Where was Eden, and does it matter?

[Bandit]

i believe eden was a real place. & since they cannot find much in the way of anyone or anything from the line of the righteous seed, HA! , i believe it even more.

Abogado del Diablo

My view is that the "Garden of Eden" (like the "Kingdom of God" in the Gospel of Thomas) is all around us (or perhaps more appropriately, in us), but people don't see or experience it.

i like this too, except for i think we can experience it when we believe & draw really really close to God, because the Kingdom of God is not of this world.
i still think eden was a real place, but possibly in a different dimension than what we will ever know while in the flesh.

[queenofsheba]

Here are some hypotheses:

1 Eden has never existed, it's meant symbolically. True, but boring.
2 Eden was in Mesopotamia, around the Tigris. A literal reading of the Bible seems to confirm this. It also says that Adam and Eve were expelled to the east. Ur is east of the Tigris.
3 Eden was in East Africa, were the first humans lived. After Eve ate from the forbidden fruit, god made the paradise disappear. This fits: the African rain forest went originally to Ethiopia. Agriculture was invented after the rain forest disappeared.
4 Eden was in Madagascar, also east Africa. There is still a lot of fauna and flora that only exists in Madagascar (island east of Africa). The two forbidden trees were two baobabs that you can still find there. They look like two lovers. Here's a photo of the Tree of Life and the Tree of knowledge:
http://cf.geocities.com/traces_dexil...s/amoureux.jpg

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by queenofsheba

Here are some hypotheses:

1 Eden has never existed, it's meant symbolically. True, but boring.
2 Eden was in Mesopotamia, around the Tigris. A literal reading of the Bible seems to confirm this. It also says that Adam and Eve were expelled to the east. Ur is east of the Tigris.
3 Eden was in East Africa, were the first humans lived. After Eve ate from the forbidden fruit, god made the paradise disappear. This fits: the African rain forest went originally to Ethiopia. Agriculture was invented after the rain forest disappeared.
4 Eden was in Madagascar, also east Africa. There is still a lot of fauna and flora that only exists in Madagascar (island east of Africa). The two forbidden trees were two baobabs that you can still find there. They look like two lovers. Here's a photo of the Tree of Life and the Tree of knowledge:
http://cf.geocities.com/traces_dexil...s/amoureux.jpg

Except that the Bible describes the four rivers converging. Tigris, Euphrates, being two of them. Question, what of the other two? Answer: now dried up, however one can see where they were when they did run, through satellite photos. The four points of the river converge in the middle east. Pictures even show that the Euphrates has moved from its original river bed by about two miles.

Nogodnomaster assumed similar ideas, however topagraphical pictures don't lie (unless retouched).

something to think about.

v/r

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Except that the Bible describes the four rivers converging. Tigris, Euphrates, being two of them. Question, what of the other two? Answer: now dried up, however one can see where they were when they did run, through satellite photos. The four points of the river converge in the middle east. Pictures even show that the Euphrates has moved from its original river bed by about two miles.

Nogodnomaster assumed similar ideas, however topagraphical pictures don't lie (unless retouched).

something to think about.

v/r

Q

The 4 rivers are anchronistic. They would not be part of the original text. How could there had been those 4 rivers around Eden followed by a world wide flood which destroyed the earth's topography? Or was there no flood which covered mountains and moved boulders?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

The 4 rivers are anchronistic. They would not be part of the original text. How could there had been those 4 rivers around Eden followed by a world wide flood which destroyed the earth's topography? Or was there no flood which covered mountains and moved boulders?

Where would you get the idea that a flood would destroy completely the earth's topography? The Pacific Islands are "mountain tops" sticking out of the water, for example. The mountain's hidden below are up to six miles high, or more, and they are being "moved" by the water.

A gulch might disappear because it is mostly sand and light earth, but a river bed cut into stone is not going to erode away in less than five thousand years. It might be covered with sand and light earth, however that can be easily filtered out with proper photographic equipment...it is done every day. Sonar and ground radar paints pictures of what can't be seen with the eye. Doesn't mean it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The San Andreas fault can't be seen by the eye either...until it is viewed from space. The four river beds are still there, and still linked to eachother at a single point in the Middle East.

