The Eden Enigma

On 06/06/202515/06/2025 By The LightkeeperLeave a comment

Where was the Garden of Eden? Just as pertinent a question would be… what was the Garden of Eden? Was it even on the Earth? What if Adam was created on Mars? And if for instance the Earth was one land mass prior to the deluge and Pangaea split afterwards into the separate continents, how could we really know where Eden was in the first place? In investigating this subject we will study Adam and Eve further; their early progeny, Cain, Abel and Seth; the events which took place within Eden; as well as various hypotheses from different commentators regarding its potential location – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. It is hoped that the reader has already read Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla.

Genesis 2:8-14

New Century Version

‘Then the Lord God planted a garden in the east, in a place called Eden [H5731: pleasure, luxury, delight (paradise)], and put the man he had formed into it. The Lord God caused every beautiful tree and every tree that was good for food to grow out of the ground. In the middle of the garden, God put the tree that gives life and also the tree that gives the knowledge of good and evil.

A river flowed through Eden and watered the garden. From there the river branched out to become four rivers. The first river, named Pishon [increase, diffusion, flowing], flows around the whole land of Havilah [in Lower Mesopotamia (or Arabia)], where there is gold.

The gold of that land is excellent. Bdellium and onyx are also found there. The second river, named Gihon [bursting forth], flows around the whole land of Cush [in Arabia]. The third river, named Tigris [rapid], flows out of Assyria toward the east [in northern Mesopotamia]. The fourth river is the Euphrates [in Mesopotamia, meaning: bountiful, fruitful].’

We learn a number of key points in Genesis chapter two. Eden was already a location, when the Eternal planted a garden within its territory. The trees of life and knowledge were placed in the centre of the garden – by the Eternal. One river flowed through Eden and specifically its garden to then branch out into four subsidiary rivers. If we take the locations at face value and where the peoples stated finally ended up, the extent of Eden is vast. The benefit of this is that it widens the search for the right river. Most searches are concentrated within the Middle East due to the present locations of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, as well as the past locations for Cush (ancient Ethiopia/Arabia – modern day India) and Asshur (ancient Mesopotamia/Anatolia – modern day Russia). It is assumed by most that Havilah refers to the son of Cush, though it may well be Havilah the son of Joktan, who anciently (and today) lived close to Asshur – Chapter XXIV Arphaxad & Joktan: Balts, Slavs & the Balkans.

What hasn’t occurred to researchers – refer to point two in the introduction – is that the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers may be more recent names for ancient rivers of the same name in an entirely different location. Support for this according to Abarim Publications is ‘in geographical reality, the Tigris and Euphrates are not part of a four river system, and there are no rivers that flow through a land directly east of Egypt and through Nubia that are in any way connected to the rivers of Mesopotamia. The Haddakel is said to flow east of Assyria, but Assyria’s eponymous city, namely Assur, sat on the bank of the Tigris. That means that the Tigris did not flow east of Assyria but [right] through the heart of it.’

Most biblical researchers regard ancient Dilmun as the most logical location for Eden.

Abraham of Ur, David A Snyder, 2014 – emphasis mine:

‘There is also a very interesting theory by Samuel Kramer about that rib that hurt Enki in Dilmun. Let us look at what he wrote: “The Sumerian word for rib is “ti” (pronounced tee). The goddess created for the healing of Enki’s rib is called Nin-ti, ‘the lady of the rib’. But, the Sumerian word ti also means ‘to make live’. The name Nin-ti therefore means ‘the lady who makes live, as well as the lady of the rib.’

Eve, according to the Biblical notion means approximately ‘she who makes live’. It is Kramer’s opinion that this was the basis for the authors of Genesis choosing Adam’s rib to make Eve. If he is right, the relationship of the paradise lost stories in Dilmun and Eden is quite likely. Dilmun has yet to be found by archeologists, but most ancient references would seem to place Dilmun on the Persian Gulf near… Bahrain of today. Some place it in southwest Iran. Both may be right as the Landsat space images of this area show that the whole top of the Persian Gulf of today was dry land before the de-glaciation of the last Ice Age. The satellite image also revealed the dry-bed remains of the Pison and Gihon rivers mentioned with the Tigris and Euphrates in Genesis as emptying into Eden.’

Author and biblical historian David Rohl has proposed an interesting location for Eden as evidenced on the map below. The most interesting point he raises in a presentation on the Garden of Eden is regarding the Land of Nod, to which Cain fled.

‘The Gihon flows to the Land of Cush. Descend the valley, the road rises up, out of the valley and goes through a pass and as it drops down the other side it goes to the town of Ardabil where all the earth quakes are. I went out there and I discovered that all over this region there are villages called Nod. In fact they are called Nod-i (belonging to Nod), like pakistani (belonging to Pakistan), inglesi (belonging to England): “i” of a belonging. The villages are all called of Nod.

This is the Land of Nod of the Bible where Cain is exiled from the garden. So even today, the topper names of this region still reflect the biblical story. It’s [been] there for thousands of years and in the recent millennia people seem to have forgotten. At any rate, according to the written record, nobody seems to have noticed the striking correlations. And those who may have added one and one may have preferred to keep their insights for themselves. But it’s also another illustration of the forest you don’t see for reason of all the trees in front of you.

We went to the mapping centre of the Iranian Government for this governorate and we actually looked at these maps. And there they were: Upper Nodi and Lower Nodi.’

Rohl’s idea is not so far removed from this writer’s thoughts discussed in the first chapter, concerning the region of Jammu-Kashmir – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. Though it is an original hypothesis, it may appear attractive merely for being blurred with the more likely option of the Kashmir being where Noah and his family settled^ after disembarking from the Ark. After looking at the evidence available, the location of the Garden of Eden in northern India or northern Iran does not appear as sustainable, though they cannot be completely ruled out.

Notice in red above, Pishan County of China, similar to the River Pishon; as well as the four river heads of the Indus below, including the Sutlej, Chenab and Jhelum.

Alternatively, the proximity of the Indus and Sutlej with the Brahmaputra and Ganges Rivers.

In this scenario, Nod would have been in southern China or where the Himalayan Mountain range is presently situated.

Stunning Kashmir^

An alternative option for Eden’s location is the Nile delta of lower Egypt. The significance of the Pyramid and Sphinx complex being built at Giza and Jacob’s descendants dwelling in northern Egypt may have significance, if this area was the original Paradise homeland – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity. In this case, the land of Nod would have been the Arabian Peninsula. The serpentine Nile river reminds of the Serpent in the Garden and the myriad heads of the river are reminiscent of both Medusa and the fanned hood on a Cobra.

