In the first video below Dr. Price starts calling members within his congregation NIGGERS after assuring them that they were God's Chosen people and the ancestors of the human race!
In this second video below we examine the 7 false major core doctrines of Mr. Price
Dr. Frederick Price quotes extensively from secular sources to try to make his case that the ancestors of the human race i.e. Adam and Eve were black/negroes from the continent of Africa BY EMPLOYING THE EVOLUTION MODEL OF CREATION. There is no empirical evidence for the hypotheses which Dr. Fred Price presents in these 2 videos for the origins of the human race. This evolution model which Dr. Price presents is contrary to the Word of God! Not once does he quote from the inerrant word of God to validate his sources. Is he right or is this just another desperate attempt to promote black supremacy over the human race? I will quote from the Torah written by Moses, a man who spoke with God face to face and received his revelations about the origins of mankind directly from the Creator. Genesis 2:8-14
A river flowed from Eden to water the garden, and from there it divided to make four streams.
The first is named the Pishon, and this winds all through the land of Havilah where there is gold. The gold of this country is pure; bdellium and cornelian stone are found there. The second river is named the Gihon, and this winds all through the land of Cush. The third river is named the Tigris, and this flows to the east of Ashur. The fourth river is the Euphrates.
Moses the author of Genesis places the location of the garden of Eden between two historic rivers, the River Euphrates and the River Tigris. The Garden of Eden was in the fertile crescent between these two great rivers in the region north of modern day Iraq or ancient Babylon. This region is also called the land of Sinar were Nimrod began to build the TOWER OF BABEL cf Genesis 11:1-9. Also see maps below and videos presentation:
TOWER OF BABEL
MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF GARDEN OF EDEN
In the days of Noah most of the parts of the world which we know today were unknown. The land between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers(modern day Iraq) was the only world which Noah and his people knew. Not for many centuries were Palestine, Africa and other westward lands become inhabited. This took place only after the dispersion of the human race and the division of languages by God cf Genesis 11: 1-6.
This fertile region was the first to be populated and thus became known as the CRADLE OF HUMAN CIVILIZATION! The inhabitants of this land were responsible for some of the greatest discoveries-notably, the alphabet, the calendar, the chariot, military organizations, and many scientific discoveries.
Some final thoughts: One of Dr. Price's sources which he quotes from this video is Henry Fairfield Osborne. Who was Mr. Osborne?
Mr. Osborn was an evolutionist who proposed the valuable concept of adaptive radiation, postulating that a primitive plant or animal in many cases evolves into several species by scattering over a large land area and adapting to different ecological niches. Osborn also served as vertebrate paleontologist (1900–24) and senior geologist (1924–35) with the U.S. Geological Survey. His works include From the Greeks to Darwin (1894), The Age of Mammals (1910), and Origin and Evolution of Life (1917).
Another source of Dr. Fred Price is Herodotus.The reliability of Herodotus is sometimes criticized when writing about Egypt.[54][l] Alan B. Lloyd argues that, as a historical document, the writings of Herodotus are seriously defective, and that he was working from "inadequate sources".[48] Nielsen writes: "Though we cannot entirely rule out the possibility of Herodotus having been in Egypt, it must be said that his narrative bears little witness to it."[49] German historian Detlev Fehling questions whether Herodotus ever traveled up the Nile River, and considers doubtful almost everything that he says about Egypt and Ethiopia.[66][50] Fehling states that "there is not the slightest bit of history behind the whole story" about the claim of Herodotus that Pharaoh Sesostris campaigned in Europe, and that he left a colony in Colchia.[52] Some of his stories were fanciful and others inaccurate; yet he states that he was reporting only what was told to him. 51][m]
It has never been shown that evolution ever happened in any degree. Evolution in all it's aspects, including theistic evolution is contrary to THE WORD OF GOD AND SCIENCE.
As you can see from the above biblical passages, nowhere does God say in his word that our human ancestors were black from Africa, white from Europe or yellow from the Far East. What Mr. Price is presenting here is pure speculation. None of his secular sources ever saw any of these people personally much less ever met them. Furthermore his secular sources are not from a BIBLICAL WORLDVIEW WHICH IS ABSOLUTE TRUTH but from an evolutionist paradigm.
