Understanding the Garden of Eden

Clarifications and unpacking for former mormons

I was recently asked by a former LDS (post-mormon) now orthodox catechumen progressing towards baptism, to help them understand the Orthodox version of the Garden of Eden story. Thus the genesis (pun intended) of this article.

Act 1 - The Setting

The story of the Fall in the Garden is really Act 2 of a larger narrative. To understand it in context, we need to set the stage (or at least build a framework for) the cosmology to understand this.

The Creation of the Angels and the Heavenly Hosts

Before the creation of the Earth and mankind, God created the “heavenly hosts,’ i.e. the Angels. In traditional christianity, angels are spiritual beings that possess intelligence, free will, immortality and great power, but they are not divine. They are created beings dependent on God. “They are an intelligent essence, having obtained by grace an immortal nature.” God created the Angels to be good. Their purpose is to serve God, glorify Him, act as His messengers, act as Guardians, to fight against evil, and participate in His divine life according to their capacity.

It should be noted that the Angels, while intelligent and conscious, are a different creation i.e. a different species from humankind. This is a different Ontology of Angels and Demons, from the LDS understanding. In the LDS understanding, Angels, are pretty much the same thing/species as human kind (in some cases minus the physical bodies.) Those that have physical bodies have glorified/perfected bodies. Whether or not they have a physical body often depends on if they have already lived a mortal life. Demons, on the other hand, were denied mortal bodies. In the LDS ontology, angels have uncreated intelligences and created spirit bodies and act as servants and messengers of God organized in and using his priesthood authority and power.

In orthodoxy Angels have a perfect understanding of the truth, of theology and of scripture. As a separate creation, they do not think like us and don’t have the same emotional capacity that humans have. The unfallen angels exist in a state of unwavering alignment with God’s will and reflect His purity. The immortality of the Angels is supported by God’s grace and energies. There is also a hierarchy among the angels: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones, Dominions (or Lordships), Powers (or Authorities), Virtues (or Strengths), Principalities (or Rulers), Archangels, Angels.

Each rank has specific functions and degrees of proximity to God. Angels and Archangels are often those who directly interact with humanity.

Humans were created for theosis - union with God by Grace, whereas Angels can never progress above their current state.

Angels and emotional experience

Human emotions are tied to our bodily and psychological experiences as well as our fallen natures. The emotional experiences of angels’ are purely spiritual and rooted in their proximity to God.

• Joy and Worship: Angels experience joy, but their joy is undiluted by the passions that affect human emotions. For example, Christ Himself says:

  • “I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents.” (Luke 15:10)

  • This joy is not based on transient pleasure but is a spiritual rejoicing aligned with God’s will and His goodness.

• Zeal and Righteous Anger: Angels, particularly the Archangels and Seraphim, are often described as zealous and fierce defenders of God’s holiness. However, their “anger” or zeal is not like human anger, which can be tainted by passion or irrationality. Instead, it is a pure, unwavering commitment to truth and righteousness.

• Love: The love of angels is perfect and undistracted, focused entirely on God and on accomplishing His will. Their love for humanity stems from their love for God, as they serve as ministers and protectors according to His command.

• Sorrow or Grief: Angels do not experience sorrow or grief in the same way humans do, since they are not subject to the passions or bodily suffering. However, they can be described as having a form of spiritual sorrow or concern for the sins of humanity, not out of personal pain but out of perfect compassion aligned with the divine will.

  • Saint John of Damascus, in The Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, explains that angels are impassible—meaning they do not experience emotions driven by bodily passions. However, they can experience emotions appropriate to their nature, such as joy and love, which are in complete harmony with God’s will.

• Due to the differing nature of their emotional experience, both Angels, and by extension, Demons, are extremely rational beings, combined with their knowledge, immortality, and advanced intelligence, that makes them formidable creatures and opponents.

The Angelic Rebellion and the Demons

Among the highest and most glorious angels was one often identified (based on interpretations of Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, and affirmed by Tradition) as Lucifer or "Daystar" (sometimes Satan, though Satan means "adversary" and can describe his role.)

Moved by pride, Lucifer desired not to serve God but to be like God in a way contrary to God's will – essentially, to set up his own will in opposition to God's, to be self-sufficient rather than dependent on divine grace. He essentially said, "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God... I will make myself like the Most High." (cf. Isaiah 14:13-14).

Using his free will, Lucifer chose definitively to act against God. This was the first sin. He persuaded other angels to join his rebellion. Estimates vary, but Revelation 12:4 ("his tail drew a third of the stars of heaven") is often interpreted in this context.

This rebellion wasn't necessarily a physical war with swords, but a spiritual division, a definitive choice of wills. Archangel Michael is traditionally seen as the leader of the faithful angels who cried out, "Who is like God?" (the meaning of "Michael") and stood firm in loyalty to the Creator. The consequence for Lucifer and the rebellious angels was a fall from their state of grace and light. They were cast down from God's immediate, glorious presence (cf. Luke 10:18, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.")

By their irrevocable choice against God, these fallen angels became demons. Their nature became twisted, oriented towards darkness, hatred, and opposition to God and His creation. God did not create evil; evil entered creation through the misuse of free will by these created beings.

