Christian Witness Home Page

Trinity Mountain Outdoors Home Page Contact T.R. Michels

Trinity Mountain Outdoor Products Catalog Message Board  

  Articles from Witness; A Christian Hunter's Insights & Outlook

Articles from Revelation; Armageddon, the Millennium & the Second Coming

To purchase a copy of the entire book log on to the Trinity Mountain Outdoor Products Catalog

Studying Genesis *

As we study (from a scientific point of view) the stories of the Creation and the Flood, and the list of the Patriarchs (who seem to have impossibly long lives), we to need to realize that scientists often look only at verifiable facts, and ignore the possibility that what cannot be explained by science and verifiable facts could still be true. What we as Christians (who believe that God can do anything) have to do is, realize that we do not have to take all of the stories literally, because some of them may be myth, or what is classified as a Historical Novel (that does not need to be taken literally).

However, we also need to realize that there is often a shred of truth in any legend or myth, and that the stories of the Creation and the Flood, and of the Patriarchs who had extremely long lives, are part of the history and fabric of the ancient cultures of the Middle East. We also have to realize that what is implied as a worldwide catastrophic event in the Biblical story of the Flood, may in fact have been a local phenomenon. The people involved in the Flood may only have known about their immediate surroundings, and therefore may have presumed that the flood affected everything they saw, which to them was the entire world.

Therefore, what we should do is accept the possibility that the stories of the Bible may be based in truth, and look for evidence of it. In our search for evidence we should examine historical documents that contain similar myths, legends or stories, and look for archaeological and geographical evidence or any scientific evidence suggesting that the stories might have a shred of truth in them. In my research I have looked at numerous stories of the Creation and the Flood from around the world, that are similar in nature to the Creation and Flood stories of the Bible In fact, there are two similar yet very different stories of the Flood in Genesis.

In support of the stories of Adam and Eve, and the Flood, recent genetic mapping has shown evidence that all humans are descended from one common ancestor, a woman (who could be Eve of the Bible); and that a group of as small as 8-10 people may have migrated out of Africa (where it is believed modern man first evolved) and ended up in the area of the Middle East. There is also scientific evidence of large localized floods in the Middle East.

When we study the list of the Patriarchs we again need to realize that, through the power of God, it is possible that the Patriarchs lived as long as is stated in the Bible. At least one other document from the Middle East contains names of beings on earth with extremely long lives. The list of the Patriarchs must be important to understanding the Bible, because portions of it appear in several different chapters of Genesis, in Ezekiel, in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and in Revelation.

As we study the list of the Patriarchs we need to realize that it is meant to show us that all humans are descended from a common ancestor (at the Creation) and from a common group of ancestors, from which the different ethnic groups of the world are descended (after the Flood). It also show us that Jesus, the human incarnation of God on earth, is in fact descended from Adam, and therefore He is related to all of us, which makes Him our "brother". The list is also meant to show us that Jesus is descended from the tribe of Judah, which is one of the Twelve Tribes of Israelites, who are descended from Abraham, who is descended from Noah's son Shem (who was the father of the Semites).

In general, the genealogy of the Patriarchs becomes narrower and narrower, and focuses on the line from Shem to Jesus. But, it often includes information on groups outside of Jesus' ancestry. This is particularly noticeable in the genealogy of Abraham, who is the ancestor of both the Jews and the Arabs.

The information about the Arabs is included in the Bible because it is crucial to an understanding of the relationship between the Jews and Arabs, from the time of Abraham to the current problems in the Middle East, and further yet to the times just before and after the future Millennium as it is depicted in the book of Revelation.

The genealogy of the Twelve Tribes of Israelites is included in the Bible because it is crucial to an understanding of why there is a Millennium. The entire list of the Patriarchs is given so that we can determine how the Patriarchs are related to the different ethnic groups of the world, which if we read Ezekiel, is crucial to an understanding of which ethnic groups or nations are involved in the Battle of Armageddon before the Millennium, and at the Battle of Gog and Magog after the Millennium. In other words, without a complete understanding of the Patriarchs in the Book of Genesis we cannot understand who the ethnic groups listed in the Books of Ezekiel and Revelation are.

If we believe the Bible is the "inspired Word of God", we understand (and believe) that God inspired the writers of Genesis to write (in depth) about the Patriarchs, so that we could understand who the different ethnic groups of the world are, and how they interact with each other from the time of the Flood, to the "end of time". And that is why I believe God inspired me to begin my studies and research of the Patriarchs and write about them in depth here, so I, and you who read this, could have a better understanding of why there is unrest and wars in the world, and to help us understand the Book of Revelation; which coincidentally was the book of the Bible I studied next (and which became my second Christian book).

As I have stated above, when we attempt to interpret the stories of the Creation and the Flood, and the lists of the Patriarchs, we need to realize that we may not have take them literally, because they may in fact be myth, legend or historical stories, which may be classified as Historical Novels, that, according to most Biblical scholars, do not have to be taken literally. However, that does not imply that we should not accept the fact that God had a reason for including them in the Bible, and that we should not look for some religious meaning or scientific truth in them.

We also need to realize that these stories were, and are, a part of the fabric, tradition and belief of the ancient Hebrews, and of the Jewish faith; and we need to understand that the Christian religion is based in part on many of the beliefs of Jewish religion. As a result of this, we need to incorporate these Hebrew beliefs and the tenets of the Jewish religion into our personal Christian faith, and interpret those stories from the standpoint of the ancient Hebrews, and the belief system of the Jewish faith; and not interpret them from what may be the incorrect standpoint of a 20^th Century non-Hebrew, and the belief system of the Christian faith.

One of the problems many Christians have when they study or try to interpret the Old Testament is that they may forget this, with the result that they look at the Bible (as a whole) as a Christian document. Then they study the Old Testament from a Christian point of view, instead of a Jewish point of view. What non-Jews should do, if they want to understand the Old Testament, is look at the Old Testament from a Hebrew or Jewish point of view, and figure out if and where the Christians fit in. And, the answer to that is that basically, the Christians don't figure into the Old Testament! The Old Testament is about the Israelites and the Jewish faith, not about Christians and Christianity. Most of what is written about Christians in the Bible is in the New Testament!

When we study the Bible we must remember that the immediate forerunners of the Hebrews, the Semites, were not originally from Israel (Palestine/Israel), they migrated there from another area. The first mention of a location associated with the ancestors of the Israelites appears in Genesis 11:28, in which it states that Abraham's brother died before his father Terah, in his native land, in Ur of the Chaldeans. Many scholars believe "Ur of the Chaldeans" was on the banks of the lower Euphrates, about 200 miles north of the Persian Gulf, near what is now the town of As Samawan in Iraq. However, as I will explain later, this may not be true. Abraham's "Ur" may have been a town much farther north, in what is now Turkey.

Tereh later moved his family to the town of Haran in Aramea (Turkish Armenia) on the Khabur River (the Habor River of Exodus), which is a tributary of the upper Euphrates. This town was located in the area of what is now the border between Turkey and Syria. The town of Haran was probably named after Tereh's son, Haran. This habit of naming locations and towns after the peoples that inhabited the area is important in understanding the ethnic groups of the world mentioned in Genesis Chapter 10.

Because the Semites lived near, and migrated through, the lands of other ethnic groups, the stories of the Torah are very similar to, and may be derived from, the stories of creation from Akkadia, Assyria, Babylonia, Chaldea, Sumeria and Canaan. The story of Creation is similar to the Babylonian Enuma Elish. The story of the flood is similar to the Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. The list of genealogies in the Bible is similar to "king lists" found on the Weld Prism of "World History" from Sumeria. Although the account of creation and the list of Patriarchs may be derived from sources other than the Semites themselves, it does not mean they are entirely untrue.

There are stories about the creation of the earth, plants and animals, and the creation of man, from all over the world. Many of them are believed to have begun in the Middle East (because they are the oldest), where there are several similar creation stories. There are in fact, two different stories of creation in the book of Genesis. The first story begins at 1:1 and continues to 2:4, where it ends with, "Such was the story of heaven and earth as they were created." The second story of creation begins in 2:4 with, "At the time when Yahweh God ..." and ends at 3:24. In the first story God created plants and animals before He created man, in the second story He created man before the plants and animals. In the first story the plural God ("let us") "created" man and woman in the "image and likeness of God". In the second story God "shapes" man out of the "soil of the ground".

Many of the creation stories from around the world have several things in common. They mention that the universe and everything in it was created from nothing; they mention darkness, light, the days of creation, the waters of earth divided to reveal land, the creation of plants and animals, the creation of human beings, the creation of man from clay, and a man and a woman. Many of the creation stories, especially the Enuma Elish, contain elements very similar to the Biblical story of the Flood.

If we understand the migration of the human species throughout the world we understand that one of the last migrations of early man was the migration of the Mongoloid-type peoples of Asia into North and South America, where they became the American Indians. And yet the creation legends of the American Indians are very similar to the creation stories of the Middle East. The question must be raised as to how these stories from such widely separated ethnic, cultural and religious groups exhibit so much in common? The only plausible explanation seems to be that they come from a common source, which goes back to the beginnings of man and the possibility of the Creation of man, and the universe, by a Creator that both the Jews and Christians believe is their god Yahweh.

Following are some of the creation stories from around the world.

The Popul Vuh, which is the holy book of the Mayan Indians of South America, talks about the plumed serpent Quetzal-Coatl. I've copied some of it here. :

This is the account, here it is:
Now it still ripples, now it still murmurs, ripples, it still sighs, still hums, and it is empty under the sky.

Here follow the first words, the first eloquence:
There is not yet one person, one animal, bird, fish, crab, tree, rock, hollow, canyon, meadow, forest. Only the sky alone is there; the face of the earth is not clear. Only the sea alone is pooled under the sky; there is nothing whatever gathered together. It is at rest; not a single thing stirs. It is held back, kept a rest under the sky.

Whatever there is that might be is simply not there: only the pooled water, only the calm sea, only it alone is pooled.

Whatever might be is simply not there: only murmur, ripples, in the dark, in the night. Only the Maker, Modeler alone, Sovereign Plumed Serpent, the Bearers, Begetters are in the water, a glittering light. They are there, they are enclosed in quetzal feathers, in blue-green.
Thus the name, "Plumed Serpent". They are great knowers, great thinkers in their very being.
And of course there is the sky, and there is also the Heart of Sky. This is the name of the god, as it is spoken.

And then the earth arose because of them, it was simply their word that brought it forth. For the forming of the earth they said "Earth". It arose suddenly, just like a cloud, like a mist, now forming, unfolding.

In their holy book, the Walam Olum, the Delaware Indians describe the history of their tribe from its origin to the coming of the white men in America. The story begins with a "big nothing". In this nothing lives the Creator, and as his name implies, he creates land, water and everything in the universe. He makes humans and gives them souls. At first the earth is peaceful, but then a large snake appears and changes everything, and death and disease come into the world.

