Bible older than we thought?

[jmcvann]

Here's an interesting article from livescience.com.

Scientists have discovered the earliest known Hebrew writing — an inscription dating from the 10th century B.C., during the period of King David's reign.


The breakthrough could mean that portions of the Bible were written centuries earlier than previously thought. (The Bible's Old Testament is thought to have been first written down in an ancient form of Hebrew.)



Until now, many scholars have held that the Hebrew Bible originated (http://www.livescience.com/history/071211-fundamental-birth.html) in the 6th century B.C., because Hebrew writing was thought to stretch back no further. But the newly deciphered Hebrew text is about four centuries older, scientists announced this month.


Your thoughts?

[Darth Rotor]

Bible older than we thought?

Your thoughts?
Plastic surgery.

[TimCallahan]

There are plenty of clues, particularly anachronisms in the texts, that indicate when various portions of the Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) were written. That there was writing in Israel before ca. 850 BCE, when the J Document is believed to have been written, doesn't mean that the Bible was being written then.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

What will the Creationists do?

~~ Paul

[WaterBreather]

Well the Kebra Nagast - from Ethiopia -
writing believed to have been scripted about 1000 AD,
tells of the Queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon in about 1000 BC.

Much of the pre-Solomon narrative is in the Kebra Nagast,
showing that those stories themselves are at least from 1000 BC.

Its interesting to compare the two. The Bible makes no mention
that the Arc of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia at this time
- before the destruction of the temple.

There is a Temple in Ethiopia which seems to hold the Arc to this day;
and
the Bible also does not mention that the union of the visit by Sheba
was Solomon's firstborn Son : Menelek; who was rejected by Israel
for being black. In the centuries to follow Israel collapses.

Are the Ethiopians then the centre of Zionism?

[Sledge]

What will the Creationists do?

~~ Paul

The same thing they do every night: try to take ove-

Sorry. The same thing they do when anything contradicts their lunacy: deny everything and say everyone else is being unscientific.

[WaterBreather]

to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?
what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?

lunacy
according to mr nobody?

well then
lets have more lunacy
its clearly a GOOD thing

[Marduk]

Here's an interesting article from livescience.com.



Your thoughts?

its been misreported, its not a hebrew text, its a palaeo hebrew text. This is not new news and has been known about since 1902
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gezer_calendar
this new find has been sensationalised for obvious reasons
:p

[HansMustermann]

Here's an interesting article from livescience.com.



Your thoughts?

We've had that discussion before.

The positive part: It's a piece of proto-Hebrew writing all right, likely one of the intermediate steps between early Akkadian and the final liturgical Hebrew.

The bunk part: well, just about all the rest. That shard does not actually mention King David, nor a united kingdom, and has nothing to do with the Bible.

[HansMustermann]

to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?
what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?

lunacy
according to mr nobody?

well then
lets have more lunacy
its clearly a GOOD thing

Oh, please, could you possibly cram more non-sequitur and BS in one message?

Incidentally Einstein by all accounts was simply fascinated with the universe _itself_. He made it clear when he called it "Spinoza's God", which is just that: a deterministic universe which just does its thing and doesn't give a flying f-word about prayers or anything. He made it clear in repeated occasions that he does _not_ believe in a God personally involved in running everything, and generally which resembles the Christian one in any form or shape.

Not that it'll stop idiot apologists from using him as a prop for their imaginary sky daddy...

Galileo? Now that's a guy who'd have been surprised to hear that his science is based on Christianity. I think he made it pretty clear when he went head on against the church's claims repeatedly, and culminated in his mocking the Pope in his book. (Which was the real reason of his conflict with Urban.)

But as I was saying, it's a non-sequitur. What Einstein believed is fully irrelevant, and ditto for Galileo and all the rest. There is no evidence that _Theism_ was the motivation of any of them. Nor that people wouldn't try to figure out the universe without the Abrahamic sky daddy -- as the Chinese, Egyptians, Sumerians, ancient Greeks, etc, had already done.

[TimCallahan]

Well the Kebra Nagast - from Ethiopia -
writing believed to have been scripted about 1000 AD,
tells of the Queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon in about 1000 BC.

Much of the pre-Solomon narrative is in the Kebra Nagast,
showing that those stories themselves are at least from 1000 BC.

Its interesting to compare the two. The Bible makes no mention
that the Arc of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia at this time
- before the destruction of the temple.

