Where is the Garden of Eden?

[amadeus2]

Like little children, we have to learn to walk in our new nature. We now have the nature of God not a sinful nature. Still we've always allowed our mind to lead our spirit. We now have to learn how to let our spirit lead our mind. Working out our own salvation is a total learning process.

What nature did the first man Adam, the son of God, have before he sinned through disobedience? We have been given a new opportunity to do it right, but it is still possible to err this time, is it not, even though the means has been provided to make to the end of our journey with Him?

I like the way you described the needed reversal so as to be led by His Spirit instead of being led by our mind.

 

[amadeus2]

What's greater, the garden of Eden or Jesus Himself? In other words, what's most important the Creator or the creation? Not being curt, the OP did ask an intriguing question but I mention this as a little reminder that when we have Jesus, the garden of Eden won't outdo a relationship with the Savior

Yes, indeed! What is more important than knowing our Lord and following Him?

 

[Dovegiven]

Wisdom brother!

I want to make a point, not sure anyone mentioned this as I've quickly skimmed the thread (catching up).

What's greater, the garden of Eden or Jesus Himself? In other words, what's most important the Creator or the creation? Not being curt, the OP did ask an intriguing question but I mention this as a little reminder that when we have Jesus, the garden of Eden won't outdo a relationship with the Savior

Eventually heaven will come down to earth for all eternity. That's just too phenomenal to even think about.

A very thought provoking topic! Tomorrow's Senior Adult Sunday School lesson is "God's Promise of a New Home", one the class has been looking forward to since seeing the current study guide Sept 1, and ought to be packed room. I've been on this topic a few weeks getting ready to teach it and answer a lot of earnest questions. The youngest is 82, the oldest 99, plus usually some younger visitors.

An interesting thing is the size of New Jerusalem, the holy city in heaven right now. Each of its 2.25 million square mile floors is 65% as large as the lower US states (3.8 million square miles). Twelve floors figures 27 million sq. miles, equal to the estimated habitable land area of earth. Some of the interior volume is the holy mountain, crested by the physical tabernacle of God, the atmosphere filled with witnesses.

But even more amazing is that for now the temple of God, where he has desired to inhabit, not made with hands, is.......... inside us.
1 Corinthians 3:16-17 (KJV) 16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

 

[Brad Huber]

The Garden of Eden was made for Adam to live in. It wasn't promised for anyone else, but of course his wife was eligible. Adam disqualified himself, so was driven out. That was the end of the garden's purpose. The Tree of Life is in Heaven too, so there would be no reason to preserve it on earth.

The flood of Genesis 7-8 ended that old world, leaving no trace of air breathers not found on Noah's ark. Most of the former vegetation and moving creatures wound up being coal or oil, methane, etc. The surface of Earth was dramatically altered, sheared smooth by the waves. Had Eden been spared it would not have been necessary for Noah to prepare the ark and preserve the animals, as the Garden had some of all animals.

Just a thought. :whistle

Some strange thoughts. You assume much, not based on scripture. You may be right, but you write as if its facts, not a wise course unless of course you are simply trying to manipulate the readers to agree with your views. Nothing wrong with your views as long as you understand they are based on faith and not fact.

 

[Curtis]

What a born again Christian has is something Adam, and Eve never had. They walked with God in the garden in the cool of the day, but in a child of God he walks inside us, not on the outside. Jesus referred to his Word as spirit, life, and as a "seed". A seed of life produces a "tree of life" that grows and produces fruit with in a believer. We are allowed to partake from this tree of life as it produces it's fruit from with in us, and not only from with in us but from each other.

Wisdom, which is understanding of the Word of God is a "tree of life".

Pro 3:18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retaineth her.

Pro 11:30 The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and whoever captures souls is wise.

2Co 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

 

[Dovegiven]

Some strange thoughts. You assume much, not based on scripture. You may be right, but you write as if its facts, not a wise course unless of course you are simply trying to manipulate the readers to agree with your views. Nothing wrong with your views as long as you understand they are based on faith and not fact.

