And Jehovah Elohim planted a garden in Eden eastward, and there put Man whom he had formed.
God plants a garden, and then places the man He has just formed inside it. Two simple actions raise big questions. Why did the man need a place made ready for him? What does the name Eden mean, and why was the garden set "in the east"?
The name is not decoration. It tells you what the place was like.
Only a word or two needs saying about the garden. It was a place of delights. Eden means pleasure. It has completely disappeared, and God meant it to disappear. Yet at least two of the rivers show us that it stood on this earth much as we have it now. The LORD God had formed the man; the LORD God had planted the garden.
God planted the garden Himself, and He left nothing for man to supply.
So at the beginning the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east. All the earth was fair before sin ruined it, and God had made everything "very good." Even so, the garden was better still, and God gave it special care in His moral government. Man had to be tested, and no excuse would be open to him, because no one could point to a single flaw. God planted the garden, so everything in it was there for use and beauty, fit for a creation that had not yet fallen. He loves a cheerful giver, and He is Himself the pattern of all generosity.
Commentators trace this sequence — first the place, then the person — right through Scripture.
This has always been God's way. He planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there He put the man whom He had formed (Gen. 2:8). The One who did this has gone to prepare a place for His own in His Father's house. He prepares the place, the land, beforehand, and then brings His people into it.
Note where the man came from.
He was not created in Eden. He was made of dust, and God breathed the breath of life into him — that is all. Then God forms the garden and places him there under set conditions. The whole scene shows the relationships, and the footing on which man stood in every respect.
How he got there also showed what kind of creature he was.
He was the favourite of Heaven, the last and newest creature. God put him there as a dependent one, and, I believe, the most dependent of all His creatures. God placed him in a paradise that He Himself watched over and cared for. All his needs became simply ways of showing God's care for him. He was a dependent creature by his very nature. The angels had fallen before this… In all this God was hiding pride from man. He was teaching him dependence.
Eden and the garden are not the same thing.
Eden was the country. "The garden" was that choice part of it, not in the west or the centre, but "in the east," which the LORD God planted for Adam. Scripture speaks of it again later — in this book, again and again in the prophets, and at greatest length in Ezekiel. It is quite distinct from another Eden, spelled a little differently in Hebrew, which seems to have been in Babylonia.
A garden is a marked-off space. Yet what God enclosed did not stay enclosed.
He planted a garden in Eden and separated it from the rest of the scene. The man was to live there, work it and keep it. Yet four rivers flowed out of it, carrying its blessings to the four quarters of the earth.
That leaves one question. Does man ever get this garden back?
Eden means "delight." It is called Paradise in the Greek translation — the Septuagint. We have heard of "Paradise Lost" and "Paradise Regained." Scripture says nothing of the second. Once lost, man's Paradise is never regained. But God in grace opens a heavenly Paradise.
Another writer turns this into a warning about how we picture Adam.
Once innocence is lost, it can never be recovered. For faith, God does bring in a better condition through the Second man at His first coming, and He will bring it in open power at His second. But the first state is never restored. People keep forgetting this. They make far too much of Adam's original condition. They fail to see how complete the ruin caused by sin is. They lower or ignore the new creation in Christ.
- Planted — Eden means delight. God Himself was the gardener, and the place matched His generosity.
- Prepared — the garden was ready before the man arrived. God still works this way: the place first, then His people.
- Placed — God formed man of dust outside and put him in. He was the most dependent of creatures, and that kept pride away.
- Poured out — God fenced the garden off from the rest of the earth, yet its rivers carried blessing to all four quarters.
- Past — innocence, once lost, never returns. God does not restore the old garden; He gives new creation in Christ.
And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; and the tree of life, in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
God filled Eden with trees that were beautiful and good for food. At its centre stood two named trees, and the whole human story turns on them: one offered life, the other tested obedience.
The verse first describes plain abundance: trees for the eye and trees for the table. One writer notes that both needs were met at once:
God created man in this way, and then made a garden of delights to be his home. The name Eden means "Pleasure." Every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food was there. Nothing was lacking to support life or to give pleasure. The verse gives special mention to two trees. The tree of life was surely a witness to a life different from the one man already had. God put that life within his reach. The other tree, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, was there to remind him of his responsibility and to test it.