There is a Temple in Ethiopia which seems to hold the Arc to this day;
and
the Bible also does not mention that the union of the visit by Sheba
was Solomon's firstborn Son : Menelek; who was rejected by Israel
for being black. In the centuries to follow Israel collapses.

Are the Ethiopians then the centre of Zionism?

As far as I've been able to find any information on the Kebra Nagast, it actually seems to have been written rather late, ca. 1,000 CE. If you have reliable information pointing to it being written ca. 1,000 BCE, I would be interested in hearing it.

[WaterBreather]

Tim:
I see no reason to change the dating system from the convention of AD/BC.
That serves only to distract.
As you well know.

...

Herr Mustermann.
Your vitriol makes your passage virtually unreadable.

My point was to show that believing in God
does not make one a lunatic,
regardless of what YOU mean by the word.

Yes, Einstein was a determinist.
Even when the EPR experiment proved otherwise.
So he was probably the worst example I chose.

Keep denying that Theism is the most powerful force in humanity.
Thats right.
Keep denying the cognitive dissonance in your own mind which
resulted in your ad hominem diatribe.

Keep pretending that your mind is an atom.

[lightfire22000]

I would be interested in seeing the actual inscription. Does the inscription in any way corroborate the Bible?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Bible had been edited numerous times either.

[sadhatter]

WAterbreather your a funny, well mannered, mature person, now that you have gotten some attention could you please get the f out of the pool and let the big kids play?

[Marduk]

Nor that people wouldn't try to figure out the universe without the Abrahamic sky daddy -- as the Chinese, Egyptians, Sumerians, ancient Greeks, etc, had already done.

Case in point, the Abrahamic sky daddy didn't help the Hebrews figure anything out as they simply copied the beliefs of the civilisations around them. The modern world owes more to the Babylonians and the Greeks than it ever did to the Bible which just acted as a method of transmission but was never original in its own right.

:p

[shadron]

Tim:
I see no reason to change the dating system from the convention of AD/BC.


Of course you do. Is this going to be another War over Xmas?

To paraphrase Tsiolkovski's quote:

"Theism is the cradle of civilization. But one should not want to live in a cradle forever.

I recommend a soothing video:

UcrJ2HFKogs

[Ladewig]

to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

Sledge appears to be talking not about theists or Christians in general but specifically about Creationists. If someone in a western democracy in the 21st century chooses to believe that the earth 6000 years old, then that person is, at best, willfully ignorant. The evidence that the earth is billions of years old is overwhelming. A denial of this evidence falls somewhere between blinding oneself to the facts and lunacy.

[kuroyume0161]

What will the Creationists do?

~~ Paul

la, la, la, la, la, la, la

LA, LA, LA, LA, LA, LA, LA!

I'm a creationist. What were we taking about again? Hold on, I have to get ready for more louder 'la, la's.

:D

[Lord Emsworth]

The Bible? *giggles*

I think the youngest bits are not older that the turn of 1st to 2nd century, and maybe a bit younger.

Just sayin'. :teacher:

[Wowbagger]

I would not surprise me if many of the stories in the Bible are many times older than what was even discovered, so far. The stories that have "stuck" appeal the best to human instincts and interests, and human minds could only conjure up a limited number of appealing stories, (until science and technology inspire narrative innovations).

Stories of Jesus-like entities existed loooong before anyone decided to write about Jesus.

World-engulfing flood stories have existed since... well... the existence of floods, actually.

[Dats]

If the Bible is older than we think does this mean we'll be seeing Victoria Principle flog a range of Bible beauty secrets on late night television?

[TimCallahan]

Tim:
I see no reason to change the dating system from the convention of AD/BC.
That serves only to distract.
As you well know. . . .

Actually, I know nothing of the kind. But have it your way. From what I've been able to find, the Kebra Nagast is only about 1,000 years old. Do you have evidence that it was actually written ca. 1,000 BC?

By the way, I'm leaving on a geology tour to Death Valley and will not be back until Monday evening. So, if you don't hear from me for a few days, that's the reason.

[kuroyume0161]

I would not surprise me if many of the stories in the Bible are many times older than what was even discovered, so far. The stories that have "stuck" appeal the best to human instincts and interests, and human minds could only conjure up a limited number of appealing stories, (until science and technology inspire narrative innovations).