Where was the Garden of Eden? Ken Ham, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Even the great theologian John Calvin struggled over the exact location of the Garden of Eden. In his commentary on Genesis he states:

“Moses says that one river flowed to water the garden, which afterwards would divide itself into four heads. It is sufficiently agreed among all, that two of these heads are the Euphrates and the Tigris; for no one disputes that… (Hiddekel) is the Tigris. But there is a great controversy respecting the other two. Many think that Pison [or the Indus] and Gihon are the Ganges and the Nile; the error, however, of these men is abundantly refuted by the distance of the positions of these rivers.”

Ken Ham: ‘God’s Word makes it clear that the Garden of Eden was located where there were four rivers coming from one head. No matter how one tries to fit this location in the Middle East today, it just can’t be done. The worldwide, catastrophic Flood of Noah’s day would have destroyed the surface of the [Earth]. If most of the sedimentary strata over the [Earth’s] surface (many thousands of feet thick in places) is the result of this global catastrophe… then we would have no idea where the Garden of Eden was originally located – the [Earth’s] surface totally changed as a result of the Flood.

Not only this, but underneath the region where the present Tigris and Euphrates Rivers are located, there exists hundreds of feet of sedimentary strata – a significant amount of which is fossiliferous. Such fossil-bearing strata had to be laid down at the time of the Flood. Therefore, no one can logically suggest that the area where the present Tigris and Euphrates Rivers are today is the location of the Garden of Eden, for this area is sitting on Flood strata containing billions of dead things (fossils). The perfect Garden of Eden can’t be sitting on billions of dead things before sin entered the world!’

Jewish Encyclopaedia, Garden of Eden, multiple authors – emphasis & bold mine:

‘It is probable, however, that the story as given in the Bible is a later adaptation of an old legend, points of which were vague to the narrator himself, and hence any attempt to find the precise location of Eden must prove futile. Indeed, the original Eden was very likely in heaven… Gunkel, in his commentary on Genesis, also adopts this view, and connects the stream coming out of Eden with the Milky Way and its four branches. The “garden of God,” situated on the mountain, in [Ezekiel 28:13-14], and the tall cedar in [Ezekiel 31:3]…’

Ezekiel 28:13-14

English Standard Version

‘You were in Eden, the garden of God… You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God [heaven]; in the midst of the stones of fire [stars] you walked.’

It has to be considered that Eden is Heaven, the abode of the Eternal. Particularly as we have learned that Adam and Eve originally had spirit bodies and were subsequently transformed into physical beings – Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Asherah was located in the Garden as the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil – Article: Asherah. The Serpent Samael also had access to the Garden. If the Son of Man equates to the Lord God of the Garden, then the Ancient of Days must represent the Tree of life. This of itself lends heavily towards Eden and Heaven being one and the same.

The Historicity of the Bible, Iurii Mosenkis – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Searching for the astronomical images in the Biblical Eden narrative, we must recollect the Sumerian constellation of A.EDIN which was located in the place of the modern constellations of Virgo and Coma Berenice. It is the center of the Milky Way circle! Two trees of Eden (Genesis 2:17, 3:22) correspond with two ‘branches’ of the Milky Way. Therefore, Eden might be a cosmological concept, linked with another cosmological concept of the World River, from which other rivers are flowing. In the Greek sacral geography, all rivers of the world flow from the Oceanus river, the rivers are his children, and the Oceanus is the river, associated with Elysium (a paradise in the ancient Greek beliefs).

Cherubs (Kerub-im in plural) as the guards of the Paradise (Genesis 3:24), like Greek Cerberus, are the embodiments of Canis Major and Canis Minor (‘big dog’ and ‘small dog’) or Leo and Leo Minor which guarded the border between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ parts of the year (i.e. between the season of the increasing sun and the season of the decreasing sun)’ – Article: The Pyramid Perplexity.

‘It is probable that the water of life also formed a part of the original story, and that the river of Eden is a trace of it. In Ezekiel [47:6-12] and, with some variation, in Revelation [22:1-2] mention is made of a “river of water of life… and on either side of the river was there the tree of life,” showing that the water of life was associated with the tree of life.’

Revelation 22:1-2

English Standard Version

‘Then the angel showed me the river of the water^ of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.’

Mosenkis: ‘The cherubim placed to guard the entrance to Eden are distinctly Babylonian, and are identical with the immense winged bulls [Lamassu below] and lions at the entrances to Babylonian and Assyrian temples.’

‘The Talmudists and Cabalists agree that there are two gardens of Eden: one, the terrestrial, of abundant fertility and luxuriant vegetation; the other, celestial, the habitation of righteous, immortal souls. These two are known as the “lower” and “higher” Gan Eden. The location of the earthly Eden is traced by its boundaries as described in Genesis.

A baraita fixes the dimensions of Gan and of Eden by comparisons with Egypt, Ethiopia, etc: “Egypt is 400 parasangs square, and is one-sixtieth the size of Cush (Ethiopia). Cush is one-sixtieth of the world (inhabited earth), the Gan being one-sixtieth of Eden, and Eden one-sixtieth of Gehinnom.”

By this reckoning today, Eden would be the size of Mongolia and the Garden, the size of Albania – or twice* the size of the state of Israel.

Mosenkis: ‘The opinions of the most eminent Jewish authorities point to the location of Eden in Arabia. The “four heads” or mouths of the rivers (= seas) are probably the Persian Gulf (east), the Gulf of Aden [Eden] (south), the Caspian Sea (north), and the Red Sea (west).

The first river, Pison, probably refers to the Indus, which encircles Hindustan, confirming the Targum Yerushalmi. The second river, Gihon, is the Nile in its circuitous course around Ethiopia, connecting with the Gulf of Aden. The third river, Hiddekel, is the Tigris, which has its course in the front of Assur (= Persia), speaking from the writer’s point of view in Palestine.’ So that the fourth river, Perath, is the Euphrates.

‘The leviathan [a description for both Asherah and Samael] disturbs the waters of the seas, and would have destroyed the life of all human beings by the bad breath of [its] mouth, but for the fact that [it] occasionally puts [its] head through the opening of Gan Eden, the spicy odor issuing from which acts as an antiseptic to [its] bad smell. The Arabic word for Eden is “Adn,” which, according to the commentators and lexicographers, means “fixed residence,” i.e., the everlasting abode of the faithful.’

One theory put forward by Samatha Siegel is that the land of the state of Israel was Eden:

Mosenkis: ‘As proof… she notes the four rivers of Eden… According to her theory, the Pishon and Gihon could be the two sources of the Nile, southwest of Israel. The Tigris and Euphrates are located in what is today Iraq, northeast of modern-day Israel. She describes these four rivers as encircling Israel with the center point being the Dead Sea and Jerusalem.

