Timothy Jay Schwab of The God culture has a theory about the rivers from Eden mentioned in Genesis 2. He says the Pison, Gihon, Hiddekel, and Euphrates rivers are deep sea ocean trenches. As a result of the flood they were covered up by the newly formed world ocean and now remain hidden. Before the flood they were a mega river system that watered the whole earth. Is this true? Let's take a look at the evidence he offers in his book Solomon's Treasure. Along the way I will offer some insights from his videos but I will primarily be sticking to his book which he claims is "the monumental case for the Philippines no one can disprove."
Here is a map of Tim's system which can be found in his annotated Book of Jubilees.
According to Tim no one in the past five years has ever been able to prove this theory wrong which means it is true. That is the logical fallacy known as the appeal to ignorance.
Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes the possibility that there may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or false. It also does not allow for the possibility that the answer is unknowable, only knowable in the future, or neither completely true nor completely false. In debates, appealing to ignorance is sometimes an attempt to shift the burden of proof.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Tim employs this fallacious argument quite often which goes to show he is not acquainted with basic logic.
This article will put his theory to the test. Like Buffy the Vampire Slayer I shall drive a sharp stake into the heart of this theory rendering it nothing but dust and ashes.
Because this chapter is so long and involves a lot of intricacies I am going to focus on several key errors that bring this theory crashing down. The long and short of it is the rivers from Eden cannot be rivers formed by snow melt and rain because there was no rain until the flood and also no ocean. There are actually five rivers and not four. The main river starts in Eden, which Tim claims is the North Pole, flows down the middle of The Atlantic and breaks off into four branches. As with all of his other theories Tim's case rests on wrong etymology, wrong bible interpretation, assumptions, and a lack of understanding the source material he is appropriating. In this case that is the map showing what the earth would look like if the oceans were drained and the nature of ocean trenches and ridges.
The Mid-Atlantic Ridge
 |
| Solomon's Treasure, pg. 273 |
The River From Eden initiates in the North Pole which we identify as Eden not to be confused with the Garden of Eden planted in the East which we will cover in detail later. The river, then, operates continually across the Earth down between the Americas and Europe, then under Africa into the Indian Ocean and all the way under Australia into the Pacific Ocean until it reaches the coast of Mexico. Therefore, these must be downhill in slope which is a challenge for other theories. As the source river for the other four mega-rivers, scientifically, it must essentially be larger in volume than the other four branches which flow from it and that concurs. It has an average depth of 2.5 km (1.55 mi.) and an average width of 100 km (62.5 mi.). This is massive.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 274
The Mid-Atlantic ridge does not begin at the North Pole. It is in fact a boundary line for the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates. The ridge actually runs through the Arctic Ocean becoming the Gakkel Ridge, the Laptev Sea Ridge, finally connecting with the Chersky Range in Siberia. This fact alone destroys Tim's entire case which rests on his assumption that the Mid-Atlantic ridge is a sunken river with the headwaters in the North Pole.
This ridge also runs through Iceland and is a popular tourist destination.
That is not an ancient river bed, it's the meeting of two continents. Now, it's true you can go swimming in a part of the ridge called the Silfra fissure but that water originates in snow and not any underwater fountain.
Silfra is spring fed by groundwater originating as meltwater from Langjökull, Iceland's second largest glacier, about fifty kilometres north of the Þingvallavatn Lake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silfra
Did Tim even bother to research the path of the mid Atlantic ridge? It goes through Siberia and continues until it meets the Philippine plate and then it diverges. Here is a map of all the tectonic plates showing just that.
Pison River
In Chapter 5 on Havilah, Land of Eve, we found that the Philippines leads the world in these three resources which define it as Ancient Havilah – gold, pearl and the onyx stone. To date, it maintains a leadership position in all three as it is the historic forerunner in gold abundance, has no rival in largest pearls on Earth and possesses the strongest onyx and marble from Romblon. Therefore, the Pison River must surround this whole land of the Philippines.
