Where should the new Garden of Eden be located? The Garden Project is built on the philosophical foundation of the Urantia Book and in it we are told that on most worlds, the Garden site is selected by the Planetary Prince. The UB says:
"These Gardens of Eden are so named in honor of Edentia, the constellation capital, and because they are patterned after the botanic grandeur of the headquarters world of the Most High Fathers. Such garden homes are usually located in a secluded section and in a near-tropic zone." Paper 51:3:2
The Urantia Book states that when Van and Amadon, who helped build the original Garden for Adam and Eve, set out with their followers to select a site they chose a Mediterranean peninsula that had a salubrious climate and an equable temperature. We are informed that water was plentiful from river tributaries and the site was probably the most beautiful spot of its kind in all the world. The location lent itself to becoming a paradise of botanic expression and had geographic features which provided a natural defense.
The Garden Council has recently launched a site selection initiative which solicits the input and suggestions of interested Urantia Book readers across the country and encourages the participation of affiliated organizations. Individuals, groups, and organizations will be invited to submit proposed sites for the new Garden and a potential Urantia center to the Garden Council in the late fall of 2010 for inclusion in an internet-based survey. The survey will include pictures and information about each property in a digital format and be widely distributed to Urantia Book readers to ascertain their preferences and top choices. The Garden Council will compile the data in a report, visit the top sites selected, and collaborate with Urantia University in convening an exploratory meeting in the Denver area with other UB-affiliated organizations on May 21, 2011.
Paticipants will strive to agree on a Garden site which reflects the preferences of the community and meets the needs of multiple groups for a Urantia center. If no agreement can be reached by consensus, the Garden Council will retain the right to consider survey results and the perspectives of other orgnaizations and make a final decision about where to locate the Garden. The site selected will be announced at a Garden presentation at IC'11. Throughout the process, we will seek the Father's will, look for signs of divine leading, and trust that the Spirit of Truth will lead the way. Click here to see a timeline for the site selection process, and submit a site proposal here
The Garden Council offers the following Site Selection Criteria for consideration:
Garden Site Selection Criteria
A Central Facility:
Most recently the council has been discussing the feasibility of partnering with another entity to secure and share a facility. This center would obviously need to meet the combined needs for the various aspects of the Garden project, and those of whichever entity or entities we partner with. Advantages of such a central facility would be that initial cost, development, and sustenance would be shared. It would provide a place to locate the Garden project and to begin whatever fundraising and income generating endeavors we decide on. With any partnership comes the difficulty of shared governance and shared use of facilities. These would be among the disadvantages of such a partnership.
Any number of large tracts of land which would meet the long range needs of the Garden Project. Parcels that have been identified either require extensive, expensive development, or have a developed infrastructure but a very high initial cost. Even these would require long term financial and personal commitment for sustainable development. To own 2000 acres which include all the necessities for short and long term development of the garden would be nearly ideal. Such a location with extensive, existing infrastructure would be even better. The high cost of such a place has been mentioned. Without existing buildings and some infrastructure, the cost in dollars and human effort would be truly daunting.
Criteria: As a minimum, this tract of land should have areas suitable for private residences, communal housing, the facilities discussed above, green belt, woodland, live water, pastureland, and tillable land. At least some existing residences and infrastructure would also be necessary, with suitability for one or more types of alternative energy, potential for expansion, etc.
This is an idea that has recently been discussed. Many intentional communities already exist. Some are more or less compatible with the core values of the Garden Project. Some have extensive experience with sustainable living and have already developed a functional infrastructure. In such communities, the expense of securing and developing residential and community property would be minimized. This idea has many advantages. To integrate with an existing community would allow individual purchase of land or residences without the purchase of a huge tract of land. Most infrastructure would already be in place. Rules and conventions would be somewhat defined. The purchase of a large house or a commercial building could be the starting point. As needed, other facilities, farmland, etc. could be purchased or constructed. Obvious disadvantages of this path in some ways parallel that of a partnership. Control and change would have to be negotiated with other entities and/or the community nearby.