The "anchronistic" concept, doesn't hold water.

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Where would you get the idea that a flood would destroy completely the earth's topography? The Pacific Islands are "mountain tops" sticking out of the water, for example. The mountain's hidden below are up to six miles high, or more, and they are being "moved" by the water.

A gulch might disappear because it is mostly sand and light earth, but a river bed cut into stone is not going to erode away in less than five thousand years. It might be covered with sand and light earth, however that can be easily filtered out with proper photographic equipment...it is done every day. Sonar and ground radar paints pictures of what can't be seen with the eye. Doesn't mean it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The San Andreas fault can't be seen by the eye either...until it is viewed from space. The four river beds are still there, and still linked to eachother at a single point in the Middle East.

The "anchronistic" concept, doesn't hold water.

Q

I got the idea from Creationist who claimed the flood formed the Grand Canyon and created mountains. Either is did or it didn't. You can't have it both ways.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

I got the idea from Creationist who claimed the flood formed the Grand Canyon and created mountains. Either is did or it didn't. You can't have it both ways.

Nothing wrong with the "creationist or Evolutionist" concept. Time is the issue. How much time, and the concept of time "biblically speaking" is the issue.

6 days, the earth is six billion years old. Man was made at the end of the six days? Makes sense. Man is not that old. Even if it was decided that he was one, two, or three million years in the making, that is nothing in the time of 6 billion years.

As for dust? Everything is made from dust...EVERYTHING.

No conflict there.

Water, is a very powerful medium. Water, can cut steel, 2 feet thick, in less than a second. The trick is that it has to be "RUSHING WATER" (pressurized and tightly focused or moving at great speeds in large quantities). Super heated steam can do the same thing.

The mountains being created by water, that is a probability (along with magma under pressure as well). If water was released from below the surface of the tectonic plates at certain faults, the result could be the shifting of said plates, causing one to jamb against another and "ride" over the top of it. The higher the mountain range, and the more jagged its surfaces suggests the "younger" that range is (errosion has not taken affect yet). the last tsunami in Asia, bears such actions, only in minor proportions). Old Faithful in Yellow Stone National Park is a miniature example of water under pressure cutting a path through stone, and being released from below the surface of the earth.

The monsoon in India last week is a small example of how rain and winds can kill everything around in short order.

Q

[queenofsheba]

Genesis says the four rivers had a common well, but the Tigris and the Euphrat don't have a common well.

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by queenofsheba

Genesis says the four rivers had a common well, but the Tigris and the Euphrat don't have a common well.

Always fighting poorly thought out theories with facts. Not very Christian of you. Cosmically the four rivers most likely represented the Milky Way at the four cardinal points.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

Always fighting poorly thought out theories with facts. Not very Christian of you. Cosmically the four rivers most likely represented the Milky Way at the four cardinal points.

Yes NG, facts do tend to get in the way of speculation...such a damned nuisance those facts. Especially when they support such "poorly thought out theories".

Queenofsheba, I don't know if you consider this of merit, but I'll present it anyway. below the surface of the desert where these "four" rivers run, is a common water table. All four rivers "spring" from this well, so to speak. That is to say their source of water is the same. Granted the water also comes from run off from the hills. Just a thought.

v/r

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Yes NG, facts do tend to get in the way of speculation...such a damned nuisance those facts. Especially when they support such "poorly thought out theories".

Queenofsheba, I don't know if you consider this of merit, but I'll present it anyway. below the surface of the desert where these "four" rivers run, is a common water table. All four rivers "spring" from this well, so to speak. That is to say their source of water is the same. Granted the water also comes from run off from the hills. Just a thought.

v/r

Q

We are really reaching on this one, but I'll give you points for originallity.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

We are really reaching on this one, but I'll give you points for originallity.

Thanks but I wasn't reaching for anything. I stated a fact. And used it to present what I speculate might be.

I never said anything was cut in stone...

