by Vorjack
One of the greatest problems when dealing with ancient history is the difficulty of thinking like an ancient human. We are all aware that humans have looked at the world in different ways during different eras, but despite the difficulties we are frequently called upon to try and imagine ourselves as a resident of ancient Rome, or a 1st century Jew, or some other ancient character.
I’d like to speak for a moment about one of the most important differences between ourselves and ancient peoples. Most of this is drawn from the lectures of Professor Darren Staloff, and in specific his lectures drawing from Mircea Eliade’s work on the ancient understanding of history.
Linear vs. Cyclical Time
Pullquote: Ancient people understood great events and influential people by casting them in terms of mythic themes or figures.
Since the Enlightenment, we have lived in linear time. We understand that time moves along in a straight line, with one event happening after another. Each event is influenced by the previous events, and in turn it influences future events. Nevertheless, each event is unique in its context. This gives us our idea of history, a record of events in the past and how they relate to each other.
Well before the enlightenment, however, people lived in cyclical time. Time did not move forward for them the way it does for us. Instead, it moved in endless loops, reminiscent of the cycles of the seasons. History did not advance — instead, it continually recapitulated previous archetypal stories. People understood great events and influential people by casting them in terms of mythic themes or figures.
Cyclical time is still with us to some degree. Consider the way we talk about our presidents. Have you noticed how we continually compare Obama to men like Abraham Lincoln, FDR or Martin Luther King? Bill Clinton was compared to JFK, Truman and FDR. Of course, if you go back, you find we did that to all our great men. George Washington was called the American Cincinnatus, while Robert Livingston was the American Cicero.
When we compare Obama to Lincoln, we don’t mean that Obama is a tall, white and unattractive railsplitter. We mean something basic, like he’s a great statesman. But we’ve reduced a complex and contradictory man like Lincoln down to an archetypal figure in our national story, and we use figures like that to understand our current situation. Eventually Obama himself will be reduced to an archetypal figure; perhaps even within his lifetime.
The Uses of Cyclical Time
The ancients used the same techniques to a much greater degree. When something unique and impressive occurred, they rushed to wrap it in a layer of mythic language. This was how they could understand it. Stories were recast and retold using mythic themes and characters.
If I could sum it up in one sentence, it would be something like this: modern people care about what happened; ancient people cared about what it meant. It may seem odd to us, but I suspect we’d seem shallow and fussy to them. Why quibble over the details? It’s all a part of the same cyclic drama anyway.
The Myth of the Historical Jesus
Pullquote: The followers of Jesus were interested in what his life and death meant.
This theory has implications for the argument over the historical Jesus. For starters, it’s sometimes argued that there wasn’t enough time between the crucifixion and the writings of the Gospels for fanciful stories about Jesus to pop up. This is false; fanciful stories were likely popping up before Jesus was even dead.
On the other hand, the mythicists argue that the gospel story of Jesus seems to be stitched together from mythic themes. Well, yes, but this is exactly what we’d expect to see, even if Jesus were a historical figure. The followers of Jesus were interested in what his life and death meant. So Paul understands him using the figure of Adam, Matthew uses Moses, Luke uses Isiah, and the author of Hebrews uses Melchizedek. This is a classic example of archetypal understanding.
I’ve grossly simplified a complex topic, and for that I apologize. If there’s one take-away message for this, it’s that the modern idea of history is a recent and strange invention. Eliade suggests that we’re likely to abandon it before too long. Whether we do or not, we shouldn’t assume that people in the distant past shared our historical concerns. They had their own way of making sense of history.
Vorjack is a librarian/archivist and a public historian, living with his wife in history-soaked Albany, New York.
Tyler!: Sooooo who exactly are they taking our country back from??? And i am in the process of moving so... 
NoYourGod: Yerp – nuthin’ saiz “patriotic” like “love it or leave... 
LawnBoy: Gee.. when exactly was this golden age of pureness in politics and the reign of common sense? 
Daniel Florien: So why aren’t you out in Montana with a bomb shelter, stocked food, and tons of ammunition? 
nazani14: Things that can’t go on forever don’t. Following the record heat, the power outages in the D.C.... 
Nelly: my apologies for using “duplicate” way too many times………..I really wish... 
Ty: Please. A moon hoaxer talking about good science? “I personally do not believe that we can prove that... 