In response, Rabbi Natan Greenburg says:

“For our purposes today, Eden was once a place but it transcended that, becoming a spiritual concept… Once it was in the physical world but now it is gone, and there is no return. That connection between the physical and spiritual is unattainable today. It’s like Valinor [Lord of the Rings – J R R Tolkien], where the elves first came from. It became a myth, a place of high spiritual transformation and something to strive towards, but there is no return.”

Rabbi Avraham Arieh Trugman adds:

“According to Jewish tradition, the Garden of Eden is associated with the Land of Israel, according to the big borders – from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates…”

‘The borders of Israel are described several times in the Bible. When God promised the land to Abraham, specific borders were described allotting to his descendants a piece of land significantly larger* than what was eventually conquered in the days of Joshua Ben Nun. These more expansive borders were based on the description of the Garden of Eden.’

In support for the land of Israel matching Eden and particularly its northern territory once known as Lebanon, which was southwards of the nation by that name today, is Ezekiel chapter thirty-one. It is addressed to the pharaoh of Egypt, yet it uncannily appears to be describing a prominent tree in Eden. Is this the same being as described in Ezekiel 28:11-19. If so, it would be Asherah and again her beauty, pride, death and destruction are the main thrust of the verses – refer article: Asherah.

Ezekiel 31:2-18

English Standard Version

‘Son of man, say to Pharaoh king of Egypt and to his multitude:

“Whom are you like in your greatness? Behold, Assyria was a cedar in Lebanon, with beautiful branches and forest shade, and of towering height, its top among the clouds. The waters nourished it; the deep made it grow tall, making its rivers^^ flow around the place of its planting, sending forth its streams to all the trees [angelic beings] of the field. So it towered high above all the trees of the field; its boughs grew large and its branches long from abundant water in its shoots… and under its shadow lived all great nations.

It was beautiful in its greatness… [Ezekiel 28:12]. The cedars in the garden of God could not rival it, nor the fir trees [Christmas tree] equal its boughs… no tree in the garden of God was its equal in beauty – Article: Asherah. I made it beautiful in the mass of its branches, and all the trees of Eden envied it, that were in the garden of God. “Therefore thus says the Lord God: Because it towered high and set its top among the clouds [spirit realm], and its heart was proud of its height [Ezekiel 28:17], I will give it into the hand of a mighty one… He shall surely deal with it as its wickedness deserves. I have cast it out [Ezekiel 28:17].

All this is in order that no trees by the waters may grow to towering height or set their tops among the clouds, and that no trees that drink water may reach up to them in height. For they are all given over to death… “Thus says the Lord God: On the day the cedar went down to Sheol [the bowels of the Earth] I caused mourning; I closed the deep over it, and restrained its rivers, and many waters were stopped. I clothed Lebanon in gloom for it, and all the trees of the field fainted because of it… And all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink^^ water, were comforted in the world below. “Whom are you thus like in glory and in greatness among the trees of Eden? You shall be brought down with the trees of Eden to the world below…”

Verse sixteen simply states, that Eden was in Lebanon and certainly appears to be a correlating verse to Genesis 2:8-14 quoted at the beginning of this section.

The Cedar tree figures prominently on the flag of Lebanon

The series of maps show the area of ‘Lebanon’ firstly, during the time of the Judges and the separate Israelite tribes, when it was within the territory of Asher and Naphtali; secondly, during the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, when it was in Phoenicia; thirdly, the present day Arab nation called Lebanon.

The word Lebanon is etymologically linked to Jacob’s father-in-law Laban and both words mean: whiteness, white, to make white, become white, purify to be purified.

Where is the Garden of Eden? Unknown author – emphasis mine:

‘Along with the idea that the Garden of Eden is buried under Lebanon and Northern Israel, I believe that the description of the rivers in Genesis 2:10-14 was given as a commentary, probably by Shem or Noah shortly after the Tower of Babel incident. The inland lakes at the end of The Flood would have been full to the brim and the ocean level would have been lower by 300 feet (or more) than what it is today. The inland lakes would have included the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea, and smaller lakes in that part of the world. Because of this, the water table would have been much higher right after The Flood. After these lakes breached, the source of water flow for these rivers probably changed.

Whoever first wrote the account given in Genesis 2:10-14 only describes the drainage system of where the rivers flowed after they left the garden, but never describes the whole drainage system of the river that flowed into the garden. That’s why I think that it’s a post-flood description, given prior to the end of Peleg [and Joktan’s life time]. Before the Flood, everyone knew where these rivers were. (The area where the river came from before it entered God’s Garden probably [became condensed] when the mountains between the Middle East and the area North of it were formed!). One interesting discovery I have made since writing this article: The Jordan River, when said in its Hebrew pronunciation is The ‘Yarden’ River. Although it’s the Hebrew word for ‘descend’, it sounds very much like the French and English words for ‘garden’, and according to my understanding of the scriptures, it’s in the right location!’

The same author discusses points which make more sense if the original Paradise was located in the environs of modern day Israel. It might just be the answer to why it was such a beautiful region on through to Abraham’s time and why it was such prized real estate, contested over more than any other region in history. Every major empire has either set foot in or conquered the area known as the holy land.

The author’s reckoning logically concludes, that the Land of Nod is buried under Babylon. This writer’s investigations regarding a. the sacrifice of the Lamb of God in Jerusalem; b. the self same spot where the original temptation occurred with Eve; c. Melchizedek choosing to dwell in Salem, conducting his priesthood there; d. the location of Abraham’s aborted sacrifice of Isaac; and e. Cain murdering Abel in the same area all bear monumental significance – Matthew 23:35.

Touching on the point about the Jordan River; it is interesting to note that Christ lived and grew up in the northern region of this river system in Galilee (meaning: region, rolling, circle, circuit) and the Sea of Galilee, until the age of twelve. This area also includes Mount Hermon where the Watchers first descended – why did they choose this region? It is also the area where the tribe of Dan migrated and dwelt. Significance will become clearer when we study Dan – Chapter XXXIV Dan: The Invisible Tribe.

It is also worth serious consideration whether instead of seeking an enlarged area with rivers having ancient names from previous rivers of the past; rather, the area for Eden was smaller and that the river system described was once condensed in the area of ‘Israel.’

The series of maps above and below show the four main tributary rivers branching off from the River Jordan. Of most interest is its source and network of rivers south of Galilee.

When the Genesis account was compiled it was a very long time after the Flood, let alone when Eden may have actually been on the Earth. Hence perhaps the river sources and geography would have likely been radically unrecognisable.