As purely spiritual beings with great intellect and free will, the initial act of rebellion through pride was a fully conscious, free, and definitive rejection of God. Unlike humans who sin often through weakness, ignorance, passion, or deception within the flow of time, the demonic choice was made with a much fuller knowledge and finality.

• Their free will, having made that definitive choice against God, became a fixed will in opposition to Him. Their nature became oriented towards evil, pride, envy, and malice.

• They lack the capacity for repentance metanoia (the change of mind and heart that constitutes repentance). Furthermore, the specific redemptive work of Jesus Christ (His Incarnation, death, and resurrection) was undertaken for the salvation of humanity, healing human nature. It was not undertaken for the fallen angelic nature.

• Confirmed in Evil: Just as the faithful angels are confirmed in good, the demons are confirmed in evil. Their existence is one of perpetual, chosen separation from God's love and light.

• One might ask, if they have Free Will, can’t they change their minds? Well, free will and freedom of action and consequence are not the same thing. You may have the freedom to injure yourself, but it doesn’t immediately follow that you have the freedom to heal yourself. The rebellious Angels harmed themselves, but they cannot heal their rebellion.

• While fallen creatures, Demon’s still have power, intelligence and the same knowledge they had as Angels. They also have the ability to appear or manifest in many different ways. They are still, like Angels, subject to God’s will and power, and they are still incorporeal spirits, so they cannot manifest in physical bodies. Due to their nature they also primarily work through deception and influencing the thoughts and emotions of others to lead people away from God. Their powers include:

  • Manipulating human perceptions to create illusions. They can make people see or hear things that are not physically present. This can take on various forms, from unsettling visions to miraculous events.

  • Demons have the ability to tempt, deceive and manipulate humans. This can give them power over a person, which if it progresses far enough, can allow them to oppress and possess a person.

  • Their ability to take on forms is limited. They are typically temporary and are always done with a purpose. Demons can manifest as animals, serpents and as angels of light.

Given all of the above Orthodoxy teaches that it is extremely important to have and exercise spiritual discernment in order to distinguish between psychological issues, and demonic activity. For this reason, many Orthodox are highly skeptical of angelic manifestations, visions and other supernatural events experienced by people. This skepticism extends even to many apparitions that other christians may hold as true (like marian apparitions.) This is particularly true if spiritual apparitions deliver new or contradictory theologies, beliefs or messages that promote ideas outside of the established teachings of the Church Fathers and holy tradition, especially claims of private revelations that add to or change established church teachings. There's a particular concern that such messages are influenced by human imagination, psychological factors, or even demonic deception aiming to lead people astray.

The Orthodox Church believes that the fullness of the faith was revealed through Christ and the Apostles and is preserved in the Church's Tradition. Private revelations, even if seemingly from a holy figure, are not seen as a source of new dogma. The potential for misinterpretation or demonic influence in such personal revelations is a serious concern.

The concept of "prelest" is central to this skepticism. Orthodox spiritual writers warn extensively about the dangers of seeking extraordinary spiritual experiences and the ease with which one can be deceived by demonic forces that can mimic divine manifestations. True spiritual growth, in the Orthodox view, is typically characterized by humility, repentance, and a deep immersion in the established practices and teachings of the Church.

The pattern of Idolatry

The pattern in the pagan, idol worshipping world is the opposite of what is found in the Scriptures. People created gardens and/or temples as the dwelling places of the Gods. In the center of these gardens or temples, people placed an Idol, usually an carving or statue of the God created by human hands. The dedication ceremony included an “opening of the nostrils” - where the “breath” of the God passed into the idol, in a sense, trapping the God in the idol. The Idol was then served by it’s worshippers as a means of controlling the God and getting favors from it. Sacrifices were made to it such as offerings of Food which were then eaten - constituting a meal then shared with the God.

Act 2

The Creation and the Fall

When God creates Man, it is the opposite pattern from the pagan one. It is God who creates the Garden. He sets up an image of himself (fashioning Adam from the dust/clay of the earth), it is He who breathes life into the image, and He feeds man rather than being fed by him. This is the opposite of Idolatry in which man attempts to control a God by feeding it. Rather, God makes man and gives him communion and relationship with himself as an act of divine freedom. It is this relationship of communion and collaborative creativity that is marred by the introduction of death to mankind. Before creating Eve, God gives Adam the garden to cultivate and care for, acts of cooperation with God; but he also warns Adam not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Placed in the Garden of Eden, Adam (before the creation of Eve), was a partaker in the creative process with God - who brought animals to Adam to name. Made to partake in this creative process with God, Adam was endowed with the Image and Likeness of God in order to participate in God’s works. God creates ex-nihlo, through the bringing forth of chaotic matter, then organizing and using it in a creative process. This is how Adam is created, from the matter of the Earth - into which God then breathes the breath of life (aka the holy spirit.) Then Eve is created, by taking a portion from Adam’s side so that she will be a proper companion that corresponds to Adam. Adam was commanded to subdue the earth and fill it, but he could not do the latter without Eve, and this is the reason for marriage - to join together a man and a woman so that they can create more humans together, and function as a unified whole.

