Slashdot Mirror
In The Beginning & The Keys of Egypt
Hieroglyphs The Keys Of Egypt was written by husband-and-wife archaeological team Lesley and Roy Adkins. It is subtitled "The Race to Crack the Hieroglyph Code," and starts with a short chapter that introduces the eventual winner of that race, the Frenchman Jean-Francois Champollion, and mentions his most serious rival, the Englishman Thomas Young.
The book goes on to examine Napoleon's expedition to Egypt which both brought the Rosetta Stone to light and started a period of French and European fascination with ancient Egypt. These were the two catalysts for the riddle's eventual solution.
This is a well-written book that looks at the struggle and race for translation and the political and academic machinations (often both combined) that surrounded Champollion. It is essentially a biography of Champollion, who grew up and worked amid the turmoil of the Napoleonic era. The story is a compelling one and the authors have done well to make it at times fascinating.
As a genre I find that 'scientific biographies' tend to be a little overblown and flowery, the writing not quite precise -- and Keys suffers from these shortcomings. I also felt that while the book is subtitled "The Race to Crack the Hieroglyph Code" it really only focuses on Champollion, while he is the eventual winner a little more effort in examining the others involved in the effort would have improved the book.
The Bible It can be argued that the King James Bible has had as large an effect on our language today as the work of Shakespeare. 'In The Beginning' has at its core the story of biblical translation, a topic you may think anything but fascinating. McGrath has done a good job in making this a compelling book.He starts, as one may expect, with the story of Gutenberg and his first printed bibles. Before arriving at the King James he covers Martin Luther, the rise of Protestantism in Europe, Henry the Eighth, more than one hanging, and several other bible translations and translators. Along the way he manages to dispel a few myths I had held about biblical translation and the King James in particular. I always thought that it was the King James version that introduced the idea of the main body in roman type and words inserted to clarify meaning in italics, but it was actually an earlier English translation known as the Geneva Bible that first implemented this idea. After explaining the technology, theology, politics and linguistics nuances that led King James to permit (but not fund) a new translation, McGrath tells us how the translation was accomplished organizationally before examining some of the nuances of the translation itself. Some of the language in the King James was archaic even when it was published; translators had been instructed to lift from previous translations all the way back to the partial translation of William Tynsdale published 90 years earlier, and this at a time when the English language was going through the huge changes of the Elizabethan era. McGrath examines this aspect, pointing out such things as changes in verb endings and personal pronouns.
I found the book patchy. McGrath does a much better job covering the story up until the translation. It is harder to get a feel for how the translation was accomplished and how the various teams worked, and when he comes to examine some of the nuances of the translation, the text makes much harder going. If this had not been a part of the topic that interested me a great deal, I may have lost interest.
ConclusionBoth books may have their flaws but both are well worth the read. It is important to realise the history of science and language that have brought us to our current place and both these volumes do a good job of illuminating the past efforts of men who worked under entirely different pressures than we find today.
You can purchase both In The Beginning and The Keys of Egypt from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
It's okay Timothy, the True Church understands the Bible can not be interpreted directly as the immutable Word of God, so if the heretical snake handlers come after you, you can seek refuge in Rome.
A. Rightmann
Really, I've read better reviews on amazon.com. It reads like something a 5th grader turned in. There's nothing there to persuade or dissuade me from reading either book. What a waste of a front page slot.
If you're intersted in decypherments you should look at John Chadwick's Decipherment of Linear B and more recent literature on that topic, a stunning intellectual feat done without the benefit of any Rosetta Stone.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
A shame. The King James Bible was almost certainly based on his translation. I've seen estimates that as much as 80% of the King James Bible was actually his work.
Like so many great reformers, he was put to death. His last known letter before he died is especially tragic to read.
The Tyndale Society
Has anyone in the last couple of decades attempted a translation from the oldest possible sources for the Bible's contents?
While I'm sure it would piss off a few here and there (see what happened with Jewish scholars when those scrolls were translated a while back) it would be interesting to compare a direct translation based on modern understanding to the more popular current versions that have passed through multiple interpretations through multiple cultural lenses.
