DiscussMormonism.com

It is perhaps significant the Lord named this site because of a future event—the pre-millennial assembly of Adam and his faithful descendants prior to the second coming of Christ. It has generally been presumed that "Spring Hill," Missouri is thus the Adam-ondi-Ahman of Adam's mortal meeting with his posterity and the pre-millennial visit, which is certainly possible.

An alternate interpretation would be the Lord has given the Adam-ondi-Ahman name to a second site (i.e., at Spring Hill , Missouri ) in memorial of the first great meeting of the whole righteous human race.

It it Church Doctrine that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri?

Although we have no contemporaneous record of Joseph Smith teaching explicitly that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri , that reading is consistent with LDS scripture, and there is substantial later testimony from Joseph's associates that he did teach such an idea.

The early Saints' view of a Garden of Eden "local" to them has its parallels in other religious traditions.

The Garden of Eden or the primordial paradise of the race is often seen as the "center of the world," or the cosmic point around which all creation turns (sometimes called an axis mundi or umbilicum mundi —the "navel" of the world).

cinepro wrote:In addition to Cumorah Uno and Cumorah Dos, it looks like there may also be two "Adam-Ondhi-Ahmans".

It is perhaps significant the Lord named this site because of a future event—the pre-millennial assembly of Adam and his faithful descendants prior to the second coming of Christ. It has generally been presumed that "Spring Hill," Missouri is thus the Adam-ondi-Ahman of Adam's mortal meeting with his posterity and the pre-millennial visit, which is certainly possible.

An alternate interpretation would be the Lord has given the Adam-ondi-Ahman name to a second site (i.e., at Spring Hill , Missouri ) in memorial of the first great meeting of the whole righteous human race.

It it Church Doctrine that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri?

Without a doubt, I think the "two different places with the same name used interchangeably" is my favorite apologetic argument.

John Larsen wrote:It seems to me that there is hardly anything in Mormonism that can be accepted with a straight forward, common sense reading. I have been meaning to make a collection of all of the words and concepts that you have to redefine and twist to make it it all work. Hinckley took a lot of criticism for his "I don't know that we teach that" but he is actually quite right--it is extremely hard to figure out just what the Church teaches and believes outside of obedience.

cinepro wrote:The funny thing is to think of what Joseph's reaction might have been had someone been around back then to actually propose these theories:

"Brother Joseph, it is possible that the Hill Cumorah you got the plates from is actually a different Hill Cumorah than the one mentioned in the Book of Mormon, and that the Book of Mormon events were confined primarily to Central America?"

"Brother Joseph, when you identified that spot in Missouri as "Adam-Ondhi-Ahman is it possible that you were just pointing out a spot of future gathering and giving it the same name as a spot in the middle east used anciently by Adam for a similar purpose?"

Saturday morning, 12th [December 1835] At home. Spent the fore noon in reading. At about 12 o'clock a number of young person[s] called to see the Egyptian records. I requested my Scribe to ex[h]ibit them. He did so. One of the young ladies who had been examining them was asked if they had the appearance of Antiquity. She observed with an air of contempt that they did not.

On hearing this I was surprised at the ignorance she displayed and I observed to her that she was an anomaly in creation for all the wise and learned that had ever examined them without hesitation pronounced them antient. I further remarked that it was downright wickedness, ignorance, bigotry, and superstition that caused her to make the remark and that I would put it on record. I have done so because it is a fair sample of the prevailing spirit of the times showing that the victims of priestcraft and superstition would not believe though one should rise from the dead.

Is it Church Doctrine that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri?

bcspace wrote:

Is it Church Doctrine that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri?

It is.. However, the verses given in support do not even imply such a thing so it seems to be by inference only, not revelation.

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Far West, Missouri, July 8, 1838, concerning the immediate duties of William Marks, Newel K. Whitney, and Oliver Granger. HC 3: 45–46.

It adds the important information that the garden was located on what is now the North American continent

bcspace wrote:My question exactly. There does not seem to be any direct revelation supporting this doctrine. Just some sort of implicative assumption.