The care behind the planting is itself the point. One writer sees the same pattern God later used with Israel's vineyard:
As with Israel long afterward, there was full preparation now. Nothing was lacking on Jehovah's part... So at the beginning Jehovah Elohim planted a garden eastward in Eden. However fair all the earth might be before ruin came through sin, and everything that God had made "very good," the garden was clearly superior, and the object of special care to God in His moral government. Man had to be tried; and no excuse was possible, no flaw could be alleged.
The verse names the two trees separately, and commentators say that separation matters:
But there is revealed in verse 9 another fact of the deepest interest. The tree of life was distinct from the tree of knowing good and evil. The test of responsible obedience was one thing; the means of life was quite another. From the very first they are separate. When man disobeyed by eating from the one tree, God drove him out, in case he should take from the other as well and make his fallen sinful state last for ever. The point is marked clearly here: responsibility and life are wholly separate.
A whole history turned on one piece of fruit. Kelly answers that the smallness was the design:
People often find it hard that God made the moral history of the world turn on touching that tree or eating that fruit. To the mere mind of man it seems a great problem that something which looks so small should carry such terrible results. Do you not understand that this was the very essence of the trial? The key feature of the trial was this: it turned only on God's authority in forbidding, not on some grave moral evil.
The name of the second tree points to something Adam did not yet have:
Almost all men say that God created Adam in righteousness and in holiness of the truth. Not so... He was innocent; he did not have what Scripture here calls "the knowledge of good and evil." Man only gained it by the fall. He had, of course, the consciousness of responsibility... Now holiness implies that, having this knowledge, we are separate from the evil to the good. Adam had no such knowledge. Unfallen, he had no lust.
Because the two trees are distinct, merging them goes against the record:
The constant effort of man, especially of religious man, is to treat the two trees as one. That is, to make life depend on fulfilling responsibility. This idea flies in the face of the facts when man was innocent. It is even more plainly false once man was a sinner, expressly shut out from the tree of life... Sin morally compelled God to be a judge. Love, divine grace, made Him a Saviour.
Commentators say the two lines meet in one Person only:
In the garden of Eden there was the tree of life, and there was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Life stood on one side, responsibility on the other. Man failed, ate of the tree of knowledge, and could not get to the tree of life. Now the law took up the same principle... and said, "Do this and live." Then the Lord Jesus Christ, the second Man, comes. He does His Father's will in everything, and sovereign grace takes up our responsibilities. He takes the consequences of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and He is the life.
The tree itself reappears at the end of Scripture, in a better setting:
If in the earliest chapters of the Bible we find man shut out from the tree of life in the middle of a paradise of innocence, in the closing chapters we find him redeemed through Christ's precious blood, and in the paradise of God — the paradise of holiness — eating of the Tree of Life, in a higher sphere and condition than before.
- Planted — God made a garden of delights for man first. Nothing was lacking, for life or for pleasure.
- Two trees — one offered a life beyond what man already had; the other tested whether he would obey.
- Separate — life and responsibility stand apart from the first page. Eating from the test tree cost man the tree of life.
- Innocent — Adam was upright, but not holy. Man gained the knowledge of good and evil by the fall, not before it.
- United in Christ — He bore the consequence of our responsibility, and He is Himself the life. So we eat from the tree of life again, in the paradise of God.
And a river went out of Eden, to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became four main streams.
One stream rises in Eden. It waters the garden, then splits into four great rivers that run out into the wider world. The details sound like geography, yet Scripture never names the main river. So what is this short account for?
Commentators read this as history, not poetry. They still admit the map is hard to draw. One writer places the garden where these rivers rise:
The point matters little in itself. What matters is that we hold the whole account of Paradise to be history in the strictest and fullest sense. More than that, the position of these rivers seems to me to explain the account given here, which has often been a difficulty to many. If the garden of Eden lay in that region (that is, in Armenia), in the part where the springs or watershed of these rivers rise, they would all lie within one limited area, surrounding this garden.
Two of the four are still household names today, but the land they cross is not what it was:
The last two rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates, are well-known rivers today, though the flood will have changed the shape of the land so much that their courses cannot be the same.
