Is The Garden of Eden a Real Place

 

Garden of Eden a Real Place

It was a perfect paradise, but because of the disobedience of man, humanity lost access to the Garden of Eden forever.

 But was it a real place, and if so where is it today? Even those individuals who might not know anything about Christianity or the Bible are typically aware of the Garden of Eden.

 A perfect place without evil, death, or pain, whose vast gardens were full of rich, always ripe fruits and the most beautiful flowers on all the earth.

 In essence, the Garden of Eden is paradise, and often used symbolically to represent perfect bliss.

But humanity messed things up by.

.

.

 Well, being human.

 You're probably familiar with the story of the apple, and how Eve- the first woman- was tempted to pluck an apple from the tree of knowledge at the heart of the Garden of Eden and thus disobeyed God.

 After pressuring Adam  to also eat the apple, both Adam and Eve  were cursed to leave the perfect garden of  Eden and wander the earth for the rest of their  lives, where they would have to toil with blood,  sweat, and tears to make a living  for themselves out of the hard,  unforgiving ground.

 And that's pretty much been humanity's state for thousands of years.

But could there be more to the story than just myth? Interestingly, the Bible actually records the Garden of Eden as not a spiritual place, but a very real, physical space that's definitely located somewhere on our planet.

 In Genesis 2:  8-14, the Bible states: The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden.

 .

 .

 .

 Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads.

 The name of the first is Piston.

 .

 .

 .

 The name of the second river is Gihon.

 .

 .

 .

 The name of the third river is Hidaka [Tigris].

  ;.

 .

 .

 The fourth river is the Euphrates.

The Genesis narrative clearly states that a single river went through the holy garden, and when it exited it turned into four rivers.

  Two of those rivers are Piston and Gihon, rivers that we don't recognize today.

 But two of them are well known to us- Hidaka, better known as the Tigris, and the Euphrates.

 Both of these rivers run through ancient Mesopotamia, and straight through the modern day nation of Iraq.

 The two rivers even share the same headwaters in the area around Mt. Ararat- which means that finding the Garden of Eden should be as simple as finding the other two rivers and seeing where they intersect the two known rivers.

But there's a problem, because the Piston and Gihon rivers are unknown to us, and no other rivers flow out of the same headwaters as the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.

 Famous French reformer John Calvin made note of the difficulties in using known geography to locate the Garden of Eden, writing the following: Many think that Psion and Gihon are the Ganges and the Nile; the error, however, of these men is abundantly refuted by the distance of the positions of these rivers.

  Persons do not want who fly across even to the Danube; as if indeed the habitation of one man stretched itself from the most remote part of Asia to the extremity of Europe.

  But since many other celebrated rivers flow by the region of which we are speaking, there is greater probability in the opinion of those who believe that two of these rivers are pointed out, although their names are now obsolete.

 Be this as it may, the difficulty is not yet solved.

  For Moses divides the one river which flowed by the garden into four heads.

 Yet it appears that the fountains of the Euphrates and the Tigris were far distant from each other.

A popular belief at the time of John Calvin was that the other two rivers which poured out of the Garden of Eden were the mighty Ganges and Nile rivers, two of the largest and most important rivers in the world then and today.

 But Calvin notes the difficulty in this being true, as obviously the rivers are very far apart from each other, and he notes that one man in the ancient world surely couldn't have habituated on both the Nile and Ganges- the distance again is simply far too great.

Calvin then supposes what others have- that the names of the rivers have been lost to us and that the Piston and Gihon are names for rivers that we know today by different names.

 This isn't entirely implausible; as the Fertile Crescent was known for being a location of much strife in ancient times- the names of even two important rivers being wiped out from the cultural record is not impossible.

  But Calvin makes a final observation, that even if this were true, and though the Tigris and Euphrates share the same headwaters, they simply don't flow from the exact same source- a singular, unified river which splits into four.

What we have now is three missing rivers, because don't forget- the river that flowed through Eden is what split into four to create the other four rivers.

And yet the author of Genesis is insistent that Eden was a real, geographical place, and not a symbol or mythological location.

Creationists and biblical literalists have an answer for the missing rivers:  they were destroyed by flooding.

 Rather, by one specific flood: Noah's flood.

 In the Bible, the world grows so wicked that God decides to wipe the slate clean.

 He finds Noah and his  family to be the only faithful people left on the  face of the earth- which to be fair at the time  would only have been a few tens of thousands  of people.

 Thus to ensure humanity survives,  he orders Noah to build a massive ark that can  hold him and his family along with two of every  land species, male and female of course.

 The  rain starts to pour- which confuses people  because until that point there had been  no rain- and eventually everything floods  leaving only Noah and his boat full of animals  to survive and repopulate the earth.

 The bible is clear that the flood was so bad that it covered even the tops of the mountains up.

There are obviously a whole host of problems with this account- namely that it would be impossible to house and feed 2 of every land species for over a year in one boat.