80 Comments
Wow … I found this really interesting and new. From what you write, I think the ancients had a much more interesting, and useful concept of time and history.
I’ve often thought that what happened and when it happened is far less interesting that why it happened and what it means for me, here and now. So it seems that trying to get any kind of clarity about an historical, real person Jesus is kind of hard, wrapped up as it is in myth and archetypes! Much more fruitful to consider the meaning of, for example, the New Testament, rather than treat it as a true record of events?
I appreciate that you grossly simplified it as I fear I might not have followed anything more complex! :-)
Excellent piece! This interests me quite a bit. Thank you.
To the point…well done.
I have always felt that non-believers, of which I am one, fret too much over whether there was an historical Jesus. (I come down on the “probably” side, simply because there is a well-delineated “focal point” for the stories of and about him.)
The existence of an historical Jesus however does not mean that any of the myths regarding him…virgin birth, shepherds, magi, healings, resurrection…are true.
Your piece does an excellent job in explaining how and why such myths came to be connected to him. No fraud or deception by his followers was necessary…they were merely doing what ancient traditions demanded.
OR…it COULD be that the stories are true…
I have always felt that non-believers, of which I am one, fret too much over whether there was an historical Jesus.
Agreed. If we discount the divine paternity, the resurrection, the miracles, the healing, etc.; as non-believers do, what we are left with is a man with a rather common name. It’s like asking whether you believe there is a man named Antonio living in Rome today.
I am devoutly Non-christian, believe in the likelihood of a historical Jesus, fully-developed human qualities in some people, and the possibility of them being great prophets.
How that gets turned into the “born of a virgin” crap, and this particular prophet, Jesus, is the only one that asked us to worship him (things I’ve actually heard people say!), and that we need to be “saved” “through” him, is the nonsense that escapes me, and does incredible damage to people.
VorJack! I’ve enjoyed your posts; nice to see you here.
Good post!
I know it’s hard to keep a post from being too long sometimes, but I would have enjoyed reading further. From the way you were going, I was hoping for more elaboration on how this idea that ancient people’s history was more about meaning than a statement of event accounts pertained to your view on the validity of the bible, particularly the new testament.
Regarding the idea that we may change our idea of what history is, it doesn’t seem likely anytime soon for the simple fact that we seem so information driven. There’s so many people on this planet with so many different ways of interpreting events that the most efficient way of explaining them to ourselves and our great great grandchildren is by telling them “this happened, then this, then this”. Information bounces to the other side of the planet in a matter of seconds. We are likely to never have to rely on storytelling as a means to keep up a history again.
Nice post Vorjack
I don’t think we can neatly divide such a view of time based on modern versus ancient though. Some cultures today still have a cyclical view of time but also I have to disagree with you in the sense that Judaism and then Christianity were very linear in the way they view time.
Views of history as being cyclical are much more in tune with the Eastern faiths, though there are elements to be found in the Bible. Solomon writes about seasons that change, think of the Byrd’s song, but viewed as a whole Hebrew scripture always looked forward with well defined view of past, present and future narratives. They looked to a beginning point with a creation story, dealt with the struggles of being an “elect” people, and looked forward to a messiah.
Compare this to the wheel of suffering or reaching for enlightenment, these types of concepts were foreign to Judaism. The archetypes you mentioned in scripture are viewed as precursors to a fulfillment such as Melchizedek and Christ. Archetypes don’t have to be simply the epitome of a trait.
I would still agree that we view the world different than our ancestors did, I find that view most people don’t know anything about history in general and tend to be very superficial in their judgements about current events. Maybe that’ always been the case to a certain degree, but I can’t help but think that even going back to the Puritans we can find a people in this country who viewed history different.
Great post, Vorjack!
The bible is rife with allusions to other “historical” events, in many cases being self-referential. When modern christians refer to the bible being so full of prophesies that have been fulfilled, they neglect to mention that many of these prophesies are made in the Old Testament and fulfilled in the New Testament, which is probably due to ancient peoples’ concept of cyclical time.
If BOARDNUTTERZ reads this::
Bring your comments to my contact. Thanks for contacting me but your rant was just cute. I don’t have conversations via comments, only on email. If you want to carry on a conversation, ANYONE READING THIS, feel free to email me and we’ll talk. Comments are just for that – COMMENTING!