Based on the above 2 videos by Mr. Fred Price, his theories and doctrines fit the bill for someone who can be properly labeled as a BLACK SUPREMACIST!
WHAT COLOR WAS ADAM?
In western countries, nearly every imaginative painting of Adam and Eve
depict two adult Caucasians with fair skin and blue eyes. These images,
even used as Bible illustrations, tend to shape the reader's mental
image of the first man and woman. The Sunday-school origin of the dark
races is often that they were descendants of Adam and Eve who had
migrated to a hot climate where the suntan eventually became an
inherited characteristic. These images and explanations discredit
Christianity.
The true explanation began to be resolved in 1913 when it was shown that human beings carry two genes for color and that each gene consists of "black" or "white" alleles. One allele was received from the mother and the other from the father. The allele is part of the gene, and the gene is part of the DNA – while the DNA resides in the nucleus of every cell in our body. Our skin color is caused by the pigment melanin, and this is controlled by two pairs of genes that geneticists refer to using the letter designations Aa and Bb, where the capital letter represents dominant genes and the small letters represent recessive genes. A and B, being dominant, produce melanin in good quantity while recessive a and b produce only a minor amount of melanin. Hence, our coloration depends upon the number of black and white alleles we received from our parents. The color genes express themselves in only one place – specialized skin cells called the melanocytes – that produce granules of melanin that are delivered to neighboring cells.
The true explanation began to be resolved in 1913 when it was shown that human beings carry two genes for color and that each gene consists of "black" or "white" alleles. One allele was received from the mother and the other from the father. The allele is part of the gene, and the gene is part of the DNA – while the DNA resides in the nucleus of every cell in our body. Our skin color is caused by the pigment melanin, and this is controlled by two pairs of genes that geneticists refer to using the letter designations Aa and Bb, where the capital letter represents dominant genes and the small letters represent recessive genes. A and B, being dominant, produce melanin in good quantity while recessive a and b produce only a minor amount of melanin. Hence, our coloration depends upon the number of black and white alleles we received from our parents. The color genes express themselves in only one place – specialized skin cells called the melanocytes – that produce granules of melanin that are delivered to neighboring cells.
Eve was made from Adam's rib and was thus a clone of Adam [Genesis
2:21-22]. They would therefore have had identical genes for melanin
production. If they were both AABB, they would have been Negroid
and produced children of only the darkest of Negroid coloration. If this
were the case, the world's population today would be entirely Negro. In
fact, only about 10% of the world's population is Negro, so we can be
certain that our first parents were not of the AABB combination. By the same argument, if Adam and Eve had both been aabb, all their children would have been aabb meaning
that all their descendants would be the lightest Caucasoid possible –
there would be no other colors. Clearly, this is not the case, so by a
process of deduction we can conclude that Adam and Eve were
heterozygous, each having two dominant and two recessive genes, AaBb.
They would thus have been MEDIUM COMPLEXION in color and from them, in
one generation, the various shades of MEDIUM COMPLEXION would have been
produced.
These color differences were likely amplified following the business at
the Tower of Babel [Genesis 11:1-9] when the human gene pool was
divided. Loss of genetic information in an isolated population is well
known and a problem to breeders of pure-bred dogs, horses and other
animals. It seems that one population group that migrated from the Tower
of Babel suffered a greater loss of the genetic information required to
produce the melanin and became the Caucasians. The bottom line is that
Adam was not white or black but a good MEDIUM COMPLEXION!
Reference: Harrub, B. and Bert Thompson. 2003. The Truth About Human Origins. Alabama: Apologetics Press, Inc. Pages 444-445. http://apologeticspress.org/pdfs/e-books_pdf/taho.pdf
CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW FOR ACCESS TO THE PDF:
Apologetics Press, Inc.
For more details on this subject go to the links below:
THE BIBLE IS BLACK HISTORY- AN ANTI-SEMITIC AND ANTI-WHITE BOOK
WHY BLACK LIES MATTER
Click here to read a great article on skin color!
http://www.wordoftruthradio.com/questions/skin.html
THE ORIGIN OF RACE By Cooper P. Abrams, III
PART II
John's Blog
Commentary on the Bible or bible topics.
