Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
In fairness, the Pyramids were built significantly longer ago than that.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
In fairness, the Pyramids were built significantly longer ago than that.
In fairness, the Pyramids were built significantly longer ago than that.
So - did he ever produce this amazing evidence?
So the poor that built the pyramids didn't wear them I assume.
The evidence is cited over and over and more has been found since this thread was begun.
Even then one is doing it.I don't play word games. Please proceed without me.
I agree with one here and rated one's post as "winner".Yes, he is using semantics.
If there were no belief, then why would any funerary text appeal to the gods, like Ra, Shu, Nut, Anubis, Osiris, Isis, Horus, etc.
Just because they don’t used the word “belief”, doesn’t mean they didn’t believe in anything.
It would be pretty stupid of anyone who read verses, utterances or prayers to their gods, and say there are “no ancient belief”.
It just simply false claim in which cladking have been caught doing, playing word games.
In Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, not once they used the word “belief”, but they do pray to their gods and make sacrifices, and sometimes the gods would directly interact with them, but not once did the author explicitly use the word belief.
Does it really matter if “belief” is used or not?
Why is one so angry with Gnostic if one's argument is strong, please?I use evidence and logic to show it's not a funerary text and you IGNORE THE EVIDENCE AND LOGIC and then repeat your vacuous claims as though they now are real.
If it's a "funerary text" then why are most of the words in the Pyramid Texts related to life and love rather than death?
Now you'll ignore this and repeat your beliefs and/ or your belief and trust in Look and See Science. Or you'll repeat the nonsense that I believe in a conspiracy you can't even define or name.
You don't even realize you're doing it do you?
Everything is perfectly obvious to you since all you need to do is look and see.
gnostic said: ↑
If there were no belief, then why would any funerary text appeal to the gods, like Ra, Shu, Nut, Anubis, Osiris, Isis, Horus, etc.
Why is one so angry with Gnostic if one's argument is strong, please?
"Revolutionary ideas" are generally NOT propped up by demonstrably false assertions and an utter ignorance of the very things that these 'revolutionary ideas' are supposed to supplant, eh Dr."broccas area"?Revolutionary ideas are rarely or never accepted by groups or collections of people.
"Revolutionary ideas" are generally NOT propped up by demonstrably false assertions and an utter ignorance of the very things that these 'revolutionary ideas' are supposed to supplant, eh Dr."broccas area"?
I don’t invent words, and I certainly didn’t provide new definitions to words.Gnostic invents new definitions of words and then refuses to use a definition that I provide. This is highly frustrating.
I don’t invent words, and I certainly didn’t provide new definitions to words.
I leave that ego and vanity to you.
I should think this out better before posting but I've been reading a little bit more about the "2000 BC" dark ages and wanted to get my thoughts down.
It looks like the event (official change to modern language) we remember only as the tale of the "tower of babel" might have actually occurred ~2090 BC. It was a "world wide" dark ages that modern scientists believe was caused by drought but I believe was the direct result of the loss of ancient science that had always operated civilization. It looks much different to us because we aren't aware that a scientific language can exist much less that it did and was used by all Homo Sapiens until it began becoming too complex ~3500 BC. Early modern "language" was just a free for all with no rules and only a hodgepodge of words that were the same as those in Ancient Language except took their meaning from context. It would sound like a modern child saying "go car grammas" and needing to deduce that he wants to travel to his grandmother's. Speakers of this pidgin language had to formulate grammar so they could converse with one another and, of course, most were none too bright anyway. It took about 300 years to get a language sufficiently comprehensible that it warranted the invention of writing which was used solely to prevent drift of meaning as pidgin (modern) language was relayed orally. Ancient Language didn't need to be written so writing was never invented for it. Much of it was written down after 3200 BC but it was incomprehensible to modern language speakers and it can not be translated. It will never be really translated because any translation of even simple sentences require a flow chart. It is easily interpreted or explained though we don't know how complex their science became and the most advanced writing might not be so easily interpreted. Remember we have only a single thing that survives and it is just silly little funerary rituals.