Scripture names the four branches. It never names the river they come from. One writer sees that silence as deliberate:
Notice that in these verses we first hear of a "river." Which river it was that went out from Eden to water the garden seems to be withheld on purpose. If it vanished when the garden was no longer seen, the wisdom of Scripture's silence is not hard to see. Some argue, like the poet Milton, that the Tigris watered paradise. Others say it was the Euphrates and the Tigris joined together. Both certainly do violence to the inspired text.
A reference work comes at it from the other side. Every search for the garden has failed, because "it belonged to the time of innocence, and as that has gone, the earthly paradise has long ceased to exist" (Morrish Bible Dictionary).
Notice the order in the verse. The water reaches the garden first. Only then does it divide.
The source of these rivers was the territory from which God had ordered that blessing should flow. River-streams took their source in Eden. This is how the garden was watered, and all their freshness was there. From there the waters flowed here and there. They surrounded other countries and gave them their character… The garden was the first object, but from there they flowed around the world, which needed them.
The number of the branches carries its own meaning:
"Four" is a number with a definite meaning attached to it. The river with four heads went out of Eden to water the garden, and through it the whole earth received its refreshment from the original fountain. Four Gospel writers record the life of Him who was sent to be the Saviour of the world, and their testimony is for the whole earth.
The river is not only a water supply. The same picture returns at the end of the Bible:
Scripture also mentions a river flowing out of the garden. It clearly rose from a spring in the earth, but it watered the garden as it flowed. This speaks of the blessing of God by His word and Spirit. So does the "river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb," described in Revelation 22:1. But this river from the garden of Eden parted into four different rivers, showing blessing increasing as the waters flowed.
The link to Revelation is also a contrast. The difference is in the dividing:
The reference to Genesis 2 is unmistakable: "A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden." The heavenly city's river does not part "into four heads," as the river of Eden did. Nor does it part into east and west, like the living waters of Zechariah. One river flows throughout the city, and one joy is shared by all. In the same way there is only one tree of life, not two trees named on their own, as in the garden on earth. Moses mentions the tree of life first. John refers to the river of life first.
- Source. One unnamed river rises in Eden — the place from which God ordered blessing to flow.
- Garden. Its first work is the garden itself. The freshness is there before it goes anywhere else.
- Four. From there it parts into four heads — the number tied to the whole earth.
- Silence. Scripture never names the main river or fixes the site. That paradise belonged to innocence, and innocence has gone.
- City. Eden's river divided; the last river does not — one river, one tree, one joy, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb.
The name of the one is Pison that is it which surrounds the whole land of Havilah, where the gold is.
The Pishon — spelled Pison in some translations — is the first of the four streams that flowed out of Eden's river. Two questions follow: is this real geography, and why does the story of paradise stop to point out gold?
One writer sets the geography question aside for the thing that does matter:
This is only a side point. Where the rivers ran is of no great importance in itself. What matters is that we should hold the entire account of Paradise to be historical in the strictest and fullest sense.
Genesis names the Tigris and the Euphrates and moves on. Pishon and Gihon each get a description of the land they encircle. That difference is itself a clue:
It is remarkable that the two less well-known rivers get a fuller description than the rivers everyone knows. This shows that the Spirit of God takes an interest and gives us a thread to help us. We are therefore justified in supposing that Scripture describes them just because they might have been harder to recognise.
Some are content to leave the question open:
Land encircled by the river Pison, where there was fine gold and precious stones. No one has identified it.
Others point to a region long known for gold:
Reland has given strong reasons for concluding that the Pison is the Phasis, though Colonel Chesney argues for the Halys. Reland even held that Colchis, the region the Phasis runs through, is simply the Greek form of Havilah. Ancient sources link gold and precious stones with that land more clearly than with the land the Halys skirts.
One writer notes which metal Genesis names first, and where in the story it appears:
Scripture speaks of copper very early (Genesis 4:22), where it calls Tubal-cain a teacher of those who worked in brass. Tellingly, Genesis names gold first, and before the fall: "the gold of that land is good." God's glory comes first. It may also mean something that copper appears in connection with the family of Cain.
Later Scripture shows what gold stands for:
Gold is a figure of the glory of God, of His attributes of righteousness, holiness, wisdom, power, goodness and truth — everything suggested by the purity, brightness and value of the metal. This is not guesswork. Under God's direction, gold was used wherever these great facts were to be shown. Solomon's temple, as God's earthly dwelling, was overlaid with gold, even its floor (1 Kings 6:21-22, 30). And in the book of Revelation the heavenly city is described as "having the glory of God"; "and the city was pure gold, like clear glass."