Even so, a different configuration which matches the Bible description may have existed in the antediluvian age and Pangaea. Remember too, Asshur, Havilah and Cush did not exist prior to the Flood and therefore the writer of the account is using post-flood geography (and ethnicities) to describe a pre-flood environment.

The above map highlights the River Jordan running through the once (proposed) land of Eden, stretching from the Sea of Galilee in the North to the Dead Sea in the South; with its four branching tributary rivers: Yarmouk; Naher Ez-Zarqa; Wadi El-Hassa; and Wadi El-Mojeb. The land to the West – level with the top of the Dead Sea – reaching to Jerusalem, corresponding with the Garden of Eden.

Cryptic clues to the location of the Garden of Eden are indirectly given in the Book of Jubilees, when the land inheritance for Japheth, Ham and Shem’s descendants is proclaimed by Noah. The boundaries of Eden are included for Shem and Ham, though not for Japheth’s sons as they lived far to the north of Eden’s boundaries.

Book of Jubilees 8:12-24

12 ‘And there came forth on the writing as Shem’s lot the middle of the earth which he should take as an inheritance for himself and for his sons… 14 And his portion extends along the great sea [Mediterranean Sea], and it extends in a straight line till it reaches the west of the tongue which looks towards the south: for this sea is named the tongue of the Egyptian Sea [Red Sea].

15 And it turns from here towards the south towards the mouth of the great sea on the shore of (its) waters, and it extends to the west to ‘Afra, and it extends till it reaches the waters of the river Gihon, and to the south of the waters of Gihon, to the banks of this river [River Nile]. 16 And it extends towards the east, till it reaches the Garden of Eden, to the south thereof, [to the south] and from the east of the whole land of Eden and of the whole east, it turns to the east and proceeds till it reaches the east of the mountain named Rafa, and it descends to the bank of the mouth of the river Tina.

17 This portion came forth by lot for Shem and his sons, that they should possess it… 19 And he knew that the [1] Garden of Eden is the kodesh [Holy] of kodeshim [Holies], and the dwelling of Yahweh, and [2] Mount Sinai the centre of the desert, and [3] Mount Zion [Jerusalem] the centre of the navel of the earth: these three were created as kodesh [Holy] places facing each other.

21 And he knew that a blessed portion and a blessing had come to Shem and his sons… the whole land of Eden and the whole land of the Red Sea…and all the land of Bashan, and all the land of Lebanon… a blessed and spacious land, and all that is in it is very good.

22 And for Ham came forth the second portion, beyond the Gihon [Nile River] towards the south to the right of the Garden [as viewed from the North]…’

The references seem on first reading jumbled overall and confusing regarding south, east and to the ‘right’ of the garden; almost as if the map is being read upside down. The repeated references to the River Gihon are not much help, unless of course – and one cannot help but think – it is the River Nile.

On one hand, the information leaves the reader none the wiser… except for verses sixteen and nineteen. Here lies valuable information. If verse sixteen refers to the River Nile, then a straight line from its northern delta region eastwards meets first Jerusalem and then the Dead Sea.

In connection with verse nineteen, it is worth noting that there are two viable locations for Mount Sinai. We will not digress and discuss the topic here, as comprehensive research has already been conducted – refer Appendix VII: Moses, the Exodus & the Red Sea Crossing – Fabrication or Fact? The traditional site is Mt Horeb or Jebel Musa in the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula. The other site, believed to be the mountain Moses ascended to receive the tablets of the Law is Jabal Al-Lawz, due east across the Arabian Gulf on the very western tip of the Arabian Peninsula in an area where Abraham’s son Midian an his descendants once dwelt.

This region would have been where Moses fled, when he departed Egypt in haste. He met his future father-in-law, Jethro the Priest of Midian and lived forty years with his family as a farmer – Chapter XXVII Abraham & Keturah – Benelux & Scandinavia.

Drawing a straight line from the alternative Mt Sinai through Jerusalem, amazingly brings one to the area northwest of the Sea of Galilee, in the region of Tyre – the land of the Cedars of Lebanon no less. Drawing a line from the traditional Mt Sinai through Jerusalem, fascinatingly brings one to the Sea of Galilee and continuing northeast to none other than Mount Hermon. Was this the Mountain of God in the Garden of Eden? Could Eden have encompassed the land within the triangle formed from Mount Sinai north to Lebanon and east to Bashan. Is this why Mount Hermon in Bashan was chosen by the Watcher angels for their descent? Is this why Nephilim and Elioud giants such as King Og, congregated in this area? Today, this disputed region is held by the Israelis after seizing it from Syria during the 1967 Six day War and is known as the Golan Heights, or simply Golan.

Bashan means ‘fruitful’ or ‘smooth.’ There are two insightful verses regarding Bashan.

Jeremiah 50:19

English Standard Version

‘I will restore Israel [the sons of Jacob, not the state of Israel] to his pasture, and he shall feed on Carmel [H3759 and H3760 – Karmel] and in Bashan, and his desire shall be satisfied on the hills of Ephraim and in Gilead.’

Nahum 1:4

English Standard Version

‘He rebukes the sea and makes it dry; he dries up all the rivers; Bashan and Carmel wither; the bloom of Lebanon withers.’

The reader has learned that Lebanon is described being within Eden and seen the link between Bashan and Eden. We have a third region and name, Carmel. What now becomes startling, is that these three geographic locations form an almost horizontal geographic line. Could this be the historic northern boundary line of ancient Eden?

The Hebrew word for Carmel means: a ‘plantation, garden-land, orchard’ or ‘fruit.’ This is a vital piece of information and surely cannot be coincidence. It also means ‘a planted field’ and ‘garden produce’ in being ‘full (green) east (of corn), plentiful.’ The word is translated as: ‘fruitful field, plentiful field, full ear, green ear, full ears of corn’ and ‘plentiful.’

Bashan means fruitful, Carmel means plentiful, as well as a ‘garden’ or ‘park’ and Lebanon means pure and Eden means luxury. These names are painting a very obvious picture of a rich and blessed land, with plentiful produce. Carmel is actually Mount Carmel located on the Mediterranean coast of northern Israel, just south of the modern city of Haifa.

Mount Carmel is famous for the showdown between Elijah and the 450 prophets of Baal (and the 400 prophets of Asherah), all in the service of Jezebel and her wicked husband King Ahab, the seventh king of Israel – 1 Kings 18:19-20, 42. Mount Carmel is due west from the Sea of Galilee and half way between the two is the city of Nazareth, where Christ was raised – Matthew 2:22-23; Luke 4:34.