You can observe the culmination of the 65,000 kilometer Mid-Ocean Ridge off the coast of Mexico essentially. At that point begins a series of Oceanic Trenches which travel all the way up the coast of America to Alaska, then, over to Russia, down to Japan and splits and surrounds the whole land of the Philippines especially. This is the ancient Pison River, the first River From Eden that branches from the main source river. It is positioned at the end of the entire Eden River System yet it is ranked first. This is because Hebrew writing initiates from right to left or East to West in direction. Therefore, the Eastern-most river would be first.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 275
The Pison river is listed first because its the last in the Eden River system and the Eastern-most river because Hebrew is read "right to left or East to West in direction." That is pretty ridiculous. I don't think even Origen could squeeze that out of the text and he was a master at the allegorical technique. But there is more hilarity to come.
The map to the adjacent top left identifies numerous trenches by name which were linked prior to the Flood as one river. Science, unaware, labels these by many names but they constituted one continuous river in antiquity.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 276-277
Here is a clearer map of the ocean trenches surrounding the Philippines.
What proof does Tim offer that these trenches were once all connected? He says that some trenches were filled in with sediment.
Understand, however, some of the areas of these trench systems have been filled in places due to sediment from modern rivers dumping into them over the continental shelves and some from the Flood. Therefore, they may not all still appear contiguous but once were and still there.
“A few trenches are partially filled with sediments derived from the bordering continents.”
“Trenches that are partially infilled are known as “troughs” and sometimes they are completely buried and lack bathymetric expression.”
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 275
What proof does Tim give that all the trenches surrounding the Philippines were once connected and now filled with sediment? None. Not a single shred of proof just an assumption. Did he research the trenches that surround the Philippines?
Immediately to the north of the Philippine Trench is the East Luzon Trench. They are separated, with their continuity interrupted and displaced, by Benham Plateau on the Philippine Sea Plate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Trench
The Philippine and East Luzon trenches are separated by Benham Rise which is an extinct volcano ridge and home to the world's largest caldera, the Apolaki Caldera. It looks like this:
The trenches surrounding the Philippines are not currently connected and by all accounts never were connected. Tim makes the assumption they were but offers no proof except his previous statement that some trenches are now filled with sediment. The status of the Philippine Trench and the East Luzon Trench being interrupted and displaced by Benham Rise proves that his theory is wrong.
Gihon River
Genesis 2:13 KJV
And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth (cabab: סבב)the whole land of Ethiopia (Kuwsh: כוש )
Compasseth: Hebrew: cabab: סבב: to turn, turn about or around or aside or back or towards, go about or around, surround, encircle, change direction.
We are seeking a river that surrounds all of Ethiopia as “compasseth” means surrounds or encircles essentially. Genesis then says the whole land which affirms the meaning. The challenge with this is most in modern times do not know where Ethiopia was considered when the Bible was written? They are confused by modern Ethiopia being named such because in history until the 1800’s, it was always identified as Abysinia. Their name is appropriate as they were part of ancient Ethiopia but a very small sliver. In order to understand where this river is located, we must understand this because there is no modern river surrounding the whole land of modern Ethiopia (Abysinia).
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 278
As you can see in the definition Tim gives the word translated compasseth does not only mean surround or encircle. Modern translations reflect this.
NIV: The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush.
Berean Study Bible: The name of the second river is Gihon; it winds through the whole land of Cush.
CSB: The name of the second river is Gihon, which flows through the entire land of Cush.
HCSB: The name of the second river is Gihon, which flows through the entire land of Cush.
https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-13.htm
Tim goes on to prove that historically Africa has been called Ethiopia. Therefore the Gihon River must surround the entire continent of Africa.
Even as late as 1611 when the King James was first published, those translators did not see Ethiopia as any less than all of Central Africa from East to West coast.
Therefore if this third Gihon River from Eden must surround the whole land of ancient Ethiopia, then it must surround the entire continent of Africa. It is not a tributary running through it and even the Nile does not fit especially since it’s source is rainfall which did not exist in Genesis 2 in verse 5. It must surround the whole land which places it on the bottom of the ocean floor. We have never seen a coherent theory on this one in the slightest. However, connecting to the Mid-Ocean Ridge leads to a Trench system which just so happens to surround the whole land of Africa or ancient Ethiopia. Later in this chapter, we provide a map of this as well as the trenches and basins that surround Africa so you can visualize.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 280
According to Tim the Gihon River looks like this:
 |
| Solomon's Treasure, pg. 277 |
The problem here is that the picture Tim has drawn, that the African continental shelf is the bank of a river, does not match reality. Here is a map of The Atlantic Ocean floor:
Tim does not offer any more about the Gihon river surrounding Africa by pointing out the trenches of which it is supposedly composed. As can be seen from this map there are no ocean trenches surrounding Africa. I guess they are covered in sediment?