Likewise, man also creates, through organizing matter that God has already brought forth. Naming the animals is part of the fulfillment of God’s commandment for Adam to subdue the earth. (Genesis 2:19) This synergistic cooperation shows how the relationship between God and Man had been designed by God.¹

Mankind is created by God as a new and different creation from the Angels, in the image and likeness of God. Initially we were created without death, like the Angels, but not immortal independent of God. We were sustained in life without death by God’s grace (i.e. the creative energies of God.) Humanity was created unique: our first parents were beings with both a material body and a spiritual soul, made "in the image and likeness of God" (Genesis 1:26-27), placed in Paradise (Eden) with the potential for intimate communion with God, growth in virtue, and ultimately, theosis (deification – becoming participants in the divine nature by grace; something even the Angel’s could not hope for.)

The Image and Likeness of God

Christians and Mormons differ on this fundamental point of theology. Mormons erase the ontological separation between God and man and take the “Image and likeness” literally, to mean that God must then have a Body like a Human, in line with Joseph Smith’s king follett discourse theology. Orthodox Christians reject this notion as over anthropomorphizing. Scriptures that talk about God’s hands, eyes or walking in the Garden, are anthropomorphisms, figures of speech using human terms to describe God’s actions, attributes and relationship with God in a way we can only partially grasp - not literal descriptions of a physical form. Yes I know this wrecks my analogy wrt paganism and idols above, but c’est la vie, personne n'est parfait.

What does it mean to be created in the Image and Likeness of God?

So, if "image of God" doesn't mean a physical resemblance, what the heck does it mean? It refers primarily to the spiritual, rational, and moral capacities endowed upon humanity at creation, reflecting attributes of the incorporeal God. While interpretations can vary slightly among Church Fathers, a common understanding distinguishes between "image" and "likeness":

1. The Image (Greek: Eikon - the same word we get Icon from, Hebrew: Tselem)

   • Refers to the inherent capacities given to humanity at creation, reflecting God's nature. It's what makes us human and distinct from other animals.

   • Key aspects of the "image" include:

     • Rational Soul / Intellect (Nous): The capacity for reason, self-awareness, contemplation, understanding, and the ability to know God.

     • Free Will: The ability to make choices freely, particularly the capacity for self-determination and moral choice – to love God or turn away.

     • Moral Consciousness / Conscience: An innate capacity to discern good and evil.

     • Creativity: The ability to create, shape the world, and bring forth new things, reflecting God's own creativity.

     • Dominion / Stewardship: The calling to have responsible authority over the created world (Genesis 1:28), reflecting God's sovereignty.

     • Capacity for Relationship and Communion: The inherent ability to enter into loving relationships with God and with other human beings.

     • Immortality of the Soul: The soul is created for eternal existence.

   • The image of God was damaged and obscured by the Fall (Adam and Eve's sin), but not destroyed. Even fallen humanity retains the fundamental image, though its functions are distorted by sin.

2. The Likeness (Greek: Homoiosis, Hebrew: Demut)

   • Refers to the potential and objective of humanity: achieving moral and spiritual perfection through communion with God.

   • It involves growing in virtues like love, holiness, compassion, humility, goodness – reflecting God's character.

   • The ultimate goal is Theosis (often translated as deification or divinization aka exaltation to mormons): becoming, by grace, what God is by nature. This means participating in the divine life and energies of God through synergy (cooperation) between human effort and divine grace. It is becoming "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4).

   • The likeness to God was lost or severely hindered by the Fall. Humanity lost that intimate communion and the clear path towards achieving this spiritual perfection. This is perhaps somewhat what Mormons mean when they talk about the “Spiritual Death” brought about by the Fall.

   • Restoration of the potential for attaining God’s likeness is achieved through Jesus Christ. Through His life, death, resurrection, and the sending of the Holy Spirit, Christ heals human nature and reopens the path to theosis within the life of the Church (through faith, repentance, sacraments, prayer, and ascetic struggle.)

The Fall

Adam was commanded not to eat of the fruit of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil because when he eats from it he is told that he will die (Genesis 2:15-17.) The text does not specifically say that God also gave Eve that commandment, and when she relays the prohibition to the serpent, she adds a detail that “neither shall ye touch it” that was not give to Adam. So, we have to infer that either Adam added that detail, or Eve misunderstood it or herself embellished it.

One question that may come to mind is, why would the fruit of that tree kill Adam and Eve? Is it poisonous? Is it a punishment?

The Spiritual War is ongoing

To answer that, recall that the original narrative about the fall of the Angels and them becoming demons is still continuing to play out in the background. The Demons, and Lucifer in particular, hate this new creation (humanity) that essentially reflects the Image and Likeness of God, and while initially created below the Angels in nature, their potential is to ascend far higher than them through eventual union with God (theosis/exaltation) placing Humanity ultimately in a privileged state above the Angels. While God perhaps could have acted to redeem the fallen Angels he does not. Instead he creates Man (i.e. humanity.)