 Also, it would be impossible to even build that boat without the assistance of modern technology- though Noah did build for years.

 The material cost alone though  would have made it necessary for Noah to be the  Jeff Bezos of his day, though to be fair the flood  account doesn't mention if Noah was rich or not.

Then there are the more scientific problems.

  Flooding the entire earth so that even the tops of the mountains would be below sea level is simply impossible.

 All that water would have had to go somewhere after the flood, and we're talking about incredible, mind-boggling amounts of water.

 At the very least we should see that water locked up in massive glaciers dozens of miles tall in the poles, but we don't.

 If Noah's ark had also been coasting  on water above mountain top high he would have  had to deal with a thinner atmosphere- though we  suppose it’s possible the atmosphere would have  been compressed by the rising floodwaters to  perhaps mitigate some of the altitude sickness  which would be plaguing Noah and his animals.

Perhaps most importantly of all though is the fact that there's simply zero evidence for a global flood- no matter what Ken Ham (https://content.Swncdn.com/zcast/oneplace/host-images/answers-in-genesis/640x480.jpg) and his cherry-picked science like to say.

  But it might surprise you to learn that evidence for a regional flood is very much present, and one of staggering scale.

The flood of Genesis is repeated across other ancient literature, including famously in the epic of Gilgamesh, leading to cries of plagiarism from critics.

 This would be a stretch for sure, as the two works bear nothing more than superficial similarities- but both could very well be reporting on a very real event, just not in quite the scale described in either work.

Sediment deposits found across Iraq indicate that the region was prone to some massive flooding in the past.

 One sediment deposit in southeastern Iraq is a whopping 3 meters thick, with 2.4 meter deposits to the southeast of Baghdad.

  Those deposits were dated to about 2900 BC, nearly 1500 years before Genesis was officially put down on paper.

 The area however was already home to the descendants of those early scribes, and they would definitely have witnessed floods devastating enough to wash away entire villages, and wide enough to cover hundreds of square miles.

Massive floods can indeed rewrite the geography of the earth; we have ample evidence of large-scale catastrophic flooding erasing river systems from existence or diverting the flow of ancient rivers.

 But the problem once more becomes with where the floods took place.

 Massive regional flooding in the Mesopotamian valley wouldn't have been able to reach to the mountains where the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates lay- that would have required truly mythical levels of flooding.

 Without being able to extend that far, no amount of flooding could have erased our two missing rivers from existence.

Climate change could have possibly dried up these two ancient rivers, but again modern geography doesn't show any evidence of major rivers linking up with a shared source in the area.

 The Tigris and Euphrates could possibly have shared a source in the past, but even this is highly unlikely given the terrain and course of the two rivers today.

 Even then, the original river which fed the four rivers that broke off “like the spokes of a wheel” is also missing from both geology and history - no people from the area have ever reported any such river in the terrain.

It could be argued then that the Garden of Eden exists 'spiritually', perhaps just out of phase with the real world and that's why no physical evidence of its location can actually be found.

 However, the ancient writers were adamant that this was a real location- though it might be best not to find it today even if we could, given that God very famously set a flaming sword and a troupe of angels to guard its entrance.

The most likely answer though is the simplest:  it was myth.

 The Genesis account is not meant to be taken literally and was simply a mythologized account of the creation of man, not just an origin story but a way for early man to explore some truths about God himself and his relationship with us.

 We see the  same in the poetic work of the Book of Job,  itself not a historical account but  rather a poetic exploration into  some of the most difficult aspects of life,  spirituality, and the nature of good and evil.

What might surprise you is that this is not a new revelation- Christians throughout history have always believed that Genesis was not history, but enlightened mythology that was supposed to be studied for its spiritual truths, not its historical accuracy.

 Famed Christian philosopher William Lane Craig argues that Genesis should be considered 'myth-history', as it contains accurate historical details alongside what are obvious mythological passages.

 This view fits perfectly into the way that ancient man understood, and spoke about his world, combining real history with mythological flourishes woven together into a single narrative.

What's curious- or sad- about Genesis is that its ancient audience understood better what parts was myth and what parts weren't compared to a modern audience.

 As Dr. Craig points out, the ancient Jews lived and died by agriculture, which meant they understood things like the water cycle extremely well as their lives literally depended on it.

 Genesis claims that before the flood the earth was watered by springs from beneath it, as no rain had ever fallen until the fateful day that God flooded the earth.

 But an ancient, farming audience would have understood this to be pure myth due to their knowledge of the water cycle.

Meanwhile, modern creationists like Ken Ham try to twist science into making something work that even the ancients knew was never meant to be taken as physical fact.

 This likely is also true about the Garden of Eden, as man did not descend from two single individuals but rather evolved from the great apes.

So if you're looking for the Garden of Eden today,  it exists only as a symbol of what man loses  every time he disobeys God's commands- your  garden of Eden is the peace you could enjoy  if you followed God’s will such as being  kind to those who hate you, or practicing  restraint against your passionate impulses.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post