3. Hiddekel River
The third river once again is accompanied by a description that one cannot ignore yet they do. In fact, they even replace the Hebrew word on this one with a modern river – the Tigris. That is erroneous.
Genesis 2:14a KJV
And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria.
East of Assyria means East of Assyria. That seems simplistic yet the traditional theory on this is far from reading the Bible. For one, there are some translations which insert the Tigris River spuriously and it misleads many. The logic almost seems reasonable. However, it is a complete misrepresentation of occult origin.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 282
Tim offers two proofs in this section that the Hiddekel is not the Tigris as the Septuagint says. The second one is that Daniel mentions he had a vision while standing near the Hiddekel. I thoroughly dismantled that argument in an article which can be read here.
The other argument is etymological.
First, before consulting Daniel who never lived on the Tigris River and never mentions the Tigris by it’s Hebrew name for obvious reason, we should consult a Lost Tribe of the Northern Kingdom as they were taken to Nineveh and surrounding areas right by the Tigris River which Daniel never lived. In the Book of Tobit, he literally comes out in Tobit 6:1 and identifies the Tigris River as TYGRYS(תיגרין) in Hebrew. That is not Hiddekel. However, there is a Hebrew name for the Tigris.
1 Kings 14:15 KJV
For the LORD shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of this good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves, provoking the LORD to anger.
Isaiah 7:20 KJV
In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard.
The Lost Tribes of the Northern Kingdom were taken captive into Assyria beyond the Tigris River. The Southern Kingdom was later taken to Babylon which is on the Euphrates River mostly especially the palace where Daniel lived on or near. “The River” in Hebrew is the Tigris River. Why? It is to the Hebrews, the river of abomination where the occult was birthed as their legends begin there at Babel. There is a Hebrew word Euphrates used several times but the Tigris is only referred to as “The River” in Hebrew mentioned 26 times or so in scripture, usually referring to Northern Lost Tribes. Judaea from which Daniel originates never lived in Assyria. Here is a list of the mentions of the Hebrew Name for Tigris as The River in the King James Version twenty-six times for your consumption:
Ha Nahar. “The River” (הנהר)
2 Chronicles 9:26; 1 Kings 14:15; Ezra 4:10, 4:11, 4:16, 4:17, 4:20, 4:23, 5:3, 5:6, 6:6, 6:8, 6:13, 7:21, 7:25, 8:36; Nehemiah: 2:7, 2:9, 3:7; Isaiah 7:20, 8:7, 11:15, 19:5, 23:3, 27:12; and Jeremiah 2:18.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 284-285
Tim's argument is that the Hebrew name for the Hiddekel is not the same as the word for Tigris. It is Ha Nahar, "The River."
First of all the reference to Tobit comes from Sefaria.org. At the link it can be seen that this edition of Tobit is from 1878. It can be found at the web archive. Reading the introduction spills a lot of light on this text.
We publish the Hebrew text from the first edition printed at Constantinople in 1516, which Sebastian Munster reproduced in 1542, and which is hence usually but wrongly called the Munster text, as if he had been the first who published it.
https://archive.org/details/booktobitachald00neubgoog/page/n16/mode/2up
Further research reveals that Munster translated Tobit into Hebrew from Greek!
Sebastian Münster, originally trained in Biblical languages as a Franciscan friar and later a leading Protestant, took one of them, retranslated it into Latin and simultaneously created a new Hebrew version as a veritable recreation of the Hebrew text that had been lost.
https://www.newberry.org/historia-tobiae?page=0%2C1
Even further research shows that two very old texts of Tobit in Hebrew, one of which dates back to the 11th century, were published in 1897. This text which the translator refers to as H.L has the word Hiddekel in Tobit 6:1.
