If we're going for things that were "edited out" (how convenient, then, that nothing remains to prove the hypothesis) we can prove a lot of things.
Look at what you quoted. "Historical documents relating to the _Old_Testament_ indicate that Yahweh was believed to have a wife at an earlier point, that wife also being a god." That doesn't seem like "nothing remains to prove the hypothesis."
I'll admit that this far after the fact i can't cite the exact references, but i do remember that they didn't just make this stuff up out of wholecloth. There were actual archeological finds indicating at the very least that it was likely. If you really wish i can try to go dig up the information on the text book we used.
I don't know about what "whole Jesus thing" you were talking about,
From the grandparent post, "Yahweh does have a "wife": Israel. And via his "wife" he had a single child: Yehoshua (Jesus)."
Without any other context to go on i have to presume that this is refering to the entity i've usually heard refered to as "Mary." That would be a wife that doesn't exist until the new testament. Therefore any "wife" refered to in the old testament is obviously not the same one. (Again, approaching it from the historical/scientific viewpoint.)
I really don't know what you're getting at with the rest of it. Yes there is no mention of goddesses in the bible that i know of. But again the whole arguement is over whether there the bible has been changed. You seem to be arguing "there are no goddesses in the presesnt version, so there were no goddesses in the older versions, so the older and newer versions are the same."
There are goddess or goddess like figures in other media from before the changeover to a monotheistic religion. One of those figures is presented in such a way so that many biblical scholars/archeologists believe that Yahweh was believed to have a wife at some point before she was removed from the official version.
The short but incomplete answer, from wikipedia: (Blame the crappy grammer on whoever wrote up the wiki entry =)
"Though yam in the phrase yam suph clearly means waters, but the reading of suph has given rise to great diversity of opinion as to the precise place where the crossing occurred."
So either the red/reed thing is just a coincidence, or the mistranslation happened in a language where the two are similar, if i was ever told i don't remember which.
But if you do that then by the holiday season your game is old and busted, and everyone wants the hot newness that your competition just came out with instead. Marketing wouldn't be so stupid if people didn't respond to it so much.
Exactly what i was going to say. _I_ could write a game that gets 120 fps. It would consist of a box, on a black background. No, acutally i can probably even have a gif in the background. You can move the box around the screen and pressing the action button button will, uh, make the square change colors, yeah!
So who wants to buy my game that will run at a blazing fast 120 fps?
I forget the exact name of the goddess, but that's not the point. Historical documents relating to the _Old_Testament_ indicate that Yahweh was believed to have a wife at an earlier point, that wife also being a god. This was in no way realted to the whole jesus thing in the new testament.
And no, my prof wasn't confused about the polytheism issue. He specifically addressed it, and it wasn't really "jaunts" either. They started out as polythesitic, then after awhile they became, well, i forget the name for it, but Yahweh became the primary god and all the others became subserviant to him. Thus "Thou shalt have no other god before me" and the whole Belal(?) thing.
_Then_ they because monotheistic. Actually the central temple in jerusalem became monothesitic while the outlying temples were still in the halfway stage. There was a lot of political and cultural strife between the two groups at the time (i forget if there was actually any fighting or not) and i believe this was about the time that one of the codifications of the bible took place. Obviously the central authorities in jerusalem who actually did the codification choose the interpretations that favored their views.
And without any proof to the contrary you can't just argue that any earlier references to a wife of Yahweh are in fact refering to someone who didn't exist until hundreds of years later. Not unless you want to declare yourself to be taking the fundamentalist side and making a religious interpretation of the bible rather than a historical one. In effect your argument starts from the assumption that the bible hasn't changed, and therefore any evidence that things were different in the past clearly can't be true because the current version of the bible says otherwise.
I actually was just going to say delusional originally, but in the spirit of the topic i decided to go back and add the fundamentalist part in an attempt to both be fair and to avoid a flame war:)
I can't really understand that people who choose to ignore what we're about 99% certain is fact in the name of faith, but i'm going to attempt to steer clear of the issue (for this topic at least) and just consider their view of the universe to be orthoganal to my own.
Legend holds that Shakespeare *never* rewrote any of his plays or poems. He didn't even bother to cross out anything as he wrote. But then, we're not all Shakespeare's are we? Still I think there's something to be said for leaving well enough alone. When we change what we believe is a flaw, it also changes much of the original genius and beauty of a work.
