received redemption from his sin. Is this a sign that he deserves forgiveness? If a man causes hundreds of innocent deaths, can he be saved? This question has been asked throughout religious ages. Who can be saved? Who is damned forever? The Mission may have been addressing this very question. However, I believe that is a question that cannot be answered by a fellow human being. Altamirano was not dead yet; he still could become his ideal self. Neither is anyone done living after a mistake.

We all have the chance to become the best we can be, and leave our legacy behind, further helping the generations after become even better than ourselves.

Worship Zeus or Be Electrocuted

When reading Victors and Vanquished, it told of an Aztec leader that was asked for help by the Mexica people that were being attacked by the Spaniards. This leader refused to help his brothers in the fight, saying,

“Why would strangers come without cause? A god has sent them, that is why they came!” (p. 188)

This idea, that God or the gods determine what happens, is found in many cultures. The mentioned leader claimed that they were being defeated because they hadn't worshiped the gods in a sufficient way. Why would a culture believe so strongly that their gods play such a large part in their lives?

When thinking about this, I remembered reading something like this for my other class, Western Humanities. The tie together was perfect, because I’ve been studying about another war in Greek times, told by the Iliad. The Greek culture also put great importance in their gods and throughout the story there are multiple times when the gods intervene and help whoever they prefer to win, often when that person would not have won otherwise.

Tying these two cultures together – the Greek and the Aztec – also helps in thinking about other cultures and how they have the same views. Even in the Latter-day Saint mind, blessings and consequences play a huge part in our reasoning behind what happens to us in this life.

I guess this stood out to me because I wonder why humans want something to blame when things go wrong, and to praise when things go right. Maybe it’s our inner desire for a bigger picture, and a need to know that we aren’t just on the earth by chance. We want a larger being to be in control, even if that larger being is selfish, punishing, and worship-hungry. Trying to please a god gives something to live for, and something to die for. Believing that hardships come from disobedience gives hope that life can get better.