Stories of Jesus-like entities existed loooong before anyone decided to write about Jesus.

World-engulfing flood stories have existed since... well... the existence of floods, actually.

You don't have to be surprised. This is very much how it works. Many of these stories were probably passed generation to generation by word of mouth, expanding and evolving like a good fish story. By the time many of these things were actually written down, so many sources were available that it appears that contamination and specialization were introduced at least once to many of them.

For instance, Jesus, to me, is the Itinerant Greek Jew wandering around pretending to be a god-man with one disciple representing each Hebrew tribe who needed to be sacrificed so that our soul shards could be 'saved' while also promoting a cleansing ritual (baptism) and a ritual meal commonly associated with mystery cults. It is just so simple. :confused:

[Brian-M]

Yes, Einstein was a determinist.
Even when the EPR experiment proved otherwise.
So he was probably the worst example I chose.



The EPR experiment disproved determinism? :confused:
Please explain how... and then explain how this is in any way relevant.

As for The Bible, why does long-established fact that writing existed before The Bible is thought to have been written suggest that The Bible is older than it is thought to be?

And even if parts of the Old Testament were written down a couple of centuries earlier than previously thought, so what? That doesn't make them "more true".

If you're going to believe in a religion based on the antiquity of it's earliest texts, become a Hindu... some of the text in the Vedas date back to around 1500 BC. (There are Sumerian texts that date back to before 2500 BC, but nobody worships those religions any more.)

[elbe]

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?

Ancient Greeks?

[kuroyume0161]

Ancient Greeks?

Natural Philosophers maybe. But then again there is a good case for Eratosthenes, Heron, Archimedes, Epicurus, and Lucretius (Roman). So, okay, yes, Ancient Greeks. :)

[Brian-M]

Ancient Greeks?


Ancient Geeks. :D

[HansMustermann]

Ancient Greeks?

Actually, I'd vote for the Sumerians, who had a civilization and an early science back when even the Achaean Greeks were a bunch of barbarians. The Greeks of Pericles were the later Dorian invaders.

The Egyptians too had quite a bit of level-headed approach to figuring out the world before the Greeks. E.g., Imhotep lived in the 27'th century BC and left us, among other things, a medicine manual completely lacking any magical thinking or woowoo rituals. As well as figuring out how to build the first pyramid, an irigation system, and stuff like that. (He really didn't deserve being made the villain of The Mummy:p)

Sure, he _was_ a High Priest of Ra, so I guess someone would take him as example of all the good that religion did. But in fact, there is no indication that religion played that much of a role at all in his approach to science. When he writes about washing and bandaging a wound, however, he conspicuously lacks any kind of prayers or spells to be said over said wound.

And generally, for someone to be the first recorded genius in medicine, engineering, architecture _and_ administration -- every bit as worthy of awe as, say, Leonardo Da Vinci -- I doubt that superstition was that high on his list of priorities. You can bet that his day included a lot more reading and study than what the sacred religious scrolls say.

He probably went and became a priest just because that was effectively the ruling class and the best you can get as a literate young man.

[Hux]

It just makes the earlier Hebrews prone to more rubbish and belief. Its not as if they were as savvy as 8th century Hebrews is it? :D

[Marduk]

And generally, for someone to be the first recorded genius in medicine, engineering, architecture _and_ administration -- every bit as worthy of awe as, say, Leonardo Da Vinci

He might have been a Genius at some things but he was imho the very worst host in history, who really wants to hear "Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we shall die.", when you've just sat down to dinner
:D

It just makes the earlier Hebrews prone to more rubbish and belief. Its not as if they were as savvy as 8th century Hebrews is it? :D

you might have said that in humour, but its factually correct. In the 10th C they were Shepherds, but in the 8th they were librarians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Ashurbanipal
later they wrote a book based on what they had learned there
;)

[Slayhamlet]

We've had that discussion before.

The positive part: It's a piece of proto-Hebrew writing all right, likely one of the intermediate steps between early Akkadian and the final liturgical Hebrew.

The bunk part: well, just about all the rest. That shard does not actually mention King David, nor a united kingdom, and has nothing to do with the Bible.

Where'd you get the idea that Hebrew is a descendant of Akkadian? It's not. They're not even in the same branch of the Semitic subfamily. That would be like saying English is a descendant of Old Norse.