The Hopi Indians have a legend that the first "one who was", is the Creator, who created the first being, a goddess. Then he made other gods, who each had their own part in completing creation. By singing the song of creation the gods made human beings in their own image. Then the humans were given the ability to speak, and they were told to honor their Creator forever. But evil came into the world and there was violence and disease, which caused the Creator to destroy the world with a flood.
North American Indian tribal stories mention "Father Earthmaker", but they don't know where he came from. This god discovered that things came into being when he thought about them. When he thought of light, there was light. When he wished for an earth, there was earth. Then he began to speak, and he decided he would make a creature like himself, so he took a piece of earth and modeled it into a human being. He spoke to the human, but there was no answer. The god gave the human a spirit, but the human still could not speak. The god made a tongue for the human, but there was still no answer. Then the god gave the human a soul, and the human said something, but the Creator could not understand it. Finally, Father Earthmaker blew his breath into the mouth of the human, after which he could understand the human.

Man made from Clay
A Chinese legend states that human beings were made out of yellow clay. The Miao (Miautso) tribes of southwestern China have a legend that the first man was created from dirt and that from this dirt a man and a woman were formed. The Miao call the created man "Patriarch Dirt". One of his sons was Se-teh (similar to Noah's son Seth, and the god Seti of the Egyptians). An Egyptian story recalls how a god modeled a human being out of clay on a potter's wheel. There is a story in the Sudan about how a god made mankind out of clay. The Shilluks of the White Nile, the Fans and the Ewe tribes of West Africa, the Cheremiss (a Finnish people) of Russia, the Kumis in Eastern India, and native tribes in the Pacific, all have stories about the creation of mankind out of clay. The Australian Aborigines have a legend about their ancestors, who made themselves out of clay, and then by singing, they created everything.

Darkness, Creation by Speech
The Maori's of New Zealand have a legend that states that the universe was once darkness, with water everywhere. Then the "Divinity" spoke and there was light. The Divinity spoke again and the waters were separated so that the land of the earth could be seen.

Days of Creation
There is a legend in Zaire about the Supreme Being, which states that because he was lonely; this was the first day. Because he longed for a home, he created the earth; this was the second day. But, there was no one to serve him, so he created a chicken, which laid forty eggs; this was the third day. On the fourth day forty humans came into being from the eggs, and the Supreme Being told them to populate the world.

From the similarities of these widely scattered stories we can see that they probably came from a common source which (if we believe that the creation stories of the Middle East are the oldest) originated in the ancient Middle East. Although this may not suggest that the creation of the universe by "a god" was real, it does suggest (when we also consider the numerous yet similar flood stories from around the world) that these stories come from a (probable) small population of people. This gives credence to the belief that all humans come from a common female ancestor, similar to the Eve of the Creation Story of Genesis.

Because the Israelites lived near, and migrated through, the lands of several other ethnic groups, the stories of the Old Testament are very similar to, and may be derived from, the stories of some of those other ethnic groups. The Biblical account of creation is very similar to the Akkadian/Babylonian Enuma Elish account of creation, from which it may be partly derived.

The story of the creation of the world in seven days is almost incomprehensible, unless we understand the prophetic interpretation of a day. Second Peter 3:8 states, "that with the Lord, a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." That statement is hard to understand until you realize that time is a human concept. A day to us, on earth, is the time it takes the earth to revolve once on its own axis, 24 hours. A year is the time it takes for the earth to revolve around the sun, 365 days.

But, what is time? It is a human invention to designate the passage of time - on earth. But, suppose you developed the concept of time on another planet, or on another planet in a different galaxie. Would a day still be 24 long? Would a year still be 365 days long? The answer is no, because time is only relevant to the planet that it was develop on.

Suppose you developed the concept of time while you were living on Pluto. The time it takes Pluto to revolve on its own axis once (which would be one day on Pluto) is roughly equivalent to 144 hours, or 6 earth days. The time it takes Pluto to revolve around the sun once (which would be one year on Pluto) is equivalent to 90,700 earth days, or 248 earth years. If a prophetic day is literally equivalent to a thousand years, then a prophetic day on Pluto is equivalent to 248,000 earth days, or 679 earth years.

Now, suppose you were not living on a planet, and that you were suspended in space, where there is no day or night, and no need to measure time. Then you can begin to understand what time is to God. Time is like God, the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. For God, it takes no time at all to create something, and it can last forever. This may mean that it took forever or no time at all (in our way of thinking) for God to create the heavens and the earth. Astronomers, physicists and cosmologists now believe that the universe is between 15 and 20 billion years old.

On the Biblical concept of days and nights in Genesis St. Augustine writes:

"... in matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision ... we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it. That would be to battle not for the teaching of Holy Scripture but for our own, wishing its teaching to conform to ours, whereas we ought to wish ours to conform to that of Sacred Scripture (p. 41)

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men ... Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by these who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. (pp. 42-43)

It is a laborious and difficult task for the powers of our human understanding to see clearly the meaning of the sacred writer in the matter of these six days. (p. 103)

These seven days of our time although like the same days of creation in name and in numbering, follow one another in succession and mark off the division of time, but those first six days occurred in a form unfamiliar to us as intrinsic principles within things created. (p. 125).

The days of creation are beyond the experience and knowledge of us mortal earthbound men ... we must bear in mind that these days indeed recall the days of creation but without in any way being really similar to them. (p. 135).

The reason (why the narrative employs the device of the six days, Ed.) is that those who cannot understand the meaning of the text, 'He created all things together,' cannot arrive at the meaning of Scripture unless the narrative proceeds slowly step by step. (p. 142).

... we should not think of those days as solar days ... He made that which gave time its beginning, as He made all things together, disposing them in an order based not on intervals of time but on causal connections (p. 154).

But in the beginning He created all things together and completed the whole universe in six days, when six times He brought the 'day' which He made before the things which He made, not in a succession of periods of time but in a plan made known according to causes (pp. 175-176)."

Some writers state the belief that, because the Bible shows six thousand years of recorded history, the universe is only six thousand years old. Others use the Biblical concept in 2 Peter which states that "with the Lord a day is as a thousand years", and interpret that to mean that the creation took six thousand years, which in turn means that the universe is actually twelve thousand years old. However, the term "thousand", as used in 2 Peter in this context by an ancient Hebrew, is a metaphor for "a large but indefinite number". The term "a day is as a thousand years" does not literally mean that 6 days of creation were equal to 6 thousand-year-periods, it simply means 6 periods, each of which were "an unspecified length of time".

We also have to realize that the "days" of creation do not necessarily have to be interpreted or understood as having twenty-four hours in each day. The Hebrew word for "day" is yom; it can be used to indicate the period of daylight as contrasted with nighttime (Gen. 8:22), a period of twenty-four hours (Gen. 39:10), or a period of unspecified time (Gen. 2:4). According to the Hebrew scholar William Wilson, yom is "frequently put for time in general, or for a long time, a whole period under consideration ... Day is also put for a particular season or time when any extraordinary event happens." In Genesis 4:3 yom is used as a framework for time; in Genesis 30:14 it refers to wheat harvest time; in Joshua 24:7 it refers to a long season; and in Isaiah 4:2 it refers to a future era.

An explanation of "morning" and "evening" as used in the book of Genesis, is found in the root word for those words. The Hebrew word for "evening" (erev) which can be interpreted as "mixed up, stirred together or disorderly"; in the evening, objects become obscure or blurred. The root for the Hebrew word morning (boker) can be interpreted as "discernable, able to be distinguished, orderly"; in the morning, objects become more distinct. Thus, Geneis 1:5 can be interpreted to mean, "Thus the evening came (when these was disorder), and morning followed (and there was order) - the first day."

It is also interesting to note that in Genesis the "first day" begins with evening, which is followed by morning, which could be interpreted to mean that a "day" started with sunset, and ended at the following sunset, which is the Jewish idea of a "day". In contrast, most Christians and non-Hebrews think of a day as beginning at midnight and ending at midnight.

We also have to realize that there was no "day" or "night" during the first three days of creation, because there was no sun until the fourth day, and Yahweh did not separate day from night until that time. Therefore, we can not apply the concept of a twenty-four day to the creation of the universe.

We also need to understand that the use of the Hebrew term "wind" (merahefet) in the first verse of the Bible is used only once in Genesis, and that it means to "hover above". This "wind" of Yahweh can be also be interpreted as "spirit" (Ec. 12:7) or "God's will" (Is. 19.3). This "wind or spirit" was a one time only occurrence, used by Yawheh at the creation of the universe. It seems to imply that the spirit of God was the instrument of the creation; because it is the Holy Spirit through whom miracles occur. Science supports this "one time occurrence" of creation. According to modern cosmology and astrophysics, the Big Bang (the term scientists use to describe the beginning of the universe) occurred only once, at the beginning of the universe!

The Bible does not state that Yahweh "created" anything during the second to fifth days. The Hebrew word barah (created) is not used except in the first verse of Genesis. This one time use of the word "create" seems to imply that, after the creation, the universe had the ability to produce the sun, moon, stars, planets, water, plants and animals on its own. As to how these things came into being the simply Bible states that Yahweh said, "let there" or "let the", and these things were "allowed" to be produced; or "allowed" to come into existence.

The Bible states that Yahweh "allowed" light to come into being on the first "day". According to science this is exactly what happened. If we examine the Big Bang theory (which I will explain shortly), we discover that one of the first visible things that came into being after the Big Bang was light (which we now know is made up of electrons). After the Big Bang, as the temperature of the universe cooled to about 3000 degrees Kelvin, electrons would have been released from the newly formed Hydrogen and Helium atoms, and light would have been visible for the first time!

Most Bible commentators, who lean toward the scientific view of the beginning of the universe and evolution, feel that we cannot use science to "prove" the Biblical (religious) concept of creation and evolution; which may in fact be true. However, those writers who lean toward the Biblical concept of creation (by Yahweh) may be able to embrace scientific discoveries about the origin of the universe in their understanding of creation. If we understand that we do not have to take the Bible literally on the matters of the creation of the universe, or in the evolution of living species, then we can see how Yahweh took a hand in creation, and in evolution.

Many scientists now believe that the universe began with the "Big Bang", when all the energy and matter of the universe condensed to an extremely small point called a "singularity". The condensation or compaction of all the energy and matter resulted in temperatures in the range of 10 to the 32^nd power (10 followed by thirty-two 0's). This condensation of matter and energy was followed by a violent increase in the expansion (cosmic inflation) of all of the energy and matter of the universe.

This expansion was (and still is) similar to someone blowing up a balloon that started out as the size of a pinhead. As times passes the balloon continues to expand, and the relative distance between all of the points within the balloon (and on its surface) becomes larger and larger. Within the first second of this explosion stable subnuclear particles, neutrons and protons were formed; within three minutes hydrogen, helium and lithium nuclei were formed; 300,000 years after the explosion occurred the first ripples of cosmic structure (galaxies) appeared, and 1billion years after the explosion some heavy chemicals were produced.