Nowhere in the review does it say the Bible has its flaws. The flaws are in the book 'In The Beginning' which he is reviewing. . .
In university, I was an Enlgish major with a habit of studying other languages - specifically, French, Russian and Old Icelandic. Studying human languages, you quickly realize that there are many ways to express the same abstractions - a realization that has helped me as a programmer.
Yeah, the review could have been better. I would have like to known more about some of the linguistic problems sovled on both books.
Not that I'm an atheist or anything, but I've been developing a feeling off late, that religion was introduced in ancient times as a deterrent against perceived immoral/harmful behavior. In the absence of effective law-enforcement agencies, the best way to encourage people to act peacefully/etc was to lay down a set of rules of "acceptable behaviour" and make it known that breach of the rules would result in punishment in the form of hell or alternately reward in the form of heaven.
I think the world has developed enough now, that we no longer need religion as a deterrent. It serves more as a tool for discrimination/fanaticism, rather than what it was intended for.
Not sure if there are other people who've thought along these lines...who knows, I may be the ONE :)
*wears Matrix goggles and gets back to work*
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
I'm no expert on this but that seems like a huge understatement -- Shakespeare invented a few words and turned an enormous number of common phrases, but the King James translation surely had an even larger impact on English, no?
If only for being responsible for the inversion of "thee/thou/thy" from familiar to formal speech.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Keirkegaard, Satre and Camus for IP infringement, at least for a start.
Ok, I don't know if I'm feeding the trolls here, it's mostly the misquoted sig that got me.
It's "Would you like to see Britannia rule again, my friend? All you have to do is follow the worms." Mr fucking Phloydphreak.
As for the other portion of this spiteful comment, it's news for nerds, and the nerds' interests are not limited to iPods, linux running on vibrators and mozilla 1.4.1 beta releases. So, if you no like, you no read. Simple!
I told pharaoh to use Pretty Good Pharaoh Privacy on those damn cartouches. France was just a mote in Isis's eye at the time, but even then I knew they would turn out to be nothing but troublemakers.
One thing to note are the political motivations behind the translation of the King James Bible. This translation was mandated to be used in all Church of England services, IIRC. It was instrumental in helping King James wrest control of England from the Catholic church to the Church of England (controlled by the monarch, i.e. James himself). This gave the British monarchy significantly more power in their own country, as well as preventing such a large portion of the funds from being diverted to the Vatican.
As a spiritual and literary work, the King James Bible has had an immense impact on western culture. It has also had a large impact on Great Britain, and, in turn, its many former colonies. Mute your sound beforehand, but there are some interesting articles about King James and the period here.
www.clarke.ca
I found the following book to be very interesting as it describs many of the people involved in the King James Version of the Bible in detail.
_God's Secretaries : The Making of the King James Bible_
by Adam Nicolson
Unfortunately I haven't read the book the poster discusses so I cannot make a comparison.
Well, I personally think its unfair to start the history of the bible at the time of the printing press. A Grand Funk Electric song captures this best - "You've got the English translation of the Roman translation of the Greek translation of the pure Babylonian". Indeed, the King James translation of the Bible is one of many English translations of the Bible. Starting one's Bible history from ca. 1450 (when the Bible first began being pressed) simply does not seem fair to me.
The first translations were made ca. 200 BC, and was the "Septuagint" - from Hebrew to Greek translation (the Old Testament). It was not until ca. 400 AD that the Hebrew version of the Old Testament was translated into Latin; the New Testament was translated from Greek to Latin -- the Old Testament was re-translated. The manuscripts on which these translations were based are no longer present in the whole.
In my opinion, there is a rich history to be told in the differences between translations of the Bible from original to later versions. Hell, one could back into European translations of the Bible and teach an entire story based upon the discrepancies of copies of the hand-written versions.
There's a rich history to the translation of the Bible. Google for it.
www.sitetronics.com/wordpress
"...previous translations all the way back to the partial translation of William Tynsdale published 90 years earlier..."
but i consider that a mention;-)
Where would Kuro5hin get the $50 bucks to buy out VA's stock?