Quest for the Land of Eden
©Land of Eden Map
I became interested as to where the Garden of Eden
might have been. As I did my research there were several possible
locations and unanswered questions, no one seemed real sure of their own
synopsis or seemed to have created a map with the biblical references.
Then I decided to just go back to the Bible and attempt to figure it
out myself. I wanted to start from scratch with an open mind of it
being anywhere or even undetermined.
Eden ay’-den; pleasure, delicate, delight, paradise, pleasant, soft; plain. Jesus is the door (Jn. 10:7,9) and the life “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” Jn. 14:6. Jesus said He is the way [door] the truth [knowledge] and the life [pleasure]. The Father (YHWH) want’s us to know Him through the person of Jesus Christ (Yeshua) and we will have that Paradise or Eternal Life; likewise, He can reciprocate. “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” Jn. 17:3. So Eden is a story of the relationship between God and Man.
First, what does the bible say happened to
the Garden? There was 11 overlapping generations with a span of a
thousand years that would have had direct knowledge (person to
person) about Eden and the Garden during it’s existence, including Noah
and his family. At least 9 of those generations lived simultaneously
with Adam during his lifespan. The Garden proper, became off limits
shortly after it’s existence, then quickly deteriorated in judgment after the fall of man
(from it’s pristine condition of less than 100 years) while probably
existing until the deluge where it was ultimately destroyed (Gen.
3:23-24). A remarkable work of dating: Annals of the World.
So my research for the Garden’s location began with the key words “Eden” and “garden”
in the biblical text; subsequently, I began to find a pattern that
locations were being described as being in the direction of “East”. The
more I researched the more I realized that it was actually mapping it
out for me. But in determining the location, one has to answer the
question: Are the current Euphrates and Tigris Rivers the ones described
in Genesis? If so, how would Noah and his family been able to identify
them and re-assign the names after the destruction of the flood?
Answer: Noah and his family would have
used the sun, moon, and stars; his knowledge of oceans, mountains,
valleys, and lakes, as well as active volcanoes. With the overlapping long lives of Adam’s descendants (11 generations), Noah and his family would have identified remnants of cities or megalithic remains,
additionally would have had God’s revelation. So with the logical
postulation those rivers are in fact correct, one can map out where it
was with some light of modern information that the river Pishon is now a subterranean aquifer
that runs along the north Kuwait border to south-west of Hafar Al
Batain, this is presently known as the Wadi al Batin. The Pishon runs
across Saudi Arabia and forks midway north-west to the An Nafud Desert, and turns west where a prehistoric system of lakes existed (what I will call the Pishon Lakes) at the region now called Jubbah
in northern Arabia, as well as being a current antediluvian archeology
site. Similarly, the Gihon River in the opposite direction, would be
what is now known as the Karun River.
James A. Sauer, former curator of the Harvard Semitic Museum, as well
as, Archaeologist and Professor Juris Zarins holds to the position that
this region is the location of the Pishon and Gihon rivers. Study of Arabian palaeohydrology confirms much of this. We also know that post-diluvian civilizations encompass the region of Sumeria
and Mesopotamia. This is indicative of the fact that Noah’s Ark did
not have propulsion, thus would have had limited drift on the Earth, and
thus making landfall not far from the region. (Plausible new theory on the flood; see also The Waters Cleaved).
Wasn’t Cush in Africa? It should be noted that the “land of Cush”
or “latter Cush” in Genesis 2:13 was more likely named post-flood after
the son of Ham. It then was used as a reference in writing Genesis 2:13
as to where the Gihon was. Ham, according to the Table of Nations in
the Book of Genesis, was a son of Noah and the father of Cush. It is
true that Cush’s father Ham lived in the region of Upper Egypt
(South) “old Kush” at which time the region of Kush may have derived
it’s name. However, Cush (son of Ham) must have then relocated to the
Mesopotamia region (where his wife Semiramis was from) and bore his son
Nimrod who became King of Shinar (in Mesopotamia). Furthermore, Judges
3:8,10 reference the “Cushan-Rishathaim King of Mesopotamia”. The
Shinar, Babylonian/Assyrian regions are much closer to the proposed
Gihon River. So it is plausible that there was a second region referred
to as Cush (latter) located where the proposed Gihon River was, and as
referenced in Genesis 2:13 or what became Elam. It’s also plausible that
Cush wanted to return to the Garden region that led him to re-settle at
the Gihon river. The adjacent known name locations of Cush’s sons
settled in Persian Gulf and Arabia Genesis 10:7 (i.e. Nimrod, Havilah,
Raamah) likewise reflect the more easterly region in which Cush himself
took up residence later in life, see Habakkuk 3:7.