One of the best books on the subject of creation and evolution that I have found is Genesis and the Big Bang, by Gerald L. Schroeder, Ph. D. I suggest you read it because it discuses how the Biblical story of creation and the scientific theory of evolution are not mutually exclusive. In spite of the findings that the universe is thought to be over 15 billion years old, Schroeder shows how it could have literally been created in six days; provided we understand the laws of physics involved.

Einstein's law of relativity states that E = mc²; or E (the energy of a photon) equals m (the mass of an object at rest, plus its kinetic energy while in motion) times c² (the speed of light squared). The speed of light presents us with one of the great paradoxes of nature; it is always constant, even if the object from which it emanates (comes from) is moving. In the book Schroeder states, "This was very confusing. We have a speed of light (c) that is constant at 200,792.5 kilometers per second, whether or not the source of the light or the observer of the light is in motion." (pg 39)

As to how six twenty-four days can be literally be the same as 15 billion years Schroeder states, "The essence of relativity tells us that when the velocity of an object changes, its mass also changes." (pg 40) In other words, as the universe expands, or the as the earth moves away from the "singularity" where the Big Bang occurred, the size of them also changes. Next Schroeder states, "The special theory of relativity is based on two facts: the principle of relativity and the constant speed of light." (pg 41) "... fundamental to relativisitc mechanics, and to the laws of the universe in which you and I dwell, is the fact, incomprehensible as it may be, of mass, space and time dilation." (pg 42-43) What this means is that as that as the mass and space of the universe become larger, time stretches out).

Schroeder then adds, "Because accelerating forces produce motion and time dilation, so must changes in gravity induce time dilation." (pg 45) What this means is that, depending on the increase or decrease of gravity, on say a particular planet in the universe, time can either be stretched, or compressed. Schroeder goes on to state, "A billion cosmic clocks were (and still are) ticking, each at its own, locally correct rate. Universally, they all started at the Big Bang and, at the very same instant, reached the moment when Adam appeared. But, the absolute, local time that passed from 'the beginning' to the instant of their particular contribution to humanity was very different for each star and so for each contribution of matter." (pg 51)

What Schroeder is saying is that as the universe is dilating (expanding, stretching outward) the objects in it are also dilating (becoming bigger), and the farther away those object are from where the universe began, the more time dilates (stretches out). He sums it all up by stating, "According to Einstein's law of relativity, we now know it is impossible in an expanding universe to describe the elapsed time experienced during a sequence of events occurring in one part of the universe in a way that will be equal to the elapsed time for those same events when viewed from a different part of the universe. The differences in motions and gravitational forces among the various galaxies, or even among the stars of a single galaxy, makes the absolute passage of time a very local affair. Time differs from place to place." (pg 50)

If we put this into the perspective of the expanding balloon, a person standing at the point where the Big Bang began could experience the time-frame from the Big Bang to the appearance of Adam as 6 twenty-four days (literally); while a person standing on the earth, which is still moving away from the point where the Big Bang began (because the universe is expanding) could experience the same time frame as 15 billion years. Time is relative, depending on how far away you are from another object (where you are also trying to determine time), how much mass each object has (how big it is), the difference in gravity between the two objects, and how fast each object is moving.

Maybe a better way of explaining the age and size of the universe is to use the example of light. We know that light moves at a constant speed, regardless of whether or not the source of the light or the observer is moving. We also know that some of the stars are billions of billions of miles away from us. That means that the light that we see from the stars may be as much as several billions of years old by the time it reaches our eye. If this is true, then the universe must be billions of years old.

If we believe the Biblical account of creation, then we believe the universe was created by Yahweh - from nothing, which means there was no light before the creation. If we examine the interpretation (of some Bible scholars) who believe that the universe began on the "first day" of the six days of creation, we can see how those scholars came to the conclusion that the universe is only six thousand years old. Even if those scholars use the Biblical statement that "with the Lord a day is as a thousand years" and interpret it to mean that the six days of creation are equal to six thousand years, and they come to the conclusion that the universe is twelve thousand years old, it still does not add up.

According to the Bible (and physics) there was nothing (including light) before the time of creation, which, according to some Biblical scholars, was six thousand years ago; and yet we see light from the stars - which we know took millions of years to reach the earth. The only conclusion we can come to is; some scholars have interpreted the Biblical account of creation incorrectly and the universe is in fact billions of years old.

If you ask an astronomer, physicist or cosmologist (a person who studies the universe) what came before the Big Bang they will tell you that since the Big Bang created time (as we know it) there was nothing before the Big Bang. If you ask them what caused the Big Bang, they will tell you that science has not progressed far enough to answer that question. Those of us who believe Yahweh is real will most likely tell you that we also believe there was literally nothing before the Big Bang, because created the universe out of nothing. Those of us who have studied the scientific theory of the beginning of the universe will likely tell you that we believe Yahweh caused the Big Bang.

The concept of "time" (which, according to humans relates to how long it takes the earth to revolve once on its own axis, which we describe as a "day", which we divide into "day" when the light of the sun is directly visible, and "night" when the light of the sun is not directly visible) is used throughout the Bible, often in reference to the "end time" or "end of days". We find the words "end time" (referring to the return of Jesus to earth and the establishment of Heaven on earth [mentioned in the Book of Revelation]) all through the Bible. But, "time", which began at the creation, ends when Yahweh establishes Heaven on earth Revelation 21:22-25 state, "the city (of Jerusalem) had no need of sun or moon ... and there shall be no night." Since there is no need for the sun or moon, and there is no night, the human concept of "time" is no longer relevant, when Yahweh comes to earth. The universe was created out of darkness, without light; it will end with light, without darkness.

Since I have primarily taken a look at the Biblical Story of Creation from a scientific point of view, I must also answer the question of whether or not Christians can or should believe in evolution. Even though the concept of evolution is still thought of as a "theory" by many people, I believe that science has proven that plants and animals have evolved over the centuries. Knowing this we have to accept the fact that evolution is a valid concept. And, even though science cannot show an unbroken link between apes and early hominids (human-looking apes), and between early hominids and modern man (Homo sapiens), I think many people believe (possibly wrongly) that humans are descended from apes. But, I also think most of us (myself included) believe that Yahweh started the whole process of evolution, and that he had a hand in the development of the species that we call humans and all the other species of the earth.

To those people who believe that creation does not negate evolution, and believe that science actually supports the Biblical concept of creation, this description of creation and evolution (with Yahweh intervening at particular points in the evolutionary process) is known as "intelligent design", meaning that Yahweh started the whole process of creation and he has been involved in what scientists refer to as the "evolution" of all the living species on earth. To a modern scientist the "Theory of Evolution" is now often referred to as "punctuated evolution", meaning that there appear to be starts and stops in the "evolutionary process". Scientists cannot currently explain these starts and stops in evolution, nor have they found the "missing link" between apes and humans; which suggests that something that cannot be explained by science has been at work since the time when the universe began; I believe that something is Yahweh.

If we look at humans as a species, there is no doubt that we are vastly different from all of the other species that we know of. We use tools more than any other species, and we alone have developed the ability to make tools. We alone use fire. We alone use speech to communicate. We alone have used our brains to study the universe and develop the sciences. We alone have developed the technology to change the face of the earth, to create artificial environments for our own use, for both comfort and profit. We alone have developed the technology to leave earth and explore the universe. We alone have developed the technology to use weapons of mass destruction, which can destroy all life on earth, and the earth itself.

In addition, we alone have an awareness of ourselves within the universe. We alone have used our minds to wonder how we as individuals fit into the universe, and how we as a species came into existence. As a result of this we alone have developed the concept of an immortal being, a Creator or God, who created and controls the universe. And, we alone have developed the concept, precepts and tenets of a belief, faith or religion, in which we believe we can and should communicate with an immortal Creator, to ask Him to intervene in our personal and collective lives. As a result of this belief in a Creator, and the concept of religion, we alone have developed the concept of good and evil forces in the universe.

We alone realize that we have a mind, which although it appears to be part of the conscious thought processes of the brain, also appears to part of the essence of our "being" human. As a result of this we alone have developed the concept of right and wrong, and the concepts of ethics and morality. And, as a result of all of this combined, we alone have developed the concept that we, alone, as a species, have a spiritual essence to our "being", which we refer to as a soul. We alone, of all the species on earth, believe we have been chosen by Yawheh to be different, because we have a soul.

In fact, as I write this, I see positive proof of Yahweh's intervention in the evolutionary process, because I detect an understanding and knowledge or intuition in my writing about this subject. An understanding and knowledge that seems beyond me - an understanding and knowledge that I don't believe I am worthy of possessing; and yet it is there! The only conclusion I can come to is that my own personal intelligence and understanding of the universe, my own personal understanding of myself in the universe, and my own understanding of and belief in a God-Creator named Yahweh, comes to me from Yahweh.

And, as I wrote that last sentence, I came to the realization that Yahweh was speaking directly to me, confirming to me that He is involved in my life, and that He is in control of my life. That realization brought with it a sense of my own insignificance, and with it a feeling of humility. It also brought a sense of joy and love, given to me by the presence of the Holy Spirit, from Yahweh. Those feelings overwhelmed me to the point of tears. I experienced a tight feeling in my chest, caused by a feeling of gratitude, for Yahweh being in my life.

Now that we have come to the conclusion that we humans, as a species, have both a corporeal nature (our body) and a spiritual nature (our soul) we have to ask ourselves why we, of all the corporeal species that we know of anywhere, have a soul. And, if we do have a soul, where did it come from and how did we get it?

The answers to those questions are found in the very thought processes that have brought us to our conclusions. Because we have come to believe that there is a Creator, we also have to come the conclusion that He, the Creator, at some point in our evolutionary process, intervened in that process, and gave us a soul. In other words, He made or formed the species we refer to as humans, a species that is vastly different from all the other species known to us. He made us to be the only species on earth that has both a body, and a soul.

If we believe in evolution without the hand of Yahweh, the only other alternative we have is that some group of molecules, some conglomeration of chemicals, which existed in the primordial soup of the ancient seas, was accidentally struck by lightning and developed into a living species which, millions of years later, through several adaptations to the environment of the earth, and possibly by accidental stimulation from radiation, altered the makeup of those molecules into the DNA and RNA which makes up the cells of all living species, past and present.

Then, through several developments or mutations, those cells began to group together and became organized (who knows how, or should I say only God knows how) into single celled life forms, which eventually developed (through millions of years) into the more complex life form of a fish, which eventually developed into an amphibian or a reptile, and eventually into a mammal, which at some point in time developed into a primate, which developed into an ape, which (some scientists believe) developed into a hominid, which eventually developed into us, the humans.

I just don't see where, in that evolutionary process, we humans developed a sense of reason, which eventually lead us to the conclusion that we have a soul; because the evolutionary process, in its strictest interpretation, leaves no room for a soul, and it has no room for a belief in a God-Creator.