Thanks to Daniel Florien for open comments and great conversation starters. I won’t use the blog comments all day long to chat. That’s the beauty of “chat” systems and email. Imagine that.
Looking forward to the next hot button. Thanks again, Daniel!
Vorjack is a good fiction writer. Unfortunately, there is nothing new, nothing substantive here, just another denial of the love of God in a very, very long list. There is no life in it.
The real life is not one of denial, but of belief, the uncreated Life living His through ours.
There is a life, there is more.
A very interesting post.
Would another big (and possibly related) difference be with regard to ancestor worship: how historic people viewed those who came before them? The writings of Sun Tzu along with other ancient orders seem to indicate that the ancients possessed all the knowledge, and that subsequent generations somehow wasted it away, leaving today’s generation with mere scraps of knowledge. It’s a common refrain of conservative thought even today, that somehow we are descending into greater sinfulness with each generation.
Today we have turned this idea completely on it’s head. Scientific thought pays no attention to tradition, and the discoveries of the present can be seen to surpass what was learned in previous times. We see the people of the past as having huge gaps in their knowledge and we see ourselves as knowing much more.
A simplistic way to sum up this article — a very good one, I might add — is context. Every aspect of history can only truly be understood in reference to its context. When context is cast aside, the meaning gets mangled.
EXCELLENT post Vorjack!!! BRAVO!!!
I, too, enjoyed your words.
Interesting…
So what are the implications of this cyclical way of thinking for our understanding of secular ancient history? How does this impact our understanding of Alexander the Great, the Roman Empire and its Caesars, ancient Greece, etc? Does this cast into doubt every work of history up until the enlightenment?
This has got me wondering if a cyclical view of history leads one to circular reasoning?
Fabulous post, Vorjack! We’ve been reading stories of mythology to my daughter for this exact reason. Even at 4-1/2, she understands that these stories’ purpose is to explain the parts of life we don’t yet understand.
Daniel, I hope to soon participate more in the threads — just have to get the grad school monkey off my back! Re: the link I sent you on FB, realized I didn’t have my friend’s permission to post it, and I withdrew it from my blog. Seeing that you’re taking submissions, I may ask him to send it to you for posting.
The post applied an interesting perspective to the matter at hand, but I am not sure about its relevance, even if true.
I say that because to me the historicity of Jesus is mostly a non issue. Aside from the fact we have very little, if anything, in regard to undisputed direct citations of Jesus in sources other than the gospels, even if there was a real person that might have served as an original mold to the myth, any meaningful link was likely lost, eventually.
What we have is a collection of paraboles and accounts that, even when attributed to a person named Jesus, may have originated elsewhere, and in such a way that we cannot tell what real connection to this supposedly historical person is left – the Jesus we talk about, including his teachings, what most would deem the most important aspect of him, seems to be little more than myth one way or another.
Let him with eyes to see, see, and let him with ears to hear, hear. The written records are left as solid proof to man until the earth shall be no more.
Flying Spaghetti Monster created the earth 7,000 years ago. Thou shalt have no other gods before him, and indeed it is impossible for you to do so, for all those other impostors came after him, a piddling 6,000 years ago at the most.
He sent into the world his only begotten son, born of a virgin olive oil, the Lamb, known in America as Meatball, or Mutton Chop, which means “the anointed one”, for he was anointed with mint and mustard.
The Old Menu was the old covenant. It was the giving of the law, and demanding obedience, and there were no substitutions, except that one be allergic to onions. The New Menu is the new covenant, and it serveth forgiveness, though not upon a silver platter, but upon fine china, which tarnishes not. If imperfect man shall be guilty of the overindulgence of gluttony, he may seek the Pepto-Bismol of the Lamb, and he shall be relieved.
Unless you be washed in the tomato sauce of the Lamb, you shall not enter the Dining Room of heaven. And then you shall be washed as white as snow, and every stain and blot shall be removed from you, for dry cleaning solvent and a baking soda rinse shall remove even the stains of tomato sauce with olive oil.
FSM commanded that we know, and not just believe. I know in my heart I have a personal relationship with the Mutton, the Son of FSM. I kneel in my heart before Him, for after a spaghetti dinner this reduces heartburn, and does gird our loins against acid reflux.