“What is man, that Thou art mindful of him? Or the son of man, that Thou visiteth him? For Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor.” Psalm 8:4-5 (LXX)

Lucifer, the highest of the angels, could not tolerate that God would elevate these “lesser creatures” to such dignity. The Fathers tell us that it was this envy and pride that caused his fall.

“The devil, seeing man destined to rise to the heights he himself had fallen from, envied and hated him, and so plotted his destruction.” - St. Gregory of Nyssa

Driven by anger, envy, and hatred towards God and a desire to wound him and anything carrying his Image, Satan and the demons - since they could not directly attack God, decided instead to destroy what he loved and valued. Corrupting and destroying humanity and its image and likeness of God, was an act of spite and attempt to thwart God’s creation and plan for human kind. It is why they continue to seek our destruction. Demons, in their hatred of God, seek to mar that image wherever they find it. Every soul that turns to Christ, every prayer, every act of repentance is like a torch in the darkness, tormenting them. Even in our fallen state, man retains the image of God. While the likeness has been darkened through sin, the image remains. This is a constant reminder to the demons of what they have lost, what they were denied — and what we still might gain. Demons are not content with their own fall. In their perpetual rebellion, they seek to corrupt and consume as many souls as possible.

“The devil hates us not because of anything we have done to him, but because we are loved by God.” - As St. John Chrysostom

“He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth… for he is a liar and the father of lies.” —John 8:44 (Words of Christ)

The demons cannot create, they can only twist and destroy. They try to mirror God’s work, but in a perverted form. Where Christ calls us to life, they can only whisper death. Where the Holy Spirit builds communion, demons sow division, pride, anger, and despair.

The Incarnation of Christ—the God-Man—was the final humiliation for the demons. Not only was man redeemed, but God became man to save humanity. Something that God did not do for the fallen Angels. The Cross, the very tool of Christ’s suffering, became the means of victory.

“The devil, seeing the human body deified in Christ, trembled. He who once rejoiced over Adam’s fall, now mourns his own downfall.” - Orthodox hymn of Pascha

This is why demons fight so desperately. They know their time is short. Every soul that repents is a blow against their kingdom.

The Serpent in the Garden is the manifestation of a demon - a rebellious angel. It is not a literal snake².

The demon represented by the serpent eventually persuades Eve to eat the fruit of the forbidden tree of Knowledge. She then persuades Adam to do the same. When they did that, they joined in the demonic rebellion against God and in response God cursed the serpent and gave them death. (We’ll discuss the theology and interpretation of this act in the next section.)

Cursing the Serpent

When we read Genesis, the appearance of a Serpent and the curse from God after the eating of the fruit, “upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life” - Genesis 3:14. is often understood literally, as the reason why snakes have no legs.

Instead what is happening is something very different. In ancient times, crawling on the belly symbolized total defeat, degradation, and humiliation. Ancient Near Eastern cultures frequently depicted defeated enemies as “eating dust” to indicate their total subjugation and humiliation. Additionally, “eating dust” was closely associated with the concepts of death and decay. By cursing the serpent this way, God is confining the Devil and all of the demons to hell - a domain characterized by death and corruption, a complete separation from the divine life.

Death and the plan of Salvation

The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was not poisonous. Death was given by God. But Why? Was it a punishment? Did God’s need for justice demand that he kill all humans? No, not at all. The giving of Death, and then mankind’s eventual redemption through Christ is what Orthodox Christians refer to as God’s plan of Salvation for humankind. Instead of a game of musical chairs with divine realms, the plan for salvation is composed of measures to allow mankind to repent and then a savior that defeats the devil, harrows death and hell, and then destroy’s death, allowing us to return to the state we were intended for. This is partially why Christ is called the New Adam and the Virgin Mary, the New Eve, as this plan of salvation entails a renewal of creation.

God did not give death to mankind out of a sense of revenge or hurt feelings or as a punishment. Death was given by God as a way to defeat God’s enemies. Recall that demons have a fixed nature, can never repent, and can never be transformed back into harmony with God. So Death is part of God’s plan of Salvation for mankind, providing a pathway to redemption. After the fall, humanity’s nature takes on all the characteristics of being in a fallen state (like the demons) with an inclination towards sin and evil. If humanity was to live in this fallen state and retain their immortality, their inclination towards evil would become increasingly entrenched and eventually, would become an eternal and unchangeable characteristic of mankind. Redemption requires repentance and a more mutable nature. Orthodox theologians sometimes use the analogy of a diseased organ or limb. If the disease cannot be healed and threatens the entire body, it may be necessary to remove it. Similarly, in humanity's fallen state, death can be seen as a radical act of divine love, preventing sin from becoming an eternal and incurable affliction.

The Orthodox understanding of spiritual struggle involves the conflict between the spirit and the "flesh" (not just the physical body, but the fallen human nature with its passions and desires.) This struggle is a key aspect of the repentance process and is intrinsically linked to our mortal existence. We learn to subdue our passions and align our will with God's will through conscious effort and the grace of God working within our mortal frame. Also, mortality is the arena where our free will is most actively engaged in choosing between good and evil. Repentance is a conscious and free turning away from evil and towards good. This exercise of freedom within the context of our earthly life is essential for genuine repentance.