Note: I believe what I have written here about creation and evolution in September of 2005, was given to me from Yahweh, inspired through the Holy Spirit, for my personal understanding. However, I believe it was also meant to be shared, with anyone who reads it. In fact, after 10 years of studying the Bible, during which I wrote my book commentaries on Genesis and Revelation, and my book Witness [my personal thoughts on Christianity], I began to realize that Yahweh had inspired me to write all three of those books, so that I could share what I have learned through my research (and especially the inspirational writing I have received from Yahweh), with anyone who may read it or listen to me.

Thank you Yahweh, Holy Spirit and Jesus.

I bless your names. Amen.

In response to the Darwinian theory of evolution Gerald L. Schroeder states, "Today's best mathematical estimates state that there simply was not enough time for random reactions to get life going as fast as the fossil records show it did. The reactions were either directed by some, as yet unknown, physical source or a metaphysical guide, or life arrived here from elsewhere. But the "elsewhere" answer merely pushes the start of life into an even more unlikely constraint" Basically, what Schroeder is saying is that creation and evolution must have been started by a metaphysical force (which we refer to as Yahweh).

I don't' think there is any question that the universe is at least 15 billion years old, that life (meaning something that can reproduce itself) first began on earth about 4 billion years ago, and that the first modern humans (Homo sapiens) first appeared about 3 million years ago (see the following Chronology of World History).

Scientists now believe that the diversity of species on the earth is the result of mutation or incorrect copying of the DNA within plants and animals. Changes in DNA, whether due to mutation or incorrect copying, may have resulted in several different characteristics in some individuals of a given species, which allowed those individuals and species to survive the many different changes in the earth, which were often the result of natural catastrophes (such as changes in solar radiation and nuclear activity, volcanic eruptions, temperature changes, drought, the ice ages, and meteors colliding with the earth). The survival of the fittest of those individuals and species, through those catastrophes, resulted in the species we know today. Without the development of all of the plants and animals that have existed on earth since life first began, earth would be just another large rock in the universe, and there would be no human life. I personally believe that Yahweh caused all of this to occur.

Science clearly shows us that humans and chimpanzees are genetically ninety-eight percent the same. Due to the complex nature of DNA, and because of the extreme unlikely-hood that two lines of similar genetic codes (that of humans and that of chimpanzees) could have developed independently of each other, scientists have come to the conclusion that humans are in fact descended from a pre-hominid ancestor, which also developed into the great apes such as chimpanzees and gorillas.

Personally, I don't see how we can come to any other conclusion, and I don't believe this negates the belief that Yahweh "made" man in His "image and likeness". In fact, if we look at Genesis 2:7, 9 and 19 we find that Yahweh "formed" (not created) the plants, animals and man out of the very same substance: the ground, dust, dirt or clay. This does not mean that Yahweh "formed " humans (out of dirt, dust or clay) to literally "look" like Himself (physically), but rather that Yahweh made or formed a "spiritual being" in the likeness of his own "spiritual" nature. Science has shown that the molecules needed to for DNA can be formed in "clay" (made up of saltwater and dirt) when the clay is subjected to electrical sparks in the laboratory. This suggest that life can be formed out of dirt, dust or clay, just as the Bible states.

Genesis 2:7 states that when Yahweh "formed" man he did something different than when he "allowed" the plants and animals to come into being; "he breathed into the man's nostrils and gave him the breath of life, and then the man became a living being." The Hebrew word neshamah used here for "breath" can be interpreted as "soul of life", and the word "being" can be interpreted as "soul". Thus, Yawheh "formed" man out of dirt, dust or clay first; and then, after the man was formed, Yahweh gave the man a "soul of life", which made the man a "living soul". In other words the being or species we refer to as a human was already formed when Yahweh gave it a soul. The argument could be made that Yahweh "formed" a man (or the human species) when he gave a hominid or a pre-human a soul.

I suppose the question of when did man get a soul has been debated for centuries, but it is difficult to find much information on the subject, because it does not fall within the scope of science, and religious scholars often accept the belief that man (Adam) was created by Yahweh and received a soul when He "formed a man". However, if we look at humans as a product of evolution, possibly as descendants of the apes and early hominids, then we have to ask ourselves when did the hominids become human? When did the hominids become humans with a soul?

As to when can we call a hominid a human; scientifically speaking I suspect that is difficult to determine. I suppose the argument could be made that a hominid became a human when the hominid first began to become aware of itself (biologists believe that chimpanzees and gorillas are aware of themselves; meaning that they recognize a reflection or picture of themselves as the individual they are; not as another chimpanzee or gorilla, but as themselves). I suspect self-awareness in the human species began before they began making (not just using) tools. Since the ability to make stone tools (such as the stone hand axe) presupposes a mind, then we could make the argument that a human with a mind first appeared prior to when humans first began making tools, which was about 3 million year ago.

As to when did a human receive a soul; for many Christian scholars I suspect the answer would be that a human receives a soul at the moment of conception (not at birth as many Women's Rights advocates would have us believe). If a human receives a soul at conception it is possible that the first human received a soul from Yahweh when it was conceived. It may also be possible that Yahweh gave souls to two different hominids who were already born. However, since genetic mapping suggests that we can trace all humans back to one female who came out of Africa, it is conceivable that Yahweh gave a (spiritual) soul to the embryo of a hominid, just as Yahweh gave Mary an embryo which was both spiritual (Yahweh) and human.

If we believe we humans do have a soul, it means that we are different from all of the other animals we know of, because we don't believe that animals have souls; which means we have to believe that Yahweh gives each of us a soul at some point in our lives between the moment of our conception and the time of our birth. Since it appears that the embryo in Mary was both God and human from the moment the angel addressed Mary, we can only conclude that Yahweh does the same for us; he gives us a soul at the moment of conception.

I suspect that many religious scholars would agree that what makes humans different from the great apes and the early hominids is the belief that humans do have a soul. For scientists, what makes humans different from all of the other species on earth is the fact that we have a mind, which we have used to develop the concepts of right and wrong, good and evil, and God and the devil.

Most of us believe we have both a body and a mind. Many of us believe we have a body, a mind and a soul. Our body is the corporeal part of our being, the part we can see, feel, smell and touch. Most of us who believe we have a soul define it as the spiritual part of our being; it is the "essence" of our being, which we cannot see, feel, smell or touch. It is the part that makes us different from all of the other species on earth. It is the part that defines us as a species, and as individuals.

But, what is a mind? Most of us would define it as a part or function of our brain, which is part of our body. But, that description doesn't really define what a "mind" is. It doesn't explain why we think, why we wonder, why we reason or how we know the difference between right and wrong. It doesn't explain why we believe there is a difference between good and evil, why we accept that there is good and an evil, why we believe that good and evil are spiritual in nature or why we believe that God is good, and the Devil is evil. (Did you ever notice how God is the root word for good, and evil is the root word for Devil? Is there some significance to the fact that God existed before we humans developed the concept of good, and that evil caused us to call the first evil-doer the Devil?)

The only valid explanation of "why" we use our minds as we do, "how" we "know" what we know, and "how" and "why" we "believe" what we do, is because our mind is not just a brain, it is also a part of our "essence" as a "being". And that essence comes from our spiritual side, our soul. The human mind is part and parcel with our soul.

Whether we humans are good or bad, there is no question that we are different from all of the other species of earth. This difference is so great that we can only come to the conclusion that some unknown force, not of the nature of earth, not adhering to the laws of mathematics or physics, took a part in our development at some point in time - possibly at some point in our evolution. Because we have developed the concept of a spiritual and immortal being, who we believe created the universe and everything in it, the obvious conclusion is that it was this immortal being (that we Jews and Christians refer to as Yahweh) who made us so different from all the other species of the earth.

When the Bible or other ancient historical texts refer to astronomical events and astrological names (or use astronomy and astrology to calculate dates) we must realize that astronomy (not astrology) is a legitimate science. The study of astronomy dates back to about 2000 BC, to the Egyptian and Babylonian civilizations. These cultures used astronomy (the study of planets, stars and the universe) to define the length of a day and the length of a year by studying the sun. They defined the length of a month by studying the moon.

The Greek philosopher Aristarchus of Samos (c. 280-64 BC) attempted to determine the relative distances of the sun and moon from the earth, and proposed that the sun was at the center of the universe. Eratosthenes (c. 276-194 BC) accurately measured the earth's diameter. Ptolemy (c. 100-170 AD) summarized much of the Greek understanding of astronomy into a volume later referred to by Arab astrologers as the Almagest, which influenced astronomical thought for the next 1,500 years. However, Copernicus did not theorize, nor did Galileo prove, that the Sun was the center of the galaxy until the 16th century. Hipparchus (c. 125-190 AD) discovered the wobbling of the earth's axis.

We must also realize that the cultures of the Middle East relied heavily on the use of astronomy and astrology to mark time, and to predict future events. The birth of Jesus (the Messiah) was marked by, and to the astronomers/astrologers of the time, was foretold by, a star. The prophecy of Balaam in Numbers 24:17 foretells of "a star emerging from Jacob, a scepter rising from Israel." In the ancient Middle East a star signified a god, and a scepter signified a king, consequently the Prophecy of Balaam predict the arrival of a god-king.

The three wise men of Second Matthew are often referred to as Magi (from which we derive the word magician). The Magi were originally a class of priests among the Persians and Medes. They are mentioned in the book of Jeremiah as part of the retinue of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Chaldeans. The prophet Daniel was "head of the magicians, soothsayers, Chaldeans and exorcists" in Nebuchadnezzar's court, where he foretold the coming of a priest-king among the Hebrews. The prophecies of Daniel were probably well known to the Magi of the Middle East. As a result of this, the Magi of had been expecting a god-king among the Israelites since the time of Daniel, around 600 BC.

The Garden of Eden is described as encompassing the area of the Pishon River in the land of Havilah, the Gihon River in the land of Cush, the Tigris River, and the Euphrates River. Many people believe the Garden of Eden was located in Mesopotamia, in what is now central Iraq. But, this may not be true. For years there has been confusion about which rivers the Pishon and the Gihon were, or are. The Gihon River may be the Nile River in the land of Cush, but it is more likely the Karun (Gihon) River of western Iran, which was in the land of the Kassites, who are probably the same as the Cushites. This corruption or transliteration of names (Karun to Gihon, Cushites to Kassites) is important in understanding the names of the nations in Genesis Chapter 10.

During my research of the Arab descendants of Abraham (trying to support my belief that they are the "Kings of the East" mentioned in Revelation) my studies led me to the passage in Gen. 26, about Abraham's descendants from his concubine Hagar, and his wife Keturah. The passage states that the Arab descendants of Ishmael were scattered across the country from "Havilah to Shur", which means from southern Iran to Turkey. I knew I had heard the word Havilah before, so I looked it up. Havilah is one of the areas mentioned as being near the Garden of Eden. I, like many other people, was taught that the Garden was located in central Iraq or Mesopotomia, somewhere near Baghdad between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. But, as I re-read the Garden of Eden passage for at least the fortieth time in ten years of Bible study, I began to realize what I had been taught was probably wrong.