Some writers read the names themselves as a picture. The stream does not just pass Havilah; it wraps right around it.
Pison, "increase," is first; it encircles the land of Havilah, "anguish" or "travail," where the gold is that is good. Gold is the symbol of God's glory. Christ has won increase for eternity by encircling the land of anguish — the birth-pains of the new creation, of which He is the Beginning. There, all the same, the glory of God has been found in all its wealth. And if faith can say now, "the gold of that land is good," how much more in the eternal day!
Another writer reads the same river as a picture of God's providence:
Leaving Eden, the river parted into four heads, marking the beginning of God's ways worldwide. The first head became the river Pison, which encircled the land of Havilah, a land that spoke of the richness, fragrance and glory of God's providence in its gold, bdellium and onyx stones.
The last book of the Bible shows another river, in another paradise:
In the earthly paradise there was a river, and with it the riches of the earth, the gold and precious stones (Genesis 2:10-12). In the Paradise of God the seer is shown "the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb" (Revelation 22:1). God and the Lamb are the source of divine life and heavenly freshness. Everything flows from the throne that orders all for His glory and the blessing of His own.
- Source. One unnamed river left Eden and split into four named heads — the start of God's ways reaching out over the whole earth.
- Stream. Pishon gets a fuller description than the famous Tigris and Euphrates — a thread left for readers who would need help finding it.
- Land. Where Havilah stood is disputed; some say it has never been identified, others place it at Colchis, long famous for gold.
- Gold. Gold is named before copper, and before the fall — God's glory comes first in the record.
- Glory. The earthly paradise had a river with gold and precious stones; the Paradise of God has the river of the water of life, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb.
And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and the onyx stone are there.
Genesis 2 stops in the middle of the garden story to name a land, its gold, and two other treasures. Why does Scripture record where the good gold lies, and what do writers make of a verse that looks like plain geography?
The names in this verse were already obscure to later readers. One writer admits the difficulty, using the Hebrew forms of the words for bdellium and onyx:
The account has the difficulties that come from countries obscure to later generations, both in their own names and in the names of their products. People have debated Havilah and Cush nearly as much as Pison and Gihon, and they have debated just as much what B'dolach and Shoham exactly mean.
Commentators differ over where Havilah was. Some argue confidently for particular rivers and regions; others hold back. One writer states the caution plainly:
No opinion has been clearly proved, because the text itself presents serious difficulties as to its meaning.
This is the Bible's first mention of gold, and one writer notes where it falls in the story:
Suggestively, gold is mentioned first and before the fall: "The gold of that land is good" (Gen. 2:11-12). God's glory is first.
The same writer explains what gold stands for, and answers the objection that gold is the stuff of idols:
Any of God's creatures becomes a source of evil only when man puts it to evil uses. Gold is the most precious thing man has, so it makes a fitting emblem of the rights that belong to God alone — the rights man wrongly hands to his idol. Gold, then, is a figure of the glory of God, of His righteousness, holiness, wisdom, power, goodness and truth. It stands for everything the purity, brightness and value of the metal suggest... Solomon's temple was God's home on earth, and gold covered it, even its floor (1 Kings 6:21-22, 30). And in the book of Revelation the heavenly city has "the glory of God", and "the city was pure gold, like clear glass."
Bdellium is a rare word, and writers weigh two meanings for it:
People have taken the word bedolach to mean both a clear white oily gum and a white pearl. The description of the manna refers to its colour in Numbers 11:7, and in Genesis 2:12 it stands with gold and onyx stones as a mark of the land of Havilah. The white pearl seems the more likely picture, since Exodus 16:14 also compares the manna to frost.
One writer traces both stones to Christ, holding together His greatness and His lowliness:
His glory as the Firstborn in Creation may be shown in the first precious stone named in the Bible, the onyx (Gen. 2:12). It is also the first in the group in Job 28:16-19, and there it is called the "precious onyx" — the only single stone given that title, except where Christ is spoken of as the Stone, chosen and precious. The onyx stones were on the shoulders of the High Priest... Genesis 2:12 names the bdellium with it alone, and bdellium is named only once more in Scripture, in Numbers 11:7, where it describes the manna. This confirms what we have said. If we have the glory of Christ as the Firstborn of all Creation in the onyx, we are reminded that when He came into His Creation He came in lowly grace as the Manna, whose appearance was like bdellium.
