Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Re-writing history to fit the bible and the flat earth argument
Pat_B -- right on - and that is just about how it probably went, yet so
many people are insistant that they are speaking "universal truths" when relating this stuff. And we cannot forget the personal or partisan agendas of the countless scribes, editors and those relating these stories. As people put their own spin on their own interpretations today, we see just how much all of these things act as influences to virtually guarantee that nothing we are reading is as it was written or intended.
posted by
gomedome
on September 21, 2005 at 6:27 AM
| link to this | reply
let's see
if it's true what they say, people remember about 1/4 of what they hear in a given message, and the old time scribes and prophets were people, they got about 1/4 of the story direct from the source. Then their language and the meanings of words changed over time -- other scholars translated the possibly misunderstood stuff to their language, and so on, and so on. So by now, six or eight thousand years after the first 25% of the first message came down, we're probably looking at something that could be about 0.5 percent right. Plus which it was based on the science of the day, in an era before anyone knew much about physics or chemistry or even simple biology, such as how the woman's cycle worked, how a sperm fertilized an egg, etc., (but probably not before there was already PMS). So in my feeble mind, I figure your guess is as good as mine...
posted by
Pat_B
on September 21, 2005 at 6:01 AM
| link to this | reply