Where was the Garden of Eden located?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nanotwerp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
grannymh said:
Granted, I had to study in order to understand the truth in the mystery. The result was worth the effort because I now find that Divine Revelation is pretty straightforward. 🙂
Click to expand...
Well, that’s great that you have found the “Truth”.

Other people are looking at nature, studying it and trying to unravel the structure of this wonderful universe created by God. We’ll never have all the answers, we’ll never get to the Truth. But every day we find out more. And it’s exciting!

It’s called science 🙂
 
minkymurph said:
It is not untrue. I know how scholarship defines and describes the two terms. Please don’t make assumptions as to what I may or may not know and please do not be condesending by presuming to know what I need to learn.

I note you have also chosen not to define or explain the distinction between the terms yourself. Isn’t it so easy to simply tell someone they are wrong, and go and find out for themselves why?
Click to expand...
It is untrue. The distinction is that a myth is invented story telling around a campfire. A legend is something I learned from my father who learned it from his father who learned it from his father and so on of something that actually happened, again told around a campfire (In the days where people had a campfire). Maybe not though because they wrote things down in those days and handed the writings down.

That is why you will find books in the library with the title “Myths and Legends of …” The two are not interchangeable unless something has changed in the last 30 years.

Examples of myths are Robin Hood, a work of fiction, examples of myths are Christopher Columbus and the flat earth society, a work of fiction. Examples of legends are Genesis. So please do not hold up the victim card against me. Learn the difference.
 
Hans_W said:
Well, that’s great that you have found the “Truth”.

Other people are looking at nature, studying it and trying to unravel the structure of this wonderful universe created by God. We’ll never have all the answers, we’ll never get to the Truth. But every day we find out more. And it’s exciting!

It’s called science 🙂
Click to expand...
My friend, Does science point to God?
 
Darryl_B said:
It is untrue. The distinction is that a myth is invented story telling around a campfire. A legend is something I learned from my father who learned it from his father who learned it from his father and so on of something that actually happened, again told around a campfire (In the days where people had a campfire). Maybe not though because they wrote things down in those days and handed the writings down.

That is why you will find books in the library with the title “Myths and Legends of …” The two are not interchangeable unless something has changed in the last 30 years.
Click to expand...
Where did you get your definitions from? One of my sources is Encyclopedia Brittannica and New Advent. Write these sources of if you wish, but they carry more authority than your word. You could try writing to them and telling them they are wrong, but I imagine your words would fall on deaf ears.

Whose holding up a victim card? I’m stating facts. It is a fact you presumed to know what I what I need to learn. Other than you disagree with what I said, what evidence do you have I have taken no steps to learn the difference between a myth and a legend?

Myths were told around campfires, as were legends. A myth is not an invented story. They are based on something that actually happened. They may be embellished but they are not pure fiction. Perhaps if you had read my other posts as opposed to making inaccurate assumptions because your definition of myth does not concur with the sources I have used you would have realized this.
Darryl_B said:
Examples of myths are Robin Hood, a work of fiction, examples of myths are Christopher Columbus and the flat earth society, a work of fiction. Examples of legends are Genesis. So please do not hold up the victim card against me. Learn the difference.
Click to expand...
Robin Hood is not a work a fiction. The story has been embellished, but there is evidence he was a historical character. The fact you have stated it is a work of fiction is an indication you need to learn your history. If you read my post at 121 you may enlighten your understanding of historical myths. If you were up to date with historical and scientific developments and interpretation of ancient texts you would know things have changed dramatically in the last 30 years.

It is not a myth people once believed the world was flat and Christopher Columbus is not a mythical character. Again, elements of truth are present.

What I have said is not untrue. The only thing that makes it untrue is the fact you think a myth is work of pure fiction which is not the case. If you can find a scholarly source that states myths are works of pure fiction and there is no truth in them, I would be interested to read it. I have given you the sources I used.
 
grannymh said:
To me, some of the language can be mysterious as I wonder if it is literal or figurative or both. Genesis 1: 1-19 is a marvelous description of the creative power of God. In my old Bible there is a “graphic representation of the Hebrew conception of the world,” The Scripture verses and the drawing of the universe were mysteries to me since they did not comport with the reality of our physical environment. The origin of Adam, earth and breath, was a mystery. Naturally, a talking snake was a mystery, Fortunately, I had learned the doctrines connected to the first three chapters of Genesis; therefore I used doctrines to clear up the “mysteries.”