In my limited understanding I see this as learning by conscious will align our image and likeness with God’s, despite our fallen natures, enough so that our fallen natures can - to some degree with God’s help and Grace - be overcome and redeemed. Perhaps enough exposure to God’s energies (Grace) through this alignment is enough to do the trick? I’m not a philosopher or professional orthodox theologian so I’m just speculating.

Death, in this perspective, acts as a limit to the perpetuation and entrenchment of sin in an eternal, unchanging state. It brings an end to the earthly life where sin takes root and overcomes us. In God’s eyes, and in our understanding of his plan, death is not seen as the ultimate end but as a transition. Through Christ's death and resurrection, death itself has been transformed. For those who die in repentance and faith, death becomes a "falling asleep" awaiting the resurrection and the restoration of their being in a glorified state - restored to the state we were meant to be in and free from the corruption of sin.

Orthodoxy views death, in the context of the Fall, not as a punishment in the sense of vindictive justice, but as a merciful intervention by God. It provides a necessary boundary to the perpetuation of sin, offers a limited but crucial time for repentance and transformation within a mortal framework, and Christ ultimately opens the door to resurrection and eternal life in a renewed state. Without the limitation of mortality, the opportunity for genuine repentance and the healing of our fallen nature might be lost, leading to an eternity bound by the consequences of sin.

Because repentance is possible only when one has a mortal, changeable and corruptible nature, after death, when the soul leaves the body, it enters a state where the capacity for change, struggle and repentance is no longer possible in the same way. It’s orientation, like that of the Angels and Demons becomes fixed. Hence the mortal life is the time for man to work out their salvation through Faith and Grace. Like the Angels, man was created immortal, but we were not inherently immortal and self sustaining - only God is. It was the energies of God, God’s grace, that sustained Adan and Eve’s immortality. Once separated from God through this rebellion, they were no longer in a place to continually benefit from the energies of God. Absent God’s life giving energies, death and corruption naturally followed. (So in a way, God didn’t punish mankind with death, death was a natural consequence of sin.)

If God had left Adam and Even as they were after they had sinned, God would have left them fixed in permanent rebellion, just like the demons. God cut humans off from the Tree of Life, exiling them from Eden, so that they would not be fixed in rebellion the way the demons were. So when God gives death (or allows death to come) to humans, it is so that they can repent and return to harmony with God. This becomes part of God’s Plan of Salvation for mankind.

Had Eve not fallen to the serpents deceptions, that Adam and Eve’s progress through their communion and collaboration with God would have continued and eventually they would have been ready and permitted to eat of both the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life, without having to suffer the consequences of the fall.

Perspectives on Eve’s Transgression

In (LDS) theology, the Fall of Adam and Eve is viewed not as a tragic error but as a necessary, even positive, step in God’s plan. Eve’s choice to partake of the forbidden fruit is honored for enabling mortality, procreation, and ultimately the joy of redemption. LDS scripture teaches that if Adam and Eve had never fallen, they would have remained in a state of innocence – unable to have children and experience growth. The Book of Mormon prophet Lehi explains:

“If Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen… [Adam and Eve] would have had no children, wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence… doing no good, for they knew no sin. But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things. Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.”

• 2 Nephi, Chapter 2, verses 22-25.

After the Fall, LDS scripture depicts Adam and Eve rejoicing that the Fall allowed God’s plan to move forward. Eve declares: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption.” In other words, breaking the commandment by eating the fruit was a transgression that opened the doorway to mortality and family life, fulfilling God’s earlier command to “be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28).

Crucially, LDS doctrine distinguishes between a “sin” and a “transgression.” The Fall is often called a transgression – a formally prohibited act that was nonetheless part of God’s design. Modern LDS leaders have taught that Eve’s decision was courageous and wise. Rather than condemning her, Latter-day Saints “celebrate Eve’s act and honor her wisdom and courage” in choosing knowledge and mortality over blissful ignorance. This perspective stands in stark contrast to many traditional Christian interpretations that assign overwhelming blame to Eve for humanity’s fallen state.

In the LDS view, by breaking the command not to eat the fruit, Eve enabled the procreative command “be fruitful and multiply” to be fulfilled—a step seen as essential for human progression and eternal joy. This view pre-supposes that Adam and Eve could not have had children in the state they were in in the Garden, a view that traditional Christians do not agree with. We believe that they could have, but it would have been somewhat different than it was after the fall.

The LDS teachings directly contrast with traditional Christian interpretations of the Fall as catastrophic. Instead, LDS doctrine holds that while the Fall brought mortal hardships, it also made possible agency, growth, and the subsequent redemption through Christ’s Atonement. This perspective is also known as the the “fortunate fall” or “felix culpa” i.e. “happy fault” perspective.

