Evolution of what?

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Myths often comes in two forms:

1. As cultural narratives, like epic poems, or scriptural narratives.
2. Or as some sorts of devotional lyrics, like hymns. Devotions to deities or to demigods.

Most people - the experts in mythology, folklore and legends - have the tendencies to focused on the former (narratives) than the later (devotional texts).

The thing with mythological narratives, they are often written with appearances or resemblance of being “history-like”, sometimes including names of places that are geographically real, hence the kernel of truth, but a large parts of the narrative is more myths than history.

Like in the creation of the Garden of Eden, it mentioned Euphrates & Tigris, are 2 geographical rivers located in most Iraq, but also in the Armenian Highlands that are part of modern Turkey. Just because Genesis 2 can named 2 actual rivers (2 kernels of truth), don’t make the rest of story - creations of Adam & of Eve, the creation of man before creation of plants before the creation of animals (which contradicted the order of timeline of creation in Genesis 1), the fruits from trees that can give knowledge or give eternal life, the talking serpent, and the angel with sword of fire, etc, don’t make this myth as history or fact.

Homer could name many of the cities that existed in his time, in the Iliad and Odyssey, but it doesn’t make the Trojan War any more historical than the myth of Adam and Eve or the Garden of Eden.

Many authors writing modern fictions often set the scenes of their narratives in real places, but these don’t make these novels as nonfiction and historic.

Having kernel or some kernels of truth, don’t turn myth into history.

And there lies the heart of the problem. Some believers of religious texts often fall for these traps, confusing myths with history, because of there have been some sorts of kernels behind the narratives, justifying their beliefs.

I agree that four rivers can be found at many places but I again submit that the combination of a mountain, four rivers flowing from its base, and archaeological evidence of habitation at 3500 BCE can only be found at Pushkar. Hence, I am saying that Pentateuch may be correct in describing the Garden of Eden.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Ezekiel 28:13 - You were in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you: carnelian, chrysolite and emerald, topaz, onyx and jasper, lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl.

Ezekiel 28.14. The holy mountain of God refers to the Garden of Eden has been my understanding. If it was not garden of Eden then one has to explain what is referred to in the Holy Mountain of God.

What is the true source of any river? It is rain. It is the water cycle. This is your kernal of truth.

In the case of Eden, it was rain ultimately but not immediately the rain recharges the aquifers around the Pushkar Lake and that led to a natural discharge into the lake through an artesian well and that is indicated in the source of river.

It is the analogy that if Nile and Indus don't work then no other work is not correct. I am repeating that four rivers named Sagarmati, Saraswati, Roopnadi and Dai, do emerge from the base of the same mountain Pushkar in Rajasthan. Hence the analogy with Indus and Nile does not work.

The location, if it existed at all, is under the Persian Gulf waters.

It is purely an assumption that the location is under Persian Gulf waters. Such hypothesis is created because we cannot find the Garden of Eden at that place.

 

[GoodAttention]

Ezekiel 28.14. The holy mountain of God refers to the Garden of Eden has been my understanding. If it was not garden of Eden then one has to explain what is referred to in the Holy Mountain of God.

What is there to explain? One is a garden, the other is a mountain.

You are making the claim, but provide no reasoning. I've asked you twice now to provide reasoning but you do not.

In the case of Eden, it was rain ultimately but not immediately the rain recharges the aquifers around the Pushkar Lake and that led to a natural discharge into the lake through an artesian well and that is indicated in the source of river.

Nothing in the scripture supports what you are saying.

It is the analogy that if Nile and Indus don't work then no other work is not correct. I am repeating that four rivers named Sagarmati, Saraswati, Roopnadi and Dai, do emerge from the base of the same mountain Pushkar in Rajasthan. Hence the analogy with Indus and Nile does not work.

I am confused. Are you saying the scriptures are purposefully misleading when it says Euphrates and Tigris?

It is purely an assumption that the location is under Persian Gulf waters. Such hypothesis is created because we cannot find the Garden of Eden at that place.

I'm sorry but nothing you have said makes any sense.

Good luck with your theory, maybe you can visit Rajasthan and take photos for all of us.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

What is there to explain? One is a garden, the other is a mountain.

Yes, one is the Garden of God and another is the Mountain of God and since both are God's places, we can assume that they are the same place.

Nothing in the scripture supports what you are saying.

The scriptures talk of. the Eden being a garden which indicates plentifulness, and this can only happen if there is perennial source of water since and that is precisely what is provided by an artesian well.

I am confused. Are you saying the scriptures are purposefully misleading when it says Euphrates and Tigris?

The scriptures do not talk about Euphrates or Tigris? The words are Perath and Hidkel. They have been misidentified with Euphrates or Tigris. So, the scripture is correct that misidentification is wrong.

e you can visit Rajasthan and take photos for all of us.

So, I am sharing pictures of three rivers that I have taken in 1982, which are Roopnadi coming to the north, the Dai river coming on the east and the Saraswati on the west. I am also sharing a picture of the Buddha Pushkar Lake made with the pumping station, which indicates that it has plentiful water.

 

[GoodAttention]

Yes, one is the Garden of God and another is the Mountain of God and since both are God's places, we can assume that they are the same place.

Garden east of Eden is never referred to as Garden of God. This is your assumption.

The scriptures talk of. the Eden being a garden which indicates plentifulness, and this can only happen if there is perennial source of water since and that is precisely what is provided by an artesian well.

The Garden is east of Eden, how do you reconcile this?

The scriptures do not talk about Euphrates or Tigris? The words are Perath and Hidkel. They have been misidentified with Euphrates or Tigris. So, the scripture is correct that misidentification is wrong.

How do you support your claim?

So, I am sharing pictures of three rivers that I have taken in 1982, which are Roopnadi coming to the north, the Dai river coming on the east and the Saraswati on the west. I am also sharing a picture of the Buddha Pushkar Lake made with the pumping station, which indicates that it has plentiful water.

 

[cladking]

I agree that four rivers can be found at many places but I again submit that the combination of a mountain, four rivers flowing from its base, and archaeological evidence of habitation at 3500 BCE can only be found at Pushkar. Hence, I am saying that Pentateuch may be correct in describing the Garden of Eden.

It might be pointed out that normally rivers are defined by a line that marks a drainage basin. Water falling on one side of a line like the Continental divide goes east and on the other goes west. It is unusual for three rivers to be close to one another and they can not originate from a point. Four rivers serving a mountain is more unusual but each has its own drainage basin.

The Bible says the river watering the garden was separated into four headwaters. With this terminology it could simply mean the writers believed water that evaporated from the Tree of life, the garden, and the river flowing from the garden fell as rain in distant areas creating the headwaters of more rivers.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

It might be pointed out that normally rivers are defined by a line that marks a drainage basin. Water falling on one side of a line like the Continental divide goes east and on the other goes west. It is unusual for three rivers to be close to one another and they can not originate from a point. Four rivers serving a mountain is more unusual but each has its own drainage basin.

The Bible says the river watering the garden was separated into four headwaters. With this terminology it could simply mean the writers believed water that evaporated from the Tree of life, the garden, and the river flowing from the garden fell as rain in distant areas creating the headwaters of more rivers.

Yes, I agree that rivers are identified. Rivers are defined by a line that marks the drainage basins. The four rivers that I have described above are in fact four different drainage basins. So, there is no need to get into forehead waters and all and other explanations. When the four rivers can be seen directly.