The more I pieced the puzzle together the
better it all fit, even dispelling some myths on subject, and
discovering new aspects of it. Antediluvian geographical regions are
referenced as “land of” in Genesis. In Gen. 2:8,10 it distinguishes the place “Eden” from the “Garden”, “planted a garden eastward in Eden” and “out of Eden to water the garden“. Also, it stands to reason that with the phrase “garden of Eden” one can postulate that there was a land or place called Eden, in which the garden existed; therefore, when reading the scriptures that distinction must be made. Now this further raises the question, “Where was the Land of Eden?” My most notable observation was that the land
of Eden, encompassed the land that God later promised to Abraham’s
descendants from the river Nile to the river Euphrates (includes Israel-
Genesis 15:18, 17:8; Exodus 6:8, 23:31; Deuteronomy 1:8)
because it would have been westward of the Pishon River and east to the
Garden according to the Biblical text; whereas, others have incorrectly
put Eden in northern Mesopotamia or Africa. Since the river Pishon
“went out [of the land] of Eden” (Gen. 2:10-11), it would have had the
greatest notability or prominence in it’s day among the rivers mentioned
in Genesis with regards to passing down the creation story
post-diluvian; thus the natural human reaction or tendency would have
been to eagerly label, even mislabel that river. However, that was not
the case, all we have labeled are the Euphrates and Tigris, thus
indicating that when the Euphrates and Tigris river names were assigned,
they were assigned with certainty of identification and credibility.
While this predicates on the above premises it seems to be the most
rational and reasonable explanations. See the Bible references in the box, on above map, regarding the land that Eden encompassed.
In Gen. 2:10-11, it sates the river Pishon “became four
riverheads” and the two keywords here are “became” and “riverheads”.
One can stand downriver, look back upriver and view the joining rivers
(Pishon, Euphrates, Tigris, Gihon) as “heads” to the river downstream.
Then in verse 11 it says “which skirts the whole
land of Havilah”; in like manner, the proposed Pision stretches across
and skirts Havilah. Since these four rivers meet in a rather large
area, does that seem to be too large to be a garden tillable for Adam?
No, the area is not too large, because God knew Adam and Eve would have
children and many descendants to carry out the work. According to the
Tanakh or Old Testament Scriptures alone we can definitively draw
boundaries of the land of Eden based the following proofs:
- The “land” of Eden is distinguished from the Garden, Gen. 2:8,10.*
- The Garden and Euphrates, are the east boundary of Eden, Gen. 2:8,10,14.*
- The Pishon River is the south boundary of Eden, Gen. 2:10-12.*
- The north boundary is as far north as Telassar, 2 Kings 19:12 & Isa. 37:12 (Ref.1, Ref.2, Ref.3);
- Even as far north as Beth-Eden (house-palace-temple of Eden-pleasure-living voluptuously or belonging to), Amos 1:5 (Ref.1, Ref.2, Ref.3, Ref.4, Ref.5, Ref.6).
- The west boundary is at least as far as Lebanon/Tyre and the Mountain of God, Ezek. 27:23, 28:13, 31:16, 28:14, Zec. 8:3, Exod. 3:1 but should extend to the “River of Egypt” Gen. 15:18.
- Southwest boundary would seem to include the Upper Egypt (South) to the delta along the “River of Egypt” (Sorry my map needs to be updated to include Upper Egypt (South), (old Cushite region), Gen. 15:18, Isa. 11:10-11.
- The four rivers met in the Garden, Gen. 2:10.*
* = Direct
Genesis account proofs; while the other proofs are in the more broader
sense “inspired of God” (2 Tim. 3:16) as referenced by scriptures
outside of the Genesis narrative.