Until the end of days, the Holy Gas Bubble pleads for us in groaning too deep for words, and on that awaited day there shall Beano discomfort.
He is the only Creator, and we await the long hoped for redemption of his Second Helping.
Then shall he say to us, well done, thou good and faithful servant, thou mayest eat eternally of dessert, and pig out yet fatteneth not, and no gas pains shall ever trouble the sons of the Mutton in the Dining Hall of heaven.
rAmen.
They recently found the fossilized footprints of a wholly developed Homo Sapeins that are one and one half million years old.
I wonder if this jives well with the evolution timeline for humans beginnings.
Leaves open the door for the third possibility- that of extra terrestrial hybridization/DNA manipulation to produce humans and possible seeding of the planet.
That natural selection is real is not in doubt but our beginning and development are far from clear.
Delusional-I know
Jesus proto types and similar stories go back through all cultures to the begiining of history. Joseph Campbell and others have addressed this.
Jesus had the luck of being around at the dawn of western civilization which made His story not only somewhat relevant to His time but also allowed the story to spread and work its way even into the top levels of governments.
Whether Jesus was contructed , ripped off from these earlier stories or quite genuine isn’t clear, but the story and message are powerful which is why it exists even today.
John C’s attempt to explain his delusion remind me of Richard Dawkin’s term, “Epistilogical Hedonism”.
Definition: It makes me feel good, so I believe it.
Of course there are many things that will make us feel good…the opiates come to mind, though I prefer old fashioned sex.
However John C…the fact that something makes you feel good is not evidence for its truth. You need to do better.
Glad I caught up with this post. Good job, Vorjack.
It’s just too bad that all those first century people were so gullibule and all. After all, people who have never been exposed to the dead up close and personal are often easy to misled. :)
AND -
all that worshiping of them and forming a religion around them – and that includes asking their ghosties into your heart – destroys the real value of whatever they offered.
So, you’ve gone from “I ask questions, but never get answers” to “I refuse to ask or answer questions in public” in about a day? Not bad…
Comments are for discussion. Email is for private conversations.
Please don’t keep telling people to email you — if you want to talk to people around here, do it through comments.
The Lord:
Comments are just for that – COMMENTING! And not for RESPONDING TO COMMENTS!
Me (bowing and walking out backwards):
Yes, Master.
To self:
Why must the Lord be so rigid????
In support of the Stephen-Webb-drive-by hit-and-run posting claims:
Here is one from Mr. “I’m just curious. Really.”
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/02/23/ted-haggard-is-completely-heterosexual/#comment-17689
And this:
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/02/26/popular-pastor-encourages-child-suffering/#comment-18249
You seem to enjoy COMMENTING, but don’t seem to read other’s COMMENTS in reply to you.
Support of that statement:
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/01/father-stabs-son-for-wearing-hat-to-
church/#comment-18805
Oh, yes, you do.
Evasive. Duplicitous. Insincere.
No, you’ll just use them to make quite frequent hit-and-run posts.
Calling someone’s writing “just cute” is passive aggressive, covert hostility.
You did not mean “cute” in a genuine, endearing way. It’s an attack. As is the insincere “thanks”. For a preacher or loving Christian, you get very nasty. But only covertly, with sarcasm.
I think everyone recognizes covert hostility; I’m the only one specifically calling it out.
Thus shall the unknown become known. I’m pointing out your covert hostility, overtly.
“He’s mad, he’s mad.”
_George Burns,
“Just Me and You, Kid”
Interesting? Perhaps. But certainly not accurate!
That link should have been
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/01/father-stabs-son-for-wearing-hat-to-church/#comment-18805
And now I can add to my reply to Webb, that other people’s COMMENTS are the answers you complain about not getting.
And there are whole columns of them.
Why email? Are you different one-on-one, when lots of other people can’t see how you behave? It seems hypocritical to COMMENT, and complain about (or ignore) other people’s COMMENTS, and that you “don’t get answers”.
My impression of you as cowardly and a drive-by, hit-and-run shooter still stands.
<blockquote.Stephen Webb:
“I don’t have conversations via comments, only on email.”
Wrong again!
The only time you don’t make COMMENTS is in reply to people.
You make COMMENTS frequently, but only new ones on new blogs, before you disappear.
I think you’re getting confused here, John. Vorjack is a good historical writer. You’re the one always writing fiction. ;)
“Sky-god!”