Mark 1:9

English Standard Version

‘In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.‘

Certain possibilities entertained previously have been the association of Adam with the colour red and whether his origins could be linked to the red planet, Mars. By extension, was Eden originally situated there and hence the difficulty in locating Eden or its garden here on Earth. Even Nibiru (Planet 9) is associated with the colour red – refer Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega. Could Adam have originated on this planet (star)? Is the celestial Eden linked with this mysterious orbiting cosmic orb?

Yet it seems plausible and logical that those commentators who have narrowed the search for Eden to the land of modern Palestine could be correct. The specific location of the Garden within another triangle formed inside the triangle of Eden; comprising Mount Zion, Mount Carmel and Mount Hermon, is supported by the Bible and the Book of Jubilees and thus difficult to ignore. The land of Nod in the region of ancient Babylon is a good fit symbolically as well as geographically. Until any new research arises to indicate otherwise, this hypothesis is the one this writer deems the most credible; if the geography of the Levant is not drastically different from that which existed prior to the great Flood.

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega.

Homo neanderthalensis II

On 23/03/202225/05/2025 By The Lightkeeper2 Comments

Neanderthal man attracts considerable interest from scientists and the public alike. The word Neanderthal is based on the area of first discovery, the Neander Valley, Germany in 1856. Tal is the German word for Valley. A time frame is required for Neanderthal man and it is the Sixth Day that presents itself.

The next human on record, though entirely different, was Homo sapiens – ‘man who thinks’ or ‘wise man’ – that is, Cro-Magnon man, named after the first location of discovery: Dordogne, France in 1868 and equating to the Eighth Day creation of Adam and Eve.

If we consider the re-creation periods as twenty-four thousand years and not twenty-four hours, there is geological and interventionist evolutionary time to prepare for each phase from plant life to animal life to eventually humankind (Neanderthal). Then a sabbatical (or multiple millennial) rest, before the next, more advanced phase introducing Adam and Eve in a separate garden region within Eden; itself west of where mankind created on Day Six dwelt. The Elohim of plural gods involved in the creation on Day six are in contrast with the singular Elohim (El) God of Days Seven and Eight. This Elohim had overseen Days One to Six, hence the rest, though now took a hands on approach towards the creation on Day Eight.

The garden in Eden had been prepared for Adam and Eve, separate from the rest of the creation. When Cain journeyed eastwards with his wife to the land of Nod, it was there, where Cain found people, the Neanderthal of day Six and consequently settled. The academic and scientific propagandised agenda, is to subject the hulking, slow-witted Homo neanderthalensis to the same condemnation as the dumb brute Homo erectus, similarly before him. Both are incorrectly portrayed as ape-like, yet both are our ancestors in part, supported by genetic evidence. The reality is that they were early humans, part of the Homo genus as distinct species, who looked like us and thought like us. In fact, due to the closeness of similarities, some paleo-anthropologists originally though incorrectly classified them as subspecies members of Homo sapiens. Both appeared abruptly… different from previous forms and without evolutionary precursors.

The creation of the Neanderthal on Day six or a precursor to them, occurred approximately 75,000 BCE, some forty-eight thousand years before the arrival of Adam and Eve. The age of Homo erectus was considerably earlier, during the age of the gods, the original Egyptian Zep Tepi or ‘first time’ when they arrived on earth approximately 450,000 BCE until their rebellion circa 200,000 BCE. During this extraordinary 250,000 year period, the Angels established a technologically advanced world wide civilisation on planet Earth. Experimentation defined the era, with dinosaurs, hominids and hominins, including the most advanced, the Homo erectus – ‘upright man’ – living during this epoch. Fossils showing footprints of dinosaur and human together are confirmation of this real yet incredible scenario from our distant past – though plausibly may have occurred more recently during the antediluvian age.

Neanderthal man was bigger boned, stockier, with larger brows, jutting jaws and sharper teeth, even so, their brain capacity appears to have been no different than later forms. The Neanderthal brain is thought to have grown at a slower rate than humans, yet became larger. Antonio Rosas, chairman of the paleoanthropology group at Spain’s National Museum of Natural Sciences in Madrid stated: “We thought our slow way of growing was very specific, very particular, very unique to our species. What we realize now is that this pattern of slow growth that allows us to have this big brain and mature slowly, with all the advantages involved with that, was also shared by different human species.” ‘Intellectually, Neanderthals have been found associated with signs of art and culture.’ Homo erectus were capable of watercraft construction [building boats] and seafaring navigation [travelling across the sea] – ‘an activity which would have required high intelligence.’

Homo sapiens sapiens skull compared to Homo neanderthalensis above

Homo erectus skeleton below

Lloyd Pye discusses Homo Neanderthalenis in, Everything you know is still wrong, pages: 159-161, 173, 545-546, 552-553, 558-559 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The neanderthals were roughly the size of modern humans in terms of height… females around 5.0 feet and males as much as 6.0 feet. Where they diverge is in their bulk. Compared to us they are physically huge. Their bones are twice as thick as ours, meaning their muscles and their strength would be awesome to behold. In all species bones and muscles have a closely interdependent relationship… [size to power ratio].

Neanderthals… are no longer considered the predecessors of Cro-Magnon [Homo sapiens]. In 2009 the first draft of the Neanderthal genome was completed. To everyone’s surprise, Neanderthals were found to be too different from humans to have been our direct ancestors. Instead they are considered very close “cousins”, who potentially interbred with the actual human ancestors, but according to the DNA, we could not have evolved from them in the Darwinian sense. This leaves an awkward gap in the family tree…

It is worth mentioning that there is a second Neanderthal-like species of [prehuman] that was initially identified from a single fragment of a finger bone. That fragment was originally thought to be Neanderthal due to physical similarities, and it was not until a chance DNA test in 2010 that the genetic differences were discovered and the new species – “denisova” – was officially recognised.

Denisova is the Southeast Asian equivalent of Neanderthal… Traces of Denisovan DNA have been found in modern humans in Australia, the Philippines, and other populations in Southeastern Asia and Oceania. Modern natives of Melanesia have been found to carry as much as 6% Denisovan DNA. Results from analysis of Denisova’s DNA announced in the Journal Nature in 2016 found that it likely had dark skin…

With the decoding of the Neanderthal genome in 2010… modern humans were reported to have 1-5% Neanderthal DNA, except in Africa. Humans of native African descent have 0% Neanderthal DNA… humans share 99.7% of our DNA with Neanderthals. [This] 99.7% similar figure is based on the total number of matching protein encoding genes, and it is the same parameters that were used to determine that chimps are [99.8%] similar to humans and gorillas 98% similar. The 0-5% figure is based on the amount of DNA that is exactly the same in modern humans. For example, Jane Doe’s DNA might say she is 10% Viking, 60% British & Irish, 2% Neanderthal, and 28% Non-specific Northwestern European. She is still 100% human but also [including] 2% Neanderthal…’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver, 2017, page 345 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘There‘s no question that H. erectus… and the Neanderthals and Denisovans were closely related. The timeline fits, the DNA fits (what little we’ve found), and their skulls show a steady progression with no awkward jumps or gaps. It’s uncertain whether the Denisovans were an offshoot of the Neanderthals or perhaps vice versa… The latest findings indicate that Denisovans were already living in Spain before the Neanderthals evolved… But the link between H. erectus… and modern humans doesn’t work at all… the most damning evidence is the shape, size, and structure of their skulls. They don’t resemble ours at all.’