Like most of Joseph Smith’s ideas, there are existing historical and theological currents of thought that provide a backdrop for the formulation of his ideas. Early Church Fathers such as Irenaeus portrayed the Fall as a necessary stage in human development—arguing that without it, Adam and Eve would have remained in a state of childlike innocence, unable to progress. Later, the “felix culpa” or “happy fault” concept, evident in the liturgical language of the Exsultet (a roman catholic easter vigil hymn.) framed the Fall as a fortuitous event that ultimately brought about the greater good of redemption. Additionally, some apocryphal and Gnostic writings celebrated the gaining of knowledge in Eden, suggesting that breaking divine prohibition had its own redemptive value. Early American religious thought also leaned toward rejecting the notion of inherited sin and guilt, (a view the Orthodox agree with) a viewpoint that resonated with the restorationist critique of traditional Calvinist doctrines prevalent in Joseph Smith’s milieu. Below are some examples:

• The very dilemma that the LDS narrative highlights – How could Adam and Eve multiply without transgressing the ban on the Tree of Knowledge? – intrigued early interpreters as well. A number of ancient Jewish legends and mystical writings addressed the interplay of these commandments. E.G., the medieval Zohar (a classic text of Jewish Kabbalah, compiled in 13th-century Spain) suggests that the Fall was necessary for human souls to enter mortality. In one passage, the Zohar asks why the Serpent was needed in Eden at all and answers: “It is because he opens the passage for the descent of souls into the world. For if he did not open the way, no soul would come down to animate man’s body in the world.” In other words, without the Serpent’s intervention (which led Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit and become mortal), the process of human birth would not commence. This is a startling parallel to the LDS belief that “if Adam had not fallen** he would have remained in the garden of Eden… and [Adam and Eve] would have had no children.”

• Early Christian and Jewish apocrypha often expanded the Genesis story, sometimes in sympathetic ways toward Adam and Eve. The Life of Adam and Eve (also called the Apocalypse of Moses in its Greek version) is a Jewish pseudepigraphon that circulated in antiquity (i.e. a falsely attributed work - i.e. written by someone who then claims it was written by someone else, like Moses. The LDS Book of Abraham is also a pseudepigrapha.) It depicts Adam and Eve after the expulsion from Eden, recording their penitent prayers and eventual hope in a future redemption. While this text doesn’t explicitly say the Fall was necessary, it does portray Adam and Eve receiving promises that mankind will ultimately be saved. In one scene, Adam is shown a vision of the coming of the Messiah who will redeem their offspring, which causes him and Eve to rejoice. This motif – a promise of redemption immediately after the Fall – is mirrored in LDS scripture. In the Book of Moses (Joseph Smith’s retranslation of Genesis), as soon as they leave Eden, Adam and Eve are taught about the Savior’s future Atonement and they praise God for the Fall because it brought the “joy of our redemption” . The idea of felix culpa appears here on the lips of Eve herself. Early apocryphal texts like Life of Adam and Eve or the later “Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan” (a Christian-era apocryphon - gnostic text) similarly emphasize that Adam and Eve found comfort in knowing a Redeemer would come for their posterity.

• Gnostic Christians also rejected orthodox readings of Genesis and often reversed the roles: they saw the material creator (the God of Genesis) as a lesser, evil and ignorant deity, and the Serpent as a revealer of true knowledge. In some Gnostic texts (e.g. the Hypostasis of the Archons or the Apocryphon of John, discovered much later at Nag Hammadi but described in ancient heresiographies), Eve is praised for seeking knowledge and the serpent is lauded as an agent who helped humanity awaken. According to these teachings, eating the fruit was actually a good thing – it broke the bonds of blind obedience and gave Adam and Eve a spark of divine Gnosis. One Gnostic group, the Ophites (so-called “serpent-worshippers”), even venerated the serpent for helping mankind escape primordial ignorance. Early Church Fathers like Irenaeus and Epiphanius had written about Gnostic “heresies,” and their works (which include descriptions of these pro-Eve, pro-serpent doctrines) were available in Latin or via later summaries.

• Esoteric and Folk Traditions: The Burned-over District of upstate New York (where Joseph grew up) was awash in religious enthusiasm and speculation. Some Americans were reading beyond the Bible – delving into freemasonry, folk magic, or occult literature. Esoteric Christian lore (from hermetic or Kabbalistic sources) sometimes seeped into Protestant thought. For instance, the concept of pre-mortal existence of souls and the need for bodies (hinted at in the Zohar passage above) might have been known in certain mystical circles.

• The LDS perspective on Eve’s actions rests on the assumption that Adam and Eve were incapable of having children before the fall. Often this is taught as a result of their innocent state. i.e. they did not have the knowledge to do that - which is why they needed to eat of the tree. If we accept this presupposition, it would effectively setup God as a trickster, one who - in order to be satisfied and obeyed, created a catch-22 situation that required Adam and Eve to fall. This implies a capricious nature to God - who then goes on to punish them for making this decision. This is not the Orthodox belief or in line with the Orthodox mind. What this is congruent with is the Gnostic belief that held that the Creator God was evil. It seems to me that if God had commanded them to reproduce that he would have provided a way or instructions on how to do so. Maybe he did and this was not recorded in scripture, or maybe Adam and Eve only needed to ask. Regardless, they chose to act without the participation of God, which led to the fall.

Different from LDS beliefs, Orthodoxy believes that Adam and Eve were capable of having children before the fall. According to the church Fathers, procreation was intended to be pure, spiritual, and harmonious, free from lust, pain, or labor.