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/01/father-stabs-son-for-wearing-hat-to-church/#comment-18958
Wait, god’s living his life through ours? I thought we were free to choose whether or not to serve him. Are you a calvinist? Are we all serving him, whether or not we choose to?
No, no, no, Daniel. John C. is really trying (dying, I might even say) to get you to understand that the True Spirit of God ™ is the Force that connects us all…it binds us…luminous beings are we, not this crude matter…hey. Did I just slip into “The Empire Strikes Back”?
Daniel…speaking of Roger’s comments…have you checked out the (science/biology) email I sent you yet? Watch the end…and put the verse with it. Even if you do not believe maybe you will admit it to be an interesting coincidence in the least? thx
Sincere Question here…how could scripture being myth be any more intriguing and exciting than the possibility of its truthfulness and inerrancy?
If its true (and it is) why not investigate further the spiritual plane in which these words literally…come to life?
Just think about it…you can know God??? How is that not exciting? Again, you continue to tie Christ to a dead religious, rule-keeping dogma which you despise and ironically so does He.
Think about it
Was there ancestor worship in pre-Mosaic times in the Middle East? I thought that was more common with Asian and Native American traditions. The traditions coming out of the Abhramic faiths seem to look at it just the opposite. The newest revelations are the truest revelations, according to their followers.
Colm -
Eliade’s most famous work is titled Cosmos and History: The Myth of the Eternal Return, and it deals heavily with this sort of story. The idea is that things are never as good today as they were yesterday. People, systems, and the cosmos itself are wearing down. Eventually, everything will collapse or explode, and then a fresh new cosmos will appear – the “eternal return.”
Obviously, the millennial ideas of the Abrahamic faiths fall into this category. Eventually, God is going to sweep away everything and start again with a new world, a “Kingdom of Heaven,” where everything is just and good.
Cello- “Was there ancestor worship in pre-Mosaic times in the Middle East?”
It looks like there was, but to what extent I don’t know. There’s a mention in Genesis to Jacob’s wife Rachel stealing the “household Gods” from her father [Gen 31:19]. Best guess from many of the historians I heard is that these are the family idols to their ancestors.
McBloggenstein – “I know it’s hard to keep a post from being too long sometimes, but I would have enjoyed reading further. ”
Daniel suggested that essays be kept to 700 words. I’ve been in academia too long. I can’t say “good morning” to my wife in under 700 words. At least, not without footnotes. ;)
Daniel’s been nice enough to give me a way to make regular contributions. Since this post looks to be popular, I’ll write some more on this theme in the near future.
I don’t want to swamp Daniel or any other contributors, though.
Comments with Descent long ago passed from hypothesis into established Theory. However, there remains a small group of contrarian emailists. The arguments of such might be summarized as: 1) If it meant comment, replys, re-replys, restatements, asides and off-topic nonsense then the Comments Header would say so; 2) Objective truth informs us that internet discussions must feel good, be one on one and private; and, 3) My ways are simpler than your ways. Evidence is mounting that emailism is a cry for control in a sometimes uncaring, critical and untidy Blogoshpere.
And if you only want to communicate through email (I see through that one, liar), then stick to email and quit making COMMENTS.
“Lord teach us to number each of our days so that we may grow in wisdom” Ps 90:12
Every day you deny Him & His love for you, the finished, eternal work of the cross, that is a day you can never get back. Love is not something to waste.
Love is what has been “freely given” in addition to restoration, spiritual blessings, etc.
When Jesus prayed “thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” He intends to impart His eternal truth and life into our temporal existance. As we say “yes Lord” to Him, He brings the truths of the spirit realm into our earthly realm, a sort of heaven invading earth. Heaven is the spirit realm and we are fleshly, but behind the veil of our flesh is our inner, spirit man that we can not see w/o spiritual eyes. There is so much more in the eternal realm than in the physical realm…things He longs to impart to us if we will only trust Him like a small child trusts his father. He say’s “it is my Father’s good desire to give you the kingdom”.
Jesus is Lord, in Him is life, love, peace, mercy, restoration, so many of the things our deep hearts yearn for. Only He can satisfy us.
He loves us so much.
JC
Claid…no wonder you cant find Him, you’re looking up there…lol.