While these books may seem well researched and informative, it is important to note their main financial contributer while doing their research was the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints(Mormons). In fact, the publishers of these two books was founded in New York, but moved it's headquarters to Salt Lake City, Utah, and is majority owned by the Mormons.
... Egyptian heiroglyphics. And while his translation has been completely debunked, millions of Mormons continue to believe. And the Mormon church wants nothing more than to trick more people. So they Have hired Lesley and Roy Adkins to slowly add credibility to their story of "enlightenment from God through their prophet".
Why does all that matter? Conflict of interest. Remember, the mormons are the ones that claim their founder, Joseph Smith, translated a previously "hidden" "message from God" into english from
This is one of the wealthiest institutions in the world, and they are trying to legitimize their claims. In fact, Mormons have already invaded much of the U.S. political system and once in power, they will censor all other belief systems and, using their overseas propoganda army they will attempt to take over the world.
If you buy into these books, you are buying in to the Mormon conspiracy.
This public service announcement brought to you by ICBLF
If you listen to it, you hear "Would you like to see Britannia (us) rule again, my friend?" The "us" is sang by the backup vocals.
Oh. And you're being spiteful as well.
Insert offensive troll-style sig here. Please mod or respond appropriately.
Did we assign moderator status to a bunch of 3rd graders? If the parent poster has had an epiphany due to Matrix over the fact that there are strong similarities in Bible mandated behaviour and moral/ethical/civic behaviour, then I guess they finally stopped reading their comic books long enough to actually think about the real world for a second. Not to mention his conclusion (no longer need religion as a deterent) is about as ignorant as you get.
On a related note, people interested in these books may be interested in this story (via metafilter) about how the Qu'ran as it's known now may be a mistranslation of the original.
There's also a rich history to the development of the Egyptian writing style of hieroglyphics throughout the entirety of the Egyptian era. Indeed, the Rosetta Stone, the key to the translation of the hieroglyphics was written using no less than three different scripts of hieroglyphics. More information about the Rosetta Stone is available here.
www.sitetronics.com/wordpress
To look at this from a point of secular evolution, exherting an influence over the masses was only one particular motivation; that it would maintain a power for few over that of the many. Even the un- or ill- educated wouldn't have thrown straight in with that lot, as it would be a voluntary loss of freedom - also, those in power would have little need to control the perceived morality of others unless it had a direct hold on the ability to control itself.
The motivation originally was the other way round - to liberate the downtrodden with thoughts of an eventual better, even if not realized in this life. How else could one prevent from despairing in the worst of conditions (which were pretty bad way back when all survival was short and toilsom) than not to accept them as a final end? To endow the afterlife with possibility was to achieve sustaining hope.
Eventually, yes, this hope began to be exploited through craftiness to maintain comforts by plying on the beliefs of others (though of course there were some genuine believers in it all). This is speaking to the rise of Western religions.
That's looking at it secularly - I don't perceive religion myself to be any kind of self administered mental opiate for my placation, but how I genuinely feel the cosmos to be organized for the sake of its own existence.
Any spoon would be too big.
KJV is not even a little 'responsible for the inversion of "thee/thou/thy."' It was using these in the familiar sense, which was the sense used in the greek original of the NT, and thus was REINFORCING the original connotation of these words rather than inverting it...
m l
o st -recent/msg10071.html
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/m971211c.ht
http://www.linguistlist.org/~ask-ling/archive-m
http://www.bartleby.com/61/66/Y0026600.html
http://www.kencollins.com/why-05.htm
... as long as the submitter doesn't give away the endings.
http://www.nazarene.net/products.htm
This page has other interesting stuff at well.
Btw, in this bible the new Testament is translated from Aramaic and not from Greek(as in most other bibles)!
Yes, of course it was! It surprises me that so few people seem to realize this.
But you can't use the fact that it might make sense to use it this way as an argument for the FACT that that was it's intended purpose. That's like saying that super glue, because it is effective at bonding things together, was created to repair china. While it may be true that it is good for that, it is wrong (originally created to help close wounds in triage on the battle field). So just because your explanation fits, doesn't make it the correct explanation. (god I hope none of you guys are detectives).