Tim did not even bother to research the Hebrew text used by Sefaria. He did not think to check its origin. If he had he would have learned that it is a relatively new text translated from the Greek. That makes it worthless for his purpose of proving that the Tigris and Hiddekel are not the same river. The 11th century Hebrew text does retain the word Hiddekel and gives more weight to its identity being the Tigris.
In Tim's next etymological foray we are to believe that the proper Hebrew name for the Tigris was "The River." He says this word is "Ha Nahar." However if you go search that out you will find the word "ha nahar" is used many times not just in reference to the Tigris. For example Genesis 15:18.
In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram,saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/15/18/p0/t_conc_15018
"Ha Nahar" simply means the river.
The proper Hebrew name for the Tigris is the Hiddekel as linguistic evidence shows.
The Ancient Greek form Tigris (Τίγρις) meaning "tiger" (if treated as Greek), was adapted from Old Persian Tigrā, itself from Elamite Tigra, itself from Sumerian Idigna or Idigina (probably derived from *id (i)gina "running water"). The Sumerian term, which can be interpreted as "the swift river", contrasts the Tigris to its neighbour, the Euphrates, whose leisurely pace caused it to deposit more silt and build up a higher bed than the Tigris. The Sumerian form was borrowed into Akkadian as Idiqlat and from there into the other Semitic languages (compare Hebrew Ḥîddeqel, Syriac Deqlaṯ, Arabic Dijlah)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tigris
And the name of the third river is the, Hiddekel, or "the darting," from חַד and דֶּקֶל, a sharp and swift arrow, referring to its rapidity. It is unanimously agreed that this must be identified with the Tigris; in the present language of the Persians designated tir, which signifies an arrow. It is styled in Aramaic diglath or diglah. That is it which goeth towards the east of Assyria. Its identity is thus placed beyond a question.
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/2-14.htm
Euphrates River
Finally, the last river is the Euphrates or Parat in Hebrew but it cannot be the modern Euphrates which originates in rain and snow melt. It would have to flow backwards to work and there is no River From Eden feeding it nor connecting it to the three other branches at the same time. None of the narrative makes sense. However, we find the fourth and final branch of the Mid-Ocean Ridge (River From Eden) next to South America running up it’s coast (Map on bottom right). Oddly, Parat is rendered in Tagalog as well meaning “salty” and with the fountains of the great deep within, this whole system is salty. This is the fourth position where the Mid-Ocean Ridge veers into another leg. Exactly four and a perfect balance conforming to every detail of Genesis 2. You will find no other theory which does.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 289-290
By process of elimination Tim concludes that the Parat, Euphrates River, is an ocean trench off the coast of South America. Do I really need to rebut this? Parat is translated Euphrates 18 times in the Bible and always means the river running through Iraq and not an ocean trench off the coast of South America. So now there are two Euphrates? How did that happen? Tim does not say. He's not finished though.
One thing we find extremely interesting is that the Filipino word “Tagalog” breaks down as “taga” and “ilog” meaning “People of the River.” Yet, we do not find a significant modern river in the whole Philippines that would define the inhabitants of the thousands of islands. No common denominator found in modern times. Should they not be referenced as the “People of the Ocean” instead. Here we have yet another clue that reveals this theory as they are the “People of The River” – the Pison River from Eden. Now it makes sense and no surprise in the land of Havilah.
Solomon's Treasure, pg. 289
For as much as Timothy Jay Schwab loves the Philippines one would think he would know that the Tagalogs are one people group among many and they all hail from Luzon.
The word “Tagalog” is believed to have been derived from either one or both sets of contractions: “taga-ilog” and/or “taga-alog”. The prefix “taga” means “coming from” or “originating from” referring to a place of birth or residence. The word “ilog” means river. The word “alog” means a shallow place in a stream where people could wade to cross to the other side. The first word “taga-ilog” is the version in the explanation of the name of the Tagalog that they were river people.
The second word “taga-alog” is related to the first concept and was first articulated by H.O. Beyer who said that the ancient Tagalogs were people of the lowland areas where the “alog” was found.