...except for certain riverbeds.

v/r

Q

[pohaikawahine]

I believe that Eden is within us or at least a world that exists in the same space as our world but on a different frequency. And yes I believe it matters because it is that place of paradise that we all seek which is suppose to exist in the "golden age". It is a world that is possible and a world in which we live in balance with each other and with our universe. That place called Eden is also called the promise land, the garden of babylon, paradise, the holy of holies .... all the same place, just different names. The process to reach this place is spelled out in many ancient texts, at least that is how I see it, but it is always meanings within meanings. One of my favorite is a Greek myth about the dead crossing the river Styx trying to reach paradise on the other side. Again, look at the human body with arms stretched out parallel to the ground on both sides .... the arms represent the "river Styx" and to cross over is from the lower world of matter (the four energy centers below the neck) to the world of spirit (the three energy centers above the neck) or the place of paradise. Those trying to cross in a boat are fearful because the river is covered with flames and there are hurricane like winds blowing and thunder storms. The other side is guarded by a three headed beast called Cerberus and he is fearsome. The metaphor is that the flames and winds represent our human emotions and old baggage that we must release to enter paradise. The three headed beast is none othe than the three hemispheres of the brain. In the end all it takes is some honey and poppyseed cake to calm Cerberus. The brain released chemicals that begin the process of bridging the hemispheres .... one of those chemicals is melatonine which is a milk like substance and the other (forgot the name) is a honey colored substance (the land of milk and honey) .... when we move the spiralling energy into the center of the brain we begin the process of visions or revelations that allow us to cross over or pass over into the world of spirit or paradise or eden. This center of the brain is also called the bridal chamber because it is covered by the veil over the brain (the arachnoid) and is the sacred place where the male and female energies (that spiralling energy) merge. It is also called the cave in some traditions and is located in the center of the brain or on the mountaintop. I'm beginning to sound like a broken record in my postings and I apologize, but all these discussions and threads keep taking me back to the same place. I believe that everything is linked .... there are many paths to the mountaintop .... but when we get there we see the same moon. It is like the passing of the year .... the winter and time of darkness when things go underground to be reborn in the spring .... and the summer the time of light when things emerge in the sunlight. In Hawaii we call it the time of PO (thetime of the gods) and the time of AO (the time of man) .... winter and summer, two halves ....the dark and the light ..... like the year itself we must pass through one to enter the other. In the ancient hawaiian tradition the top of the mountain is called "wao akua" the "forest of the gods" because it is a place so dense and is seldom penetrated by man .... but when it is penetrated one finds Eden or Paradise. When we each discover that this place exists within us and has been with us all along, we will begin to change our world simply because we have changed our minds. he hawai'i au, pohaikawahine

[littlemissattitude]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

The Chicago, the Snake and the Missouri Rivers dumping into the Mississippi...I can see that. But what is the fourth river?

v/r

Q

Sorry it took me so long to get back to this.

I honestly don't know that they feel constrained to figure out the four rivers description. I can't say that I have ever heard it discussed, although it could well be that there is an answer. I don't have access to the books that might answer the question. The only publication I can think of off-hand that might discuss it and might be in a public library is "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie, but that isn't even official LDS doctrine, despite the title of the book. I do know of one place I can ask, but I can't guarantee I'll get an answer there.

[Chalice]

The Biblical Text tells us that out of Eden went a river head that eventually turned into 4 rivers: The Euphrates, River Pison, which completely goes around the land of Havilah where there is gold, and the River Gihon, which goes around the "whole land of ethiopia. The last River, Hiddekel goes east toward Assyria. the Euphrates river originates in a place on my Biblical map called "Togarmah" which looks to be beneath the caucausus mountains, so I would say that if the river head has not changed in 5000 years, you are looking at Eden being located somewhere between the black and the caspian sea. I think this may be right as the description of eden is full of trees and rivers and fountains and fruit and animals - things that would not survive further south in the desert. Eden must have been a mountainous, cool and beautiful place that was NE of Israel. That does not surprise me, because Abraham the patriarch was not from Israel either, but came from "the Land of Ur, in Chaldea", i.e. modern day, northern Iraq. National Geographic had an issue recently (last 2-3 years) dedicated to Abraham's birthplace, and had photos of his aledged birth place and so forth, very deserty. He headed into Israel on God's call. This area was directly beneath where my location of Eden must have been. Good luck for your web sight.