On the other hand, if we want to look at historical examples we should also consider fairy tales and legends. Before that whole writing stuff down thing happened stories were passed along orally and just about everyone who told the same story told a slightly different version. Both methods have resulted in great stories that have influenced our culture in numerous ways.
Of course in one case we've got a single author who make up his mind and stuck with it, and in the other case we've a bunch of people working "together" and each having their own favorite version. Nowdays we've got directors who can't make up their minds about their own stories.
Let's see if i can remember a few things from the history class on the old testament i took in college. The mistranslation of "Reed Sea" into "Red Sea." There's a decent amount of evidence that Yahweh had a wife at one point but she got edited out later. There was at least one point where stuff was codified and a lot of stories, which were just as "valid" as the ones where were kept, were dropped for political or cultural reasons. It's been about six years since i took the class, but i can tell you for sure that anyone who thinks the bible hasn't ever changed is either a fundamentalist (and therefore willing to completly ignore historical evidence) or delusional.
Stick to one format, guys, that's what will satisfy the consumer most. Do they REALLY want a rerun of VHS v Beta, Cassette v DCC, CD v Minidisc? These chaps are thick in the head.
I'm sure both manufacturers agree with you 100% and think the other guy should just give up for the good of the consumers and drop out of the competition.
I'd mod the entire blurb as +1 Obvious, except that for some reason so many people fail to get the point. During the last presedential election there were far too many people arguing about how voting doesn't matter, usually in regards to voting for third parties. Meanwhile in related news the entire electronics industry is unable to figure out how to lobby half as effectively as Hollywood.
So which number uncrushed turtle is the world resting on? I don't think you can say infinity because we can point at the turtle we're sitting on, so it must have a specific place.
Is that so? I admit that i'm not a mathematician and many of the things that seem impossible to me don't phase them at all, however that seems, well, impossible.
I can understand how if the turtles were indiscrete you could have an infinite number of them in the stack, but not how that could be the case with discrete turtles. Like how there are an infinite number of real numbers between one and a million but only a finite number of integers. The uncrushed turtles would seem to be a discrete set with both a specific begining and end.
Hmmm, the crushed turtles are definitely infinite, but are they discrete or indiscrete?:)
Dude, there is no bottom. It's turtles all the way down.
The whole stack of turtles goes all the way down, but there's a substack of uncrushed turtles on top of the substack of crushed turtles. The grandparent poster was obviously just being linguistically lax and was refering to the bottom of the stack of uncrushed turtles.
This would seem to imply that the stack of uncrushed turtles is finite while the stack of crushed turtles is infinite.
E-paper is attempting to replace paper so there's nothing wrong with expecting it to be as easy to read as real printed paper. Otherwise, what's the point?
Oh i don't know, maybe the part where you can read an entire library of books on a single sheet of e-paper? Or maybe the part where you can display animations on it?
Ahhh, but is a chicken egg an egg that is layed by a chicken, or an egg that a chicken hatches out of? Your answer is correct for the second case but not the first. One could argue for the first case given that unless you live on a farm the only chicken eggs you're ever going to see are unfertilized and aren't ever going to be hatching a chicken out of them.
(And this is of course going with the assumption that the implied question is really "which came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?" Otherwise there were plenty of other species laying eggs long before chickens and the question is stupid.)
2. Right to Win
Not sure on this one, unless he means arcade-style games that don't have an end. Perhaps he's referring to games which have a bug that prevents finishing, none of which I've had the misfortune to encounter yet.
3. The Right to a Swift Death
One game i played that managed to break both the above rules to some degree as well as the rule that should have been included, "The Right To Not Do The Programmer's Job For Them."
Inindo was a game from Koei that seemed like a cool combination between an RPG and one of their normal strategy games. You spend most of your time doing RPG type things with your character, fighting monsters, leveling up, dungeon delving, but occasionaly you could take control of armies and fight like in the Rot3K and Nobunaga games.
In theory at least. I never got that far because in one of the required dungeons there's a locked door which requires you to go on a fetch quest to get the key. When i returned with the item the guy with the key told me to make sure i had room in my inventory to hold it. This seemed dumb, but i checked, saw i had room, and got the key from him. I headed off to the locked door and stopped by the save point on the way.