[lightfire22000]

Case in point, the Abrahamic sky daddy didn't help the Hebrews figure anything out as they simply copied the beliefs of the civilisations around them. The modern world owes more to the Babylonians and the Greeks than it ever did to the Bible which just acted as a method of transmission but was never original in its own right.

:p

You forgot Egypt.

Oh, I think their religion did help for some reason. I don't know why it helped, but it might have had to do with the simplicity of their faith and its emphasis on discipline. Also, the Hebrew's religion appealed to nomads as opposed to Mesopotamian city gods. Babylonian, Greek, and Egyptian polytheism changed a lot over the centuries and it's possible that the Hebrew religion influenced other religions.

Amateurs, like myself, make the big mistake of assuming that the mythologies we were taught in school were believed during the civilization's entire existence, and they didn't change philosophically. This is false. The pantheons of Greece and Egypt evolved into monotheistic religions at some point.

In Egypt, Akhenaton made Aton-Ra the one god. In Greece, there was Cleanthes, the Stoic who prayed to Zeus as the essential god. Interestingly enough, one of Zeus' sons, Heracles, dies ostracized only to rise again. Also, note the similarity between the words theos and Zeus.

[The Fallen Serpent]

...even the Achaean Greeks were a bunch of barbarians.
The Achaean Greeks were not native speakers of Greek? I tease :p Good points on the Sumerians and Egyptians. The point is all cutlures influence and are influenced by other cultures. It is a slow build up through out time and some of our greatest achievements are rooted back quiet a long time ago.

He might have been a Genius at some things but he was imho the very worst host in history, who really wants to hear "Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we shall die.", when you've just sat down to dinner
:D
That actually sounds like a great way to kick off an epic party to me.

Where'd you get the idea that Hebrew is a descendant of Akkadian? It's not. They're not even in the same branch of the Semitic subfamily. That would be like saying English is a descendant of Old Norse.Good point. They are more cousin languages. Hebrew is a Caananite language of the Northwest Semitic group. One of the difficulties in translating the shard was determining which Caananite language it most closely represented.


Amateurs, like myself, make the big mistake of assuming that the mythologies we were taught in school were believed during the civilization's entire existence, and they didn't change philosophically. This is false. The pantheons of Greece and Egypt evolved into monotheistic religions at some point.This is a great point. In discussions it is easy to fall to presenting the situation based on the image of a single period, and really the dominate philosophies of the day. Modern cultures are not unique in having divisiveness and splintering philosophies. We tend to represent civilizations passed as monolithic in form. This may have been desired by many, yet not something that is easily if ever achieved.

ETA: What I found most interesting is that the translated text bears resemblance to Deuteronomy 10:18-10:19. To my uneducated eye this implies evidence for the fragmentary theory of the Torah. I definitely do not see this as evidence as proof of the United Monarchy having existed as described in the Bible, nor of it being written in its full or even similar form centuries earlier.

[Marduk]

You forgot Egypt.

I am hard pushed to think of anything in the modern world that was inherited from the Egyptians

anyone help ?

[The Fallen Serpent]

I am hard pushed to think of anything in the modern world that was inherited from the Egyptians

anyone help ?

I thought we got makeup from them?

[lightfire22000]

I am hard pushed to think of anything in the modern world that was inherited from the Egyptians

anyone help ?

A 365 day year
Early calculations of pi
Simple machines such as the inclined plane/screw, level, and elaborate tools
Paper making
Glass
Numerous medical innovations such as the stitch, prosthetics, laxatives, and health insurance
Astronomy(crucial for weather prediction)

[Marduk]

A 365 day year
Early calculations of pi
Simple machines such as the inclined plane/screw, level, and elaborate tools
Paper making
Glass
Numerous medical innovations such as the stitch, prosthetics, laxatives, and health insurance
Astronomy(crucial for weather prediction)

All of those were invented in Mesopotamia with the exception of paper making which was invented in China around the 2nd century AD, Paper takes its name from Egyptian papyrus, but it wasn't invented by them.
True the egyptians did invent the 365 day year but as the mesopotamian timed their year on the vernal rising of the Pleaides they had a year which was 365.256 363 051 days long. Or to simplify, one actual year exactly. They actually orientated their temples to face the rising position and split their year into 360 days plus some change. The change was when they considered the Gods had abandoned them and everyone got drunk and didn't do any work until the priests said it was safe to do so as the gods had returned. This had the advantage of their years always being accurate and served as a chronological mooring point to time their lunar and ritual calendars on. Other cultures messed around by having to add an extra day every few years to make up the loss, including the egyptians

no prize this time
sorry
:p

[Marduk]

I thought we got makeup from them?