Other proofs include the following: A Levitical lineage with the place derived name of Eden associates it to the Hebrew people. Etymologically, the word Eden is of Hebrew Semitic
origin. Archeology supports the region for the origin of the word
Eden, in the form of Babylonian cuneiform tablets containing similar
words. Ezekiel tells us that Eden is God’s Garden, it belonged to God
(Ezk. 28:13, Isa. 51:3), yet he entrusted it to man. Allow me to beg
the question, “Where is God’s Land? Thus, where was the Garden if it
belongs to God?” This region of the world also concurs with the
location where the descendants of Adam and Eve would have lived, as the first city named after Cain’s son called the city of Enoch
(Uruk) was located in the Land of Nod just opposite of the Land of Eden
(divided by the Euphrates), as supported by the biblical text and
cuneiform writings. The region contains gold, bdellium (resin or
amber), and onyx as described in Genesis 2:11-12.
Furthermore, the proposed location
coincides with better known locations such as: Nod, Havilah, Assyria,
Lebanon/Tyre, Euphrates, Hiddekel / Tigres, and Holy Mountain of God.
The region is rich in oil and coal deposits
suggesting it was once lush with plants and animals. Furthermore, the
region is littered with other evidences. Five separate similar extra
biblical stories in the form of cuneiform writings
dating as far back as 2150 B.C. have been found in the exact same
region of the Garden, ancient Sumer or Sumeria. There is evidence that
this region is also the origin of the wheel, stone knife, writing, arch
for architecture, and mathematics, furthermore various tools of wood,
stone and bone are found here. So, does this area (Eden or area
promised to Abrahams descendants) conflict with his later giving of
borders to the tribes under Moses in Numbers 34:1-15 and Ezekiel
47:15-20? I think not. It is plausible there were to be more tribes
that would have encompassed the larger area but there may have been the
loss of one or more descendants under Jacob not mentioned in the bible.
Also, it is unknown how tribal distribution and lineage might have
occurred under Esau.
A few other points worthy of noting are, since the Garden of Eden was referenced as a garden in Eden, one can postulate the “land
of Eden” as a whole, was NOT like a garden. I also noticed scriptural
points that allow one to imagine what it was like from the perspective
of Adam and Eve. Secular Prehistory parallels Genesis 1:26-4:26 in that
it explains origins of man and importance of food. Food production was
so important to the beginning of humanity that it likewise is reflected
in the book of Genesis as the primary sustenance of life, whereby God
assigned man the task of horticulture in the Garden of Eden; foraging
likewise is implied, while agriculture followed; and subsequently
reveals mans invention of pastoralism. What was utopian about the
Garden and why did God create it? The answers is actually the
obvious, it had not yet been tarnished by sin, and man needed the
garden to forage for food. Adam and Eve would have started as
vegetarian gathers as this would have been the simplest form of
obtaining food and what God had directed them to eat (Gen. 1:29-30).
Because food was of such importance, it was this that God would test
mans obedience with. After man sinned, death entered the world (Rom.
5:12,6:23) and Adam and Abel discovered eating meat most likely by
observing animals eating other animals, thus became hunters and then
herdsman as “Abel was a keeper of sheep” and offered sheep as a
sacrifice (Gen. 4:2,4 ). It appears that because the land was
“tillable” outside the garden, that it contained less trees than the
garden itself (Gen. 2:5, 3:23, 4:2&12). Likewise, since God so
graciously “put” man in the garden one can postulate that he was created
outside the garden (Gen. 2:8,15); furthermore, God “sent him [Adam] out
of the garden to till the ground from which he was taken”
(Gen. 2:15, 3:23). Both Adam and Cain first tilled the ground in the
Garden, then later outside the Garden. Adam and Cain would most likely
have learned horticulture by making observations of seeds naturally
sprouting in the garden as they fell from trees and noticed that plants
grew better near water.
We see animals existed inside and outside
the garden. Death reveals the consequence of sin (Heb. 9:22,Mat.
26:28), thus, the reason God accepted Abel’s sacrifice over Cain’s;
Abel’s sacrifice being the picture of Jesus Christ (Gen. 3:15). It was
in the garden that clothing and sewing was invented “they sewed fig
leaves together and made themselves coverings” most likely by Eve simply
stringing a vine through leaves (Gen. 3:7,21). Again, Eve most likely
discovered this by seeing how vines grew intertwining and connectively.
