Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Re: [b-hebrew] Re: Eden and Flood

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: <david.kimbrough AT charter.net>
  • To: Brian Roberts <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>, "Walter R. Mattfeld" <mattfeld12 AT charter.net>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: Re: [b-hebrew] Re: Eden and Flood
  • Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 3:35:38 +0000

Well that was interesting.

A few emails back, someone asked where the Land of Nod
(wandering) might be. I emailed and suggested that since
Nod was east of Eden. If we know where Eden was, we know
about where Nod was.

In an other email I suggested that whoever wrote Genesis
and 2 Kings (how many authors that might be is not
important) seemed to think Eden was northwest of
Mesopotamia. As a result, Nod might be in northern
Mesopotamia or the Median highlands.

I took a strictly *sola scriptura* approach, i.e. only from
what the Bible says. I thought this approach would appeal
to folks on this list who seem to favor more traditional
views of exegesis. Imagine my surprise at some of the
responses.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say Noah and his sons named
the four rivers of Genesis 2. In fact ?nahar? does not
even occur in Genesis 6 ? 9. Furthermore, Genesis is
surprising explicit, locating Eden at the headwaters
(roshim) of four rivers, including the Euphrates and
Tigris. These two rivers actually have their headwaters
near to each other in the highlands of southern Turkey, in
the land of the Medes. It is actually unique in the world
for two large rivers to have their headwaters so close
together, flow opposite directions for hundreds of miles,
and then come together again at their delta.

The Bible also says nothing of the world?s features being
unrecognizablely changed by the flood. Indeed there are
many features identified in Genesis 2 were observable after
the flood (i.e. later in the Bible) and even today. The
Euphrates and Tigris rivers are listed before and after the
flood (visible even today). The land of Cush (kw#) is
mentioned several times after the flood. Asshur is
likewise mentioned before and after the flood. *Indeed,
Eden itself is mentioned twice after the flood, in 2nd
Kings (as noted before) and Ez 27.* A literal and
conservative reading of the OT would suggest that there was
no change in the features of the Earth.

Stepping outside of the realm of exegesis, mountains,
hills, rivers, shorelines, and valleys are actually pretty
durable creations. Water flow can change geological
features, not doubt about that. While presumably the
amount of rainfall in those 40 days and nights was
unprecedented, once a geological feature is submerged,
erosion is actually much slower than in the air. Wind is
a major source of erosion. None of that underwater.
Erosion caused by rain and freezing would not be a
happening either.



> From: Brian Roberts <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>
> Date: 2004/06/13 Sun AM 12:30:23 GMT
> To: "Walter R. Mattfeld" <mattfeld12 AT charter.net>
> CC: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Re: Eden and Flood
>
>
> On Saturday, June 12, 2004, at 04:08 PM, Walter R.
Mattfeld wrote:
>
> > As Karl has so rightly pointed out, the notion that
Eden could never be
> > found because the Flood had so destroyed and changed
the landscape was
> > embraced by a number of Renaissance scholars.
> >
> > Of interest, though is a PhD dissertation in 1696 by
Beck at the
> > University
> > of Jena, in Germany (written in Latin, the
international "scholarly
> > language
> > of his day"). He argued that Eden could be found
despite the Flood. How
> > he
> > arrived at this notion is quite interesting. He argued
that one of the
> > lands
> > mentioned in the Edenic account was called Havilah and
it was near the
> > river
> > Gihon. Find Havilah and your on your way to finding
Eden, or so he
> > argued.
> > He "noted" that a man named Havilah appeared in Genesis
10:29, a
> > descendant
> > of Shem. He suggested that _perhaps_ the land of
Havilah was "named
> > after
> > this man" -if this hunch was correct- then Eden's
location could be
> > determined in a post-flood world, as Havilah was born
AFTER the Flood.
> >
> > He noted that Havilah's brother's were Sheba and Ophir.
He reckoned
> > Sheba to
> > be Classical Greek Saba in the Yemen (as so preserved
in Classical Roman
> > Geographical sources) and thus suggested Havilah was
near by. He
> > eventually
> > settled on Eden being preserved at the port of Aden in
the Yemen.
> >
> > Unknown to Beck, Jewish Hasmonean Pseudepigraphical
Literature (2d-1st
> > century BCE) mentioned Eden was "the source of spices
and incense," and
> > it
> > was to be found _according to the Book of Jubilees_, by
following the
> > Nile
> > (Geon) SOUTH then EAST to Eden. The Nile has TWO
tributaries from the
> > East,
> > both are formed near Lake Tana in Ethiopia. Just east
of Tana/Ethiopia
> > is
> > the "Land of Aden." In Hasmonaean times the source of
many Spices and
> > Incense was understood to be Sheba in the Yemen
(perhaps from the Queen
> > of
> > Sheba's gifts to Solomon ?).
> >
> > Of interest, is that Medieval Yemenite Jewish
traditions (14th/15th
> > century
> > CE) claim the land of Eden is in the Yemen, as noted by
an Italian Rabbi
> > when Yemenite Jews showed up at Jerusalem on a
Pilgrimage in the 15th
> > century BCE.
> >
> > Arab traditions have Cain and Abel buried at Aden. Of
course there are
> > several other suggestions for Eden's location (Lebanon
Edhin, and
> > northern
> > Mesopotamia {Beth-Eden]). Some of them mentioned by
David Rohl. Some
> > scholars have suggested Eden is a "re-working" the
Sumerian Land of
> > Dilmun
> > myth, and locate it at/near Al Qurnah in the marshlands
of southern
> > Mesopotamia, where the Tigris and Euphrates rivers come
together to
> > form one
> > river the Shalt al-Arab which empties into the Persian
Gulf.
> >
> > I have two articles on Eden, if interested cf. the
following urls :
> >
> > http://www.bibleorigins.net/Edenslocation.html
> >
> > http://www.bibleorigins.net/Edenadhanamarib.html
> >
> > Regards, Walter
> > Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A.
Ed.
> > mattfeld12 AT charter.net
> > www.bibleorigins.net
>
> Walter,
>
> You would have a hard time proving the Eden-Aden
connection. First of
> all, modern Aden was called Eudaemon is the 1st century
BCE, which would
> be the first known reference to it. ("Eudaemon Arabia was
once a
> full-fledged city, when vessels from India did not go to
Egypt and those
> of Egypt did not dare sail to places further on, but only
came this
> far") (see Periplus of the Erythraean Sea).
Heuristically, I don't see
> the connection to be made here.
>
> Brian
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
> > To: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2004 3:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Eden
>
> >
> >> The problem of locating Eden is the extent of the
flood under Noah. If
> >> it was world wide, as the text says, then, according
to experts in
> >> hydrology, it would have completely rearranged the
surface of the
> >> earth, effectively destroying the original Eden. The
present names were
> >> given by Noah and his sons to the rivers they found
after exiting the
> >> ark. As such, the names point not so much to the
original Garden of
> >> Eden, but to the location where the ark rested at the
end of the flood.
> >>
> >> Not everybody believes the text.
> >>
> >> Karl W. Randolph.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>

David Kimbrough
San Gabriel





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page