Moderate me into oblivion
Your wish is my command.
This public service announcement brought to you by ICBLF
Pfft...everybody knows the bible came down from heaven in Renaissance era English way back in the day. Imagine the trouble Moses had trying to explain the Ten Commandments without knowing what language they were in! Fortunately, God guided our language in such a way that we are today able to read it.
The idea that the words of the bible changed to English from some heathen language is an evil LIE and work of the Devil! Everybody knows that Jesus was and his disciples were English speaking white men! Haven't you seen the movie! and TBN! They couldn't possibly be wrong!
You also have to look at history to gain understanding and context of why certain church events are placed where they were. Christmas was moved to the winter in order to combat a popular winter occult festival. Not only that, but remember that during the early formation of the Christian church, Rome was in the heydey of its power. The Jewish/Christian problems with self-image and body issues are a direct result of trying to turn away from "matters of the flesh" which Rome so famously embodied. But remember that religion has always been used as a dividing force: Christians in Venice rounded up Jews and placed them into a ghetto long before Hitler did this, and for many of the same reasons: fear of the other. I like to think that there is a divide: faith is from God/Deity/etc and good, while religion is a human construct that is more often than naught fsked up and twisted.
I don't think this lessens my christian belief - it just adds context and deepens the reasons.
Please email all complaints to root@127.0.0.1 and the issue will be dealt with in due time.
It can be argued that the King James Bible has had as large an effect on our language today as the work of Shakespeare.
I had an english lit prof who argues that the King James edition of the Bible, or at least portions of it, were written by Shakespeare (he also believes Shakespeare was more than one guy).
He cites simliar styles of prose, the fact that King James was Shakespeare's patron, and basically has a ton of research to back up his position.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
To ask a totally random and silly question, does Unicode support Egyptian hieroglyphics, or is it technically counted among the non-living languages not supported?
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
There's a theory that Shakespeare actually worked on the King James Bible. I never looked into it enough to decide if it was some nut trying to get attention or something with serious merrit.
Too many religious morons to mod down, so we just ignore them.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
I wouldn't take anything from jesus-is-lord.com seriously. That site is one of the most discriminatory, hateful sites I have seen. I find it even more offensive than the KKK or American Nazi Party sites. Furthermore, both their history and theology are screwed up. Think of it as religious FUD.
It's perhaps an old urban legend that William Shakespear (spelled here without the terminal 'e', both spellings seem to be around) was consulted on the poetry of the Psalms. Presented as evidence:
KJV Psalm 46Note that 4+6 = 10, the number of letters in Shakespear. Count to the 46th word from the beginning, you see "shake" and the 46th word from the end (excluding the "Selah", a musician notation, IIRC) you have "spear"...
I'd love to find out if the Bard really did have a hand in it... which one might hope this book would...
...just sliced your reply in two.
Sorry, but when faced with the two choices of:
(a) There is a god, and he caused the creation of religion
and
(b) There is no god, and religion is an institution that has its roots in superstition and social control
One has to make the most likely choice given the evidence at hand. Most logical, lucid people who discount that which cannot be proven find themselves coming to logical conclusions.
It amazes me how some people (not necessarily you) will suspend the very logic which they use in every other aspect of their life just for the chance to believe in something or someone that, for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist.
... if you ever got invited to one.
A man comes up on a priest banging his head against the wall -- clearly frustrated. The man asks him, "what's wrong?"
The man, who has been celibate all his life, replies, "We just retranslated the oldest manuscript available. The word is 'celebrate'!"
Have you ever noticed how all religions are essentially the same, and yet somehow their followers all argue with those of other religions about 'the one true faith', even though their beliefs are all virtually identical. Example 1, the cruisades, Christians killed thousands of Muslims, even though Islam teaches all of the same things (God, heaven, how to get into heaven, how not to go to hell etc,.) Example 2, the holocaust, Christians killed tens of thousands of Jews, even though the only substantial difference in the two religions is which half of the Bible they would rather read. Example 3, 9/11, Muslims indiscriminately kill people of all religions, even other Muslims, despite the fact that the belief systems of all of these religions are so nearly identical that they probably would have done just as much damage suing religious leaders for copyright infringement. This leads me to believe that all religion is self contradictory, and so should be ignored completely.