Genesis 2:10 states, "A river from the land of Eden flowed through the garden to water it; afterwards the river divided into four branches (here some Bibles use the term "river heads" but there is no support for the use of this term). One of these was named the Pishon; it winds across the length of the land of Havilah ... v. 13 the second branch is called the Gihon, crossing the entire length of the land of Cush. The third branch is the Euphrates ((Perat), which flows east to the city of Asher. And the fourth is the Euphrates (Hiddekel)." (source The Book based on the Living Bible) The mention of the Euphrates flowing "east to the city of Asher" creates a problem, because the city of Asshur is traditionally located north of Babylon on the Tigris River.

The use of the term "river heads" in this passage may have led some scholars to the misconception that the Garden of Eden was in an area where four rivers began. But, as we will see this may not be the case. An alternative reading states, "A river watering the garden flowed from Eden, and from there it divided. It had four headstreams. The name of the first is the Pishon. It winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there. The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates." (source unknown)

The problem with locating the "land" of the Garden of Eden is that many people believe the Garden was in Eden (which it appears it was not), and not many people have identified the Gihon and the Pishon rivers. One of the first things we need to realize is that the names we read in the Bible are often English translations of Greek translations of Aramaic, which is why I have used the ancient or Aramaic names here. To understand which rivers these are we need to look for geographical areas or rivers with similar sounding names in the Middle East. We also need to understand that the river ran through the Garden of Eden, and then afterwards branched off into four other rivers.

We can see that the interpretation of these two Bibles is significantly different. Both of them imply that Eden was upstream of the garden and that the river ran through the garden. But, the first quote uses the term "afterwards the river divided into four branches" implying that "after-wards" [outside] of the garden the river divided). The second quote states that the river flowed "from" Eden (not began in it). The second quote also states "it (the river) divided" and "It had four head-streams", simply meaning that the river that started or ran through Eden, and then ran through the garden, had four head-streams. These differences are very significant. The second quote could imply that the river eventually broke up into four parts, or other rivers. Since rivers generally break up into several other rivers or streams upstream on larger rivers, it seems to imply that these four head streams were upstream from Eden. We also have to note that two of these rivers ran through the land of "Cush" and the land of "Havilah". Now lets do a little research and deduction.

If the four head-streams are upriver from Eden, and we know that two of the rivers are the Tigris and the Euphrates, we have to assume that the large river (that they are part of) is the confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates in the delta region north of the Persian Gulf. Then, if we understand that the rivers are listed in order of occurrence, and know that the Tigris is the third river we can expect to find on a map, and know that the Euphrates is the fourth river we expect to find, and understand that we are listing these rivers in a counter-clockwise succession (remember, the Israelites wrote and looked at writings and maps from left to right), and we know that the two rivers we know about (the Tigris and the Euphrates) are on the west side of the Tigris/Euphrates delta, then we know we have to look for the first two rivers either north or east of the Tigris River. So, we can probably begin looking for the "Pishon in the land of Havilah" north and east of the delta, and we can look for the "Gihon crossing the land of Cush" to the north of the Pishon, but north and east of the Tigris. I did an Internet search on some of these names and here is what I found.

Fragment 2 Column 21 of the Dead Sea Scrolls mentions a river named Gihon;

"God came to me in a dream and said to me: Go up to Ramat Hazor which is north of Bethel, the place you are living now, and look to the east, west, south and to the north. Look at the land which I am giving you and your descendants forever. The next morning I went up to Ramat Hazor and looked at the land from that height, from the river of Egypt up to Lebanon and Senir which is north of Bethel, and from the Great Sea up to Hauran (Iran?), and all the land of Gebel, and all the Great Desert, as far as the Euphrates and he said to me: I shall give all this land to your descendants; and they will inherit it forever. I will multiply your descendants like the dust of the earth that none can count. Your descendants will be numberless. Arise, walk about, go "see how long and how wide it is, for I will give it to you and to your descendants after you, forever.

Then I, Abraham, went out traveling in a circuit to survey the land. I began the circuit at the Gihon River, I went along the Mediterranean Sea until I reached the Mountain of the Bull. I circled from the coast of this great river saltwater sea, skirting the Mount of the Bull, and continued eastward through the breadth of the land until I came to the Euphrates River. I traveled along the Euphrates until I reached the Red Sea in the east, whence I followed the coast of the Red Sea until I came to the branch of the Reed Sea, jutting out from the Red Sea. From there I completed the circuit, moving southward to arrive at Gihon River."

This fragment seems to suggest that from Ramat Hazor, Abraham could see (at least) as far as the mouth of the Nile River, to Lebanon, and from the Great Sea (the Mediterranean) to the Euphrates River. The next part of this fragment is confusing, because it appears that Abraham began surveying the land at the Gihon River, then traveled (north?) along the Mediterranean Sea until he reached the Mountain of the Bull (which is near northern Israel and southern Lebanon), then went eastward to the Euphrates, followed the Euphrates south, then went west to the Read Sea, to the branch of the Red Sea called the Reed Sea (probably the reed beds on the northern part of the Red Sea), and completed the circuit by moving "southward" to arrive back at the Gihon River. We must assume that the word "southward" here is translated wrong, it must be north. In any case, we have mention of a Gihon River, in Israel; it is a stream on Mt. Zion. But, this is probably not the Gihon River near the Garden of Eden

According to one source the word "Eden" in the Sumerian language simply meant "fertile plain." This could be the Tigris/Euphrates delta of flood plain. The web site at "http://www.jhom.com/topics/rivers/eden.htm/t_blank" states:

"Pishon, the meandering river associated with "the land of Havilah", is an unknown name. If this latter name (Havilah, TR) is Hebrew, it means "sandy land". There are two biblical sites identified by the name Havilah, one within the Egyptian sphere of influence, the other in Arabia. Here the place is described as a source of gold and precious materials.

Rashi thought the Pishon River of Genesis was the Nile (even though the Euphrates and Tigris flow in a southeasterly direction and the Nile to the north). According to Josephus, it was the Ganges or the Indus. Rabbi Aaron Marcus offered an alternative in the Karun, which flows through Iran into the Persian Gulf. In support of Josephus, there is a city called Havelian on the upper Indus River, in Pakistan."

There is one other area associated with the name Havilah, which is the area of Havelian, Susiana, Susis or Susa, which is on the Rud-e-Karun River east of the Tigris River, in what is now Iran. This area is given credence by the observance of Josephus of a city named Havelian on the upper Indus River in nearby Pakistan. Genesis 10:29 states that Havilah and other tribes, "occupied a stretch of country from Mesha (Meshech) to Sephar, the eastern mountain range". This eastern mountain range could only be the mountains of Iran.

Part of the reason why Rashi probably thought the Pishon River was the Nile River, was because of the use of the term "land of Cush" (often interpreted as Ethiopia, or the ancient Egyptian peoples), which is used in conjunction with the next river named in Genesis 2, the Gihon. However, as we will see, neither the Pishon nor the Gihon rivers are located in Egypt. It also appears that there was an area referred to as the "land of Cush" in or near Mesopotamia. The ancient city of Kish which was east of the city of Babylon gives support to this theory. The word Kish is probably derived from Kush or Cush.

The web site at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04575c.htm states:

"Nemrod, son of Cush, rules over cities in the valleys of the Euphrates and Tigris (Gen., x, 8-12). This text points to the foundation of the first empire in this region by Cushites."

By this we can deduce that Nimrod was a Cushite (son of Cush) and that part of the land of his or his father's domain would have been called the "land of Cush." We know that part of Nimrods' Empire was near the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, because of some of the place names associated with him in Genesis, "Babel (Babylon), Erech (Iraq), Accad (Akkadia, northern Iran/Iraq), the land of Shinar (Sumer, southern Iran/Iraq). We can also find the word Cush or Kush in the Hindu-Kush Mountains near western India, which suggests that the Middle East ancient 'land of Cush' may have extended as far east as India. Thus the unknown Gihon River (which runs through the land of Cush) is probably a river in ancient Babylon (modern Iraq/Iran)."

As I looked at the map of Iraq, the first river I noted north and east of the Tigris/Euphrates delta was called the Rud-e Karun (which mainly runs through Iran). Remember that Rabbi Aaron Marcus felt that the Pishon was the Karun. I suspect that the Rud-e-Karun is the same as the Pishon River "that winds across the length of land of Havilah." One of the next major rivers north of the Pishon/Karun is the Nahr Diyala, in which we can possibly see the name Havilah. This river flows into the Tigris River near Baghdad. There is also a town named Halabjah (which sounds similar to Havilah) close to this river, near the Iranian border. I suspect that the Nahr Diyala River is the same as the Gihon River that "wind through the entire land of Cush." Thus, both the Pishon/Karun and the Gihon rivers (like the Tigris and Euphrates) may be in Iran/Iraq.

Since the river flows "through" (not out of) the garden of Eden, and since the four rivers mentioned are "afterwards" of Eden (upstream of Eden, not surrounding the garden), we can assume that the "Garden" was not necessarily in Eden, but close to it, and that Eden encompassed the area from south-central Iraq to southern Iraq; and that the "Garden" was probably on the flood plain of the Tigris and Euphrates in southern Iraq, not in central Iraq or Mesopotomia as many have suggested.

The area of the Garden of Eden may have been the primary area known by the early Semitic patriarchs of the Middle East. It is doubtful that they knew if there were people in most of Europe, or in China, Africa, Australia or North and South America. The Middle East is where many of the stories of the Bible originated. But, as we will find out, the list of ethnic groups in Genesis 10 includes groups that inhabited areas of Europe, Asia and Africa, that were probably unknown to the people of the Middle East when they first used the names of those ethnic groups. The question is: How did the Semites know of these far off peoples and their locations, unless it came to them through divine inspiration?

Although the lengths of the lives of the patriarchs in the Bible seem unbelievably long, they are short in comparison to the lengths of the rulers listed on the Weld Prism of World History, which is a clay tablet inscribed with hieroglyphics believed to have come from Sumeria around 2000 BC. It lists 10 kings, among them Alalgar and Dumuzi, who each ruled 360 years. One of the questions I had to ask myself while reading the Bible was, "Can the list of names of the patriarchs, and the lengths of their lives really be true?" While I cannot say I found the answers to my questions, I did find some interesting things during my research.

The Bible states that all the people of earth (except Noah and his family) were destroyed in the Great Flood. Again we must realize that the "entire world" to the people of the Middle East might only have meant the area of the Middle East, not the World as we know it today. To determine if any of the people listed in the Bible lived through the flood, and to find out if the story of the flood was possible, put the time line of each of the Patriarchs on a graph, and then I placed a line at the time of the flood.

To my surprise none of the people listed before the flood lived longer than the flood, which might suggest they, and any other people alive at the time of the Flood, did not survive the flood. Methuselah, the longest-lived man, and the only named-person still alive at the time of the flood did not live past the year of the flood. In fact, he died the very year of the flood. Considering the way that the births, lives and deaths of the patriarchs were written down (such as "when Enoch was 65 year old he fathered Methusaleh" and "after the birth of Methusaleh Enoch lived for 365 years") and taking into account that the Biblical Story of the Flood may be just a myth or legend (as some experts and theologians suggest), someone performed very meticulous calculations to get this correct, and it never got corrupted through all the translations of the Bible. How did this happen? Did someone do this just to make a good story? Or was it divine inspiration?