Few accounts of the collapse of ancient civilization exist but those which do clearly say that famine was the result and population decrease through collapse, starvation, disease, and infertility was extreme. I find it curious that even before the collapse that there is an apparent decentralization of power (especially in Egypt). We attribute this to a change in religion but it seems as though large scale failure of the population to acquire Ancient Language would have had the exact same effect. It was becoming increasingly difficult to acquaint the population with the will of a far flung capital. It would be difficult to show that the latest edict was in the best interests not only of the capital and state but also of the local population. Decentralization was a very natural consequence even before the utter failure to operate the state scientifically and to communicate efficiently. Knowledge > Creation > Understanding required an entirely new path for modern language speakers. There was no science of any sort whatsoever for them. It is hardly surprising that the collapse of the "tower of babel" ushered in a dark ages.
Is it a guess or there is more to it, please?When Ancient Language lost its status as the official state language there were still thousands of speakers. Most had probably already
begun concentrating their efforts on science and metaphysics to the exclusion of being judges, official, scientists, prophets, and leaders for the state.
They had had centuries to see this change coming and they did everything they could to prepare for it. These people were known as "Nephilim" after
the change in language and their science apparently survived at least until about 1400 BC. There were numerous reasons they had to die out beyond
their wealth and knowledge. The language continued to become more complex and the knowledge contained in it could not be taught to modern lan-
guage speakers. Inventions could be shared but there was little benefit to the Nephilim to do so, and more importantly, ancient science was poor at
creating invention. More accurately ancient science in practice was much more an "applied science" than a body of knowledge, instrumentation, and
widespread application. It was effective for overcoming specific problems or establishment of efficient processes but it was weak for invention of tools
with far reaching application and this is especially true when the tools are being used by modern language speakers who lacked any form of scientific
understanding.
To a large extent the real power and utility of Ancient Language was closely correlated to the number of individual who used it. As users were greatly
reduced in number after Babel and isolated in few enclaves their days simply became numbered. There was no means to convert their knowledge or
science to a transmittable media and their numbers had to decline further as the language became more complex. I imagine that by the end children
were ten or twelve years old before they could even speak properly so even education was impacted to some extent.
Yet every single time I point out that;
...
"We operate on belief and they operated on knowledge. We see "Gods" like Ra, Shu, Nut, Anubis, Osiris, Isis, and Horus but these were mere words that represented ancient theory and defined the subject of sentences. Specifically they were "sun", "sky", "architect", "water source", "counterweight", and "stone/ overseer"."
...
...is metaphysical and that a language can exist that is the basis of science you want to argue about the meaning of "basis of science" and you call me a believer in conspiracies despite the fact that I don't believe it's even possible for some cabal to withhold theory or fact.
You don't want to discuss the literal meaning of what the pyramid builders literally said like, "osiris tows the earth by means of balance" or "tefnut makes the earth high under the sky by means of her arms". I have nothing but facts and logic that show the pyramids were built with linear funiculars and you want to play word games and semantics.
Is it a guess or there is more to it, please?
Is it a guess or there is more to it, please?
You are forgetting that the Pyramid Texts have some similarities with the 1st Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom Coffin Texts. And these same names you have brought up (eg Atum, Ra, Shu, Nut, Osiris, Isis, Horus, Anubis, etc), not only appeared in the Middle Kingdom, but in dynasties of the New Kingdom, 3rd Intermediate Period and Late Period, eg Book(s) of the Dead.
If what you were saying were true about the Pyramid Texts, then these same names wouldn’t appear together in similar rituals and sayings of later funerary texts (eg Coffin Texts, Book of the Dead).
Why are the Pyramid Texts were written in similar fashions that of the Coffin Texts and Book of the Dead?
Not only these names appeared in hieroglyphs, but in artworks that are associated with funerary customs.