Homo erectus, Denisovans and the Neanderthal are all related; whereas Homo sapiens are not, in that they did not evolve or descend from the other three forms, though they do carry a small percentage of their DNA. Well, ostensibly only neanderthal and Denisovan… The data confirms that Adam and Eve were genetically different, as humans are in comparison with chimpanzees, even though sharing 99.8% genetic data. We are likewise genetically close to Neanderthal man with 99.7% similarity. Scientists claim Neanderthal man became extinct; even so, humans today carry from zero to 5% of their DNA. This data confirms that Homo neanderthalenis existed prior to the flood in the antediluvian world with Homo sapiens; though not during the First Time before the re-creation, with Homo erectus. Thus, inter-breeding between Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man must have occurred, as scientists now admit – Article: Homo neanderthalensis IV.

Scientists discovered that the male Neanderthal Y sex chromosome probably kept the two lineages from successfully interbreeding, in that the chromosome could have created conditions which frequently led to miscarriages when a Neanderthal male and Homo sapiens female procreated. This is remarkably similar with the conditions associated with the Rhesus negative factor and pregnant mothers – refer Chapter XXVI The French & Swiss: Moab, Ammon & Haran. The April 7th 2016, issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics contains a study* by Stanford University. Fernando Mendez, a population geneticist and his colleagues ‘discovered three mutations on the Y chromosome of a Neanderthal male that would have produced molecules which can trigger immune responses from women during pregnancy.’ The immune responses were linked to miscarriages.

If the Adamic line grew to outnumber the Neanderthal line, then it is easy to see that their numbers would dwindle even faster when hampered with a breeding incompatibility. Regardless, successful mating did occur, for the presence of Neanderthal DNA in small measure in Europeans; the peoples of the Middle East; South Asia; and then considerable levels in East Asian peoples, reveals that this DNA was carried by Japheth’s wife, Adataneses. For Neanderthal Y-DNA is deemed extinct and not present in humans today; with just variations from the female mtDNA Haplogroups being detectable.

The Divergence of Neandertal and Modern Human Y Chromosomes*

‘Although the Neandertal Y chromosome (and mtDNA) might have simply drifted out of the modern human gene pool, it is also possible that genetic incompatibilities contributed to their loss. In comparing the Neandertal lineage to those of modern humans, we identified four coding differences with predicted functional impacts, three missense and one nonsense. Three mutations – within PCDH11Y, USP9Y, and TMSB4Y – are unique to the Neandertal lineage, and one, within KMD5D, is fixed in modern human sequences. The first gene, PCDH11Y, resides in the X-transposed region of the Y chromosome. Together with its X-chromosome homolog… it might play a role in brain lateralization and language development.

Interestingly, all three genes with potentially functional missense differences between the Neandertal and modern humans sequences are H-Y genes… [and] have led to genetic incompatibilities between modern humans and Neandertals and to the consequent loss of Neandertal Y chromosomes in modern human populations. Indeed, reduced fertility or viability of hybrid offspring with Neandertal Y chromosomes is fully consistent with Haldane’s rule, which states that “when in the (first generation) offspring of two different animal races one sex is absent, rare, or sterile, that sex is the (heterogametic) sex.”

Seventy percent of East Asians have inherited the Neanderthal POU2F3 gene, which is involved in Keratin production and is thought to be responsible for straightening hair. DNA tests demonstrate that Neanderthals possessed fair skin, like the majority of oriental people. Most Mongoloids and Australoids who interbred with them, carry both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA.

The Combined Landscape of Denisovan and Neanderthal Ancestry in Present-Day Humans, multiple authors, 2016 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Some present-day humans derive up to ∼5% of their ancestry from archaic Denisovans, an even larger proportion than the ∼2% from Neanderthals.

We developed methods that can disambiguate the locations of segments of Denisovan and Neanderthal ancestry in present-day humans and applied them to 257 high-coverage genomes from 120 diverse populations, among which were 20 individual Oceanians with high Denisovan ancestry. In Oceanians, the average size of Denisovan fragments is larger than Neanderthal fragments, implying a more recent average date of Denisovan admixture in the history of these populations. We document more Denisovan ancestry in South Asia than is expected based on existing models of history, reflecting a previously undocumented mixture related to archaic humans. Denisovan ancestry, just like Neanderthal ancestry, has been deleterious on a modern human genetic background, as reflected by its depletion near genes. Finally, the reduction of both archaic ancestries is especially pronounced on chromosome X and near genes more highly expressed in testes than other tissues… This suggests that reduced male fertility may be a general feature of mixtures of human populations…’

Fine-Scale Maps of Denisovan and Neanderthal Introgression

(A) Non-overlapping 100 kb windows that have non-zero inferred archaic ancestry in each of six populations (blue, Denisova; red, Neanderthal). In the innermost rings, we plot deserts (windows >10 Mb).

(B) Correlation of confidently inferred archaic ancestry (Neanderthal ancestry in six non-African populations and Denisovan ancestry in Oceanians) across populations in non-overlapping windows of size 100 kb, 1 Mb, and 10 Mb.

(C) We plot the median of the proportion of Denisovan and Neanderthal ancestry within quintiles of a B statistic measuring intensity of linked selection (low B indicates the regions most affected by linked selection).

‘It has been suggested that the empirically observed reduction in Neanderthal ancestry in Europeans and East Asians near functionally important regions could be explained by a greater load of weakly deleterious alleles in Neanderthals due to the smaller population size of Neanderthals since separation, followed by purging of deleterious Neanderthal alleles in the mixed population. Since we have shown that similar patterns are associated with the Denisovan introgression event, it seems plausible that similar evolutionary forces operated to remove Denisovan ancestry segments. However, the model of a greater load of deleterious mutations in archaic humans cannot explain the observed reduction of both Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry near genes that are disproportionately expressed in testes, suggesting that male hybrid sterility may have been associated with both introgressions. An important direction for future research is to understand the relative importance of purging of slightly deleterious alleles, as well as reduced fertility in hybrid males, in changing the content of genomes in the aftermath of the interbreeding that occurred between modern and archaic humans.’