According to the dates of the Bible, Adam died only 126 years before the birth of Noah. Could the years listed in Genesis be correct? Let's use some currently accepted dates, and two different Biblical events, to find out. Scientists believe Abraham and the Israelites first passed through the land of Canaan about 1850 BC. According to the Biblical genealogy Abraham first went to Palestine 2,023 years after Adam was created. Adding 1,850 years to 2,023 years would mean that the creation of Adam occurred in 3,873 BC. If we add 2000 years to this date in the year 2000 AD, we would end up with 5873 years since the creation. Now lets look at the time when the Israelites took control of the land of Palestine.

According to the Bible, Jacob's birth was 2,148 years after Adam was formed. He arrived in Egypt when he was 130 years old (Gen. 47:9), which was 2,278 years after Adam was formed. The Israelites remained in Egypt for 430 years (Ex. 12:40), until 2,708 years after Adam. Then they wandered in the desert for 40 years before entering Palestine, which was 2,748 years after Adam. Scientists believe Joshua entered Canaan about 1250 BC. If we add 1,250 years to 2,748 years we come up with 3,998 years, or about 4,000 years after Adam was created. In 2000, if we add 2000 years to this number, we end up with 5998 years since Yahweh formed Adam.

When we combine current scientific belief with the Biblical genealogies concerning these two different events, using the creation of Adam as a starting point, there is only a 125-year difference between the two calculations. It appears that the time frames of the post-flood Biblical genealogies are remarkable reliable. However (as I will explain later), the "twenty generations" from Adam to Abraham in the List of the Patriarchs may be symbolic of "several" generations before Abraham.

Note the number of years that some of the Patriarchs lived. Enoch lived 365 years, the same as the number of days it takes for the earth to complete a solar year. His life of years may symbolize completion, because the Bible states that Enoch "walked with God then was no more." Most scholars take this to mean that Enoch was extremely pious, and because of this he did not die, but was taken straight to Heaven (raptured) by God. Enoch may be one of the two prophets mentioned in Revelation who return prior to the Second Coming of Christ.

Lamech lived 777 years. Seven is the godly number, which would mean perfection. Three sevens represent abundant perfection, and may refer to the three persons of the Holy Trinity. Lamech was the father of Noah who, with his family, were the only survivors of the flood. Noah, the father of the people of the new earth after the flood, was the 10th generation from Adam. Abraham, the father of the people of the new land of Canaan, was the 20th generation. Is there some symbolism in these numbers?

The story of Canaan is noteworthy because it may be misunderstood. Canaan may not have been cursed because he saw his father's nakedness, but because he saw his father's wife naked. Leviticus 18:8 (KJ) states, "The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover, it is thy father's nakedness." The term "seeing thy father's nakedness" was a colloquial term for seeing the father's wife naked. According to the Bible Canaan was cursed because of this event. The Canaanites later lost their land to the Hebrews. Was this the fulfillment of the curse in Genesis 28:25? In Joshua 10:13 it states", And the sun and the moon stood still, until the people had taken vengeance on their enemies." We now know that, by the laws of physics, this is highly unlikely. There are probably several other instances of colloquial language and unlikely historical beliefs in the Bible.

There are inconsistencies in the Bible, because, although God divinely inspired it, men wrote it. Genesis 5:32 states that Noah was 500 years old when he fathered Shem. Genesis 7:6 states that Noah was 600 years old when the flood occurred, which would make Shem 100 years old at the time of the flood. However, Genesis 12:10 states that Shem was 100 years old when he became the father of Arpachshad "two years after the flood". Shem could not be both 100 at the time of the flood, and two years after the flood. There are also inconsistencies in the genealogies of Matthew. The names Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah are left out of Matthew's genealogies; they are listed in both Kings and Chronicles.

Genesis 6:1-4 makes us aware of the moral decay of humans, introduces us to the "sons of God" or Fallen Angels, and the Nephilim, and sets the scene for the Flood. The Nephilim were supposedly the offspring of the fallen angels and human women. One of the Qumran scrolls refers to the Book of Enoch (the Enoch who walked with God), in which it states that during the time of Jare (Enoch's father Jared) approximately 200 hundred "watchers" came down from heaven. These "watchers" were supposedly the Fallen Angels. According to the scroll, Enoch was warned of an impending disaster, but, he was told that as long as Methuselah was alive "he should not be anxious", because the disaster would not occur. Coincidentally, the words "do not be anxious" or "do not be afraid" (which mean the same thing) are listed 365 times in the Bible. Methuselah's name may be interpreted as "man of the dart" or "in his day it shall be sent". According to my records, Methusaleh died in 1656 AA, the very year of the flood. The foretold disaster of the scroll appears to have been the flood. Over 200 different cultures around the world have legends similar to the flood of the Bible.

The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic accounts of a flood, from around 1750 BC, much older than the Biblical account of the flood, states that "the god of the underworlds tore out the posts of the dam" and "all the earth's spirits leaped up with flaming torches, and with the brightness thereof they lit up the earth." This legend suggests that there was a flood on the Euphrates, and that a boat with humans floated down the Euphrates and landed in what is now Bah'rain in the Persian Gulf. Archeologists have found evidence of a flood along the Euphrates about 5,000 years ago, which is about the time of the Biblical flood in 3,000 BC. In the last few years an older Sumerian version of the flood legend, from around 1850 BC, has been found in a British museum. The Sanskrit texts of the Mahabharata (Vana Parva) of India state, "the earth, as if oppressed with excessive burden, sank down, suffering pain in her limbs, and the earth in distress was deprived of her senses by excessive pressure." A Persian story recalls how the world became wicked through the influence of the king of darkness, Ahriman. The earth had to be cleaned by a gigantic flood, and the raindrops were as large as a bull's head. The fact that these flood stories, which are all older than the Bible, suggest that the Biblical account of the flood is derived from older legends.

The Bahnars of Asia have a legend of how a bird called a kite quarreled with a crab. The kite pecked the crab's skull so hard that a hole appeared in the crab's skull. In revenge, the crab caused the sea and the rivers to rise until they reached the sky. All living beings perished, except a brother and a sister, who were saved in a big chest. They had a pair of every kind of animal in the chest with them. They floated on the water for seven days and seven nights. Then, on the command of the spirits, a cock started crowing to let the brother and sister know that the waters were receding. They let the birds fly away, and then they let the other animals loose. Then a black ant brought two grains of rice to the humans, which they planted on a plain. The next morning the plain was covered with a rich crop of rice.

Another Southern Asian tribe, the Benua-Jakun, believe that we are not standing on solid ground. They believe that land is more like skin covering an abyss of water. Long ago the god Pirman (sounds similar to the Persian god Ahirman) broke up this skin, and the world was destroyed by a huge flood. Pirman then created a man and a woman and put them in a wooden ship, which had no opening. They ship drifted on the water and eventually came to rest, and the man and woman came out and stepped on dry land. But the earth was dark, because the sun had not been created yet. The man and woman became the ancestors of all mankind.

According the Ami tribe of Formosa an earthquake caused a great flood. The earthquake caused the mountains to crumble and the earth to open up. From this fissure a hot spring gushed forth, flooding the whole earth. The only people to survive were a brother and sister, who floated in a wooden mortar. The Chinese Miao people have a legend of a wicked world shaking its fists in the face of a "Mighty God". As a result of this, the god caused it to rain for forty days, during which the waters covered the highest mountains. The legend goes on to state that the Patriarch Nuah (sounds similar to Noah) was righteous, as was his wife, the Matriarch Gaw Bo-lu-en (sounds similar to the Boldog/Eneth goddess of the Huns), and that they escaped the flood by building a huge boat.

The Pamary, Abedery and Kataushy tribes of South America have legends that the sun and the moon turned red, blue and yellow, and the wild beasts mingled fearlessly with men. A month later they heard a roar from above and below them. Then there was darkness, accompanied by torrential rain and thunder, and the light of daylight was blotted out. (This is reminiscent of the "Wrath" in Revelation.) The water continued to rise and all of mankind perished during the darkness. Only one man, Uassu (sounds similar to the Uanna-Adapa (Adam) of Greek legends, and the Noe (Noah) of Egyptian legends and the Nuah of the Chinese legends), together with his wife, survived the flood. When the waters were gone they couldn't find any corpses.
A Peruvian story from the Huarochiri province in the Andes relates how a man was warned by his llama that there was a flood coming within five days. The man was astonished to hear the animal speak and asked how he could be saved. The llama told him to gather up enough food for five days and follow him to the top of a high mountain. As soon as the man reached the top of the mountain the waters began to rise. After five days, all the people of the world had drowned, and the waters began to recede. According to the story the man was the only survivor of the flood, and all the nations of the earth are descended from him. The Peruvian Incas have a flood legend that relates how the waters of the earth rose above the highest mountains in the world, and all of the people and every living thing perished. The only ones to escape were a man and a woman, who survived by floating in a box on the "face of the waters".

The people of India have an account of the flood similar in many respects to the Biblical account. The name of their Hero is Satyaruata, and he had three sons. The name of the oldest was Iyapeti (Japheth), and the other two were Sharma (Shem), and C'harma (Ham). The interesting thing about this legend is that C'harma was cursed by his father because he laughed at him when he got drunk, which sounds similar to the account of a Noah and Ham in the Bible. The Greeks have a legend that their ancestor was a man named Japetos (Japheth). They regarded him not only as the father of their race, but the father of all humanity (according to the Bible he is the father of the Caucasian and Mongolian races).

The Brazilian Flood Legend states that the god Monan sent a great fire to burn up the world and its wicked inhabitants, and a magician caused so much rain to fall in extinguishing the flames that the earth became flooded. A Chinese legend refers to a boat with eight people, to eight people united together on earth, and to a great flood.

Indian tribes living in the Ancasmarca province of Peru have a legend that, in ancient times, their sheep watched the stars at night and refused to eat. When the shepherd asked the sheep what was going on the sheep told him that the conjunction of stars foreshadowed the coming destruction of the world by water within the next month. The shepherd and his six children gathered together all the food they could find and went to the top of the highest mountain. The waters rose higher and higher, but as the waters rose, so did the mountain, so that its top was never submerged. When the waters receded, the mountain did too. The shepherd and his children were the only survivors of the flood.

The Chinese also refer to ten ancient Emperors, who were considered to be divine. This is similar to the ten Patriarchs who lived prior to the Biblical flood. The Weld Prism of World History from Sumeria outlines world history and lists ten kings, who ruled before the flood. The people of India refer to nine Bhramadikas, and their founder Brahma, who make up the ten petris (fathers). The Arabs refer to the ten kings of the Adites. There are ten patriarchs between Adam and the flood of Noah.