Neanderthals invented make up
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122466430&ps=cprs
they preceeded the egyptians by a few years
:D

[TSR]

If the Bible is older than we think does this mean we'll be seeing Victoria Principle flog a range of Bible beauty secrets on late night television?

.
Victoria Principal ... flogger...



I'm sorry, what were we discussing? I kinda got distracted...
.

[Marduk]

Ok I have answered my own questions by reading this article
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/egyptians/egypt_importance_01.shtml
apparently they invented the pyramid form and may possibly be helpful to medicine in the future from the study of mummified bilharzia worms

Colour me not impressed. Nature surely invented the pyramid form earlier as the shape of the Egyptian pyramids was based on......
http://www.guardianweekly.co.uk/images/articles/698.jpg
;)

[lightfire22000]

All of those were invented in Mesopotamia with the exception of paper making which was invented in China around the 2nd century AD, Paper takes its name from Egyptian papyrus, but it wasn't invented by them.
True the egyptians did invent the 365 day year but as the mesopotamian timed their year on the vernal rising of the Pleaides they had a year which was 365.256 363 051 days long. Or to simplify, one actual year exactly. They actually orientated their temples to face the rising position and split their year into 360 days plus some change. The change was when they considered the Gods had abandoned them and everyone got drunk and didn't do any work until the priests said it was safe to do so as the gods had returned. This had the advantage of their years always being accurate and served as a chronological mooring point to time their lunar and ritual calendars on. Other cultures messed around by having to add an extra day every few years to make up the loss, including the egyptians

no prize this time
sorry
:p

Uhh...The Egyptians used papyrus for writing long before 100 A.D. You still have to acknowledge mathematics, simple machines, medicine, boats, and much more. The Ebers papyrus contains the earliest known roots of a Scientific Method.

[Marduk]

Uhh...The Egyptians used papyrus for writing long before 100 A.D. You still have to acknowledge mathematics, simple machines, medicine, boats, and much more. The Ebers papyrus contains the earliest known roots of a Scientific Method.

Papyrus isn't paper, all the other things you have mentioned were not egyptian inventions. I stated that, so I did acknowledge that they did not originate in egypt.


The Ebers papyrus contains the earliest known roots of a Scientific Method.
no it doesn't, there are numerous examples of science from ancient Sumer (3000bce) and there is a medical text actually called "Treatise of Medical Diagnosis and Prognosis." which is babylonian and dates from 1600bce (50 years older than the Ebers papyrus)
Doctors were active in Mesopotamia using empirical medicine before Egypt existed.
;)

[babbits]

Waterfella says:

"what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?"

They were atheists, except Newton. In those days, intelligent people lied if they wanted to survive. So they just pretended. No one was safe from Christian dogma and intellectual domination. Even the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick was excommunicated, and his subjects were excommunicated with him. His subjects ordered to rebel against Frederick in order to be reinstated. (If you die excommunicated, you go straight to hell, of course.) So 'good and holy' pope Alexander III was quite prepared to send a whole nation of innocent people to hell for eternity of torture if they wouldn't rebel against their king -- who had been crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the previous pope! And in fact all his subjects who died between the time of Frederick's excommunication and his grovelling apology to Alexander III (who put his foot on Frederick's head as the final humiliation) are in hell now.

Copernicus had the first edition of his theory placed in his dying hands. He wouldn't permit its publication until he knew he was dying, because he didn't want to burn.

Newton may have been a Unitarian. But he didn't advertise that fact, or he would have lost his position with the Royal Society (chartered in 1662). The Royal Society was supported financially by the Crown, and the king or queen was the head of the Church of England.

The Established Church of England was of course Trinitarian. Unitarianism was a heresy. For which the noted scientist Bruno was convicted and burned at the stake. Bruno also said and wrote that the earth was a satellite of the sun, not the other way round. He was ordered to recant, but unlike Galileo, wouldn't.

(Galileo lied when he denied to the Inquisition what he had previously written. He did it to save his life from a horrible ending.)

Galileo was sentenced to house arrest for the remainder of his life, for the same belief that Copernicus believed, but at least he wasn't burned alive.