When i got to the door i found that it wouldn't open. I checked my inventory and there was no key. I went back to the guy and he seemed to think he'd already given me the key. As far as i can figure out what he'd _meant_ to say was "Make sure that your _first_ _character_ has room in his inventory." My first character's inventory was full up, but i had two other characters with empty slots so i figured that was okay. The key apparently got sent off to the item netherlands with no error checking by the programmers and i had then saved the game in that state. No way to convince the guy to give me anothey key, no way to go back to a previous save (which was partly my fault, but only partly) and the entire game was screwed about five or ten hours in. All because the programmers decided to give the player some unclear instructions on how not to screw everything up rather than take the time to deal with the issue themselves.
Of course if you want to glorify the "technical race" over gimicky things like novel methods of input (like joysticks and d-pads?) than PCs have the dedicated gaming systems beat hands down.
We have both this and the shape changing planes posted on the same day and the first thing you think of is if they have sharks on them? Now if you'd asked if they Transformed into sharks...
Slashdot Mirror
Look at what you quoted. "Historical documents relating to the _Old_Testament_ indicate that Yahweh was believed to have a wife at an earlier point, that wife also being a god." That doesn't seem like "nothing remains to prove the hypothesis."
I'll admit that this far after the fact i can't cite the exact references, but i do remember that they didn't just make this stuff up out of wholecloth. There were actual archeological finds indicating at the very least that it was likely. If you really wish i can try to go dig up the information on the text book we used.
I don't know about what "whole Jesus thing" you were talking about,
From the grandparent post, "Yahweh does have a "wife": Israel. And via his "wife" he had a single child: Yehoshua (Jesus)."
Without any other context to go on i have to presume that this is refering to the entity i've usually heard refered to as "Mary." That would be a wife that doesn't exist until the new testament. Therefore any "wife" refered to in the old testament is obviously not the same one. (Again, approaching it from the historical/scientific viewpoint.)
I really don't know what you're getting at with the rest of it. Yes there is no mention of goddesses in the bible that i know of. But again the whole arguement is over whether there the bible has been changed. You seem to be arguing "there are no goddesses in the presesnt version, so there were no goddesses in the older versions, so the older and newer versions are the same."
There are goddess or goddess like figures in other media from before the changeover to a monotheistic religion. One of those figures is presented in such a way so that many biblical scholars/archeologists believe that Yahweh was believed to have a wife at some point before she was removed from the official version.
"Though yam in the phrase yam suph clearly means waters, but the reading of suph has given rise to great diversity of opinion as to the precise place where the crossing occurred."
So either the red/reed thing is just a coincidence, or the mistranslation happened in a language where the two are similar, if i was ever told i don't remember which.
But if you do that then by the holiday season your game is old and busted, and everyone wants the hot newness that your competition just came out with instead. Marketing wouldn't be so stupid if people didn't respond to it so much.
So says the _third_ person to say that :)
So who wants to buy my game that will run at a blazing fast 120 fps?
And no, my prof wasn't confused about the polytheism issue. He specifically addressed it, and it wasn't really "jaunts" either. They started out as polythesitic, then after awhile they became, well, i forget the name for it, but Yahweh became the primary god and all the others became subserviant to him. Thus "Thou shalt have no other god before me" and the whole Belal(?) thing.
_Then_ they because monotheistic. Actually the central temple in jerusalem became monothesitic while the outlying temples were still in the halfway stage. There was a lot of political and cultural strife between the two groups at the time (i forget if there was actually any fighting or not) and i believe this was about the time that one of the codifications of the bible took place. Obviously the central authorities in jerusalem who actually did the codification choose the interpretations that favored their views.
And without any proof to the contrary you can't just argue that any earlier references to a wife of Yahweh are in fact refering to someone who didn't exist until hundreds of years later. Not unless you want to declare yourself to be taking the fundamentalist side and making a religious interpretation of the bible rather than a historical one. In effect your argument starts from the assumption that the bible hasn't changed, and therefore any evidence that things were different in the past clearly can't be true because the current version of the bible says otherwise.
I can't really understand that people who choose to ignore what we're about 99% certain is fact in the name of faith, but i'm going to attempt to steer clear of the issue (for this topic at least) and just consider their view of the universe to be orthoganal to my own.
On the other hand, if we want to look at historical examples we should also consider fairy tales and legends. Before that whole writing stuff down thing happened stories were passed along orally and just about everyone who told the same story told a slightly different version. Both methods have resulted in great stories that have influenced our culture in numerous ways.
