MAN'S HISTORY FROM ADAM TO ABRAHAM Roger Waite BIBLICAL HISTORY FROM ADAM TO ABRAHAM In this section we will explore the history of the Pre-Flood world and early Post-Flood world following the accounts contained in the first half of the Book of Genesis which centre mostly around the area of Mesopotamia. We will explore the Bible account of this period and endeavour to flesh out its concise account of this first 2000 years of recorded history with the use of ancient traditions and legends, both Jewish and non-Jewish. When dealing with legends and traditions, even with Jewish legends (1 Timothy 1:4), we have to be aware that they are a mixture of truth and error and often it is hard to discern between the two so that caveat needs to be kept in mind as we try and flesh out this fascinating period of human history. Mesopotamia is known as the cradle of civilization for this is where civilization was born according to the Bible. Mesopotamia is a Greek word which means between the rivers. Mesopotamia is between the two great rivers we know today as the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers which flow through the Middle Eastern countries of Iraq, Syria and Turkey. Often when people think of Mesopotomia they think of the land in southern Iraq where the city of Babylon existed but we need to remember that Mesopotamia extends right up to the area in southern Turkey between the source of the rivers near Lake Van. Where was the Garden of Eden? The first mention of the land of Mesopotamia in the Bible is found in the account of the Garden of Eden where God created the first human beings, Adam and Eve. Is there any historical evidence aside from the Bible to back up the biblical story of Adam and Eve? William Dankenbring gives us some fascinating information about this. In his book "Beyond Star Wars" he writes: As if to corroborate the Biblical account, in 1932 Dr. E. A. Speiser of the University Museum of Pennsylvania, was excavating 12 miles north of Nineveh. Near the bottom of the Tepe Gawra Mound he found a seal, which he dated at about 3500 B.C. and called 'strongly suggestive of the Adam and Eve story'—it was of a naked man and a naked woman, walking as if utterly downcast and broken-hearted, followed by a serpent! The seal is about an inch in diameter, engraved on stone, and is called the 'Adam and Eve' Seal. Another seal found among ancient Babylonian tablets, now in the British Museum, seems definitely to refer to the Garden of Eden story. In the center is a Tree; on the right, a Man; on the left, a Woman, plucking Fruit; behind the Woman, a Serpent, standing erect, as if whispering to her. 'These old records, carved on stone and clay, at the very dawn of history in the original home of man, preserved under the dust of the ages, and now at last brought to light by the spade of 1 the archaeologist, are evidence that the main features of the Biblical story of Adam became deeply fixed in the thought of primitive man.'(Halley's Bible Handbook (p.72) In Genesis 2:10 we read: Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads. The name of the first is Pishon, which surrounds all the land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good. There is also bdellium and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one that surrounds the whole land of Cush. And the name of the third river is Tigris, which goes toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. The names of the fours rivers that branch off from the river that went through the Garden are the Pishon, Gihon, Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Now since the Tigris and the Euphrates have their sources in the mountainous region of southern Turkey, it is commonly assumed by theologians today that the Garden of Eden is located in that same area. Regarding the Hebrew for the word riverhead Ernest Martin writes: Where rivers came together, or a river intersected with a larger river, this juncture was called the HEAD of the river that joined the other. The word 'HEAD' did not describe the source (the beginning) of a river, but it signified a place where it intersected with another river or flowed into the ocean (Solving the Riddle of Noah's Flood, pp. 10-11). The Hebrew word used for head is rosh, familiar to Jews from the feast day of Rosh Hashanah which means ―Head of the Year‖ (first day of civil new year). Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Greek and Hebrew Dictionaries has this to say about this Hebrew word: H7218 ro'sh (roshe) n-m. 1. the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itc.) [from an unused root apparently meaning to shake] KJV: band, beginning, captain, chapiter, chief(-est place, man, things), company, end, X every (man), excellent, first, forefront, ((be-))head, height, (on) high(-est part, (priest)), X lead, X poor, principal, ruler, sum, top. It means prime or beginning. Beginning can mean source. Prime or forefront, on the other hand, could refer to a chief or major junction. Other independent instances where the word rosh is used in relation to rivers is needed to determine the correct ancient usage for the term in this verse. 2 David Rohl in his book "Legend - The Genesis of Civilisation", like most theologians, suggests that the Garden of Eden was in eastern Turkey near the source of the Tigris and Euphrates. I quote now from his abovementioned book which the research that he has provided which supports that conclusion of his: Down the Garden Path The location of the Garden of Eden has intrigued the inquisitive and the religious ever since the Bible was first read. Today, few scholars would be brave or reckless enough to suggest that the land of Eden actually once existed - let alone that it was from this place that civilised humankind first emerged. This approach speaks volumes for the attitudes of modem scholarship where caution and outright scepticism now seem to prevail. In the century which preceded the Second World War, however, things were rather different. Scholars of the Victorian and Edwardian eras seem to have been rather more adventurous (some might say naive) in their thinking and, because of this, a comprehensive synthesis between the biblical text and archaeology was still a laudable aim. Intui¬tion and reasoned speculation were acceptable tools of the ancient historian - so long as ideas were predominantly based on the available evidence. And much of that evidence came from the Bible which was still a principal source book for ancient history. Over that hundred-year period many Bible researchers attempted to pinpoint Eden's whereabouts on the basis of the description provided in the book of Genesis. There it states that four rivers flowed out from Eden. In Chapter Two of Genesis these rivers are named as: (1) the Gihon - winding through the land of Cush; (2) the Pishon - winding through the land of Havilah; (3) the Hiddekel = Tigris - flowing east of Ashur; (4) the Perath = Euphrates - known to everyone. The geographical clues have always been there but, in spite of this, the various interpretations of this key passage have differed considerably. Some scholars looked to their counterparts from the Roman world - the historians and early church fathers such as JOSEPHUS, St. AUGUSTINE and St. JEROME. Even in their time the question of the whereabouts of Eden was a subject for speculation and debate. The Jewish historian, Josephus, identified the `land of Cush', bordering on Eden with the well-known African kingdom of Kush, south of Egypt. As a result, the first of the four rivers which flowed from Eden - the Gihon (from a root meaning `to burst forth') - was identified as the river Nile. This seemed to be supported by the fact that both the Ethiopians and the Egyptian COPTS referred to their river as the ‗Geion'. However, the renowned nineteenth-century biblical scholar, Friedrich GESENIUS, observed that this name may have itself derived directly from the Alexandrine exposition of the Genesis text. 3 In other words the river was named after the Gihon precisely because of the association of African Kush with biblical Cush. The Christian communities of Africa had done exactly what the early church fathers were now doing in identifying the Nile with the Gihon. The Hiddekel (Arab. Diglat) and Perath (Arab. Firat) were the two well-known rivers of Mesopotamia which the classical authors knew as the Tigris and Euphrates. Thus a broad view of the primeval earthly paradise was established with the land of Eden covering a vast expanse stretching from ancient Sumer in the north to the Nile valley in the south. It then became a straightforward assumption to identify the second river of Eden - the Pishon (from a root meaning ‗to spread') - with one of the other great rivers of the region - the Indus or the Ganges - which flow through Pakistan and India respectively. Whereas Josephus, Augustine and Jerome conjectured that the Ganges was the biblical Pishon, Gesenius opted for the Indus valley as the location of the biblical land of Havilah. His view was soon supported by the discovery of a high civilisation in this region which dated back to early biblical times. The heart of Eden was therefore identified as the central Levant and, in particular, the Promised Land itself. This was all very convenient with the cross-roads of three faiths - Jerusalem - recognised within the theology of Judaism (and