The only way to unravel this perplexing mystery and understand the sudden demise of the Neanderthal is to recognise that a. they were an adam and the ‘mankind’ created in the Sixth age, b. they died in the Flood, regardless of how many were left because they may have been hunted by the lines of Cain or Seth and c. they did intermarry with either or both Cain and Seth’s line – from the Adam of the Eighth age – hence their DNA in modern Homo sapiens sapiens which must have been carried by Noah’s daughter-in-law Adataneses at least. The studies concluding points.

Denisovan admixture into modern humans occurred after Neanderthal admixture
There is more Denisovan ancestry in South Asians than expected from current models
Denisovan ancestry has been subject to positive and negative selection after admixture
Male infertility most likely occurred after modern human interbreeding with Denisovans

Alan Alford adds – capitalisation his, emphasis mine:

‘As uncomfortable as it may seem, all of the Mesopotamian texts indicate that man was originally created as a slave race to relieve the “toil” of the Gods. These claims are indeed repeated in our encyclopaedias, under the heading of religious myth, but it is a fact that the Hebrew word for worship, avod, literally means “Work”! The Sumerian texts consistently called these earliest beings LU.LU, which also had the connotation of worker or servant. According to the ancient texts, the first Adam was a test-tube baby, created by the Gods from already living matter. Adam’s DNA (~~not~~ his rib) was used to create the first woman. Humans were then cloned to ease the “toil” of the Gods. As for the first “Adam”, the evidence suggests that he was a hybrid mixture of God and Homo erectus.’

Sumerian texts confirm that during the age of the gods on Earth, they created a prototype human after many unsuccessful attempts. This being was to be a worker for them, mining precious elements, particularly gold – refer article: The Ark of God. These workers for the Annunaki gods (or angels), were called Lulu, the ‘black headed ones.’ Alford mentions the Lulu worker and Homo erectus in the same breath and by coincidence, they are one and the same. His misapplying the Lulu with Adam and Eve is incorrect. Even though Adam was created to ‘work the garden of Eden’ he was a spirit being fashioned to serve the Creator, not the Angels as the Lulu had been designed. His transformation with Eve to become ‘human’ meant a deconstruction of his spiritual composition and ‘godlike’ anatomy and the addition of ‘humanlike’ – such as Homo erectus – genes. In this regard, Alford hits the nail on the head.

The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne, 2014, pages 110-111 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Black Heads were created at… Nippur, known in legend as the place where heaven bonds with the earth. The first Black Heads were two interesting individuals named Ulligarra and Zalgarra, from which all Black Heads derived. Black Heads were created… male and female at the same time, with a mandate to multiply^ in great numbers. Their posterity’s purpose was to till the soil, to erect buildings, and to serve the Annunaki. Black Heads also thought of themselves as the “tenants of the garden of the gods.” They proliferated^ beyond all expectations [like the descendants of Japheth – Genesis 9:27] and later were drafted by the gods to toil as a massive workforce in exchange for consistent rations of food. At some point much later in time, Adapa and Titi [Adam and Eve] were procreated through a selected female from among the Blackheads [Homo erectus]… and the god Enki.’

Adam and Eve were the original Homo sapiens, thus either Noah or his three sons, Japheth, Ham and Shem, were the first Homo sapiens sapiens.

An Analysis of modern African DNA reveals that ancestral Eurasian Haplogroups – mitochondrial Haplogroups M and N and Y-chromosomal Haplogroup CF – appear to represent mutations of mtDNA HgL3 and Y-chromosomal HgCT; Haplogroups associated with African ancestors. The complication with using this recent DNA data to place the ancestors of all living humans in Africa is that it assumes the first people carrying the identified mutations were themselves on that continent. To confirm the proposed assumption requires DNA from humans who definitively lived in Africa circa 70,000 years ago. Recall, it is proposed that the Neanderthal was formed between 75,397 and 51,397 BCE.

The huge problem, is that the oldest sample of African DNA ever recovered is a mere 8,100 years old. The lack of sufficiently old African genetic material means scientists cannot currently use DNA alone to geographically place the earliest ancestors of modern Africans. If we accept for a moment, the belief that the ancestors of today’s Africans lived in Africa 70,000 years ago, we still have no evidence that the Haplogroups at the base of the Eurasian population, were associated with these populations earlier than 70,000 years ago. Moving the ‘out of Africa’ migration dates back even further “takes an already weak model into the realms of outright scientific fraud” according to one article.

A selection of insightful scientists are beginning to question whether the basal Haplogroups might relate to migrations into Africa rather than originating there. Researchers at the University of La Laguna have suggested that Haplogroup L3 entered Africa from Asia. This would support the Ark coming to rest in the Himalayas and the first major post-diluvian civilisation springing up in the Indus Valley region – refer Chapter I Noah Antecessor Nulla. The paper’s title is self-explanatory: Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basic lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago. The authors of the paper posit an earlier African origin for these Asian migrants, whilst highlighting a further glaring anomaly within their data:

‘The southern route hypothesis proposes that the Eurasian branches (M and N) of the macrohaplogroup L3 differentiated in or near the African continent and rapidly spread across the Asian peninsulas to reach Australia and Melanesia. Under this assumption, it is expected that, in general, coalescence ages of haplogroups should decrease from Africa to Australia. However, we have demonstrated that this is not the case. Just on the contrary, the… relative ages of M and N haplogroups run, against to expectation, westwards with younger haplogroup ages going to Africa.’

Humans are not from Earth, Ellis Silver, 2017, pages 148-150 – emphasis mine:

‘Scientists working on the Human Genome Project and other DNA projects have discovered an extra 223 genes (out of a total of about 20,000) in us that don’t appear in any other species. Some of these orphan genes… may have arisen from non-coding sequences of DNA… de novo origination… Or… from natural or artificial horizontal transfer from another organism… viral, bacterial or extraterrestrial… we can immediately rule out the viral option… We’ve already mapped the parts of our genome that came from viruses, and none of the 223 orphan genes were among them. But we did find the complete genome of a functioning virus hidden in there.’

Appropriate, as humankind acts unlike any animal on earth, even considering the reptilian and mammalian aspects of our mind and brain function. Human beings are akin to a virus. We as the virus, are living off the host the Earth, rampaging and pillaging the resources and environment of our gracious host. Exhibiting the same ruthless disrespect for the earth, as a virus does in its single-driven desire to feed and grow exponentially.

Romans 8:20-22

English Standard Version

‘For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.’