Again, as with the stories of creation, the fact that so many widely separated cultures, from the Middle East to Asia and South America (many of which are not even Christian), have similar legends of a great flood, ten patriarchs, and eight people in a boat, and even use the same or similar sounding names for the people of their flood legends; and the fact that the oldest of these beliefs appear to have come from the Middle East, leads us to one conclusion; these legends are derived from a common group of people, and that group appears to have come out of the Middle East, which leads us to the further conclusion that the Flood Story of the Bible may be partly true.

After the last ice age scientists believe the oceans may have risen by as much as 200 feet. It is believed that the flood that flowed down the Mississippi River valley may have been as much as 10 to 20 times higher than any known flood peak. A recent study of the floor of the Black Sea, using remote controlled vehicles, shows that humans originally inhabited the floor of the sea 300 feet down, meaning that either the sea has sunk, or water levels have risen. The studies suggest that the Mediterranean Sea broke through the Straits of Bosphorus and flooded the Black Sea sometime in the distant past. Some Scientists believe this flood caused the Black Sea to rise by as much as 6 inches a day, for a total of 240 inches, or 20 feet. It is possible that this is the flood referred to in the Bible, and that the people who survived the flood spread out across the earth, carrying the story of the flood with them. There is no scientific evidence to support the idea of the Biblical flood; it may simply be an allegory, a story with a moral.

Several cultures around the world make reference to the father and mother of all men. In the Sumerian and Akkadian traditions Noah is the preserver of the seed of man. According to an Egyptian tradition Noah was the begetter of the gods, and his wife was the mother of all living people. The survivors of the flood, including Noah and several other Biblical characters, were perceived to be gods by several cultures. These gods or patriarchs were referred to by different names in different cultures. Note how many of the names sound alike.

Noah's Ark is referred to as Nuhu'un Gemisi (Noah's boat) in the Kurdish language. Sanskrit legends describe the Ark as a raft. The Egyptian god Ammon-Ra sailed a reed boat in the sky; the boat was referred to as Uaa Nu (the divine boat of Nu, or Noah). The Mittani of the Middle East worshiped a "rain god" called Mithra, and referred to the boat of their legends as Ma-banda-anna (the boat of the sky). The "rain" could be a reference to the flood, and the "rain god" could be the man who survived the flood, Noah. Persian, Vedic and East Indian myths refer to the ark as Varuna's (Noah's) house of clay. The Haulapai Indians of the southwestern United States believe the survival boat of their ancestors was made out of stone.

According to Moslem tradition in the Koran, the ark was believed to have landed on a hill called Cudi or Sura Houd, which had a north-south axis. It is believed that the ark originally lay on the western side of this hill. The hill known as Cudi is part of the mountainous range of Ararat, it is also known as Mahsur Gunu (which sounds similar to Sura), a Koranic phrase of Arabic background, meaning "raised from the dead". This could refer to the survival of Noah's family from the flood.

The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic states that the landing site of Utnapishtim (Noah) is Mount Nisir. The Turkish village of Uzengili on the slopes of Ararat was once known as Nasar. Since none of the Semitic languages used vowels in their writings, the word Nasar would be spelled nsr, and could be written as msr, nzr or nsr; Mahsur, Nazar, Nasar or Nisir; it may have been corrupted into the "sur" of Sura Houd. The East Indian translation of the word Nasar is "to make a presentation or sacrifice". Noah built an altar of thanksgiving and offered a sacrifice to God when he landed on Ararat. Again the question must be asked, "Are the similarities of these legends just coincidental?"

Fragement 2, Column 12, of the Dead Seas Scrolls states, "After the flood Noah and his sons descended from the mountain. They saw the widespread devastation of the earth. After the flood Noah's children began to have his grandchildren - sons and daughters. They then planted the soil and put a vineyard on Mount Lubar that produced wine four years later: On the first day of the fifth year, there was a feast at which the first wine was drank. Noah gathered his family together and they went to the altar and thanked God for saving them from the destruction of the flood." I'm not sure where this Mount Lubar was, or if it is the same as the Mount Nisir of the Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic; they sound similar so they could be the same. No evidence has been found of a boat or ark on Mount Ararat.

At this point I feel I must inject some verifiable scientific evidence as to the origin of man, and the migration or dispersal of the different races of man into this study. Recent genetic testing and mapping shows that modern man (Homo sapiens) first appeared in Africa, and probably had light brown skin. The "Sand People" of the Kalahari Desert are thought to be the oldest group of people on earth, and we can see that their light brown skin and facial features could develop into the different skin colors and facial features of the other races and ethnic groups of humans.

The first migration of humans out of Africa occurred about 60,000 years ago. They probably crossed from Ethiopia to Yemen on the Arabian Peninsula, then traveled through the Middle East to India, through southern Asia, and eventually into Australia. Another migration occurred as people moved into the Middle East, where it appears they may have developed into the Tatar/Turkic type peoples prevalent on the Asian Steppes. Some of these people eventually moved (in two groups) into what is now northern and southern China. At least two other migrations occurred out of the Middle East, probably from the area of Kirghistan and Kazakhstan near the Black Sea. One group migrated north into Russia to eventually become the Chukchi type people of eastern Russia, who later developed into the Native Americans. The second group became Cro-Magnon man and the eventual Caucasian types of Europe.

The genetic mapping strongly suggests that the first humans were dark skinned, probably what we would consider of the Negroid type, and that they later developed into several different types. It also shows that all humans can be traced back to one female who came out of Africa. The first group of humans remained as the Negroids of Africa, and some of them became the dark skinned peoples of India and Malaysia, and the Aborigines of Australia.

The Aborigines (who are Negroid) appeared in Australia about 60,000 years ago; the first people appeared in Siberia about 40,000 years ago; the first Europeans and Indians appeared in America about 17,000-14,000 years ago.

As I stated above, genetic research has found that all humans can be traced back to one female who came out of Africa, and that the first groups of humans out of Africa may have consisted of as few as eight to ten people! A researcher has also found a man living in Kirghistan (near the Black Sea), who has the genetic marker for all Europeans, Mongols and American Indians! This is the area from which it is thought the Indo-European languages (of India, southwest Asia, and Europe) began. This testing has shown that the modern Lebanese are descendants of the Phoenicians, and that the Phoenicians were Canaanites, who were descendants of Ham. I suspect that modern Syrians are descendants of Shem from his son Asshur.

To try to reconcile this scientific evidence with the Story of Creation in the Bible may be difficult, but I can try. It is possible that two different legends, the flood legend, and the dispersal of mankind, were combined into one legend. We can see evidence of this by examining several of the creation and flood legends from around the world, in which creation, a snake, evil, the fall of man, the flood, ten patriarchs or gods, people surviving the flood in a boat, and eight people, are combined into one or more of these legends. It is also possible that the people of the Middle East did not have knowledge or a memory of the earlier migrations out of Africa, because of the lack of communication skills, such as language and writing. They may only have had story of the creation of man, and a limited knowledge of a dramatic event (such as a flood) that encompassed part of the Middle East.

The flood legend may only pertain to one of these migrations, such as the second migration out of the Middle East, which led to the eventual development of the Semitic types (Jews/Arabs) and Japhetic types (Europeans and Asians). In the context of the Bible, the Semitic types are best described as the current Syrians/Jews/Arabs; the Japhetic types as the Europeans (Caucasians) and Asians (Mongols); and the Hamitic types as the Lebanese/Africans and Australian Aborigines (Negroids).

If (as noted below) Ham's descendants were brown-skinned, then it appears that either Ham or his wife had brown-skin. If Ham had brown-skin, it is probable that either Noah or his wife had brown-skin, or that both of them had brown-skin. However, since it appears that some of Noah's descendants may have been white, brown or yellow, it is probable that Noah or his wife, or the wives of Noah's sons, had different skin colors.

If we understand human physiology we realize that the Negroid-type humans in Africa needed a lot of melatonin (dark pigment) in their skins, to keep them from being exposed to the potentially harmful ultra-violet (UV) rays of the sun, which they were exposed to in the southern hemisphere.

However, besides being potentially dangerous, UV rays also provide a benefit to humans, in the form of vitamin D, which is needed to use calcium to build bones. As the dark skinned people moved farther north, they were not exposed to as many UV rays as they were in the Southern Hemisphere, which allowed them to have lighter skins. It may also have "forced" them to have lighter skins, so they would get enough vitamin D from the UV rays of the sun that they could utilize calcium in their bodies. One of the ways the early humans got enough vitamin D was by eating fish, which is high in fatty acids. Obviously the migration of early humans forced them to stay near fairly close to water, where they could find fish to eat.

After the flood the Bible states that Noah and his sons and their families landed on Mt. Ararat (Urartu) in the Arax Mountains, which is near the River Murat, in eastern Turkey, near the borders of Russia, Turkey and Iran. If the Ark floated for a year it could have easily moved from the southern Black Sea to Turkey. From there it appears that the families of the three sons of Noah went their own ways. The names of many of the men were given to their tribes, and we know where they lived by their names. Note the corruption, and progression of the names, many of which are used by scientists today.

Shem The Semites: Akkadians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Chaldeans, Hebrews, and the half Hebrew-half Egyptian Arabs of the Middle East.

Elam Elamites Pisa, Susis, Susiana, Cissiana, the city of Susa on the Karun River in southern Iran

Aram Aramea, Armenia, southeastern Turkey, northern Syria and northern Iraq

Ham The Hamites appear to be the ancestors of people of the Middle East, Africa and China. Because the name Ham can be translated as "sunburnt" many scholars believe Ham's skin was brown. His descendants may have been the dark-skinned people of Africa, and the lighter skinned Egyptians.

Cush Kush, Kass, Kush-Tana, Etana, Ecbatana (Persian capitol) 1. Kassites of the Tigris and Euphrates (Babylon, current Iran/Iraq). 2. Cushites / Nubians of the upper Nile (Ethiopia) The word Cush has been interpreted as "black". The Ethiopians are dark- skinned.

Seba The Island of Meroe near Ethiopia

Havilah Ivah, Pisa, Susis, Susiana The Pishon/Karun River "in the land of Havilah" near Eden in southern Iraq.

Sabtah

Raamah

Sheba in the Persian Gulf, probably Yemen in southern Arabia. The Queen of Sheba.

Dedan

Sabteca

Mizraim Egypt The use of the word "The" and the -im suffix denotes "tribes" of the "sons-of-God" (Fallen Angels), in this case it is probably a reference to the "giants", the offspring of the fallen angels and human females, referred to as the Nephilim/Annakim/Rephaim of the Middle East.

The Ludim Probably the inhabitants of Lybia.

The Lehabim Lebu or Rebu, now Lybia

The Naphtulim Probably Nubia (refers to Negroids) which is current Ethiopia.

The Pathrusim Pathros, upper/southern Egypt

The Casluhim lower/northern Egypt

Put Phut, possibly Nubia, Ethiopia or Lybia, this is possibly the beginning of the Negroid race; Nubians were dark skinned.

