Re: My point |
Posted by
Dalale
(Guest)
- Monday, July 26 2004, 2:29:42 (CEST) from Canada - Windows XP - Internet Explorer Website: Website title: |
My point was not that the clay tablets should be questioned so much as the *translator* of the clay tablets ought to be questioned. Let's say that you have a code to decipher. Let's say that you decide that something in that code looks like a car or that the word "car" fits conveniently in the context of the code you are translating. Maybe the word originally meant "chariot." The problem is that what comest to mind as "car" originally meant something else. We may not know what "car" really meant because the things that existed in the time of our ancestors are not well researched nor may they be a part of our present-day culture. The problem in translating code (text written in a different script or language) from a long time ago is that our present day culture is very different, in some ways, from the culture that existed back then. We've lost some of the context, and we attempt to pick up pieces of that culture through archaeological excavations. The rest of our interpretation can only be a extrapolation and projection from the present onto the past. This is the problem with Sitchins. He is clearly a fan of modern day science and science fiction, which are things that I, too, enjoy. HOWEVER, those things that he loves have tainted his translations of the tablets. ********"I trust that modern science will continue to confirm ancient knowledge" is one of Zachariah Sitchins favorite lines..not that ancient knowledge will confirm modern science ....and there is a difference...... nonetheless, I understand your point...and there certainly are ways professionals get around such issues, as i'm sure Sumerologists, Assyriologists, and others who decipher Hieroglyphics, Linear A and B and so on and so forth must have gotten stuck many times when a "car vs chariot" issue came up. (Even though car vs chariot is very easy to resolve!!!!) There are ways to get around such blocks since we know that there were no "cars" back then and none of the cuneiform tablets had a car or cars depicted on them (i've seen rocket's and helicopters depicted on clay slabs 6000 years or old or so, but never a car)... *********Sumerologists would most likely translate the word as "chariot" or a vehicle which enabled the ancient people to travel from point A to point B, which would be common sense! Now if there were cars back then and we just never found clay tablets which depicted them, it wouldn't matter all that much. What's the difference between "chariot" rather then "car"? The ancient people could travel from point A to point B in a car, a chariot, a horse, a dinosaurs, and it still wouldn't change the story all that much. Does it matter if our ancestors, the ancient people of Mesopotamia saw people or beings coming down from another planet on a flying chariot, in a airplane, on a flying horse, in a flying car, and or on a flying dinosaur? ***********The significant part is not what their means of transportation was. From my point of view the significant part is that they mention these beings coming from another planet over and over, thousands of times in cuneiform text. This is the part of our ancient text which intrigues me. On the other hand, the word "God(s)" to explain the nature of these beings may have been translated wrong. These beings may be humans just like you and I, or humans who are at a higher spiritual level then us. I personally would not worry about the "car" vs "chariot" translation....cuneiform text states these beings existed and came from another planet and this cannot be denied..... even the Vatican knows about it.... --------------------- |
The full topic:
|
Content-length: 4051 Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave-flash, */* Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate Accept-language: en-ca Cache-control: no-cache Connection: Keep-Alive Cookie: *hidded* Host: www.insideassyria.com Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf2/rkvsf_core.php?My_point-2HZy.zbgi.REPLY User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) |