Btw…you are a new-comer of sorts…I have answered hundreds of questions ad nauseum to those you listed…just ask them. Boomlsang keeps trying to bait me so I dont respond anymore to his posts like I used to, but I assure you…ask Winter, Tele, Metro…I have spent many hours attempting to answer as best I could their various questions, of course not always to their liking, but I tried.
All the best
sky-god.
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/01/father-stabs-son-for-wearing-hat-to-church/#comment-18958
“Every day you deny Him” (John C)
So do you. Your psyco-babbel isn’t any form of Christianity I’ve ever seen before, not even a heretical one.
I agree with you John: Not to my satisfaction.
You’ve generally tended to go with a bunch of mystical new-age-Christian-sounding gobbledygook which you plainly regard as self-evident without ever actually providing evidence for it beyond “I feel it, therefore it’s true.”
When we ask why we should believe what we consider your personal delusion above any other, your answer is to “stop thinking and start believing”–I paraphrase.
That’s why we don’t talk much anymore. I recognize that you’re making an effort, but you’re not a convincing witness.
“for all those other impostors came after him, a piddling 6,000 years ago at the most.”
imposters? Don’t you mean im-pastas?
“thou mayest eat eternally of dessert, and pig out yet fatteneth not”
rAMEN!!!
At least I wasn’t drinking when I read that – that would be the third documented monitor-screen spraying on these blogs today.
I mean, LRA, your rejoinder would have made me snort brandy toddy onto the monitor.
The cops were right: “Don’t Drink and Laugh”.
he he he! :)
FSM rules! rAmen! and let’s all get touched by the noodly appendage!
Sounds fair…
We (me and the mouse in my pocket, and maybe your questioners), may chime in form time to time, saying, “Try harder!”, Stay with the point!”, or “Be more specific”, though.
You’ve never “answered” a question; you’ve spouted gallons of pedantic “spiritual” babble and tried to dress it up as serious “answers.”
If you’ve tried, it’s to be as obfuscated as possible. Or to run away from questions before anyone notices you’ve not answered them.
Feel free to answer this question, if you want to prove me wrong.
And Claid: Don’t bother asking John a simple, yes-no question. You’ll get 5 paragraphs that don’t even begin to address the question, but boil down to “god must exist, because I have no other friends and that would make me sad”.
Its only powerful due to it being truthful. This is a beautiful mystery. The interior life that Christ offers has nothing to do with oppressive, rule-keeping religion, but everything to do with life & liberty. Christ offers a new nature (His) within so wholly remedying the condition of man.
Does anyone (really) want to know? Or are you content to merely mock what you do not understand?
Anyone?
Thats because it is not “religious” Marcion. Spirituality is the offer, a new nature (His) within where love is the dominating attribute.
You are caught in the temporal, seen realm with your values and identifying attachments anchored “down here”. The Lord liberates us from this when we truly know Him and sets us free from the bondage of hatred and judgment.
Love is a power.
**crickets**
Surely, John, it would be nice to know the truth, but as many of us have said many times… In order for us to feel reasonably confident that something is true, especially a claim on the existence of a mystical being, it would require at least some level of liklihood on par with other aspects of our world that we have more reason to believe are true. Oh, and a little evidence wouldn’t hurt.
Stop trying to change us.
What you call mocking, we call discussing an alternate viewpoint.
“sky-god!”
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/01/father-stabs-son-for-wearing-hat-to-church/#comment-18958
I will go back and find all the questions you have not answered, and all the points to which you have not stuck.
Do not mock FSM if you truly do not know him.
The interior life that Meatball (Mutton Chop, “the anointed”), the Lamb of FSM, offers is peace, life and liberty. He offers a new nature.
FSM can have no other gods before Him, because he came first, and the others were invented later. External sky-gods or internal heartworm-gods, it matters not where they live, they are fables the true seeker uses before finding The FSM.
His Bible came first, and the other phone bibles that came later plagiarized many of His words.
Does anyone (really) want to be washed inthe tomato sauce of the Meatball?
I *know in my artichoke heart the peace that comes from knowing the mutton. It’s not a belief; it’s true! We have the written records to prove it, and my feelings just *know* it right down to the tinglies I get when I think of Him. Sometimes it was my cell phone set on “vibrate”.
But I KNOW.
There is MORE!
Bullshit.
I don’t see why not.