"SSHHHH! You're giving away all our secrets!
The next thing you'll be telling people is that America was founded as a secular nation, not a "Christian country"".
--the Religious Right
Always look on the briight side of life! (whistle, whistle)
The point being that of all possible documents you could hold a copy of in your own language, a modern translation of the Bible is about as close to the closest possible meaning in your language of the meaning in language 0 of document 0 as you could possibly have of any text of similar origin and antiquity.
And all that without invoking a single phrase of mumbo jumbo...in saecula saeculorum Amen, Amen
Still hoping for Gentle Treatment...
I earnestly believe that there is a fundamental unseen organization to the cosmos, administered by intelligence. That is, even independent of any perceived reward for activity upon this belief for myself, I feel that these things are. I feel this belief morally, logically, and spiritually.
My role within it is a matter of personal improvement, I find the guidelines of this perception to be helpful and indeed rewarding - but it is not a perception shaped by a need to control moral behavior or satisfy an otherwise unanswerable despair.
Perhaps I should have clarified in my original post, that, "I don't perecieve my participation in religion to be a self administered mental opiate for (my) placation..."
Any spoon would be too big.
One has to make the most likely choice given the evidence at hand. Most logical, lucid people who discount that which cannot be proven find themselves coming to logical conclusions.
So, on the basis of exactly *what* "evidence" (remember, you said "given the evidence at hand") have you concluded that "(b) There is no god..."?
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
Does the book mention anything about the Schwallers, Isha and Rubicz?
You can't post and moderate in the same discussion.
The problem with trying to analyze why religions were "made up" and what social purposes (deterrence, discrimination, thought control, etc.) they are used for is that it ignores the possibility that there actually is a God, and that which we call "religion" came to exist as a result of God's revelation of himself, not as a result of random guesses or evil conspiracies.
If that possibility is true, it just means that trying to analyze why one particular religion was "made up" would be pointless, but all the others are still fair game.
Yes, it's the NET Bible
Or did /. just get bought out by Kuro5hin?
One can hope..
Wouldn't the arguments be that much more facinating?
A question for you two biblical scholar types:
Can you post examples of where the text of a "corrupted" manuscript differs signifigantly from the text of an "uncorrupted" text?
It might be interesting to see the size of the head of the pin.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
While an English translation was probably aimed to get control over the people compared to the church, James did not establish a separate church without the pope as its head. This was done by Hnery VIII in 1534's since the pope wouldn't annul his marriage to Catherine. He set up the church of England, with himself as head, and he annulled his own marriage, no thanks to the pope.
James, grandson of Henry and Anne Boleyn, did reinforce the Church of England, however, and the English bible would have fit with this motive.
Here's a link on Church of England History.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
you're close, they were Latin speaking white blond-haired swedish looking guys who wore arab clothing. Just look at all the paintings.
Translation is really at the heart of software.
How do you
a) recognize the information in whatever you define as reality, and
b) express that information in another language?
c) maintain that expressed information over time?
The KJV is a great example of a porting attempt that is either a monument to its new language or a dog what won't hunt, depending upon whom you talk to.
The best comment on the effort was offered in advance by one of the source authors, Qoheleth:
"...vanity of vanities; all is vanity. What profit hath a man of all his labour which taketh under the sun?" (Eccl1:2,3)
IMHO, there is more bass in the KJV mix in these 'wisdom' portions, for all more modern translations are easier on the eye.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Amazon has both books MUCH cheaper!
In the Beginning ($3.50 cheaper!)
The Keys of Egypt ($2.50 cheaper!)
The problem with computer viruses is they don't select the unskilled users out of the population.
It should read:
The problem with computer viruses is they don't remove the unskilled users out of the world|online|general population.
That is much more clearer... don't you think?
"You may all go to hell and I will go to Texas"
Sen. Davy Crocket to US Congress, Nov. 1, 1835
"Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
"The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'
"`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
"`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.