One writer reads the Hebrew names themselves as a small parable — riches found in a place of pain:
Pison, which means "increase," comes first. It winds round the land of Havilah, which means "anguish" or "travail," and the gold there is good... The Hebrew word for bdellium means "in trouble," and the word for onyx-stone means "their recompense." Here we may get a hint of how faith is joined to the sufferings of Christ and the glories that follow. Those who find their increase through the anguish of Christ are given not only to believe but to suffer for Him. Suffering leads to being glorified with Him, so there is both the trouble and the recompense.
The Bible's last picture of heaven brings back gold and jewels:
Scripture describes heaven as a city of gold and jewels, just as here we have the gold of the land of Havilah, which is "good", and bdellium and the onyx stone, precious jewels. They foreshadow that final display, when God at last will be free to let all the brightness of His glory shine out to His ransomed creatures.
- Good place. The verse names a real land with real treasure. Where Havilah lay is debated, and writers admit the text is hard to pin down.
- Good gold. Gold enters the Bible here, before the fall, and God calls it good — it is only misuse that ever made it a snare.
- Gold as glory. Because of its purity, brightness and worth, gold stands for the glory of God: the temple floor, and the city of pure gold.
- Gold at cost. The names read as suffering and reward — increase found by way of anguish, trouble paired with recompense.
- Gold at the end. What lay scattered in Havilah's soil fills the city of gold and jewels at the end, when God's glory shines out to His ransomed creatures.
And the name of the second river is Gihon that is it which surrounds the whole land of Cush.
Genesis 2:13 names the second of the four streams that flowed out from the one river of Eden, and ties it to a land called Cush. Two questions follow: where did this water run, and why does Scripture record such geography at all?
The river that watered the garden is not named. Only when it splits into four does the account start naming rivers and lands. One writer sees here blessing flowing out from the place God appointed:
Scripture had not yet mentioned rivers, though it had mentioned seas and dry land. Their source was the land from which God had ordered blessing to flow… Their freshness all was there. From there the waters flowed here and there. By their course they surrounded and gave their character to other countries. So the sense would be — "And a river-source was in Eden to water the garden; and from there it was distributed, and became four principal streams." Of these we know two, and two are uncertain — which is not very surprising… The primary object was the garden; but from there they flowed around the world which needed it.
Older translations read "Ethiopia" here, which points readers to Africa. But the name is Cush, and it belongs to a man in the family lists as well as to land:
The Ethiopia of verse 13 is really Cush, of whom we read in Genesis 10:6. There appears to have been a district bearing his name between Mesopotamia and India, as well as the better known land we now call Abyssinia.
The identification is not settled. One writer puts the difficulty plainly: "Ethiopia (margin Cush) is then a difficulty as to what country" (J. N. Darby).
Commentators differ over which modern river this is. One writer argues for a northern river, on the ground that Cush was not only African:
Reland has clearly proved… that the Gihon is the Araxes, or Aras… There is no doubt that the Gihon or Aras encircled the Cossaei, the descendants of Cush. There was an Asiatic Cush no less than an African, and widely dispersed too. This certainty explains "the rivers of Cush" in Isaiah 18:1.
Another writer places both of the lesser-known rivers north of Eden: "one running into the Black Sea, the other into the Caspian… the Phasis and the Aras or Araxes" (William Kelly).
Scripture gives some details and holds others back. One writer calls that silence mercy, not a gap:
What is given clearly was worth knowing. God holds back the details that would only satisfy man's curiosity, or might expose people to dangerous superstition. The burial place of Moses is not the only spot which divine wisdom has veiled from human sight. And the site of the lost paradise might have become the goal of an even wider — indeed worldwide — pilgrimage of folly and evil. The sad truth is that sin led to man's expulsion. He is an outcast.
The lands named by the rivers may each point to something God has in view:
Ethiopia may show that God has before His eye even the distant lands. Assyria may show that God is watching the land that will be closely tied to Israel. The Euphrates may show that God is already marking out the borders of Israel.
