What piqued my interest was the description of Havilah, where there is not only good Gold and Onyx (a precious metal and precious stone), but also bdellium, a resin probably once used as an incense (and now used for makeup brushes).
So why the mention? What was the author trying to explain? Obviously these 3 materials were of importance to the culture at the time the words were put into writing, but there is no mention of it’s significance to the Garden of Eden, to Jehovah God, or to Adam and Eve.
The author wanted the reader to know there were good things in Havilah. So is there a place in the Middle East where we can find these three valued materials?
I don’t know. I will research but I will say this. The instant I read this verse I thought of the Annunaki, who according to Sumerian texts, came to this planet to mine for Gold. Who also have a creation story that archaeologically speaking, pre-date the Bible with many similarities.
Because I am curious about the cultural relevance, I will continue to look into the significance of these three materials. In our culture, gold is highly valuable for it’s decorative nature. But we must remember that gold has industrial value as well, and value is often culturally defined. For some people in this world, Gold was merely a decoration and other precious stones were more valuable. For others, Gold was so valuable it resulted in slavery, greed and death in their quest to obtain it.
What would you do for a nice chunk of Gold? Would you stay in possession of a gold plated bible? I know there will be more Gold references later in the Bible so I look forward to seeing how it is portrayed and why.
Genesis 1:28 says Elohim created man and woman and mandated their dominion over the earth. Verse 29 says that Elohim gave man and woman “every herb yielding seed” and Verse 30 “every green herb for food” and mandates them to go forth and multiply.
Yet in Genesis 2:5 we are told “And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up” because there was no man to till the earth.
Unless Book 2 is rewinding and going over the details of Book 1, this doesn’t make sense. Even if it is rewinding, the order of creation is different (see paragraph below). The phrase “in the earth” is probably primarily translated as “the world” but does it really say that? Could this verse be describing a particular spot in “the earth”? I’ve got “earth” in my front yard, but that does not equate with the entire world. So why is it translated so?
In Book 1 Elohim made animals first and THEN made man. In Book 2, Jehovah creates man and THEN animals. What’s going on here? See the difference? Is there a difference between God in Book 1 and Jehovah God in book 2?
Genesis 2:7 “Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground”. But we are told man was already formed in Genesis 1:26. Was this a different type of man created in Genesis 2:7? Also, Genesis 2:7 does not specify that this was the FIRST man. It’s an assumption we all make. Wasn’t there already another man created? If so, then Adam is NOT the first man. Maybe the first man of a certain lineage but Book 1 tells us man was already made. To lead us to a hint of answer to this question, we are immediately introduced to a geographical reference in Genesis 2:8 where we are introduced to Eden, which is “eastward”… but eastward from where? This “where” is HUGE to know.
Because I believe that Genesis Book 2 is simply a description of creation of man and culture in a SPECIFIC area on earth. Which specific area? Look to Genesis 2:11 where the four rivers are described that define this area: Pishon that encompasses Havilah, Gihon which encompasses Cush, Hiddekel which is in front of Assyria, and lastly the Euphrates (which for some reason didn’t need any further clarification).
Remember the “go forth and multiply” mandate of Book 1? In Genesis 2:15 Jehovah puts man in the Garden of Eden and assigns him to dress and keep the garden. What happened to the mandate of go forth and multiply? This particular man was created to tend to the Garden. Not only that, woman wasn’t even created for him to procreate with at this point in verse so he was unable to “go forth and multiply”. Yet we are in Book 2 well after the mandate to go forth and multiply?
We are told that it is a simple continuation of Book 1, but it clearly is not. We can try to force the issue and just pretend these distinctions don’t exist, but this is not what the Word is telling us.
My theory: Adam is not the first man of the planet earth. He is the first man of the earth in the land defined by Jehovah God. This theory gets supported further in upcoming books where Jehovah clearly defines his domain with CLEAR borders and delineation: the Tigris, Euphrates, the sea, and the wilderness.
To finish Genesis Book 2, Jehovah God forms animals from the ground and populates the fields and the heavens (skies). Jehovah God then performs what we would call an intensive surgery by putting Adam under (aka a “deep sleep”), cutting him open, removing a rib, and then closing his flesh back up. From Adam’s rib was created woman and the cultural norm of what we call marriage was instantly defined.
Why would an omnipotent god, who, apparently created the universe, need to pull a physical rib out of a man to create a woman? Couldn’t he just create a woman the way he created man?
The idea of marriage, in this case, is a cultural norm. In some cultures the woman leaves her family to join the man’s, and in this case and culture, men leave their family to join the woman.
So at this point, Adam, Eve and animals created by Jehovah God roam the Garden of Eden. What is happening in the rest of the world? Most Christians assume nothing because the Bible does not mention it and they assume this is the beginning of all life on earth (despite the words of Book 1).