So let's test your opinion, whether based on fact or scripture or faith.

I wrote:

The Garden of Eden was made for Adam to live in.

Genesis 2:8 (KJV) And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

From that Adam was formed somewhere outside the Garden, contrary to what I was taught many years.

Genesis 2:15 (KJV) And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

It appears God made that Garden for only Adam to manage it. None of his sons inherited it, whether they sinned or not. Abel's sacrifice was accepted, yet he wasn't put in the Garden. Instead, his brother killed him.

That Garden was for that one man Adam, later to include his wife, though she also was disqualified because of sin. Sin ended any chance of another human setting foot in it at least partly from the possibility of a sinner eating of the tree and living forever in his fallen flesh state.

What's speculative about that? How am I failing to comment on fact? Why is that belief just a matter of faith? Because I believe the Genesis account is truth, by faith? How can any of the Bible be believed without faith it is true?

I wrote:

it wasn't promised for anyone else, but of course his wife was eligible. Adam disqualified himself, so was driven out. That was the end of the garden's purpose. The Tree of Life is in Heaven too, so there would be no reason to preserve it on earth.

I think that conclusion is based on facts and certainly the absence of any promise by God to any man concerning setting foot in the Garden. There isn't even a hint of a possibility.

Note the Bible says Adam was driven out, along with his wife. Genesis 3:23-24 (KJV)
23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

I wrote:

There is no record in the Bible of any further use of the Garden by any creature.

Revelation chapters 2 & 22 describe the Tree of Life in Heaven, the same species in the Garden originally meant for consumption, there being only one other tree that was forbidden by God.
Of course I believe all that by faith. I take it all as literally as God allows man to take it literally from a simple reading in context. I don't believe as some do that Heaven is merely a concept in the minds of men, or that the Tree of Life is merely symbolic. You will find it used symbolically in Proverbs.

Can you find one scripture indicating other than my opinion? If you have one, you are free to propose it.

I wrote:

The flood of Genesis 7-8 ended that old world, leaving no trace of air breathers not found on Noah's ark.

There are more mentions of that besides Gen 7 & 8. Peter believed that. 2 Peter 3:3-7 (KJV)
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

I'm with Peter on that. I am not among the willingly ignorant. Peter and I believe that account by faith.

Is it necessary to quote about the flood from Genesis?

I wrote:

Most of the former vegetation and moving creatures wound up being coal or oil, methane, etc. The surface of Earth was dramatically altered, sheared smooth by the waves. Had Eden been spared it would not have been necessary for Noah to prepare the ark and preserve the animals, as the Garden had some of all animals.

I realize Old Earthers and their brethren the Darwinian evolutionists consider that my unfounded opinion. I was with them until 1986, ten years after my spiritual birthday. It had to be a matter of indelible fact towards me to handle the science courses I took. We were not allowed to buck that opinion, else take a big hit in grades or be forced out of a science career, though admitted to pursue another major. Now I realize and believe the true science of the Biblical record of creation and the flood of Gen 7 & 8. Many well respected scientists are agreeing. If you have a better idea of the cause of the huge deposits of biomass around the world in the form of organic combustibles at great thicknesses and depths, say on. The consistent arrangement of species in those far flung deposits supports the Genesis flood model, with not one example of intermediates (missing links) that Darwin admitted probably would never be found. Big topic.

Should God have to have had written some common sense ideas about the Garden of Eden, the animals of which were not driven out? If they were there when the flood came, wouldn't they have survived along with the Garden if the Garden survived? If so, what foolishness for Noah to go through his experience? Why not just have enough ark to save his own family? Well, I think that's heavy speculation, which some people like to say about it.

Is agreeing with God about that, then promoting that word, manipulation of readers? I hope you are not among the scoffers.

I wrote:

Just a thought. :whistle

OK, I can see how that one opinion can be seen as questionable. I had in fact expressed several thoughts. Yet, in another sense, the whole of those thoughts in that post presents one thought.
Also, I can't whistle, so that emoticon was not a true statement of my last thought in that post. I apologize for any confusion it caused.

