OF THE
TIMES
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
These parasites do like their grand-standing. This sounds very much like the rhetoric obomber Barry was spouting during his tenure. He spent a...
These are the wet dreams of psychos and the out-of-touch. None of these nato armies, apart from the US, can field more than ten thousand trained...
Doorstep? Do they mean the Hearthstone? The most important stone of the building by which one is granted entry and an ancient symbol. "Doorstep"...
The real stone of destiny is held by the knights Templar.
es mas sospechoso que un gitano haciendo footing (Chiquito de la Calzada).
To submit an article for publication, see our Submission Guidelines
Reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the volunteers, editors, and directors of SOTT.net or the Quantum Future Group.
Some icons on this site were created by: Afterglow, Aha-Soft, AntialiasFactory, artdesigner.lv, Artura, DailyOverview, Everaldo, GraphicsFuel, IconFactory, Iconka, IconShock, Icons-Land, i-love-icons, KDE-look.org, Klukeart, mugenb16, Map Icons Collection, PetshopBoxStudio, VisualPharm, wbeiruti, WebIconset
Powered by PikaJS 🐁 and In·Site
Original content © 2002-2024 by Sott.net/Signs of the Times. See: FAIR USE NOTICE
Reader Comments
[Link]
BK
—is a false assumption. Because the text must have existed prior to any external reference to it. Also, if followed through logically, the external testimony itself can then not be dated earlier than a further external testimony to that. In which case, using this assumption, the entire chain of texts and testimonies can not be dated earlier than the present.
But that's just logic and does not necessarily invidate the hypothesis.
1. A text's early existence does not depend on an arbitrarily small number of patriarchal names or arbitrarily chosen mythemes being cited verbatim in a later one. An ancient text can perish (Genesis never did) and never be cited whole or in part in any other document, but the lack of later citation is not proof that the ancient text never existed earlier. This is a form of the "absence of evidence" fallacy. ((EDIT - Thanks for making the same objection, Sim, while I was writing mine))
2. The cited "proof" ignores clear allusions to portions of Genesis, other than the patriarchal names, in other likewise ancient biblical texts, e.g. allusions to Genesis 1-3 in Leviticus 11, 16 & 26 [Link] ; burning the fat in Ex. 29:13 & Lev. 4 passim is absolutely an allusion to Genesis 4:4; Ex.20:8-11 references both work in the six days of creation and rest on Shabbat as per Genesis 1:1-2:2-3; the almost verbatim citation in Psalm 136:7-9, which is pre-exilic, some even argue of Mosaic authorship, of Genesis 1:16 etc. I could go on and on and on about allusions and citations of passages and/or themes of Genesis appearing in later OT writings, not even touching the NT, but the artificially constrained methodology utilised in Neil Godfrey's rubbish cited above by Shangri only reveals how superficial the attempt is to prove that next to nothing in Genesis appears later; the opposite is the truth. Plenty in Genesis, thematic allusions and verbatim material, appears later if one doesn't employ a ridiculously constrained methodology of comparison. It just so happens that Godfrey inadvertently latches onto a few items that the ancient Hebrews didn't need to cite again and again, probably because it was assumed and accepted tradition .
3. The oral traditions (esp. Jerusalem Talmud & Mishnahs) of the Hebrews which very much affirm the antiquity of every part of Genesis as being an integral part of their ancient history. Completely ignoring Hebrew oral tradition is a gross error, even if what is recorded in it should be treated with a fair deal of reasonable skepticism.
4. To suggest or imply, as many do, that other cultures (e.g. Plato in the Timaeus ) can reliably pass down written traditions but the Hebrews can't, they can only steal other work, is rank methodological hypocrisy. Who's to say that Plato didn't steal his ideas from the Hebrews? Or that both stole them from "Lost Earlier Culture X" close to both of them, e.g. the Phoenicians? Scholarship needs to let go of their rank "ultimate source" obsession and endless genetic fallacies. Maybe both Plato and the Hebrews came up with their own similar material independently , like still happens today with PhD theses.
That'll do me. I've got better things to do with my time than debate with fools.
Here's an example. Let's say the earliest external reference to a text is the year 1525. The assumption is that you cannot claim with any degree of certainty that the text in question was written in the year 500, for the simple reason that there is no external evidence for that. It may in fact be the case that it WAS written in 500, but there's no reasonable way of arguing it, because it could also be 400, or 600, or 1400.
Luckily, that is not the ONLY evidence to take into account when dating a text. Scholars call it terminus ad quem and terminus a quo, which are essentially the earliest and latest dates possible. An external reference is the latest possible date a text was written. E.g., just prior to 1525 in the hypothetical example above. But if the text can be shown to have used a text written in 1450 (and doesn't show evidence of having used any texts before then), then that gives a range of 1450 to 1525 for the composition of the text.
