originally posted by: Rasalghul
I doubt that. The bible is not accurate in so many places regarding geography.
Exactly so. And it looks as though one of the anomalies is the use of the name "Cush" in different places.
Read first Genesis ch2 vv10-14
We are told that four rivers have their source in one area- Tigris, Euphrates, Pishon and Gihon.
If Cush is the Sudan in this chapter, that make Gihon the Nile, which is geographically absurd. Just look at an atlas and contemplate the idea of the
Nile and the Euphrates having their source in the same region.
What makes much more sense is Eden being the highlands of eastern Turkey, with Euphrates and Tigris flowing out of it south-west and south-east, while
Pishon and Gihon flow out of it north-west and north-east, making Cush part of that highland region.
Read next Genesis ch10 vv8-12
We are told that Cush is the father of Nimrod, who is the founder of Babylon and also the founder of Assyria.
Look at the atlas again. This connects Cush with the Mesopotamian region, and it would make sense if Cush belonged originally to the highland region
just north of there.
As for the other Cush, consider the possibility that Cush was also the name of the peoples
on either side of the Red Sea (by coincidence, or
the same people wandering a bit further).
Then the Midianites would be Cushiites as being part of that ethnic
Later on, that group would give its name to the region
south of Egypt, which is where we find it in the prophets.
It's just a question of grasping that geographical names can move, and they can be in more than one place at the same time, especially if they are
really ethnic names.
Obviously you know there is a Perth in Australia. But perhaps you are also aware that there is another Perth in Scotland? See what I mean? Placenames
can be duplicated.
edit on 18-2-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)