Of course in one case we've got a single author who make up his mind and stuck with it, and in the other case we've a bunch of people working "together" and each having their own favorite version. Nowdays we've got directors who can't make up their minds about their own stories.
Let's see if i can remember a few things from the history class on the old testament i took in college. The mistranslation of "Reed Sea" into "Red Sea." There's a decent amount of evidence that Yahweh had a wife at one point but she got edited out later. There was at least one point where stuff was codified and a lot of stories, which were just as "valid" as the ones where were kept, were dropped for political or cultural reasons. It's been about six years since i took the class, but i can tell you for sure that anyone who thinks the bible hasn't ever changed is either a fundamentalist (and therefore willing to completly ignore historical evidence) or delusional.
I'm rather disapointed that despite the Doom trailer looking like a joke, Doom opened to a 50% higher box office total than Serenity :(
I'm sure both manufacturers agree with you 100% and think the other guy should just give up for the good of the consumers and drop out of the competition.
How does one view meta-moding of one's moderation?
The thing is, i'm pretty sure Swift didn't also say "and I'll give 100 pounds to the first person who proves to me that they've eaten an irish baby."
(Well, for the first twelve years anyways, we'll see who gets the last laugh then!)
I'd mod the entire blurb as +1 Obvious, except that for some reason so many people fail to get the point. During the last presedential election there were far too many people arguing about how voting doesn't matter, usually in regards to voting for third parties. Meanwhile in related news the entire electronics industry is unable to figure out how to lobby half as effectively as Hollywood.
So which number uncrushed turtle is the world resting on? I don't think you can say infinity because we can point at the turtle we're sitting on, so it must have a specific place.
[Turtle]
I can understand how if the turtles were indiscrete you could have an infinite number of them in the stack, but not how that could be the case with discrete turtles. Like how there are an infinite number of real numbers between one and a million but only a finite number of integers. The uncrushed turtles would seem to be a discrete set with both a specific begining and end.
Hmmm, the crushed turtles are definitely infinite, but are they discrete or indiscrete? :)
The whole stack of turtles goes all the way down, but there's a substack of uncrushed turtles on top of the substack of crushed turtles. The grandparent poster was obviously just being linguistically lax and was refering to the bottom of the stack of uncrushed turtles.
This would seem to imply that the stack of uncrushed turtles is finite while the stack of crushed turtles is infinite.
Mine won't, it keeps complaining that it doesn't know what "Expanded memory" is =P
Oh i don't know, maybe the part where you can read an entire library of books on a single sheet of e-paper? Or maybe the part where you can display animations on it?
(And this is of course going with the assumption that the implied question is really "which came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?" Otherwise there were plenty of other species laying eggs long before chickens and the question is stupid.)
3. The Right to a Swift Death
One game i played that managed to break both the above rules to some degree as well as the rule that should have been included, "The Right To Not Do The Programmer's Job For Them."
Inindo was a game from Koei that seemed like a cool combination between an RPG and one of their normal strategy games. You spend most of your time doing RPG type things with your character, fighting monsters, leveling up, dungeon delving, but occasionaly you could take control of armies and fight like in the Rot3K and Nobunaga games.
In theory at least. I never got that far because in one of the required dungeons there's a locked door which requires you to go on a fetch quest to get the key. When i returned with the item the guy with the key told me to make sure i had room in my inventory to hold it. This seemed dumb, but i checked, saw i had room, and got the key from him. I headed off to the locked door and stopped by the save point on the way.
When i got to the door i found that it wouldn't open. I checked my inventory and there was no key. I went back to the guy and he seemed to think he'd already given me the key. As far as i can figure out what he'd _meant_ to say was "Make sure that your _first_ _character_ has room in his inventory." My first character's inventory was full up, but i had two other characters with empty slots so i figured that was okay. The key apparently got sent off to the item netherlands with no error checking by the programmers and i had then saved the game in that state. No way to convince the guy to give me anothey key, no way to go back to a previous save (which was partly my fault, but only partly) and the entire game was screwed about five or ten hours in. All because the programmers decided to give the player some unclear instructions on how not to screw everything up rather than take the time to deal with the issue themselves.
Of course if you want to glorify the "technical race" over gimicky things like novel methods of input (like joysticks and d-pads?) than PCs have the dedicated gaming systems beat hands down.
We have both this and the shape changing planes posted on the same day and the first thing you think of is if they have sharks on them? Now if you'd asked if they Transformed into sharks...