I've asked after the last interview, why couldn't the relationship between the Bible and Plato be from a common source, like Egypt. Solon visited there. Moses got his start there. Joseph lived there, Solomon had a historical Egyptian wife as demonstrated by an Egpytian tomb in Israel. The "breath of life" would be represented symbolically by one of the Egyptian gods holding the ankh to the nose of the Pharaoh. Then Akhenaten reduced the multiple Egyptian gods to the Aten, or sun.
it seeks to validate because it requires authenticity to establish a position in which to base a case, but doubt remains, so it stuck on an irritating pause, with countless others.
am confused , is their influence on thought, doubted ?
.....then it not all bad, even if truth is no further than a vatican vault, each nudge pushes us closer to the original story maker - but no matter, as can always find the creator, withiin ourselves
BK
I reckon I’ll listen and get more info. BK
Is this a video for philosopher graduates only? The terminology presumes requisite understanding, and I’m not sure I have it.
BK
*
Ouspensky: In Search of the Miraculous [Link]
I’ve read Homer and Plato, but decades ago. Plato had the good fortune of a Socrates who taught questioning and critical thinking, of being born to a noble family, and of pre-Socratic philosophers like Pythagorus. It is useful to place his teaching in the contextual history of his time. Plato and Socrates were born into the high period of Athenian dominance and culture. This century began with the defeat of the Persian invasions of Darius I and Xerxes. Pericles had the Parthenon built as a monument paid for by many city-states and introduced Democracy. Pericles ruled from 460-429 BCE. Socrates is said to have been born in 469 BCE. The Pelopponesian war between Sparta and Athens began in 430 BCE, and Pericles dies in a disease outbreak at Attica. One suggested cause was the Athens Megarian economic decrees that placed sanctions on the Megarian people. Sparta wins and installs the 30 tyrants to govern Athens.
Plato’s works were a reflection of these times, of him trying to create a world view. They were also a reflection of the view of man at that time as a tripartite being: reason(rulers), spirit(fighters like Spartans), and appetite(the masses). He created the Academy to educate the young noble men of Athens because he understood the importance of education. His Republic, recognizing the wars of his time, and the imperialism of tyrants, tried to create a society based on 3 classes of individuals for different functions, based on the understanding of man’s tripartite nature, would lead to harmony. (tangential note: I scanned through the 3 Divergent movies and the scifi society is built on 5 classes, and this leads to “peace”, but there are “divergent” individuals who must be eliminated, and the society turns out to be an experiment of a psychopath(no concern for human life) funded by the remainder of civilization after catastrophic war.)
Yes, the Republic can be seen as authoritarian. Like Machiavelli, it is based on observation of the times with wars and tyrants. It is based on the view of man at the time. Where are women? Where are noble emotional values and perceptions, like compassion and beauty? What is reason without values and emotional principles; there is a questionable moral compass?
I lived in Seattle for a few months after I left graduate school, before my computer career began. I think it was 1979. I applied for a job with a reagent company, selling radioactive reagents for research, but the company froze hiring so I had to go back to California.
- Utt.311: I will not be blind if you put me in darkness, I will not be deaf even though I do not hear your voice; take me with you, with you...
From Psalms 23:4 - Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.,
Instruction of Amenemhet III by Breasted -747.
The beginning of the teaching which he composed before his children. I speak great things, I cause you to hear, I cause you to know the eternal manner, the true manner of life--the passing of life in peace…
From Luke 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
From cosmopolitan Alexandria to chaotic Cairo to 'snooty' Luxor/ western desert and down to the chilled nubian Aswan and the wonder of Ramesses IIs' Abu Simbel.
Egypt will always hold a special place in my heart and a place that fills me with wonder even to this day.
If Zahi Hawass is still involved with Egyptian archaeology then all is lost.
The show that you write about will give you the new insights.. or maybe not!
There are many examples that defy explanations and one that always had me question.. the inset hieroglyphics ( Medinat Habu!?) so perfectly cut as to defy explanation using traditional tools of 'the day'!
As to Kufu.. only one cartouche was found.
There are the quarries where the 30m+ obelisks still lie, broken.. so it seems the use of muscle power/rolling logs? at some stage.
[Link]
If you don't resonate to his narrative that is fine just don't make a song and dance of it and move on.
Much appreciation to all your discourse.
May the eternal soul in me acknowledge the eternal soul in you. Namaste
I will attempt to type it out correctly this time.
[Link]
Hope this works, unless auto spell check flips the X to C again.
Xheers
🥴