therefore Christianity) as the gateway into paradise on the final Day ofJudgement… Some scholars chose to narrow down the field of search. CoLcxis (ofJason and the Argonauts fame) was identified with the land of Havilah, `rich in gold', partly because of the tale of the golden fleece but also on the grounds that the name of its principal river - the Phasis - bore some resemblance to the biblical Pishon… Sources for Eden So far I have introduced you to the crucial passage in the book of Genesis which locates the land of Eden at the sources of four rivers - only two of which we are able to recognise with confidence. As we have seen, there have been many attempts to identify the other rivers of Eden, but none have been particularly convincing. Soon we will be focusing on the true location of the earthly paradise by pinpointing those two rivers in the mountain region of western Iran. But first, what about the name Eden itself? There is an ancient Mesopotamian word edin (Sumerian) or edinu (Akkadian) which first occurs in a short narrative concerning a war between the Mesopotamian city states of Lagash and Umma. The context suggests that this edin is an open plain situated between the two disputing cities - a sort of wasteland or zone without cultivation. On this basis scholars have understood edin to mean ‗open plain' or ‗uncultivated land' and thus some recognise in it the etymological origins of the biblical Eden.' The term edin also occurs in an important Sumerian epic tale known as ‗Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta' - but more on that later. An alternative view is to see Eden coming from the Hebrew verbal root adhan meaning ‗to be delighted'. Thus Eden would mean something like the `place of delight'?... Let us deal in detail with the four great rivers in reverse order. (a) The Perath (Sum. Buranun) is the river known to the Greeks (and subsequently to the modem world) as the Euphrates. To Arabs it is the Firat which, of course, harks back to the biblical Perath. It is the longest river in the Middle East (excluding the African Nile). From its sources near Lake Van (close to Erzerum), the Euphrates flows in a great arc for 4 2,720 kilometres before disgorging into the Persian Gulf to the south of the modem port of Basra.' (b) The Hiddekel (Sum. Idiglat) is the Hebrew name of the River Tigris. It descends from the high Zagros mountains to the west and south of Lake Van and Lake Urmia, journeying some 2,033 kilometres to the head of the Persian Gulf. In its upper reaches there are three major streams which flow into the main channel from the north - the Greater (or Upper) Zab, the Lesser (or Lower) Zab and the Diyala. The principal source rises in a small lake, with the modem name Hazar Golu, which is located about sixty kilometres to the west of Lake Van. ' Much further downstream, just to the north of Basra, the Rivers Tigris and Euphrates come together at the modem town of Kurnah, to form the Shatt el¬Arab, before emptying into the ‗Southern Sea' as the ancient Mesopotamians called the Gulf. The Tigris is the second great waterway of the Mesopotamian alluvial basin. The word Mesopotamia, of course, is Greek for the land ‗between the two rivers' - the mighty Tigris and Euphrates. (c) The identity of the Gihon is a little more difficult to establish but, as Walker discovered, it has to be identified with the River Araxes whose tributaries rise in the mountains to the north of Lake Van and Lake Urmia (also near Erzerum). From there they flow down to join the main channel (known as the Kur) which empties into the Caspian Sea south of Baku. The name Araxes (more recently referred to as the Araks or Aras) and the name Gihon obviously bear no resemblance to each other. Here, then, we seem to have a clear case of a name change which has taken place at some time in the past. So how far back do we have to go to find clues to the original name of the river now known as the Aras? Not very far at all is the answer. During the Islamic invasion of the Caucasus in the eighth century AD stretches of this third great river were still called the Gaihun. There was, indeed, an inter¬mediate stage, before the Gaihun became known simply as the Aras, when the Persians of the last century referred to this major watercourse as theJichon-Aras.6 Interestingly enough, you will find the name Gihon¬Aras in early biblical dictionaries and commentaries dating from Victorian times. Today this crucial piece of information has apparently been forgotten and you would be hard pressed to find a modern work on Genesis which links the Gihon with the Aras. So much for modern scholarship! Victorian scholars not only identified the Aras/ Araxes with