"`Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing."
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
One interesting thing about the translation of the Bible into English was the transliteration of the word "baptizo". In Greek this work means to dip or immerse. This translation was done under the rule of the English King James (duh!) who was part of the Church of England (Anglican/Episcopal Church). The word baptizo was not translated directly into english, but was transliterated. The new word "baptize" was invented at that time. The reason for this transliteration was that royalty had to be part of the church, into which they were introduced by Anglican baptism, which involves springkling water onto the heads of infants. To literally translate baptize into immerse would imply that all the royal officals were not part of the church since they had not recieved a valid baptism
If geneticists could indeed create even a single-celled organism using completely artificial means using basic hydrogen-carbon groups and the resulting entitity does come alive, what would that mean? Could we take such advancement as ultimate proof that god is not necessary for life and likely does not exist?
How to dominate other /.ers
... Lather rinse, repeat.
1a. Create account 1, whore karma till good or excellent.
b. Create account 2, whore karma till good or excellent.
2. Post using account 1.
3. Mod up using account n, which currently has modpoints.
4. In case you don't like someone's reply, nuke him with -1 Troll.
27 accounts and counting... =)
The Story of Decipherment: From Egyptian Hieroglyphs to Maya Script by Maurice Pope covers the Egyptian Hieroglyphs along with other decipherments. The author goes into detail on earlier decipherment attempts and reasons why it took such a long time to decipher. The history of the attempt to decipher hieroglyphs goes back well before the discovery of the Rosetta stone.
Lost Languages: The Enigma of the World's Undeciphered Scripts by Andrew Robinson also covers the Egyptian Hieroglyphs and some other decipherments. However, the focus of the book is on semi- or un- deciphered scripts. There are a number of scripts which will probably never be deciphered.
Andrew Robinson's other books are also worth checking out including The Man Who Deciphered Linear B: The Story of Michael Ventris.
Oh I don't know, Linguistics has always been a pretty nerdy enterprise. And even though a lot of /.ers tend to downplay religion, the fact is that religion has played a huge role in the development of our so-called "advanced" world. In other words, it's nerdy and relevant.
My problem with the argument that it might just be the real thing from a real God, is that I must ask the question, which God? Which Religion? Who is right? Who is wrong? Is Sunday the day off or Saturday? Does a being which created the universe really care? Are all the prophets right? How can they be?
From the outside looking in at all the different religions with their different teachings (no matter how you try to reconcile the differences, some remain), it is obvious to an atheist that at least some of the beliefs are wrong. Each incompatible diety cannot have created the universe. If one of them did, then the rest of them do not exist but try telling that to all the different believers.
Is there room for a God in the universe? Sure, but I won't believe in one and certainly won't worship one based upon ancient texts alone. Asking begged questions doesn't help either.
$#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
But if you want really obvious asteroid strikes (seems to have been in the Persian Gulf, causing in addition a hurricane from the heat released), try the story of Noah. But don't get it just from the Bible -- take it from the Epic of Gilgamesh. Shamash had set a stated time: ...,
'In the morning I will let loaves of bread shower down,
and in the evening a rain of wheat!
Go inside the boat, seal the entry!'
That stated time had arrived.
In the morning he let loaves of bread shower down, and in the evening a rain of wheat.
I watched the appearance of the weather--
the weather was frightful to behold!
I went into the boat and sealed the entry.
For the caulking of the boat, to Puzuramurri, the boatman,
I gave the palace together with its contents.
Just as dawn began to glow
there arose from the horizon a black cloud.
Adad rumbled inside of it,
before him went Shullat and Hanish,
heralds going over mountain and land.
Erragal pulled out the mooring poles,
forth went Ninurta and made the dikes overflow.
The Anunnaki lifted up the torches,
setting the land ablaze with their flare.
Stunned shock over Adad's deeds overtook the heavens,
and turned to blackness all that had been light.
The... land shattered like a... pot.
All day long the South Wind blew
blowing fast, submerging the mountain in water,
overwhelming the people like an attack.