Living in a Utopian world, man most likely did not need fire prior to
the fall. Man would have first observed fire/light from the sun,
volcanic activity, (and lightning and forest fires after the fall) also
the “flaming” sword that guarded “the way to the tree of life“. It appears God created man with the capacity to communicate verbally, most likely an Ancient Hebrew (Early Semitic or “Edenic”) language (Gen. 2:23, 11:1)
As
the world began to deteriorate, man may have observed a dead log
floating in water and realized the invention of a boat. Lastly, after
Eden was destroyed by the flood it was described to have become a desert
according to the Scriptures (Isa. 51:3). Interesting, that
subsequently, Arabia and the connecting North Africa is the single
largest desert region on earth. Recent scientific research has
discovered that Arabia was once green and quite populated by man and animals early in human history.
The kinds of trees shown in the garden
detail map are not truly for certain, only graphics to joggle your mind;
however, there are references to the fig, chestnut, and cedar trees,
that they were beautiful and very large, so much so, that the Prophet Ezekiel uses them as an analogy against Pharaoh.
One must imagine a world without technologies or modern conveniences as
we know them. To Adam and Eve the life around them (plants and
animals) is what was important and must have brought a sense of wonder.
They might have thought, animals were somewhat similar to them but trees were quite different and majestic. Animals are: animate, fleshly, life forms; whereas, trees are inanimate lifeforms.
What was the “tree of knowledge of good and evil”
and the “tree of life”? While being literal trees; presumably, they
both also must have a meaning simply because of their names. What are
their meanings? One brought physical and spiritual death (Gen. 2:17),
while the other life so you could say there was the tree of death and
the tree of life.
The first tree: We’ll look at the descriptives of this tree as “good” then “evil”. Why would “knowledge of good” bring death? Knowledge of good here is twofold:
1. to know to do good and do evil deeds “to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.” (James 4:17), and or
2. mans deciding to dictate what is good
and evil in his own eyes that contradicts what God says. “lean not on
your own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5). “Jesus said to them, “If you
were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore
your sin remains.” (Jn. 9:41). Essentially calling good evil, and evil
good.
“Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies” (1 Cor. 8:1); furthermore, only God is all-knowing. “Self-righteousness” by “good works” was not acceptable because it is without faith. Good works is based on one’s own merit. The “tree of knowledge of good and evil” (good works and evil
deeds), thus meant mans false conclusion (like Satan) that he can live
or have life on his own merit without God, instead man wanted to be God.
Then, there was the knowledge of evil, that lead to disobedience and the evil desire
to be God (Gen. 3:5,22). Thus, two reasons to not partake of it’s
fruit. Rather than heeding God’s warning, man did evil by disobedience,
and justified that it was the good thing to do because they were told
by another that it was good, yet consequentially results in death. It
began with the Serpent’s deception by first questioning what God said,
then by twisting the word of God. So there was two “paths or ways” to
this first tree that man could make on his own that would lead to death:
1. knowledge of good or self-righteousness and hypocrisy (doing what was right in his own eyes Judges 17:6) or it’s root sin of the “pride of life” (1 John. 2:16), and also
I will call this “natural sin” where one
offends/hurts God; whereas, what follows in the next paragraph I will
call “spiritual sin”, where one turns against or becomes anti God. Both
kinds of sins have the same consequence- death physically and
spiritually because they are blasphemy and unbelief, thus requiring the
forgiveness of sin by salvation in Jesus Christ.
2. blatant evil or it’s root sin of rebellion/defiance, hedonism, and Satanism.
Knowledge of good and evil actually instilled a desire
in man known as strict Secular Humanism, or deification of man, and the
serpent took advantage of that (Gen. 3:5,22). This sin of worshiping
man and man wanting worship by man, subsequently emerged and manifested
in humanity as Kings. Just as Lucifer wanting power, “I will be like
the Most High” (Isa. 14:14). This pits man at war with God. There is
only One Authority- Jesus, He is King of Kings and Lord of Lords who has
all power and ability to make law. God will not share His glory (Isa.
42:8, 48:11). What is the key to overcoming this? Humility in Jesus.
Hebrews 11:6 says, “But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is,
and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” Knowledge
of good or doing good may be good but it cannot save from sin and thus
becomes a snare leading to death. There is only one who is good, that
is God (Mat. 19:17, Psm. 14:3). It is this tree of sin that will kill
you, not God.