 

[Dovegiven]

What a born again Christian has is something Adam, and Eve never had. They walked with God in the garden in the cool of the day, but in a child of God he walks inside us, not on the outside. Jesus referred to his Word as spirit, life, and as a "seed". A seed of life produces a "tree of life" that grows and produces fruit with in a believer. We are allowed to partake from this tree of life as it produces it's fruit from with in us, and not only from with in us but from each other.

Wisdom, which is understanding of the Word of God is a "tree of life".

Pro 3:18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retaineth her.

Pro 11:30 The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and whoever captures souls is wise.

2Co 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

It all started with God and Adam having a personal relationship. Reference the great majority of the Bible demonstrating God wanted that relationship back. In Christ we are sealed towards a future redemption. In the New Earth God will bring his holy city down to earth to live among men forever being our God. That happens after our total redemption. We will literally live with him, not by our current hope and faith. Those will have been fulfilled, there being no more use for hope or faith.

 

[Brad Huber]

So let's test your opinion, whether based on fact or scripture or faith.

I wrote:

Genesis 2:8 (KJV) And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

From that Adam was formed somewhere outside the Garden, contrary to what I was taught many years.

It is also said that man was created from the dust of the earth, are you assuming there was no dust in the garden that he could have been formed there? Again, I see assumption in the form of assumed fact.

Genesis 2:15 (KJV) And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

It appears God made that Garden for only Adam to manage it. None of his sons inherited it, whether they sinned or not. Abel's sacrifice was accepted, yet he wasn't put in the Garden. Instead, his brother killed him.

That Garden was for that one man Adam, later to include his wife, though she also was disqualified because of sin. Sin ended any chance of another human setting foot in it at least partly from the possibility of a sinner eating of the tree and living forever in his fallen flesh state.

What's speculative about that? How am I failing to comment on fact? Why is that belief just a matter of faith? Because I believe the Genesis account is truth, by faith? How can any of the Bible be believed without faith it is true?

And yet the sentient creature known as the serpent was there as well, and the animals that were brought to Adam to name. It doesnt say it was only for Adam, just that Adam would tend it. It is wise not to assume more than we know.

I am not one for long replies or long arguements, so I didnt bother reading or replying to the rest. Not a lawyer or scribe here, just a man of few words who tends to think most have too many words and not always wise words. No sense in continuing this conversation, as I sense that you merely want to argue for yourself and your opinion. You are welcome to it.

 

[Dovegiven]

It is also said that man was created from the dust of the earth, are you assuming there was no dust in the garden that he could have been formed there? Again, I see assumption in the form of assumed fact.

There is nothing assumed by the plainly written words of Genesis 3:23 (KJV) Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

So according to your comprehension, that means God removed Adam from the Garden then sent him back to the Garden where he was formed from Garden dust, to till it In spite of the angels guarding and flaming sword menacing?

And yet the sentient creature known as the serpent was there as well, and the animals that were brought to Adam to name. It doesnt say it was only for Adam, just that Adam would tend it. It is wise not to assume more than we know.

While it doesn't say verbatim "only for Adam to tend it", it does say in Genesis 2:15 (KJV) And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

I am not one for long replies or long arguements, so I didnt bother reading or replying to the rest. Not a lawyer or scribe here, just a man of few words who tends to think most have too many words and not always wise words. No sense in continuing this conversation, as I sense that you merely want to argue for yourself and your opinion. You are welcome to it.

I figured you'd have to avoid that post. It isn't my intention to rub your face in it like that, but to establish facts presented with a supportable opinion pertinent to this topic. I know there are many readers capable of understanding those two confirmations of truth above are not errors. I don't tend to dwell on argument, so will leave my statements unrepented for the record.

My suggestion for you is from 2 Timothy 2:15-16 (KJV)
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

Try by faith believing the word of God is fact, is truth.

 

[Brad Huber]

So according to your comprehension, that means God removed Adam from the Garden then sent him back to the Garden where he was formed from Garden dust, to till it In spite of the angels guarding and flaming sword menacing?

Its speaking of the earth in general, not a location, otherwise he would be tilling a small spot from where he was taken and that spot would not be enough to sustain himself much less him, his wife, and children. Assumption, assumption, assumption. This is ridiculous, goodbye to this conversation.

 

[Bendito]

Question.... If the garden is gone, why is there an angel guarding it to keep us mortals from accessing the tree of life
Question.... If God set a guard to keep us out that wouldn't that mean it's still there, yet nobody can find it....Why not?
Last question.....Why did God kick Adam out of the garden? Anger or loving mercy?[/QUOTE]

I'm kind of amazed how this thread attracted such discussion. If we can use a bit more scripture it would help us delve the depths of this subject a bit more accurately. What do you think?

 

[B-A-C]

This thread has shifted slightly. From "where" was the garden... to who was in the garden, and why were they there.

Ahhh... why were we created?

Well, from Gen 1:26; an onward, man is given some commands.
The first is to multiply... ( Gen 1:28; ) This is the first command given to man from God.
It was given before man fell. It was always God's will for man to fill the earth. This isn't an assumption, it's scripture.

Man was supposed to rule over the earth and subdue it ( Gen 1:28; ) and rule over the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky,
and every living thing that moves. We are told God gave plants for food ( Gen 1:29; )
The plants are also food for the animals ( Gen 1:30; )

At this point, God saw all that He had made and... it was good ( Gen 1:31; )

So before man fell, we were supposed to rule the earth, and the animals upon it.
We were supposed to multiply and fill the earth. Was it only the garden? It doesn't say that,
it says to fill the earth. (That's one command that men followed pretty good ).

Man was of course formed from the dust of the ground, and his life was "breathed into his nostrils"
the breath of life, and man became a living being. ( Gen 2:7; )
We were of course created in God's image, not the image of a monkey that became a man.

So some of the reason we were created was to subdue the earth and the animals, and to multiply and fill the earth.
When we get to Gen 2:15; it says that God put the man (Adam) into the garden to cultivate and keep it.

So now cultivating the garden has been added to the list of chores.
The second command God gave man was in Gen 2:17; "from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat"
... for in that day.. you shall surely die.

This is the passage most often given for free will. God told man not to do something... yet man did it anyway.

In Gen 2:19; we also see that God let the man name all the animals. The woman was given to man before the fall also.
We've made it all the way through Gen 2, and man hasn't fallen yet. Some say this could've been millions of years.
But I would assume that if God told man to multiply and fill the earth, that would have already happened in
"millions of years".

Finally in Gen 3; we see the fall of man. The serpent... The serpent isn't called Satan in Genesis... he doesn't
really have a name yet. yet we are told who the serpent really was in Rev 12:9; and Rev 20:2;

Pure speculation... but it has been suggested that men would have filled the earth.. more "gardens would have been created to accommodate them. Yet it makes sense, unless only Adam and Eve were to have "the" garden.

Other than multiplying... subduing the earth and the animals, and cultivating the garden....
It seems the man could talk to God. In Gen 3:8; it says God was walking in the garden, and the man (and his wife)
hid from God ( Gen 3:8; ) This is often taken to mean the man thought he was hiding from God, but God
really knew where the man was.
Man had fellowship with God before the fall.

After the fall... things change a bit.

 

[Curtis]

1Co 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
1Co 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
1Co 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

We are God's "Garden", "purchased field". Man plants the living Word of God, and God gives it increase. Living Word of life produces trees of life within God's garden which is what we are.

 

[B-A-C]

In Gen 3:16; God gives the curse of sin to the woman...
The pain of childbirth ( presumably this wouldn't have been painful before the fall )
and women are to be ruled over by their husbands.

In Gen 3:17-19; God gives the curse of sin to the man.... (why do men get 3 verses worth?)
We will now toil to cultivate the ground. There are now thorns and thistles on the ground.
(the presumption is that these things did not exist before the fall, at least in the garden).
We shall sweat and work, and eventually our bodies will return to the dust ( Gen 3:19; )

If man never would have sinned, would we die? Would we return to the dust? Or would we have
continued to have fellowship with God when he came to our garden?

In Gen 3:23; God sends the man (and his wife) out of Eden... to cultivate the ground from which
they were taken... (so was the ground from which they were originally taken outside the garden?)

After this... God stations an angel to guard the tree of life.

So why was man created? Was it primarily to work the earth and animals (and multiply).
Or was it to have fellowship with God?

 

[Curtis]

If the Garden still exists, then what will happen to it when this earth is destroyed by fire, and made new?

 

[B-A-C]

1Co 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

Hmmm... the word husbandry may have multiple meanings.
The NASB says we are God's fellow workers.
The NIV says we are His co-workers.
The ESV says we are God's fellow workers
The KJV says we are laborers together with God.
The Darby Bible says we are God's fellow workmen.

Strongs says the word sunergos is..
a companion in work, fellow worker

 

[B-A-C]

If the Garden still exists, then what will happen to it when this earth is destroyed by fire, and made new?

I'm not sure it still does... what would be the purpose for it?
If we take Gen 2:10-14 literally... there is no place that those rivers all run together into one river.
The two main ones that we know of (Tigris and Euphrates) empty into the Arabian gulf.
Either the courses of the rivers have changed... or the river that the 4 rivers ran into is flooded
beneath the Arabian gulf.

 

[Curtis]

Hmmm... the word husbandry may have multiple meanings.
The NASB says we are God's fellow workers.
The NIV says we are His co-workers.
The ESV says we are God's fellow workers
The KJV says we are laborers together with God.
The Darby Bible says we are God's fellow workmen.

Strongs says the word sunergos is..
a companion in work, fellow worker

(CEV) Apollos and I work together for God, and you are God's garden and God's building.

Complete Word Study:
geo??rgion; gen. geo?rgíou, neut. noun from geo?rgós (G1092), a farmer A tilled field, farm (Sept.: Pro_24:30; Pro_31:16). Used metaphorically of Christians (1Co_3:9).
Syn.: agrós (G68), a cultivated field; cho??ra (G5561), land, country, field; cho?ríon (G5564), a piece of land, field.


Strongs
gheh-ore'-ghee-on
Neuter of a (presumed) derivative of G1092; cultivable, that is, a farm: - husbandry.

 

[Curtis]

I'm not sure it still does... what would be the purpose for it?
If we take Gen 2:10-14 literally... there is no place that those rivers all run together into one river.
The two main ones that we know of (Tigris and Euphrates) empty into the Arabian gulf.
Either the courses of the rivers have changed... or the river that the 4 rivers ran into is flooded
beneath the Arabian gulf.

I do not believe it exists either, but have no scripture to back that up. The Old Testament promise land was a "type" of the spiritual promised land in which born again Christians have been translated into by Jesus Christ other than "Joshua" who led the Israel in the physical promise land.

 

[Bendito]

I'm not sure it still does... what would be the purpose for it?
If we take Gen 2:10-14 literally... there is no place that those rivers all run together into one river.
The two main ones that we know of (Tigris and Euphrates) empty into the Arabian gulf.
Either the courses of the rivers have changed... or the river that the 4 rivers ran into is flooded
beneath the Arabian gulf.

b
BAC I agree that God probably did move the garden. The rivers though....Its not talking about where they flow to but rather where they flow from.... Now check your maps. You can find where it is located on a map but if you go there, there is nothing. I do have another theory though I don't think this thread is the place for it...LOL There are some who would thing the place for my theory is the trash bin.
Oh yes! The commands you mentioned? Take another look at them and keep them all as one command.....What do you see? God was blessing mankind. The first words God spoke to man was Blessing! Now how sweet is that?