Silver: ‘Some (non-mainstream) geneticists believe that aliens may have spliced 223 orphan genes into the genome of one of the Earth’s native hominids, such as Homo erectus… ** some researchers claim there’s evidence of twenty extraterrestrial species in our DNA… this hybridisation process created an instant leap from the native hominin to modern humans [Homo sapiens].

There’s plenty of evidence of external interference in our genome… there are hundreds of scars where sections of genes have been duplicated from other genes, had their heads or tails stripped off (which normally disables them), had sections added or removed, or been joined onto parts of other genes. These cuts and splices have been present in our genome for… thousands of years. Our own scientists can perform these same processes in their labs today, but they’ve only had the technology to do it for the last few years. If we accept that the hybridisation theory is correct, that means… that the… process didn’t turn out quite the way it should have done. Since alien abductions are still happening, it may be the case that we’re a work in progress and not yet the finished article.’

DNA Study Reveals We Have a Mystery Human Ancestor, Ed Whelan, 2020 – emphasis mine:

‘A new method for analyzing modern and archaic human DNA has thrown up some fascinating results. It appears that modern humans (Homo Sapiens) mated earlier and more frequently with an archaic human ancestor, a species of extinct hominins [early humans]. Moreover, they have found evidence the DNA of this mysterious archaic human ancestor** is still part of our modern human genetic inheritance.

An American team of scientists, from leading American universities, embarked upon an ambitious plan to map the flow of genes between different species of hominids [primates and humans]. Gene flow is an indication of interbreeding between ancient human species. A new algorithm, known as ARGweaver-D, was developed by Melissa J. Hubisz to achieve the goals of the project. This algorithm allowed researchers to develop a model of the lineages of early humans.

During the study, researchers compared the genomes of two Neanderthals, a Denisovan and two modern African individuals. The Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) were an extinct species of humans that… once inhabited vast areas of Eurasia. Denisovans are a mysterious species, only known through their DNA, who probably ranged across an area that covered Siberia and East Asia. The samples from modern Africans were selected because they are known not to have Neanderthal nor Denisovan genes.

Based on the ground-breaking algorithm the researchers were able to develop an ancestral recombination graph, which “includes a tree that captures the relationships among all individuals at every position along the genome, and the recombination events that cause those trees to change from one position to the next,” Siepel told Live Science. The team were able to build up a picture of the extensive interbreeding between different species of hominids and gain insights even into their migration patterns.

And research has already shown that modern humans, Denisovans, Neanderthals interbred in the ancient past. However, using the new algorithm, researchers were able to show that this interbreeding occurred much earlier than once believed. The results from a sample of Denisovan DNA were remarkable. [Inverse] states that the ‘genome contained genetic material that came from an unexpected source – an archaic human ancestor that was neither human [homo sapiens], nor Neanderthal, nor Denisovan.’ This was a mystery. Researchers have theorized that the genes may have come from Homo erectus…

However, the “story” of Homo Erectus is unproven because we do not have any DNA from this long-extinct human species. Siepel told Live Science that “the genome of that extinct species of human has never been sequenced.” As a result, there is much we still don’t know about human evolution, including if H. Erectus (upright man) is our ancestor. It is also possible that the mysterious DNA found ‘nested’ in the genome sequences comes from a new and unknown archaic human ancestor species.’

In the advent of no other likely candidate, Homo erectus is not only the favourite front runner, but the only one. Bear in mind that Adam was a spirit entity turned into a physical being. The physical genes and blueprint had to have originated from an existing source, as our DNA reveals a pre-existing component in Homo sapiens even though Homo sapiens itself was a new hybrid species. Scientific investigation proves humans did not descend from Neanderthals (and Denisovans) but rather interbred with them; yet have discovered an ‘unknown archaic human ancestor.’ There just aren’t any other options that we are aware, apart from Homo erectus.

Whelan: ‘The new research indicates that the human tree is much more complex than first thought… Siepel told Live Science that “A picture is emerging of a series of distinct but related populations moving around the globe and frequently interacting with one another, with occasional interbreeding events that produced hybrid offspring.” It is not known if these hybrids were fit enough to survive and have offspring. It seems likely that at least some survived and this accounts for the distinctive genetic inheritance of many groups.

For example, Tibetans and Pacific Islanders show traces of Denisovan DNA. These interbreeding events were very important in the evolution of modern humans. Science Daily reports that “15% of these ‘super-archaic’ regions may have been passed down to modern humans.” This means that genes which flowed between different archaic human species are still part of modern people’s genetic make-up, including those from an [original] unknown archaic human ancestor.’

The line of Seth, which includes righteous Enoch – as opposed to evil Enoch from the line of Cain (refer article: Thoth) – on through to Noah is the Homo sapiens line of humans. Beginning with the Y-DNA Adam and mtDNA Eve, (for scientists) the fallen and transformed Adam and Eve (for the benefit of Christians). Later, transferring to Noah’s three sons as Homo sapiens sapiens (modern man). Homo neanderthalenis were the male and female humans created two Days prior and had been living on the earth for some forty-eight thousand years or more. Their line did not survive the flood, because the Creator chose to save the line of Seth instead. The people of Day Six may have been corrupted beyond return by their mixing with Cain’s descendants. The Denisovans are as labelled, mysterious and while they are genetically linked to the Neanderthal, it is for now until more data is forthcoming, that we can only include them with the Neanderthals from Day Six.

Regarding the ‘unknown archaic human ancestor’, if modern humans are a combination of varying genetic sources, whether from God, angels or aliens and say the human component is from Homo erectus as seems entirely plausible; surely it would be integral within our composition and not necessarily an anomaly that could readily stand out. It would differ from the genetic material which was introduced via inter-breeding like Neanderthal DNA in humans. Alternatively, should it turn out to be the unknown genetic material is not a core element but rather an admixture through intermixing, the unknown ancestor and addition of extra genetic DNA would result from mixing with another species entirely.

Could that species be the dark Angels, who were the Watchers and descended to Earth during the time of Jared the father of righteous Enoch. Jared was born circa 22,797 BCE and the arrival of the Watchers would have been circa 22,000 BCE. The pairing of angels with human women may have occurred with both the Neanderthal and Seth lines of humans. It most definitely took place with the line of Cain.

Two points to ponder from the above is firstly, the unique fact that sub-Saharan Africans either do not have any Neanderthal (or Denisova) DNA at all or virtually none. The other, is the question regarding 15% archaic genetic material residing within modern humans. We will address the Rhesus negative component in modern humans – Article: Rhesus Negative Blood factor. For it is rare in the Black and Asian communities, though within White Europeans it averages… fifteen percent.

An original excerpt transferred from Chapter XXII Alpha & Omega