No pope has ever admitted that the earth circles the sun; one pope has said, though, that the jury of clerics who, under the pope, tried Galileo, had been ill-advised.

No apology for the murder of Bruno, though.

Christianity led Western Europe into the Dark Ages, and she only emerged from it after the Reformation, which splintered the totalitarian hold that Christianity had over the minds and bodies of Europe.

[lightfire22000]

Waterfella says:

"what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?"

They were atheists, except Newton. In those days, intelligent people lied if they wanted to survive. So they just pretended. No one was safe from Christian dogma and intellectual domination. Even the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick was excommunicated, and his subjects were excommunicated with him. His subjects ordered to rebel against Frederick in order to be reinstated. (If you die excommunicated, you go straight to hell, of course.) So 'good and holy' pope Alexander III was quite prepared to send a whole nation of innocent people to hell for eternity of torture if they wouldn't rebel against their king -- who had been crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the previous pope! And in fact all his subjects who died between the time of Frederick's excommunication and his grovelling apology to Alexander III (who put his foot on Frederick's head as the final humiliation) are in hell now.

Copernicus had the first edition of his theory placed in his dying hands. He wouldn't permit its publication until he knew he was dying, because he didn't want to burn.

Newton may have been a Unitarian. But he didn't advertise that fact, or he would have lost his position with the Royal Society (chartered in 1662). The Royal Society was supported financially by the Crown, and the king or queen was the head of the Church of England.


I think Newton was almost a throwback to the Gnostics.

[Brian-M]

I am hard pushed to think of anything in the modern world that was inherited from the Egyptians

anyone help ?


Coin-operated vending machines. Seriously.

http://www.smith.edu/hsc/museum/ancient_inventions/hsc18b.htm

[ddt]

Coin-operated vending machines. Seriously.

http://www.smith.edu/hsc/museum/ancient_inventions/hsc18b.htm

That's a great site! Another nice one is the folding stool (http://www.smith.edu/hsc/museum/ancient_inventions/stool2.html), dated to 2000 BC. Virtually unchanged in 4000 years.

[Marduk]

Coin-operated vending machines. Seriously.

http://www.smith.edu/hsc/museum/ancient_inventions/hsc18b.htm

The name of the Greek inventor not giving you a clue as to why its not qualified then
:D

[Marduk]

That's a great site! Another nice one is the folding stool (http://www.smith.edu/hsc/museum/ancient_inventions/stool2.html), dated to 2000 BC. Virtually unchanged in 4000 years.

the King shown here on the right using the worlds first flush toilet and suddenly realising that bog roll won't be invented for another three thousand years, Akkadian 2400bce
http://conspiracyclothes.com/the2012deception/wp-content/themes/HallOfCostumes/HallOfCostumes/images/243.jpg

the cuneiform on the right decribes his anguish
"Attendant, Attendant, I have been sat here so long I have tag nuts"
and the faithful servants reply on the left
"thats ok my liege I have a workman here with a variety of chipping tools"
:D:D:D

[ddt]

the King shown here on the right using the worlds first flush toilet and suddenly realising that bog roll won't be invented for another three thousand years, Akkadian 2400bce
http://conspiracyclothes.com/the2012deception/wp-content/themes/HallOfCostumes/HallOfCostumes/images/243.jpg

What's your claim? Your picture doesn't show the same design as mine.

[Hlafordlaes]

As for who first invented what and where, it's useful to think in terms of who first successfully contributed to accumulated and wide-spread knowledge. The Chinese invented many things first, yet like the first clock, they were given to the emperor and passed into oblivion. Didn't help that the Middle Kingdom thought itself the center of the world and saw no interest in spreading the word. First to invent paper? OK. First to change the world with flexible and portable writing? Nope. Plenty of other isolated advances that went nowhere in Africa and America.

The Greeks got a jump start from surrounding civilizations, but their body of work was the first one to constitute a true knowledge explosion, and lasting base, for humanity.

[Slayhamlet]

Also, note the similarity between the words theos and Zeus.

The similarity is merely incidental, as they're not etymologically related.

Ζεύς is, however, etymologically related to the Greek word δῖος meaning "divine" or "godlike", as in the famous epithet δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς "godlike Achilles". Ζεύς is also related to the Latin deus "god", both being derived from the same Indo-European root. But θεός is from a completely different root.

