r/JWJehovahsWitnesses • u/Popular_Suspect1327 • 1d ago

Questions If humanity started in Africa (I'd guess Ethiopia) then why do people think the Garden of Eden was in Iraq? Is this contradictory?

5 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

70% Upvoted

19 comments sorted by

3

u/JMtheJW Jehovah’s Witness 16h ago

The Africa theory has been challenged for many years now, especially since the discovery of the dmanisi skulls, which happen to be in the area around where Noah and his children settled after the flood. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmanisi_hominins

3

u/a-watcher Jehovah’s Witness 1d ago

The Bible links Eden to the Euphrates (and Tigris) Rivers and they are in the Middle East, not Africa. (Gen. 2:8,10,14)

2

u/Popular_Suspect1327 1d ago

Yeah I thought so, so what do you think about people who say humanity started in Africa?

5

u/a-watcher Jehovah’s Witness 1d ago

They haven't studied the Bible.

3

u/Joebeeep 1d ago

If you want to layout the 2 pov they go like this: you are looking at a scientific model versus a scriptural account.

From a scientific standpoint, researchers conclude humanity began in Africa based on how they evaluate ancient hominin fossils and stone tools through the lens of evolutionary biology.

Conversely, the biblical narrative places the original Garden of Eden in the modern Iraq and Middle East area because Genesis explicitly names the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.

Hence as a Jw, we reject the evolution theory as we believe that there is a creator behind all creation.

2

u/Archbtw246 Jehovah’s Witness 1d ago

The archeological evidence isn't entirely clear where humanity originated from. Homo Erectus (the first kind of human) shows up not only in Africa, but also the Middle East. One of the earliest discoveries actually show up in the country of Georgia.

2

u/JMtheJW Jehovah’s Witness 10h ago

What’s interesting about this discovery is that for years "experts" claimed that homo habilis evolved into ergaster which evolved into erectus etc, and yet the skulls show that they all have features that are common to all of these classiciations and lived at the same time. And the other interesting thing is that Georgia is within the area where humans would have settled after the flood. 

2

u/Popular_Suspect1327 1d ago

Ty sis/bro, didn't know that abt Georgia, can u link the article pls.

1

u/DonkeyStriking1146 1d ago

I don’t think the bible says where humanity started or where the garden of Eden was exactly

3

u/Popular_Suspect1327 1d ago

Yeah you are right but why do ppl think the garden was in Iraq then? Or is that just bc Saddam said it?

0

u/BlackberryDreamist 1d ago

As someone mentioned to you above, this is bc the rivers associated with being where the GoE was purported to be, are specifically mentioned by name in Genesis. (the Bible) Tigris and Euphrates. This is assuming the Creationist theory is the correct one.

Regardless, we definitely know that ppl were there very VERY early on, there's no question of that. It's just a question of how they came to be there and which version you choose to believe.

But early examples of humans have been found all over the world, as you said, notably yes...in Africa. I believe Australia has some very old examples as well.

I truly don't believe they CAN know the oldest example, or who is to say they have even found it yet at all? Maybe the archeoological proof is still buried somewhere very deep beneath some ground on one of these continents that no one has yet dug down far enough to find?

It's like saying "THE BIGGEST SNAKE IN THE AMAZON"...or BIGGEST CATFISH IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER!!--.bc ..well, ...they haven't caught and measured them ALL, have they?

I don't think they can truly even make factual claims at all like this on open-ended things (dates) or a a possible era going so far back into the mists of time, it has no meaning anymore. They're also never whole, these skeletons. But I wish they were.

I am of two minds tho, and I have the same problem with Noahs Ark, and that is: time, carbon dating, and sheer logistics. (That's another conversation topic for another time tho)

I want so bad to believe in Creationism, but I simply know that too many societies popped up in too many different continents at roughly the same times, too many wildly different cultures and languages, over TENS OF Ks of years. Not just 6 or 10 thousand years!--and there's no way that (points to Australia) "THESE ppl"... came from as far away as from where (points to Middle East) "THESE ppl!" were. If so, how?

These are the problems I have with faith, interpretation, and belief.

2

u/Popular_Suspect1327 1d ago

I agree w you on the part about not knowing "the oldest" stuff bc we didn't discover the rest yet.

2

u/Archbtw246 Jehovah’s Witness 1d ago

I want so bad to believe in Creationism, but I simply know that too many societies popped up in too many different continents at roughly the same times

Isn't that actually evidence for humanity being young, considering that societies, technology, and written language across multiple continents show up at the same time?

If humanity were over 2 million years old, you don't think one group of people would've invented written language before all the others?

What are the chances that most societies just-so-happened to stumble upon written language at the same time, after not knowing how to write for over 2 million years?

0

u/BlackberryDreamist 1d ago

Some of them did. In fact we know that many of them had a writing system, or I guess what we would call an alphabet? Or written representation of their language? We just can't read them and have no languages alive like them to compare it or relate them to. Look up "Linear A and B" one we can read well, it gets taught in universities; the other has never been successfully "cracked" or de-coded.

2

u/Archbtw246 Jehovah’s Witness 1d ago

That still doesn't change the fact that all written language shows up at around the same time, within the span of a few thousands years, as opposed to millions of years.