In Gen. 3:
9 Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you?”
Paraphrase: “Where are you spiritually?”
10 So he said, “I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself.”
Paraphrase: “I heard and am reminded of
your word that I should not eat of the tree of knowledge, and my
conscious was convicted of my sin so I tried to cover it.”
11 And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?”
Paraphrase: “Who accused you of sin?” Answer being, the Serpent. Instead of repenting, man blamed others and tried to cover their sin.
Knowledge of good and evil was mans feeble
attempt at determining his own destiny. Subsequently, redemption is
revealed in Gen. 3:15 and culminated in John 3:16 “For God so loved the
world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him
should not perish but have everlasting life.”
The second tree: The “tree of life”,
on the other hand, meant choosing Gods will, and by man’s belief in,
dependence upon, and trusting God’s love for man’s life. The tree of
life was the “way” to God. “In all your ways acknowledge Him” (Proverbs
3:6). Furthermore, this tree of life, having to remain a mystery until
God carried out salvation through love (John. 3:16) by Himself through
the person and work of Jesus Christ, from whom true life comes, thus
having to be guarded by an angel. Man could not usurp the Holy Spirit
or “live forever” apart from salvation since man had now sinned.
“Eternal life” must come through the Savior; the tree of life was a
picture of the things to come through Jesus Christ, Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (Jn. 14:6). “Yet the law [includes good works] is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”
Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse
for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree [wooden cross]”), that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith (Galatians 3:12-14).” Jesus is that tree of life.
He who overcomes, may eat of the tree of life
(Rev. 2:7). Only those who have faith and believe in Christ are
over-comers as Jesus has overcome the world (Jn. 16:33). “Who is he who
overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?”
(1 Jn. 5:4-5). “I have set before you life and death, blessing and
cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may
live” (Gen. 30:19). It is interesting to note that the Tree of
Knowledge vanishes from scriptures but the Tree of Life re-appears in
Paradise (Rev. 2:7) and that it bears 12 fruits (Rev. 22:2)
(another correlation to Israel), for the healing of the nations. How
did Israel heal the nations? Through the Messiah Jesus.
Before Sin
So why then in Gen. 3:22 does it say, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”?
Was God holding out? Not at all, man simply did not have the full
nature or attributes of God, nor could he, to live eternally. Notice
the “And now” in this verse, and “become” is qualified by only “like one“.
Put it this way, “And now [that man has sinned]” he is no longer
allowed to partake of the tree of life. Salvation or the way to God was
not to be by mans good works but by the grace of God, “that in the ages
to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness
toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:7-9).
Continuing with Gen. 3:22, the word “like“, is in what form? Knowing good and evil,
yet still short of being God. Partaking of the “tree of life” in sin
would be like, receiving the Holy Spirit without Jesus Christ, much like
attempting to obtain life through “ritualistic religion” vs. a willing,
loving relationship with God. In Gen. 7:22 it associates life with the
Spirit in the phrase “Spirit of life”. Continuing with Gen. 3:22, then
“one of us“, referring to the triune Godhead, three in
person one in essence. It wasn’t until Adam’s third son, Seth, that
man began to turn back to God, “Then men began to call on the name of
the Lord.” (Gen. 4:25-26).
So what was so pleasant about the Garden
of Eden? Was it the lush environment, well maybe partly in the physical
sense; however, it was mostly paradise because God walked with man, the
very presence of God dwelt with man (Gen. 1:28,29, 3:8; Immanuel- “God
with us” Isa. 7:14). This direct encounter Adam had with God was a
Christophony (preincarnate appearance of Christ), and would most likely
have been the way God imparted the story prior to and including the
creation of Adam. And so then on, this would be the land, Eden, where
God would directly interact and dwell (tabernacle) with man throughout
history, forward, even making his home (temple) in Jerusalem until the
Messiah appeared.
“The Israelites never came close to taking all of the territory God had given them. God had so much for them. He had given so much to them. He had such grand plans for them. Yet they never took advantage of them. I can’t help but wonder, Lord, how much more do You have in mind for me, for my family, for the church?” -Jon Courson.