St. John Chrysostom and St. Gregory of Nyssa assert that before the Fall, humanity would have reproduced in a manner not driven by the bodily passions and corruption that characterizes human reproduction after the Fall. St. Maximus the Confessor suggested that reproduction in the pre-Fallen state would have been in full cooperation with God’s will and grace, without the suffering introduced by sin.

After the Fall, procreation becomes entangled with pain, toil, and corruption, a view supported by scripture. Genesis 3:16 (KJV): “Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children…” The fact that childbirth is made painful implies that childbirth itself would have occurred differently before the Fall. The introduction of pain and struggle into childbirth indicates a fundamental change in the nature of human existence and reproduction.

In the Orthodox understanding of the Story, Eve is deceived by the Serpent. Remember that Demon’s are extremely intelligent, with a full knowledge of truth, God and history and they are extremely manipulative and work primarily based on deception. Eve on the other hand is a new creation that hasn’t yet matured. The Lord is still in the process of teaching and nurturing them. Eve doesn’t have a full knowledge of the truth, a knowledge of the history of creation, or knowledge of the fall of the angels and demon’s etc. Thus, the devil deceives while appealing to Eve’s human desires, including a desire to independently become like God, but without him. Also, when the serpent comes to Eve, Adam is not there with her and there is likely a reason why. Adam had lived longer and perhaps had more time to be taught and nurtured by God. The serpent’s temptation aimed directly at replicating his own sin in humanity: sowing doubt about God's goodness and His word ("Did God really say...?"), inciting pride ("your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God"), and encouraging disobedience to God's commandment.

No matter the uniqueness or flattering nature of the view of Eve’s sin in LDS belief. The scriptures support the orthodox view. Genesis says that Eve was deceived by the Serpent, not that she made the best decision from a set of contradictory commandments. Neither does the Serpent say, “then your eyes shall be opened, and you’ll know how to replenish the earth by having children.” NO, Satan says “ then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

This is just my opinion, and at the risk of being more repetitive that I already have been, I think that it would be very cruel for God to setup a catch-22 situation where innocent and naive Eve, in a desire to fulfill God’s commandments, is then doubly punished for doing so. As an Orthodox Christian I reject the implication of this that God is an evil and capricious God who plays games with his children and then punishes them for striving to make the right/wise choice.

In many Western Christian traditions, especially those influenced by Augustine, there is a tendency to associate sexual reproduction itself with the Fall, seeing it as inherently tied to sin. The Orthodox perspective, however, is more nuanced, seeing procreation as good and blessed by God, but corrupted by the Fall, not created by it.

In essence, the Orthodox perspective sees the drama in Eden not as the beginning of evil, but as the extension of a pre-existing spiritual conflict into the newly created human realm. The fall of the angels provides the crucial backdrop for understanding why the temptation occurred and the nature of the tempter. It highlights that evil originates not from God, but from the misuse of free will by created beings (first angels, then humans), motivated by pride and envy.

Secondary Effects

The prevalent view in Western Christian history has been to blame Eve for bringing about our unhappy condition, citing it as proof of woman’s inherent weakness and the justification for her subordination. Harsh words from Church Fathers solidified this view – for example, Tertullian in the 2nd century chastised all women: “You are the devil’s gateway… you are the one who unsealed that forbidden tree and betrayed Adam… On account of your deed, that is, death, even the Son of God had to die.” - In hind sight, this is not good. The secondary effects that women had to endure thanks to this perspective have, over all, contained some things that are unfortunate and regrettable. We would do well to remember that while Eve ate first, Adam also ate, and arguably, it was his act of eating (not Eve’s) that sealed the results of the Fall.

In sharp contrast, LDS doctrine exonerates and even extols Eve. Far from the “devil’s gateway,” she is considered a noble heroine who made a conscious, wise choice. Modern LDS leaders teach that “we honor rather than condemn what [Adam and Eve] did” and that Eve’s choice was “essential to the eternal progression of God’s children.” Rather than a curse upon women, the Fall in LDS thought is seen as a blessing to all humanity, and any “curse” of Eve (Genesis 3:16) is tempered by understanding that it was part of a divine plan, not a perpetual stigma on womankind. This elevated view of Eve arguably gives LDS teachings a more egalitarian tone: Eve and Adam are seen as equal partners in the Fall and in the progress of the human family, both “transgressing” in order to bring life. This is one reason some commentators note that the LDS view of Eve is comparatively progressive. In modern western society this view is much more acceptable to 21st century sentiments.