the Gihon but also suggested that the classical land of Cossaea, located according to the ancient geographers near Media and the Caspian Sea, was to be identified with the biblical land of Cush through which the Gihon flowed. (d) Finally, the biblical Pishon is, according to Walker's arguments, the River Uizhun which rises from several springs located near Mount Sahand (a large extinct volcano east of Lake Urmia) and within the Zagros mountain massif around the Kurdish capital of Sanandaj. It outflows into the southern Caspian Sea not far from the modern port of Rast. The Uizhun is also known as the Kezel Uzun – ‗long gold'. Here the ancient name Uizhun, of unknown meaning, has been colloquialised into the 5 familiar Iranian word Uzun ('dark red' or `gold'). There is no obvious connection between the names Pishon and Uizhun but the geographical overview seems to confirm this identification. The simple schematic diagram (on the following page) indicates where we should look for the Pishon - having already established the identity of the three other water courses mentioned in Genesis 2:8-14. Working around in anti-clockwise order, we have the Gihon/Gaihun-Aras occupying the north-eastem sector; the Perath/Euphrates flowing out from the north-west; and the Hiddekel/Tigris descending from the mountains in the south- west. This leaves the south-eastern sector as the place to look for the Pishon. The only great river flowing through this quarter is the Uizhun. Unfortunately, there are no modem topographical features or town-names which appear to retain memories of the biblical name of the river. But, as Walker argued, the name Uizhun itself may hold the key. This is our first opportunity to indulge in the ‗name game'. For a moment let us drop the initial vowel in Uizhun. This leaves us with [...]izhun which, allowing for the usual linguistic variations in vocalisation (sh to s or z and o to u), would be identical with biblical [...]ishon. It appears that, in the Hebrew text of Genesis, the vowel `U' underwent a conversion to the labial consonant `P'. Uizhun is thus tlic original name of the river, stubbornly retaitivd by local tradition into modem times, whilst the Pishon is a biblical corruption of that original name. At first glance this may seem a little far fetched, but an example of precisely this kind of fluidity is known. The modem name Pisdeli (ascribed to an ancient occupation mound near the southern shore of Lake Urmia) derives from the ancient Iranian toponym Ush or Uash which was in common use throughout the general region of southern Urmia. Recently discovered contemporary texts confirm that Pisdeli was ancient Uishteri (demonstrating the well¬attested changes from tto dand rto lbut, most importantly, also U to P).' So all four of the rivers of Genesis have their headwaters in the Lake Van and Lake Urmia region… Cush and Havilah Genesis 2:14 confirms what is already well established - that the River Tigris flows to the east of the heartland of Assyria (biblical Ashur). The very fact that the writer felt the need to record such an obvious geo-political detail should give us the confidence to believe that the other topographical pointers mentioned must also represent the geographical reality of his time. So what of the lands of Cush and Havilah? Genesis 2:13 describes the River Gihon as winding ‗all through the land of Cush'. Are there any classical or modern topographical clues in the general vicinity of the River Aras (formerly Gaihun) which suggest that this region may once have been called the land of Cush? We have already mentioned Gesenius' observations concerning the land of Cossaea, but there is a much more impressive monument to ancient Cush. To the north of the modem city of Tabriz there is a high mountain pass through which the modern road winds its way up to the towns of Ahar and Meshginshahr. Several of the Aras' tributaries 6 have their headwaters near these AzraiI towns. The modem Iranian name of the 4,000- metre mountain ridge which separates the valley of Tabriz from Ahar is Kusheh Dagh - the `Mountain of Kush'. Genesis 2:11 informs us that the River Pishon winds all through the land of Havilah and that this region is rich in gold. Although I have been unable to find a general geological report on the river basins of the upper reaches of the Uizhun/Kezel Uzun, it is clear from the isolated information I have gathered that the mineral wealth in the entire region is significant. In recent years gold has been mined in the Ardabil region and a SASSANIAN (third to seventh centuries AD) gold mine has been identified at the village of Zarshuyan near the famous ZOROASTRIAN fire temple of TAKHT-E SULEIMAN. If