Anyhow, in the region of the persion gulf, you do have about 8 feet of bottom mud all radiocarbon dating to the same year, about 5 or 8000 BC (sorry, it's hard to remember, and I don't see a good web reference off hand).
No matter: it isn't just made up.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
The New English Translation is a free translation of the Scriptures with extensive translator's and study notes. I couldn't bookmark it fast enough when I saw what a fantastic tool it is.
Why don't we send some of the original bible texts to the last few slashdot stories about automatic computer translation?
I can see it now...The King Taco translation: "In the beginning, there was ATT who begat UNIX, who begat Novell, who begat SCO, who claims to have begat all code ever written.
But in all seiousness, linguistics might be a science, and we're all nerds. These translation articles are getting old like the SCO jokes (bad joke intended).
I would suggest a much more likely reason for monks to be burning an old manuscript was not because it was imprecise, but because it was politically wrong, ie, it disagreed with current church teachings. It was trash only in the sense of being politically incorrect.
This seems a much more likely concusion to draw.
Infuriate left and right
Seems to me, if I were an/the all knowing, all powerful god, it would not be in my best interest to let all these bogus copies float around, and let my words be corrupted into so many different ambiguous versions.
... which god should I choose?
As for taking the safe bet that there just might be a god who could condemn me for bad thoughts
Infuriate left and right
Personally, I believe in an afterlife... But after reading The God part of the brain, I feel the depressing reality of logic at hand. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0966036700/ qid%3D1059766886/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/103-6 383081-9437440
Life is not for the lazy.
Much of the research that has 'debunked' Joseph Smith's translation has been debunked. See Papyri & Book of Abraham Articles, Analysis & Reviews for the articles which refute the debunkers.
Read both and decide for yourself which is the more scholarly research.
James 1:5 - If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him.
The book may be interesting (I haven't read it), but Linear B is boring. Lots of records of goats changing hands and the like. I started on it until I realized that there wasn't anything written in Linear B that I actually wanted to read. I found Egyptian Hieroglyphics far more interesting.
Plus, KMT rocks my socks. Take that, Linear B!
-Waldo Jaquith
"The Keys of Egypt" - very interesting topic, a pity the storytelling wasn't any better (I thought it was a bit boring).
"In the Beginning" - equally interesting topic, good read, might even want to read it again some day.
Of course, I am not in the least an expert on the subject matters, and the authors could be lying through their teeth about these things for all I know, but that was what I thought as a Reader!
.sig? No.
Anyhow, here's a link, with sample text:
"In 1929, the English archaeologist Sir Charles Woolley reported finding water-deposited layers as much as ten feet thick in excavations near the Euphrates..."
- Isaac Asimov, In The Beginning, (1981) pp. 153-154
"...Evidence of a major flood just over 6,000 years ago has been found around Ur, where a layer of water-laid clay two and a half meters deep covers an area of more than 100,000 square kilometers. This amounts to a spread across the entire width of the Tigris-Euphrates valley from north of modern Baghdad to the coast of the Persian Gulf in what now includes parts of Iraq, Iran and Kuwait."
- Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key: Pharaohs, Freemasons and the Discovery of the Secret Scrolls of Jesus
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Here is a decision matrix based on Blaise Pascal's wager (one of the world's most prestigious mathematicians):
GOD EXISTS | GOD DOESN'T EXIST
BELIEVE IN GOD Eternal Bliss | Just die, nothing more
DON'T BELIEVE Eternal Agony | Just die, nothing more
If religion (Christianity in my case) is a big scam, how come countless millions since the creation of the world have followed God and been willingly martyred for his glory?
Interesting.
-kgj
While the "crack" comment might be true, the "getting run over by the car" comment might be considered over-the-top. LOL
MMORPG Fan? Prove your worth!
But then again, a good theory doesn't have to be logically irrefutable. Science, history, and yes, criminal justice are full of theories that are valued mainly for their explanatory power. Circumstancial evidence (the butler had access to the fatal candlestick, the butler cannot acount for his whereabout when the crime was committed) can't irrefutably prove that the butler did it. But it can be strong enough to convict the butler, if there's so much of it that alternative theories cease to be plausible.