The meanings of the two names together form a picture of rescue:
The second river of Eden is Gihon, "the bringer-forth." It surrounds the whole land of Cush, which means "terror," or "black." Christ is our Deliverer from the land of our terror and blackness. In this way God in His mercy brings us out of darkness into marvellous light… To this end Christ first entered the land of terror and blackness, and came out as the firstborn from among the dead. Those who believe share in His triumph.
- Source. One unnamed river rose in Eden. It watered the garden first, and only then divided into four.
- Spread. The four streams "flowed around the world which needed it." Eden's freshness reached out to named lands beyond the garden.
- Reach. Cush may be a district between Mesopotamia and India, and also the land now called Abyssinia. Even far-off lands are under God's eye.
- Silence. Two of the four rivers are known, two are still debated. Scripture hides the exact site of paradise, so curiosity cannot turn the lost garden into superstition.
- Rescue. Gihon means "the bringer-forth." It circles a land whose name means terror and blackness. That points to Christ, who entered the darkness and came out first from among the dead.
And the name of the third river is Hiddekel that is it which flows forward toward Asshur. And the fourth river, that is Euphrates.
Genesis 2:14 closes the list of four streams that flowed from the one river of Eden. It is the only one of those verses that names rivers still on modern maps. Two questions press: can we still trace this geography, and why does Scripture record it at all?
Two of the four names never dropped out of use:
Scripture describes the garden, and mentions two rivers that certainly exist today. There can be no doubt that the Euphrates and the Tigris, or Hiddekel, named here, are the same two rivers that still go by those names.
Hiddekel appears only once more in the whole Bible, and there it is the setting for a vision:
This river is only mentioned by name in one other place (Gen. 2:14). Most identify it with the Tigris, from both geography and the origin of its name. If this is correct, Daniel would have had to cross it on his journeys to Shushan (Dan. 8:2) from Babylon.
The four streams all get names; the river they came from does not. Verse 14 then spends almost no words on the Euphrates, while verses 11 and 12 spend several lines on Pison and Havilah. One writer explains why:
The river that watered paradise has no name, and that silence is the more striking because the four rivers it was parted into are carefully named. The last was well known enough to need no description. Its companion called for the very few words, "that which flows toward," or in front of, "Assyria." The first and second get a fuller description, since Israel hardly knew them, and in fact the scriptures never mention them anywhere else.
Some argue the named rivers settle the location near their sources in the highlands:
The text then settles the Armenian table-land as the true place, and disproves every version of the scheme that puts the garden and the rivers described here in Babylonia. As to the moral lesson, it was only a test for the creature, and neither the river nor paradise was permanent.
Others say the passage is too brief to settle anything:
That there were four rivers is fairly clear. Of the four heads, two are named and well known as rivers — Tigris and Euphrates. Nobody has identified the other two for certain… No opinion has been proved, because the text itself is seriously hard to understand.
A third view treats the search as closed for good. The garden "belonged to the time of innocence, and as that has gone, the earthly paradise has long ceased to exist" (Morrish Bible Dictionary).
Assyria first appears in the Bible here, as a place a river runs past:
The early mention of Assyria in Genesis 2:14 shows how important it is in the ways of God. So does Genesis 10:11, which might read, "he (Nimrod) went to Assyria, and built Nineveh."
The same writer reads the whole list as a map of God's later dealings. Assyria shows "that God is watching the land that is to be closely linked with Israel," and the Euphrates "that God is already marking out the bounds of Israel" (An Outline of Sound Words).
The fourth river opens a thread that runs to the end of the Bible:
Among the many rivers mentioned in Scripture are the Euphrates and the Jordan. The Euphrates stands out in the ways of God with the nations of the world. Its first mention is in Genesis 2:14 and its last in Revelation 16:12. There, as the great barrier between east and west, its waters are dried up "to prepare the way for the kings from the east," so they may enter the conflicts of the last days.
Between those two points it becomes a promised border: "It was the N.E. boundary of the land promised to Abraham, as the river of Egypt was the S.W. Gen. 15:18" (Morrish Bible Dictionary).
Some writers press the names themselves for spiritual instruction:
The third river is Hiddekel, which means "sharp words." "The word of God is sharper than any two-edged sword." Mark presents the Lord Jesus as a servant. Connect the name with that, and we find His word full of power and authority. Those who opposed Him felt its sharp keen edge all the way through. Demon, disease and death all fled at His word.
