Eden Revisited #3: The Garden River

The Eden story includes a detailed report of a river complex then never mentions it again.  Yet, this “out of context” passage hints at our natural origins.  Without the unbiblical constraints of perfectionism, humanity’s lineage started outside the garden.

The river passage separates two versions of man’s arrival in the garden.  The river ran through Eden and the garden.  Then outside, it divided into four rivers that flowed through distant lands where commodities existed.

Believers speculate on the meaning and placement of this passage.  Many scholars have used it in the attempt to locate Eden.  Each time they ended in failure because the Tigris and Euphrates do not share headwaters with two other major rivers or even with each other.  They conclude this source was lost in the Great Flood or the worldview of the ancients contained an underground river where the four great rivers originated.  They then pick two large rivers that they think fits the descriptions.  Their reasoning often shows philosophical prejudices for those chosen.

Others say this passage is symbolic for the “river of life” or a spiritual description of the human body.  These tend to get very mystical and impart unbiblical philosophy.

A few say the river section is a late insertion, which interrupts the flow of the Eden story.  They tend to downplay or ignore the text.

These popular interpretations do not answer my questions.  Why did distant rivers and lands have names but not the one that flowed through the garden?  If later people named them, then why place the passage in context with the creation of man?  If the passage is purely metaphysical, then why is an interpretation not included; why must we guess?  If the Great Flood altered the landscape, then why would we consider that any of these rivers exist today?  Why remember them at all? 

More importantly, if God inspired the Bible, what was the reason He wanted this passage included at this point of the story when it provided no literal map and a very sketchy metaphor?

The text does not provide evidence that it was meant as a metaphor where we glean theological meaning.  The writing lacks mystical phrases to develop supernatural implications.  I believe that God inspired the biblical creation texts and their placement.  We must address a passage about nature as a description of nature.  We must set aside our preconceived ideals and let nature interpret them.

Nevertheless, the rivers still do not match any river system today.  Does that matter?  Not really.  Inspiration requires truth not perfection.  As a natural metaphor, the named rivers do not need to be huge rivers or even entire river systems.  They might describe a small river with many channels, with names transferred to or adopted from the larger rivers.  The lands could represent groups of people that later became city-states.  Within this kind of metaphor a literal description is drawn.  All the people who would fill these lands came from one source.  No matter where we live, humanity is one family.

Nature gives us a literal reason for the insertion of lands at the creation of man but beyond the characters’ comprehension.  Outside the garden is where our lineage originated.

Instead of an unnatural instantaneous creation, God used evolution to produce all the lineages of animals, including that of humanity (Genesis One).  The river complex depicts places almost-humans lived.  They knew how to obey, speak, sew, and collect interesting objects, but they did not know shame or evil.  Out of those people, God chose one male to receive His Breath, a spirit, which gives life beyond the normal life of animals.  In doing this, God joined with nature to create something different (Genesis One).  He then transferred that spirit into a female and set the stage for them to choose desire over obedience.  That gave them lasting shame, but it also provided the possibility of becoming something greater, a true image of God (Genesis One).

Outside the garden, Adam and Eve transferred the Breath and Knowledge to their children.  Their children found mates from the almost-humans, and the legacy of the Breath and knowledge continued.  These almost-humans knew fear of strangers, since Cain said they killed vagabonds.  Fear is our birthright from the animal kingdom.  Growing past fear is our birthright from God.

The almost-humans knew symbolism, so they did not kill the one who bore God’s mark.  Instead, they respected him enough to help build a fortified community (city).  After many, many, generations went by, only the people who possessed the Breath and had knowledge of good and evil remained.  Humanity is one as our Creator is one.

In the safety of a garden, God changed two almost-humans into humans.  For our good, God let innocence end and sin exist so that humankind could become the image of God.

To be continued:

[Lessons from Creation’s Parables: Genesis and Standard Science, Sung as One, by Jo Helen Cox.]

Also in this series:

Eden Revisited #1: Powerful Love vs. Limited Perfection

Eden Revisited #2: A Safe Place to Grow

Eden Revisited #4: Humanity’s Origins

Eden Revisited #5: Creation of Death

Eden Revisited #6: Curse? What Curse?

Eden Revisited #7: Original Sin Theology

Eden Revisited #8: The Lesson of Blessing

Also see series:

Genesis Revisited

Eden Revisited