the Kezel Uzun is the biblical Pishon, then this early gold mine is at the heart of ancient Havilah `rich in gold'. Interestingly enough, the river which flows down from the extinct volcano of Takht-e Suleiman is called the Zarrineh Rud which means the ‗Golden River'. The village name 'Zarshuyan' itself is formed of two Persian words: zar – ‗gold' and shuyan –‗washing', strongly suggesting a link to panning for gold in the `Golden River' (Zarrineh Rud). As we have noted, even the word Uzun in Kezel Uzun can have the meaning `gold' although its more common colloquial meaning is ‗dark red'. There is no doubt then that the mountain region from which the various sources of the Uizhun/Uzun/Pishon flow could indeed be described as a land once `rich in gold'. But, according to the author of Genesis, Havilah is also the source of prized stones, in particular 'Shoham stone'. It is not exactly clear which stone this represents. However, recent Iranian research has shown that lapis lazuli, previously thought only to come from Badakhshan in Afganistan, is to be found in the Anguran region, at the heart of the area we have identified as biblical Havilah. David Rohl has marshalled together some good evidence connecting the names for the Araxes and Kezel Uzun with Gihon and Pishon respectively and some good evidence that Cush and Havilah could be in the region of Armenia. For the opposing point of view indicating the head is used for the junction nearer to the mouths of these rivers rather than at their sources I‘d like to now quote an article by John Keyser entitled ―Newly Discovered – The First River of Eden: In Genesis 2:10-14 we read: "Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became FOUR RIVERHEADS. The name of the first is PISHON; it is the one which encompasses the whole land of HAVILAH, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good. Bdellium and the onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is GIHON; it is the one which encompasses the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is HIDDEKEL [TIGRIS]; it is the one which goes toward the east of Assyria. The fourth river is the EUPHRATES." While two of the four rivers mentioned in this passage are recognisable today and flow in the same general location as they did before the Flood, the other two have apparently disappeared from the face of the earth. Great changes occurred in the topography of the earth during the Noachian flood and also at other times in the earth's history since; so it is not that remarkable that some of 7 the pre-Flood geographical features changed or disappeared altogether. As an example of this, scientists have found evidence of floods in Mesopotamia, deep lakes in Africa, grasslands and lakes in Arabia and heavy forest cover along the eastern Mediterranean coast. This provides testimony that a lengthy wet period once enveloped the ancient Near East. Some researchers, such as Ernest L. Martin, claim that the Karun River (which flows into the Euphrates/Tigris river system) is the Pison, while the Karkheh, which also flows into the Euphrates/Tigris river system, is the Gihon. However, these two rivers are minor in nature and do not fulfill the requirements of the Book of Genesis. In an attempt to correctly locate and identify the Pishon and the Gihon rivers, we need to closely evaluate Genesis chapter 2. Garden in Armenia? Since the Tigris and the Euphrates have their sources in the mountainous region of Armenia, it is usually assumed by theologians today that the Garden of Eden was located in that same area. Therefore, they claim, the Gihon could be the Araxes which flows into the Caspian Sea and the Pison could be the Cyrus which joins with the Araxes. Smith's Bible Dictionary states: "...most probably, Eden was situated in Armenia, near the origin of the rivers Tigris and Euphrates, and in which same region rise the Araxes (Pison of Genesis) and the Oxus (Gihon)" (page 155). Insight On the Scriptures (Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, 1988. Page 676) maintains that "the traditional location for the garden of Eden has long been suggested to have been a mountainous area some 225 Km (140 mi) SW of Mount Ararat and a few kilometers S of Lake Van, in the eastern part of modern Turkey." Also: "The Hebrew text points rather, to a location in the mountainous region N of the Mesopotamian plains, the area where the Euphrates and Tigris rivers have their present sources." Now, is this feasible – is this really so? While all of this may appear quite reasonable to the average person, the geography is very confusing when this interpretation is applied -- and is actually unintelligible to our modern understanding