John's Blog

Commentary on the Bible or bible topics.

Quest for the Land of Eden

with 5 comments

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_Ancient_HebrewEden 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?

Land of Eden

Land of Eden Map ©

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:

  1. The “land” of Eden is distinguished from the Garden, Gen. 2:8,10.*
  2. The Garden and Euphrates, are the east boundary of Eden, Gen. 2:8,10,14.*
  3. The Pishon River is the south boundary of Eden, Gen. 2:10-12.*
  4. The north boundary is as far north as Telassar, 2 Kings 19:12 & Isa. 37:12 (Ref.1, Ref.2, Ref.3);
  5. 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).
  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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.

Garden of Eden

I will suggest that the post-flood atmospheric catastrophe resulting from the flood was far more impacting to man, plants, and animals over several centuries than the actual flood had on the landscape, altering the climate permanently from it’s original protected canopy by reducing the ozone, oxygen, humidity, and pressure thus increasing solar radiation that ultimately reduced the maximum age of man as well as forest able regions.

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:

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 evilAnd 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 not intended to refute other assumed Eden locations but 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!



All biblical references are from the New King James Version of the Bible.  Download PDF version of the map: Garden_of_Eden_Map_1_v4_7

Creative Commons License
Quest for the Land of Eden by John DiCesare is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at


5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. This paper agrees with all the research I have done. I have printed out your map of the Eden. This is the one of the most significant tracts of land in world history. It is still being fought over today and the center of world events. I am currently doing a paper on creation and this fits right in on the research I am doing. You have done a very impressive job of putting all this together. Thank you for all your effort and God bless you. Don Fleury

    Liked by 1 person

    Don Fleury

    July 10, 2017 at 8:51 AM

  2. Hi John re “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” is incorrect.

    This is based on the Masoretic Text of 1008 AD. I would suggest a comparison with the Greek Septuagint or LXX to understand chronology proper. You will find that the pre Flood Patriarchs in the LXX that only Enoch and Lamech were outlived by their fathers and Methusaleh died 5 years before the Flood.

    In the meantime as an overview that more work is need by those who just use the MT is to consider the information in this video
    entitled Were the Pyramids Built Before the Flood? (Masoretic Text vs. Original Hebrew) and also the Israel 400/430 years one also mentioned. It is great ground work and general overview to get restarted – nothing new – just rediscovering what was. Indeed the author at one point in the video had to concludes based on the evidence – what was the motive? I will mention that below. I have since emailed him of it. Seek and you will find. The simple answer was and is – denial of Jesus Christ as Messiah.

    Author NathanH83 gets it mostly right except he omits the Second Cainan after the Flood which Luke 3:36 preserves. Luke was not a liar. Yes argument can be made for Luke’s NT record to be an addition however the earliest LXX A has Second Cainan in in both Genesis and Chronicles as do other early Jewish non canonical works/fables. Yes there is some element of histiorical truth even found in Jewish fables. e.g. I must reject the Book of Jubilees as a 2nd BC work and this is my observation because it mentioned date of creation as 2450 AM from memory which is based on the shorter MT and not the longer LXX. Only the pride of the rabbis would seek to extend back the jubillee before the time God decided to implement it.
    Ussher also used the NT for 4004 BC. The LXX however has longer history around 5,404 BC which as Nathan shows corrects Egyptian and Biblical chronologies. The later altered MT creates issues in so manys ways. I have also found that Sumerian culture (3100 BC to 2100 BC) aligns better using the longer LXX rather than the shorter MT. If this were known many skeptics would not be able to raise the so called “discrepancies” as they do.

    Also I recommend a history on the LXX and the MT – and note which came before and after Christ. Yes the historical record shows that the Torah was modified after the First Century because Christians had a point which pointed to Jesus Christ being the real Messiah because He fulfilled so many OT prophecies. Rabbinicism which became dominate after the Temple destruction in 70 AD (no need for Sadducees and Levites anymore) worked with Aquilla, Symmachus and Theodotion in the C2nd to alter the original Hebrew Torah leading up to the Masoretic era from C5th to C11th AD. Of course Western Gentile scholars sought help from the rabbis/Jewry (whom Jesus would never walk!) and what did the rabbis give them? The altered Torah. Their historical allegiance of disobedience is not of God.

    I have done the hard draft work on OT/NT comparison using both the MT and the LXX (can make available on request) – the LXX which almost all scholars agree that NT writers used anyway – wins hands down in affirming Jesus Christ as Messiah. Another common example? Luke 4 and Is 61 – note missing “recovery of sight to the blind” – that because the Is 61 ref of the MT and the KJV and all Western Protestant Bible which use the MT had this missing because their Jewish Messiah had to be purely political.

    There is so much more including the rabbis supporting the Bar Kochba rebellion promoting Simon as the Messiah even using the then LXX longer chronology which was then in common use. But after this failed attempt to bring about their “messiah” and then calling Simon “son of lies”- Jewry forbade other Hellenised Jews use of the Septuagint even though back in 250 BC (before Christ) they had given their approval of the Hebrew to Greek Translation of the Torah. Even the 8th Tebeth today on the Hebrew Calender highlights their distaste for the LXX.

    Time for Western Christians to wake up and realise that Eastern Christians though not perfect nor immune to Jewry inflitration since the C2nd AD as has been the case in the West – that the LXX more closely preserves the original Torah/Old Testament to which the Western Reformation largely unaffected.



    January 26, 2018 at 12:37 AM

    • Very good points and arguments that I would have to agree with. Only, I would like to do more research concerning a comparison to the texts that pre-date the MT vs. the MT just to know more why we are using that today in translations if it is found to be clearly incorrect. I understand how we got there but wonder why we are not seeing the use of older texts concerning translations. Maybe you can respond with a link to information on these issues. Nonetheless , this does not discredit my argument that the Genesis account was accurately passed down, and neither do I think you are trying to say that but only make corrections as to the genealogical timeline. For now, my schedule does not permit, but I hope to someday soon revisit and clarify this as well as the genealogical timeline in this article. Thank you very much for shedding light and sharing your knowledge on this topic.


      John DiCesare

      February 21, 2018 at 11:12 AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: