Replies

It has been 10 years since Saddam Hussein began draining the vast bulrush marshes of southern Iraq - home of the Marsh Arabs and sometimes described as the original Garden of Eden.

I hate to disabuse the author, but relating the location of the Garden of Eden to a static place defies geolotechnical history. First, according to coral reef dieoff strata, the Great Flood of approximately 7,000 years ago raised sea level by about 15 meters, bringing the coastline of the Persian Gulf inland and up-river by a good many miles and the estuarine marshes with it (Mesopotamia is a VERY flat alluvial flood plain). The Flood engulfed a good many coastal cities and we have a great deal of sub-marine archaeology to do. Second, siltation moves that coastline outward into the Gulf by about 100 feet per year, or 45 miles in the last 5,000 years. Assuming that the fall of Adam was but 10,000 years ago, if the Great Flood hadn't happened, the site of the Garden of Edin (as it was called) would be very close to present day Baghdad. Who knows?

Wouldn't it be ironic if the site of Babylon and its Hanging Gardens were on top of the Garden of Eden? Fits Satan's MO, IMHO, just like the Dome of the Rock on top of the Second Temple.

The Bible is quite clear that the Garden of Eden is at the source of the four rivers named - i.e. the headwaters, not their confluence. So it never would have been anywhere near lower Iraq

As some more astute observers have mentioned, it is highly likely that the rivers mentioned are mistranslations. It has been suggested that the Pamir Plateau, and the four rivers flowing forth from the "Roof of the World" are the actual location.

Good rundown. I've read that UR, during the time of Abraham, was a coastal city and that during the last Ice Age, with the world's oceans 300-500 feet lower, these river valleys could have looked like the Grand Canyon. I don't remember how many miles inland Ur is now.

Further, I say, restore the marshes, if practical.