The Tagalog culture was essentially a river and water-based culture. Fishing and agriculture were predominant means of livelihood. Most of the ancient cultural centers of the Tagalog regions were founded on river banks, specifically near the delta and the “wawa” or the mouth of the river, where the river meets the sea.
Riverine communities, especially those by the delta and river-mouth became centers of trade and commerce. In pre-Hispanic Philippines, some of these trade centers were Maynila, Tondo, Sapa, Pasig through the Pasig River; Talim, Bay, Pila, Lumbang through the Laguna de Bai; Balayan though Pansipit River; Lipa and Taal through Bonbon or Taal Lake.
https://ncca.gov.ph/about-ncca-3/subcommissions/subcommission-on-cultural-communities-and-traditional-arts-sccta/northern-cultural-communities/lowland-cultural-group-of-the-tagalogs/
That is enough for Tim's book. Now I want to show you how inconsistent he is. In his worldview there was no ocean before the flood, only these 5 rivers which are now ocean trenches. Listen to what he says in his Answers in Enoch series.
25:43 One of them coming from the west pours its waters into the Great Sea. Now, Enoch is also identifying the Pison river here. How do we know? Well, look at it it flows from the coast of the americas west to Asia and the Great Sea here is the Pacific ocean. That is the greatest or largest of oceans today. Then we have two more rivers. Two and three we'll label them. Verse six, and these two come from the north to the sea and pour their waters into the Erythraean Sea. We know that is the Indian Ocean in all of history no doubt. And especially in this book of Enoch we've already covered that.
How can the Pison River be flowing into the Pacific Ocean when Tim teaches elsewhere there were no oceans until after the flood? For this theory to work the Pacific Ocean would have to be LOWER THAN these ocean trenches. That does not make any sense. Not to mention he teaches Cain walked all the way to Mexico from the Philippines!
36:04 He could have settled anywhere, in the Pacific perhaps founding maybe even the fabled Lemuria which is a nephilim kingdom because the nephilim took it over which is no surprise because Cain's lineage did in fact mate with nephilim, well, with angels to create and procreate the nephilim. But we find it far more likely he traveled even further east to higher ground. Why? Well, Cain would have known that the earth was going to be flooded. See, Adam knew this prophecy according to several accounts. We actually do cover that. We are not going to go into detail on this because this is an educated guess and no more because no one has found the road sign yet saying "Cain lived here." Just hasn't happened.
If you follow the 10th parallel to the east from the Philippines specifically from the Garden of Eden area above ground through the Pacific you end up in south Mexico. Well, that's odd because there is an ancient city there built on top of a more ancient city, no one really knows how old it is so we don't have any data to prove it's exactly that old and this is definitely Cain's, we don't, we are speculated, speculating in an educated manner here. Here's what we find odd though and we've even heard Steve Quayle and others I believe mentioning this if I have that right. Tenochtitlan actually has the name of Cain's son and that's right there in south Mexico. Enoch the magician not the good one and that just happens to fit Cain naming his first city after Enoch. Can you fully prove that out? Well maybe you can we cannot, not right now but it is an interesting thought.
https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2021/10/the-god-culture-atlantis-lemuria.html
How would Cain have walked to Mexico if there was a Pacific Ocean? He would not have been able to do so. Timothy Jay Schwab cannot even keep up with his own system.
This is the first in-depth look I have given to Tim's entire Rivers From Eden theory. None of his theory fits with the reality that those boundaries he claims are trenches are actually tectonic plates. In the case of trenches they don't all connect. It's bad etymology, bad geography, and bad bible interpretation like everything else he does. To quote the God Culture:
That's a rather extreme view. Not one worth consideration. Yah Bless.
Tim loves to crow about no one being able to refute his theory but now I have done exactly that. He might ask me, "So where are the rivers?" The answer is I don't know. The Euphrates and Tigris are well documented. I am not going to speculate nor do I need to. The problem is Tim thinks he can know everything and that gets him to concoct extreme theories that he claims are eternal verities which he can't even keep up with as we see in his Answers in Enoch video.
_NAMRIA_layout_2_May_24_2017.jpg)