These samples of “mysteries” in my eyes did not prevent me from understanding the Divine Revelation which was being presented. Granted, I had to study in order to understand the truth in the mystery. The result was worth the effort because I now find that Divine Revelation is pretty straightforward. 🙂
Click to expand...
Genesis doesn’t “comport with the reality of our physical environment”? What does that even mean? Of course you won’t find an intelligent snake or the Garden of Eden or immortal people if you look in your current environment. That doesn’t mean they never existed back then.
Richca said:
Well Genesis places it somewhere around the Euphrates and Tigris rivers which only exist in the mesopotamia area of the world as we know it. This appears to me as some kind of evidence of the location of the Garden of Eden.
Click to expand...
I strongly disagree. Noah’s Flood happened since then, and probably wiped out all evidence of the Euphrates and Tigris of Eden. The modern rivers are probably just named after them, kind of like “New” Euphrates and “New” Tigris.

Eden could have been anywhere in the world, as far as I know.
 
minkymurph said:
Where did you get your definitions from? One of my sources is Encyclopedia Brittannica and New Advent. Write these sources of if you wish, but they carry more authority than your word. You could try writing to them and telling them they are wrong, but I imagine your words would fall on deaf ears.

Whose holding up a victim card? I’m stating facts. It is a fact you presumed to know what I what I need to learn. Other than you disagree with what I said, what evidence do you have I have taken no steps to learn the difference between a myth and a legend?

Myths were told around campfires, as were legends. A myth is not an invented story. They are based on something that actually happened. They may be embellished but they are not pure fiction. Perhaps if you had read my other posts as opposed to making inaccurate assumptions because your definition of myth does not concur with the sources I have used you would have realized this.

Robin Hood is not a work a fiction. The story has been embellished, but there is evidence he was a historical character. The fact you have stated it is a work of fiction is an indication you need to learn your history. If you read my post at 121 you may enlighten your understanding of historical myths. If you were up to date with historical and scientific developments and interpretation of ancient texts you would know things have changed dramatically in the last 30 years.

It is not a myth people once believed the world was flat and Christopher Columbus is not a mythical character. Again, elements of truth are present.

What I have said is not untrue. The only thing that makes it untrue is the fact you think a myth is work of pure fiction which is not the case. If you can find a scholarly source that states myths are works of pure fiction and there is no truth in them, I would be interested to read it. I have given you the sources I used.
Click to expand...
Hmm status bored.
 
minkymurph said:
So why bring it up?
Click to expand...
Because when well known historical myths are defended as true, and Genesis legends are defended as being myths, things seem upside down, and there is nothing I can do for that mindset.
 
Darryl_B said:
Because when well known historical myths are defended as true, and Genesis legends are defended as being myths, things seem upside down, and there is nothing I can do for that mindset.
Click to expand...
There’s more evidence of a historical Robin Hood than that of talking snakes, no matter how many people fantasize about our past.
 
Darryl_B said:
Because when well known historical myths are defended as true, and Genesis legends are defended as being myths, things seem upside down, and there is nothing I can do for that mindset.
Click to expand...
Quick and Easy Solution 😃 😃 😃 😃

Present the mindset of Catholicism. If one knows how to find it.
 
Darryl_B said:
Because when well known historical myths are defended as true, and Genesis legends are defended as being myths, things seem upside down, and there is nothing I can do for that mindset.
Click to expand...
You really don’t get it, do you?

That why you can do nothing for that ‘mindset.’ You don’t understand what I’m talking about.
But perhaps that’s because your bored.
 
Darryl_B said:
I am starting to suspect that doesn’t really exist.
Click to expand...
Historically, the mindset of Catholicism has existed since the day Adam appeared as a created creature whose nature is an unique unification of both the material world *and *the spiritual world.

May I respectfully ask what is it about the Catholic mindset in paragraphs 355-357 & paragraphs 1730-1732,* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*, which does not really exist?

Links to Catholic teachings (mindset)

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/
 
grannymh said:
Historically, the mindset of Catholicism has existed since the day Adam appeared as a created creature whose nature is an unique unification of both the material world *and *the spiritual world.

May I respectfully ask what is it about the Catholic mindset in paragraphs 355-357 & paragraphs 1730-1732,* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*, which does not really exist?

Links to Catholic teachings (mindset)

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/
Click to expand...
Thank you. You have restored my faith.
 
Darryl_B said:
There is more evidence of Robin Hood than Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
There’s more evidence for Jesus than talking snakes too. You know I can never understand people who waste energy and resources trying to prove the latter when the former needs more defense. Talking snakes are not a tenet of our Faith.
 
Lost_Wanderer said:
There’s more evidence for Jesus than talking snakes too. You know I can never understand people who waste energy and resources trying to prove the latter when the former needs more defense. Talking snakes are not a tenet of our Faith.
Click to expand...
The author’s description of Satan’s message, via whatever symbol, is interpreted correctly as the general temptation to the original Adam wherever he lived.🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top