Canaan progenitor of: 1. Canaanites/Phoenicians in Canaan/Palestine, 2. Carthaginians of Africa.

Sidon Sidonians, Phoenicians, The town of Sidon in Lebanon.

Jebusites

Amorites

Girgashites East of Galilee

Hivites Mount Hermon, Mount Lebanon, Hamath in Israel

Arkites north of Phoenicia, now Turkey

Arvadites Aruadites The island of Ruad in Phoenicia which is now Lebanon.

Zemarites Zem, Em, Emessa, the modern city of Hums

Hamathites Hamath was the principal city of northern Assyria, current Iran/Iraq

Note: In the above genealogy there are seven sons of Mizraim, and eleven sons of Canaan, who both inhabited lands in or near Canaan/Palestine, and who were enemies of the Hebrews. The animosity between the descendants of Canaan (the original inhabitants of Palestine, Lebanon, Arabia and Syria) and Mizraim (the Egyptians, and Arabs from any country); and the descendants of Shem (the Hebrews/Jews) still exists today.

Japheth The Hebrew word yapht is translated as "enlargement". His descendants dispersed to the islands of the Mediterranean (Gen. 10:5). The ancestors of Japheth appear to be both Caucasians and Mongoloids who went north and east from Ararat. Japheth may be transliterated to Aegean (Aegean Sea), and Achaia in southern Greece.

Gomer Gomarians, Gomerites, Chomarians, Comarians, Cimmerians: 1. Parthians, Persians of Persia (Iran/Afghanistan); Hurrians, (Urartu, Mt. Ararat in Turkey); Arii, Aryans of the Iranian Plateau, 2. Galatians (Turkey), Gauls (France), Gaels and Celts (Scots, Irish), Wales (Welsh) 3. Cimbrii, Cimbrians, Germans, Franks (France), Gaths, Goths, Jutes, Teutons (of northern Europe); Angles, Saxons, Bretons (of Britain), etc; and the Russian Crimea

Ashkenaz Scandia, Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden, Denmark)

Riphath Riphaean/Carpathian Mountains between Turkey and Asia

Magog Sacae or Scythians; refers to the Scythians, Mongols and Tatars (who founded the Mongol Empire), known as the Dada in Mongolia, and as Juan-Juan or Xiang-nu in China.1. Mongols of China, 2. Aschin Huns, Kushan-Huns, (Hungarians, Magyars), 3. Dada, Tatars, Tartars of Azerbaidzhan, Georgia, Kazahkstan, Kirghistan, Kurdistan, Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan; Turkestan (of China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Iran); 4. Mogul Empire of India.

Madai Medes, Madi, Mitani, of the Medes-Persian Empire, current Iraq/Iran.
Javan Ionian, Ionia, Greece; possibly Italy

Elishah Cyprus

The Kittim Cyprus) The -im ending probably denotes giants

Tubal the cities of Tobolsk, Tiblisi 1. Eastern Iberia (Republic of Georgia), 2. The Picts of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal; later on the British Isles) 3. possibly Italy

Meshech Moschi (eastern Turkey), Muscovite (Moscow), Pole, Lapp, Czech, Slav, Slovak, Latvian, Lithuanian

Tiras 1 Thrace and Macedonia (northern Greece), 2. The Etruscans of Tuscany (northern Italy)

Interestingly, in Genesis 10:2, the sons of Noah are not listed as they are in Genesis 5:32 and 10:1, where they are listed as Shem, Ham and Japheth. In Genesis 10:2, Japheth is listed first, then Ham and then Shem. This may be an example of "The first shall be last and the last shall be first". Japheth may also be listed first because his descendants populated much of the world. Shem may be listed last because his descendants had the smallest population of the three families, or because the Semitic Hebrews, Israelites and Jews may be the last groups to recognize Jesus as the Messiah during the "end times".

To the ancient Semites, naming something was to take dominion over it (Gen. 1:28), and the name of the leader of the tribe was often given to the town or country where he settled. We can see this by the names and places listed above. We now believe that this list was first formulated around 1400 BC. In spite of this, some Bible scholars (and many scientists) believe that we cannot take the Bible literally, even though many scientific resources refer to these names, and relate them to specific geographical locations. However, this study suggests that the Bible is remarkably correct: historically, geographically, linguistically and genetically.

One of the things we have to learn to do to interpret the Aramaic and Hebrew names and places in the Bible is to: 1. associate similar sounding words with each other (such as Cush, Kush Kish) and recognize the corruption or progression of those words into other words (such as Hori, Horim, Horite) and realize that they may be the same name, people, thing or place; and 2. look for the transliteration of those words from one language to another, such as from Aramaic to Hebrew, and Hebrew to Greek (apokalupsis is Greek for Revelation, which we refer to in English as Apocalypse; Nimrod is equated with the ancient Middle East god Marduk, who is the same as the Greek Heracles who we refer to as Hercules).

We can get a sense of this when we realize that the Hebrew word for Cherubim is karibu, which was described as a bull with horns; an American Indian name for reindeer is Caribou; and there is a buffalo in Indonesia called the Carabao. The Roman word Caesar (pronounced Ce-ser and Kay-ser), is the German word Kaiser (pronounced Ky-ser) and the Russian word Czar (pronounced Zar). The Semitic word for Heth is Khettai (pronounced Kett-a), which sounds similar to Cathay, which is an old term referring to China. The Hebrew word Messiah is the Greek word Christ, which is often thought of as "anointed" or "Savior". Edom means "red" and designates the descendants of Esau, and the land of the Edomites, which is also known as Idumea. The Persians called their language "Aryan". The Scythians were referred to as Sacae in ancient Persia, Skythai in ancient Greece, and Sai in ancient China. They were also referred to as Magog.

The descendants of Adam and Cain's sons are a good example of how Hebrew names reflect the character of the person. The Hebrew name Adam (adam) means "come from the ground". The Hebrew name Eve (hawwah) is explained by the root word hayah which means "to live". Adam's son's (Cain's) first descendant is Enoch, his son was Irad), his son was Mehujael, his son was Methushael, his son was Lamech, who married two women, whose names were Adah and Zillah.

Adah gave birth to Jabal who was the first tent-dwelling herdsman, and Jubal, who was the ancestor of all who play the harp and pipe. The Hebrew word Jabal (ybl) means "to lead" (as in leading a herd of cattle); Jubal (yobel) means trumpet, as in yodel. Zillah gave birth to Tubal-Cain who was the ancestor of all whom work copper and iron; Tubal was a northern tribe that lived where there were deposits of metal; cain in one of the Semitic languages means "smith".

Genesis 4;22 states Tubal-Cain's sister was Naamah, whose Hebrew name means "pretty/beloved". Naamah, the descendant of Cain, may be the same Naamah who was the wife of Noah. Noah was the tenth generation from Adam, Tubal-Cain, whose sister was Naamah was also the tenth generation from Adam. Since women are rarely mentioned in the genealogies unless they are important, we can only conclude that Tubal-Cain's sister Naamah is mentioned because she was the wife of Noah. This suggests that the line of Cain (the murderer) survived the flood. The song of Lamech in Genesis 4:23-24 suggests that Cain's son Lamech also committed murder, and shows the increasing ferocity of the descendants of Cain. Many people believe that Noah's grandson Canaan carried on this line of Cain.

In Hebrew, Adam's son's name Seth (shet) means "he has granted", as in "Yahweh has granted me another son". Genesis 4:26 states that Seth's son Enosh was the "first" to use the name Yahweh in reference to the god-creator of the later Hebrew race. However, Jews today do not say the word Yahweh; if they must talk about Yahweh they say the word God.

One of the questions we must ask ourselves is how we incorporate what we know about the ethnic groups of the world (through archeology and linguistics) with the list of the names in the Bible. We do it by examining the ancient historic documents of people such as the Greek historian Herodotus and the Jewish writer Josephus, and by looking for names, ethnic groups and locations in those documents that are the same as or similar to the names in the List of Patriarchs in the Bible. Then we look for indications that they are the same names, groups of locations.

This often leads to an understanding of where these people and groups where at the time of the writing of the different books of the Bible (including the people listed in the books of Ezekiel and Revelation) which is essential if we want to understand the Bible, especially if we want to know which ethnic groups are involved in the Battle of Armageddon and the Battle of Gog and Magog mentioned at the "end time" in the Book of Revelation.

When we compare what we know about the ethnic groups of the world with the List of Patriarchs in Genesis, we find that the List is remarkably correct. In fact, if we do not believe that the Bible was inspired by God we would conclude that the correctness of the List of the Patriarchs was nothing less than a miracle. As I have said before, the only conclusion I can come to is that the List of the Patriarchs is correct, because the Book of Genesis was inspired by Yahweh, and everything in it is there for a reason.

Several different cultures of the ancient Middle East believed that "fallen angels" came to earth. Sumerian records mention gods who descended from the stars. Sanskrit records mention gods who hybridized with human females, and state that their offspring had supernatural learning abilities and the skills of their celestial fathers. As mentioned earlier, one of the Qumran scrolls refers to the Book of Enoch, in which it states that during the time of Jare (Enoch's father Jared) approximately 200 hundred "watchers" came down from heaven. These watchers were equated with the Fallen Angels.

Genesis 6:4 states, "The Nephilim were on earth in those days (and even afterwards) when the sons of God resorted to the women, and had children by them. These were the Heroes of days gone by, men of renown." This makes it clear that the descendants of the Nephilim were still on earth after the flood. The Hebrew word nephil is translated as "feller" as in "one who cuts down". It is also associated with the word "giant". As further evidence of the Nephilim being giants Deuteronomy 1:28 states that when the Israelites were going into Canaan they said to Moses "Our brothers have discouraged us by saying that the people are stronger and taller than we are, their cities immense, with walls reaching to the sky. And we have seen Anakim there." The -im suffix means sons of God (as in Cherubim and Seraphim). The use of the terms "sons of God" and "resorted to women" has led some to believe that the "sons of men" were the sons of Cain and the "women" were the daughters of Seth, but I can find no Biblical support for this theory. It may come from the some ancient Jewish scholars who thought that Cain was Eve's son from Satan, not from Adam.

The Anakim, Avim, Emim, Philistim, Rephaim and Zamzummim (Zuzim) are the legendary names of the aboriginal inhabitants of Palestine. These people were identified with the Nephilim, who supposedly raised up huge monuments. Second Samuel 21:18-22 mentions the giant sons of Rapha, from whom the Rephaim get their name. It also mentions that some of these giants had six fingers and six toes. Rock paintings from around the world show figures of beings with six fingers. Deuteronomy 3:11 states "Og king of Bashan was the last survivor of the Rephaim; his bed was the iron bed that can be seen at Rabbah-of-the-Ammonites, nine cubits long and four wide; according to a human cubit." This bed would have been 15 feet long by 7 feet wide. The Hebrew word used here for Rehpaim is Rapha, which is translated as "giant".

Some ancient sources point to the belief that the descendants of Gomer (Gomarians) intermixed with some of