- One source. The river that watered the garden is left without a name, while the four rivers it divided into are all carefully named.
- Four heads. Two of the four needed no description, since everyone knew them; the two Israel did not know are described at length.
- Two known. Hiddekel (the Tigris) and Euphrates are still on the map. Pison and Gihon are not, and commentators differ over where Eden lay.
- Two nations marked. The verse names Assyria, a land God is watching, and the Euphrates, the border of the land God promised Abraham.
- One ending. The Euphrates is first mentioned in Eden and last mentioned in Revelation 16:12, dried up to open the way for the kings from the east.
And Jehovah Elohim took Man, and put him into the garden of Eden, to till it and to guard it.
God placed the first man in a garden He had prepared and gave him work to do. Two questions follow. What does it mean that God put him there? And why does a world with no sin or curse need anyone to work and keep it?
The verse starts with God, not with the job. One writer traces every right Adam held back to God, who owned it all first.
The man had received his being from God, and it was God who placed him in the garden prepared for him. He was placed there not to be idle, but "to work it and keep it." How complete were God's rights over the creature He had formed! All of Adam's rights — over the garden, the earth, and the various kinds of lower creatures — came from the sovereign appointment of the One to whom they all belonged, Adam included.
Nothing in the garden was broken. Yet God still gave the man a charge, and one writer says why doing nothing would have been wrong:
Here we are told not about the place, its resources and surroundings, far-reaching as they were. We are told its moral point and purpose. God the Governor took Man and put him into the paradise He had prepared. All was unfallen, in order and beauty, with no stain in Adam or in the creation under him, and certainly none in its loveliest spot. Yet God put Man there to work it and keep it. Standing above the work in indifference would have been out of place, even though Man was blessed, everything was very good, and toil and sorrow were unknown.
Many assume work began as punishment. One writer separates work from the toil that came later:
Scripture does not say there was no "work" before the fall. Man was placed in the garden "to work it and keep it," which shows God did not want His creature to be idle. But no "toil" or "sorrow" went with that occupation. Now thorns and thistles were to appear, and man was to eat bread by the sweat of his face. Weariness is known now, and so is the sweetness of rest after work. Idleness was one of the sins of Sodom (Ezek. 16:49). It had no place in innocence… Work here is good for all, and there is profit in it. For out of evil God can and does bring good.
Service does not end where toil and weariness end:
How telling it is that God laid toil on man when sin came into the world! Man was to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow. At first God put him there to work and keep the garden, but there was no bitterness of service and toil. So in that heavenly Paradise, the rest of God we enter, there will be service and ministry throughout eternity — but no weariness, no toil, nothing to show that sin is present.
One writer contrasts Adam's place in the garden with the stoop of a slave:
He had put Adam there to work it and keep it — not as a slave, bent low by the sweat of his face over ground cursed because of him. That ground gives back for his labour, along with the plants he eats, "thorns and thistles," rods of discipline and constant reminders of his fall. No, God had placed Adam there as king, centre and head of the whole lower creation, a picture of the One who was to come.
The charge was also a lesson. One writer counts it among God's provisions for Adam:
Along with everything else God provided for his blessing we must count this — too little thought of — that Adam was also to be taught mastery, even in a place where no moral evil existed. He was to "fill the earth and subdue it," and to "work and keep" even the "garden of delight."
Adam did not keep what he was given. One writer sets Eden beside a second garden:
In the first garden God placed Adam, innocent, with access to the tree of life. But he chose the tree of responsibility, went the wrong way, and fell. In the second garden lay the One who had a right to the tree of life, yet who had met that responsibility in the dust of death. For the first man, the garden east in Eden became the gateway to a lost world that ends in the lake of fire. For the other, that garden becomes the gateway for His people — not back to Paradise regained, but into the Paradise of God.
- Placed — Adam did not choose his place. God set him there, and every right he held came from that gift.
- Charged — even where nothing was wrong, standing back would have been out of place. He was given the garden to work and to guard.
- Trained — the charge was a gift, teaching mastery in a scene where no evil yet existed.
- Not cursed — work belongs to innocence; toil, sweat, thorns and weariness came in only with sin.
- Restored — the first man lost the garden he was to keep. The One who lay in the second garden met that responsibility in death. He opens not Eden again but the Paradise of God, where service goes on without weariness.