Not Out Of, But Rather Into Africa

[spook]

Breaking news is that archaeologists have found evidence in the Middle East showing earliest man there would appear to predate the earliest finds in Africa by 200,000 years.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12084496

 

Putting aside that dating processes themselves are based on the present understanding and use of dating processes themselves, what is relevant here is that this underlines the Bible in which the clues to the location of Eden indicate somewhere within today’s Middle East would also underline that man did not emerge from Africa but instead in the form of Noah’s sinning son went into Africa to found the people who populated that land.

 

Isn’t it fascinating how increasingly science is not debunking the Bible, but is being debunked BY the Bible!

[Evil Goblin]

All this may show is that Homo Sapiens was around in Israel about 400,000 years ago. It does not prove that HS originated there - they may well have moved there out of Africa. The story of human origins is constantly evolving and at present the weight of evidence is that HS's forebears originated in Africa and HS probably did as well. In any event, there is no reason to think that the HS of 400,000 years ago had the knowledge and ability to build arks and what have you. Whilst I agree that many biblical statements are being supported by arecheological discoveries I think you are stretching things here.

 

BTW, the location of Eden is given as somewhere in Northern Iraq/Syria, not Israel.

[Albert Tatlock]

BTW, the location of Eden is given as somewhere in Northern Iraq/Syria, not Israel.

I always thought it was somewhere near Warrington, and that there was a large Ikea built on the site now?

[buzz]

Nah, it's opposite B&Q

[Evil Goblin]

You're both wrong - it's actually in Widnes on what is now a chemical tip (as cursed by God).

[spook]

 

BTW, the location of Eden is given as somewhere in Northern Iraq/Syria, not Israel.

 

That is why I wrote somewhere in the Middle East.

[Evil Goblin]

 

BTW, the location of Eden is given as somewhere in Northern Iraq/Syria, not Israel.

 

That is why I wrote somewhere in the Middle East.

And that is why I gave the information as an aside and not as a criticism!

[Chinahand]

No - you've all got it wrong.

 

We evolved in Norfolk with Eden being in the environs of Cromer.

 

Link

 

Keep on cherry picking your evidence, Spook, to fit in with your holy book.

 

And Evil Goblin what is it with you - why do you assume that Eden existed as a physical place rather than as a legendary/mythical place. You regularly get onto this sort of track - these are the legends of a bronze age people - accuracy is not a requirement of such things. Do you feel a need to explain where Nuwa repaired the pillar of heaven and molded mankind from dust, or do you just aspire to rationalize jewish legends?

[Evil Goblin]

My - you have got it in for me, China!

 

First of all, why do you assume that I assume that Eden existed as a physical place? We are talking of what the Bible says about Eden's location, not (yet, anyway - but see below) whether such a place existed or not.

 

Secondly, legends generally have a basis in some fact or belief and many legends can be traced accordingly. e.g. one explanation of Eden is in a folk memory handed down over thousands of years of a time when the area in question had a very different climate to that of today and accordingly supplied a plentiful supply of naturally growing food resources for a very small number of people. The changes subsequently required an explanation and the Biblical story (a story not unique to Jewish traditions) was developed to explain things.

 

It would be helpful if you used the brain you evidently have to good purpose instead of to snipe at those who have, for some reason, offended your sense of self-esteem.

[Chinahand]

Oh come on EG - you've got broad enough shoulders and more than enough ability to not be wounded by my sniping! If I've offended let me apologize, I've simply noticed you've done this a few times whether over the Exodus and now Eden, I find it interesting - it seems out of character, dare I say you seem to have an attachment to these legends having some basis in reality. Why should they - any more than Hindu or Chinese myths, or stories about Tokeloshe.

 

I'm not a Freudian, but do think there are deep resonances to ancient legends, but that can have almost nothing to do with their physical reality.

 

I don't think Atlantis existed, or not as Plato described it, or Penlai island, and think that a legend about a paradise where we were created doesn't need to have any basis in reality. It's just a more sophisticated version of the grass is greener - off over in that direction was paradise. The psychology of that myth makes perfect sense to me - but for people to want to then draw on a map and say this is where this myth was talking about seems to me to be missing the point entirely.

[Evil Goblin]

Yes. I've got fairly broad shoulders and tend not to be offended by what others say - so, apologies not needed, although obliged for your sentiment.

 

Yes, I do have an attachment to legends, myths, etc. - not just biblical ones - having some sort of basis in reality. although that reality then gets distorted by invention as some sort of explanation of things is developed in terms of belief systems. I think this is a sensible way to try to understand how these stories get developed rather than thinking that they simply spring out of thin air. Thus, whilst you may well be correct in asserting that legends of a creation do not necessarily need to have a base in some reality or other, I would contend that by and large they do have such a basis (albeit a basis which can be heavily obscured). In these terms, locating an Eden in Northern Iraq/Syria is not unreasonable (although assuming that such an Eden has all the characteristics per the legends may be going too far).

 

Ref Atlantis, the favourite origin for this story is (as you probably know) the Santorini civilisation and its' disappearance in the volcanic eruption there.

[Evil Goblin]

To annoy Spook a bit more, how about the latest theory on the Great Flood? In this, "Noah" and co lived in the Black Sea basin and the Flood occured about 6,000 BC when the Mediterranean burst through the Bosporus and inundated the Basin, submerging the prosperous communities which lived by the waterside there. Makes the tale of the Ark coming to rest on Mt Ararat a bit ropey! Oh, and no rain needed.

[Chinahand]

Rationalize

Spook!

 

[spook]

To annoy Spook a bit more, how about the latest theory on the Great Flood? In this, "Noah" and co lived in the Black Sea basin and the Flood occured about 6,000 BC when the Mediterranean burst through the Bosporus and inundated the Basin, submerging the prosperous communities which lived by the waterside there. Makes the tale of the Ark coming to rest on Mt Ararat a bit ropey! Oh, and no rain needed.

Why should it annoy me? If anything the theory, and it is only a theory, would support a population living some way from the break facing increasing rain as a result of condensation of water vapour released by such a break and the resultant spray that added to the deluge of flood water coming through the break.

 

The building of The Ark is also explainable by Noah being aware of the weakening of the land and The Lord revealing to Noah what would happen while the remainder ignored the warning and paid the price.

[Mr. Sausages]

Did the T Rex go in two by two?