of the topographical features in the region of Armenia. Notes Ernest L. Martin: "From what place and what manner did the one major river that supposedly fed the four other rivers have its source? Also, how can one river flowing downstream in a single riverbed (and in a mountainous area) logically be explained as branching off into four main rivers? Only in a delta region near the mouth of a river can one river become four (or more), but the sources of the Euphrates and Tigris today are in the mountains (separated by a mountain ridge) and so most commentators dismiss the idea of most biblical traditionalists as impossible in a geographical sense" (Solving the Riddle of Noah's Flood, pages 7-8). Martin goes on to say: "In truth, the river system of Moses has such mysterious factors associated with it that most interpreters today throw up their hands and say: 'Only God knows what Moses meant because it doesn't make any sense to us."' Do these passages in Genesis have to be so baffling? Can we make sense of these apparent anomalies in the geography of Moses? The River System of Eden 8 The main reason the account of the rivers of Eden is so difficult to understand is because the interpreters of the Bible have completely missed the point of what Moses was saying. Explains Ernest Martin, "In actual fact, they have been reading Moses COMPLETELY BACKWARDS from what he intended. If one looks closely at the matter, Moses was NOT speaking about a major river flowing downstream from some unknown source in the Land of Eden and then dividing into the rivers Euphrates, Tigris, Pison and the Gihon when it reached the region of the Garden. IN NO WAY! The geographical intention of Moses was directly OPPOSITE from what most people have thought. And this is where the problem has emerged. Moses actually commenced his geographical account of the river system STARTING AT THE PERSIAN GULF and proceeding northward. His direction of interest was UPSTREAM, NOT downstream!" (Ibid., page 8). Martin goes on to explain that when the Bible talks about the Land of Eden, it is not referring to a small plot of land. It is, in fact, referring to a HUGE region comparable to Old Testament countries such as Assyria, Cush (Ethiopia), Egypt or Canaan! And it was inside this vast territory called Eden that God planted the Garden -- which in itself was quite large. Martin notes that the Garden itself had to be spacious because four rivers could be traced from the Garden into adjacent geographical areas. These regions were NOT small insignificant parcels of land as most people imagine today. Now let us take note of what Moses said in the Book of Genesis about the river system associated with the Land of Eden and the Garden. "He said that 'a river went out of Eden to water the Garden, and from there [from the garden] it divided and became into four heads' (Gen.2:10). The use of the word 'heads' (Hebrew: rosh) in relation to the four rivers gives the impression to us in the western world that Moses is talking about the HEADstreams or HEADwaters of the four rivers - their sources!" However, this is NOT what Moses meant! In M'Clintock and Strong's Cyclopaedia (Vol. III, p. 53) we read: "In no instance is rosh (literally, 'head') applied as the SOURCE of a river." It is very important to understand this point because it is precisely THIS misconception that has given Bible interpreters the most difficulty in trying to comprehend the preflood river system as penned by Moses. We must realize that in the first ages of the world in Middle Eastern society, THE HEAD OF A RIVER WAS AT ITS MOUTH -- NOT ITS SOURCE! Let Ernest Martin explain: "Where rivers came together, or a river intersected with a larger river, this juncture was called the HEAD of the river that joined the other. The word 'HEAD' did not describe the source (the beginning) of a river, but it signified a place where it intersected with another river or flowed into the ocean. And so it was with Moses. In his description of this river system, he was simply giving a geographical description of the HEAD (that is, the central 'hub') where the four rivers branched out from one another" (Solving the Riddle of Noah 's Flood, pp. 10-11). In other words, MOSES' DIRECTION OF THINKING WAS UPSTREAM -- NOT DOWNSTREAM! A number of scholars, including Professor R.K. Harrison, have understood this. He noted that "probably the most suitable answer concerning the actual location of the Garden of Eden is to think of the river that watered the garden and thereafter became four 'branches' as actually comprising the beginning or juncture GOING UPSTREAM from a point in southern Mesopotamia" (ISBE, new edition, vol. II, p. 17) Emphasis mine). 9