Ultimately, during the Millennial Reign of
Christ, the curse will be lifted from the earth, and all will be made
right and good as a “new earth” (Rev. 3:12, 21:1). Israel will enjoy
all of it’s territory under the Messiah’s second advent. The “New Jerusalem”
or city of peace, will come down out of heaven, yes Paradise will
return (Rev. 2:7, 21:2), and notice the reference as to the geographical
location, “Jerusalem”. Until then, we can experience His presence,
peace, love, forgiveness, power, and have the hope of eternal life now
by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit through belief in Jesus Christ.
“Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away” (Rev. 21:2-4).
This article is intended to refute
other assumed Eden locations and to provide the biblical historical and
literal location. I will say though, based on the evidence provided,
all other proposed locations simply do not fit the Scriptures, in fact
one would have to divert from the scriptures to assert Eden or the
Garden were in: Africa, North Mesopotamia, Pangaea continent, Temple
Mount, or Somewhere else.
However, I will address one due to its
uniqueness. Some hold the unique position that the Temple Mount is the
location of the Garden of Eden. Those who hold to the “Temple Mount
Garden of Eden” are correct in that Jerusalem is in the “Land” of Eden; however, it does not fit the scriptures for being the exact location of the original historical “Garden” proper, as described in Genesis. Distinguishing the “Land” of Eden from the “Garden” of Eden helps clarify this. Furthermore, it’s plausible, they are also correct with their parallels, more in a prophetic sense, in that the Temple Mount will be the “future” Garden of Eden, or paradise described as the “new Jerusalem” in Rev. 3:12, 21:1.
However, the assertions that the Garden
was on the Temple Mount are done so by alluding to parallels and
similarities. This understanding is NOT taking a historical or literal
interpretation approach of the scriptures as their basis (Gen. 2:4). It
is interpreting history based on parallels instead of facts reviled in
scripture. Doing so, does not let the text tell the story; it is
interpreting the text on the pretext of wanting the “garden” in
Jerusalem, when in actuality, it is that Jerusalem is in the land of
Eden. The basis of this interpretation attributes the “river Gihon” as
being the “Gihon Spring” (2 Chron. 32:30,33:14); these are two different
bodies of water. Then to add more complexity to the matter, it does
appear that the “pure river of water of life” in Rev. 22:1 is in fact a
parallel with the “Gihon Spring” but NOT the “River Gihon” in Genesis.
This is where proper homiletics, hermeneutics, and exegesis is critical
in rightly dividing the word of truth.
Because God transcends science, we must
not allow science to constrain the Word of God, that is, be restricted
to science or force God’s Word to fit science; likewise, we need not
interpret the Word of God without rational science.
We ought to take the Word of God literally, and when science confirms
the Word, then understand it with the light of science. We must believe
God’s Word and accept the fact that we may not fully understand in the
natural how God did and does things that may be supernatural – this is
faith.
So
we see that the bible references Eden as a: land, garden, trees, house,
people, and person, all of which lend clues to where the land of Eden
and Garden was located. Due to the patriarchs overlapping long lives
the original story could have easily been passed down with accuracy.
All the maps I found didn’t seem to fit the scriptures conclusively, so I
set out to re-map Eden and the Garden with the biblical references so anyone can further confirm and if possible further develop upon.
In this article you will see my expandable
maps (by clicking on them twice), hope you all enjoy and research the
related Scriptures, you will be even more amazed and convinced as I was
that the Bible really does tell us where Eden and the Garden was. Never
in history were we this certain as to where the Garden of Eden was.
Only to be revealed with aid of internet, Landsat, and earth/natural
sciences. Why, in our day, some six thousand years later can we now
know where the Garden of Eden was? What is the significance of the
Land of Eden being the same area of land promised to Abraham?
Foremost, it defines the north and south
boundaries of Israel. Why does that matter? We know in the last days,
God will change the course of humanity by re-focusing on Israel. God
will make one nation of Israel (people and land) without division (Ezek.
37:22) “I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of
Israel; and one king shall be king over them all; they shall no longer
be two nations, nor shall they ever be divided into two kingdoms again.”
No less than that area belongs to Israel. God will not allow dividing
up His land (Joel 3:1-2; Gen. 12:3, Zech. 12:3) “They have also divided
up My land.”, from the River Nile to the River Euphrates; from
Beth-Eden to the Pishon River, it will be Israel. Who will be that
king? Jesus Christ!