Zechariah Sitchin’s Earth Chronicles are fun to read, not provable, although better researched and proven than the bible by a long shot! And still fun to read if you like that sort of thing.
It still begs the question of where *those* “peoples” came from, but so what? That hardly sets our knowledge of human origin back! Just more evolution and genetics to study.
Don’t see why we have to rule that out.
No, not “wholly developed Homo sapiens“, but H. ergaster, a completely different (but related) species.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/02/content_10926763.htm
http://www.livescience.com/history/090226-ancient-modern-feet.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7913375.stm
Yes, it does.
H. ergaster was already well attested 1.5mya from fossil evidence, so there’s nothing terribly surprising about finding it. It does give us more information about how it walked, which matches up quite nicely with what we thought, based on the arrangement of its hips.
We can’t rule it out, I agree*. But this doesn’t provide any reason to imagine it might be true. We also can’t prove that mice didn’t commission the Earth to be built so that they could calculate the Question to Life, the Universe and Everything.
*Well, we can rule out alien hybridisation, because we’re just so closely related to apes. And we don’t share a common ancestor with these aliens, so we ought to be more capable of interbreeding with an ear of corn than anything that developed off-world. But we can’t rule out that aliens tweaked our DNA.
You cant pin me down to some theology…am not religious like that. Am a God lover, not a bible thumper. Need to appreciate the disparity between the external print (bible) and the internal blue…print, His nature within. That’s what its all about.
As far as your sky-God” reference, Christ taught just the opposite. He says “I will be in you and you will be in me” John 17:21-23. And Paul shared the “mystery of the ages is Christ IN you” Col 1:27.
Now I dont know about you, but I dont live “up in the sky”. You are making the age old mistake of associating Him with what you have observed in “religion”. Religion being external and Christ internal…not literally “in ur heart” as you guys are so fond of mocking but literally in one’s spirit, united as it was in the beginning before man lived from the tree of independence whose fruit was death (separation).
Spirituality is what He offers. Truth is always liberating. Religion and “sky-God” mindsets are incorrect and not scriptural.
Bullshit. The very claims you make about God, Jesus, and spirituality are derived from Christianity–hence, you derive your spiritbabble FROM religion.
That’s because you have no reasoning capacity. And because you refuse to be specific or to support anything you say.
Even if I don’t agree with them, there are reasoning Christians I can respect, (not on this blog) and they aren’t above being pinned down to some theology.
You aren’t above it; you are beneath it. Incapable of it.
Saying someone “cant pin [you] down” to it doesn’t make anyone believe that you are simply refusing to lower yourself. (Kids call words that don’t match reality “lies”; adults call them “bullshit”.)
You simply haven’t any thinking capacity.
And don’t tell me you use “feelings” – someone with no ability to think is going to have muddy feelings in response to the muddy thinking.
You also are completely devoid of (that means it’s absent or deficient or missing) any sense of sarcasm, humor, and most especially, the point I am making about your unsupported, unreasoned, non-sequitur, pointless rambling.
Wow, I never knew that. My eyes are opened!
Yeah, John C, start there!
It’s going to take me a while, in my mere one month here, to slog through all the questions you <haven’t answered.
So pick one, this one, and start answering!
“sky god”
http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/03/01/father-stabs-son-for-wearing-hat-to-church/#comment-18958
You have FOUND it! The TRUE RELIGION!
Yay! We must coalesce as True Spaghetti Monsterians and force the godless college textbook printers to put his (true) message in their chapters on evolution.
We have the written records to prove it. No one can say they are not true, because they weren’t there!
In true al dente spirit, until his Second Helping,
rAmen.
Yeah, his cell phone might be stuck on “vibrate”.
I’m guessing he is at home all day on permanent partial disability. (I won’t elaborate the details of this guess further.)
Maybe starting a medication regimen would help.
Then again, maybe not.
You should try the modern sex. It’s far better than the old-fashioned variety.
Would THAT be with your cell phone on “vibrate”?
And you have a good sense of humor too!
2 Trackbacks
[...] month ago I wrote a piece discussing Cyclical Time and the way it affected the ancients’ understanding of history. Let’s look at that [...]
[...] down to nowhere, had no suburbs or malls or clever plastic toys. But they had more time to observe the cycles of the seasons and the stars. And they had a truer sense of how human beings are situated in space and [...]