We should note that the LDS view of Eve is completely in context for Joseph Smith’s day and would not have been a foreign concept to him. The early 1800s in America saw growing ideas about the moral equality of women and men in God’s eyes. While not exactly a feminist era, there was a reconsideration of Eve’s legacy. For instance, Methodist and other revivalist preachers, focusing on personal salvation for all, tended not to dwell on Eve’s culpability, unlike earlier fire-and-brimstone sermons of the past. Joseph Smith’s own teachings would later elevate the status of women in certain theological ways (e.g. a Mother in Heaven, temple marriage as a partnership, etc.). His more charitable view of Eve as “a companion equal and necessary” to Adam resonates with an American religious ethos at that time that was gradually moving away from seeing women as inherently more culpable. His tendency towards views of equality and egalitarianism are credits to his character. Also, Joseph Smith seems to have had support in his approach to this. Parley P. Pratt (1840s), explicitly condemned the idea that “the sin of Eve” makes all women inferior; he wrote that through the Restoration, “we no longer believe that the female was designed to be a ‘tool of the devil’ as some of the [apostate] (i.e. roman catholic) churches teach.” While Pratt’s statement comes a bit later, it reflects how LDS thought was consciously distancing itself from the old misogynistic tropes attached to Eve.

When I was LDS, I often viewed the LDS view of Eve as superior in that it would not have negative secondary effects on women, unlike the mainstream Christian view. Which I think everyone can agree is a good thing.

However, I have to wonder. What are we more concerned with? A correct view of God and creation that allows you to eventually come to communion with him? Or a social-justice oriented feminist view of Eve that while not further propagating any harmful perspectives can do absolutely nothing to erase the historic negative impacts of the traditional view of Eve that extends back into Christianity’s roots in Judaism.

I believe if we are looking at the big picture, the most important thing is to make sure that we have a correct view of God and the Fall so that we can correctly understand Him and our role and ultimate destiny in creation.

Closing Thoughts

I apologize for wading back into a sore spot and a divisive topic, but the necessity of this article has brought these thoughts back to my mind. I continue to have discussions with Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, about their assertions about being Christian. It typically goes like this:

• LDS: The name of Jesus is in the name of our Church.

• My response: That doesn’t mean anything. How does that make you Christian? Is naming your organization after someone all it takes to be that religion?

• LDS: You don’t understand, you don’t know what we believe. We believe A.B.C., X,Y.Z about Jesus.

• My response: I was mormon for almost 50 years, I’m a return missionary, married and sealed in the Temple, have two kids who went on missions, graduated from BYU, also sealed in the Temple. Also taught primary, Sunday school, and served in the Elder’s quorum and bishopric. I also, have formal educational training in religious studies and mormonism specifically. I know very very well what you believe. I fully understand, and more importantly, I fully understand why you are making these assertions.

• Still me: Without trying to be harsh, What *you* don’t understand is what it actually means to be Christian and what it means to live life as a Christian, and until you know and understand the Christian lived experience, you’ll never understand why I, or other Christians say that LDS are not christian. It’s one thing to assert that you are, it’s another to actually know what your assertion means.

• LDS response: Sigh, well why aren’t we Christians then?

• My response: To re-articulate the same information from my previous article. (Meanwhile, I’m thinking, ‘that’s the wrong question to ask at this point in the discussion…. it’s clear that nothing I said sunk in.’)

Unpacking Controversy: Are LDS Christian?

TLDR

• It’s not enough to say you believe in Christ. All Christians believe in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses - it doesn’t make us Jewish.

• We don’t have a mutually intelligible vocabulary. As soon as I start talking about ecclesiology, christology, eschatology, soteriology, the average mormon has no idea what I’m talking about. Even if I don’t use theological terms. If I use the word eucharist, or the term real presence, Mormon’s are still lost and don’t understand what I’m talking about, or why it matters.

• We have very very different ecclesiologies, christologies and soteriologies.

• Our understanding of who Christ is and why he came and the father’s plan of salvation is different as are our understandings of very basic foundational religious stories, their meanings, and the frameworks they create, like the Garden of Eden. I think the fact that I needed to create this article and that it’s as long as it is, goes to illustrate the wide divide in understanding between mormonism and Christianity at a foundational level. The fact that I had to explain in detail the natures of Angels and Demons, because LDS don’t even have this shared understanding, is illustrative.

• Our understanding of who God is is radically different. While there may be some superficial ontological similarities between the Trinity and the GodHead, like the three hypostases vs personages of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that’s where the similarities end. What we believe about who they are, what they are made of, their natures, their functions, etc. is very different.

If we don’t have a shared culture, shared language or shared understanding of foundational stories, and our understanding of God and Jesus, who they are and their natures, are so different, how can anyone reasonably claim that we are part of the same religion?

Anyways, that’s as divisive as I want to be here. The entire goal of this publication is to bring LDS/Mormon’s closer to an understanding of Orthodoxy and what Christianity is and means; but I do get tired of having the same discussion with the same arguments and talking points, over and over again.

1. Arise, O God, Chapter 2 07:49 timecode in audiobook, by Fr. Andre Stephen Damick.

2. Some religious studies scholars have pointed out that at the time the Genesis account was composed, that Snake worshipping cults were prevalent. In these snakes cults, snakes were associated with fertility, healing and wisdom. (You can see this in the depiction of the exodus story, the raising of the Bronze serpent, and the staff of Moses being turning into a snake, devouring the snakes of the egyptian sorcerers.) The inclusion of snake imagery in this story can be seen as an attempt by the jewish religious authorities to undermine and delegitimize these snake cults. Their portrayal in this story can be seen as a demonization of the snake cults. (pun intended.)