[Bob Klase]

I am hard pushed to think of anything in the modern world that was inherited from the Egyptians

Nothing at all? Not a single thing?

your original post was attempting to point out Egyptian inventions that have had an effect on the modern world you have yet to name one.

Not a single one?

the earlier egyptian system is called "Unary", not base 10

but yes, so thats one thing the Egyptians invented that has had an effect on the modern world. Thanks

Oh, there's at least one then.

I am not denying the importance of Egyptian culture in the ancient world, I am stating that very few of its innovations made it into the modern one,

Very few? I thought there weren't any?

I have also noticed that you are moving the goalposts

Perhaps the Egyptians invented irony?

[Brian-M]

The name of the Greek inventor not giving you a clue as to why its not qualified then
:D


Nope, not at all.

Hero (or Heron) of Alexandria (Greek: Ἥρων ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς) (c. 10–70 AD). was an ancient Greek mathematician who was a resident of a Roman province (Ptolemaic Egypt); he was also an engineer who was active in his native city of Alexandria. He is considered the greatest experimenter of antiquity[1] and his work is representative of the Hellenistic scientific tradition.[2]


The inventor lived in Egypt.
The inventor's "native city of Alexandria" is in Egypt.
And the invention itself was used exclusively in Egypt (as far as we know).

As far as I'm concerned, that's Egyptian enough for me.

[Marduk]

Nope, not at all.




The inventor lived in Egypt.
The inventor's "native city of Alexandria" is in Egypt.
And the invention itself was used exclusively in Egypt (as far as we know).

As far as I'm concerned, that's Egyptian enough for me.
This is what he looked like
http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/BigPictures/Heron.jpeg
and nice omission on your part there
from the same page on wiki
Due to strong Babylonian influence in Hero's work, it was once speculated by a minority of scholars that Hero may have been a Greek of Egyptian or Phoenician origin,but the modern scholarly consensus is that he was a pure Greek. The historian of mathematics C. B. Boyer explains that Hero's identification as an Egyptian or a Phoenician was largely due to the strong Babylonian influence on his work. However at least from the days of Alexander the Great to the close of the classical world, there undoubtedly was much intercommunication between Greece and Mesopotamia, and it seems to be clear that the Babylonian arithmetic and algebraic geometry continued to exert considerable influence in the Hellenistic world.
deny deny deny
:p

[Brian-M]

This is what he looked like
http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/BigPictures/Heron.jpeg
and nice omission on your part there
from the same page on wiki

deny deny deny
:p


You're disqualifying him on account of his race?
Isn't that a little... racist? :p

(What's this thread about again? I forget.)

[HansMustermann]

This is what he looked like
http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/BigPictures/Heron.jpeg
and nice omission on your part there
from the same page on wiki

deny deny deny
:p

Umm, if you're going to ascribe the work of someone born and raised in Egypt to Greece just because he was an ethnic Greek, should I understand that the UK gets the credit for most US patents? :p

[Belz...]

to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?
what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?

lunacy
according to mr nobody?

well then
lets have more lunacy
its clearly a GOOD thing

No. These people were good scientists because they IGNORED the teachings of the old myths to focus on reality.

[babbits]

You forgot Egypt.

The destruction (by arson) of the great library of Alexandria probably accounts for the under-rating of the place of Egypt in the history of civilization. But the Greek philosophers credited Egypt with the beginnings of philosophy in mathematics and logic. And of course the Mathematics was developed to foster engineering.

[realpaladin]

Umm, if you're going to ascribe the work of someone born and raised in Egypt to Greece just because he was an ethnic Greek, should I understand that the UK gets the credit for most US patents? :p

Aw cr*p! Now we dutch get blamed for the financial crisis...

[Christian Klippel]

Keep denying that Theism is the most powerful force in humanity.

Well, if you mean "most powerful force" as of "most powerful force to start wars" or "most powerful force for violence against people with different minds" or "most powerful force to keep people stupid" or ....

Then yes, it surely has been, and still is, the most powerful force at that. However, if you mean that in terms of advancing humanity, advancing science, striving for peace, etc... well, then you are as wrong as one can be.

[TimCallahan]

WaterBreather: I'm back. In the time I've been gone, have you found anything to substantiate a date for the Kebra Nagast that would make it anywhere near the time of even the divided monarchies of Israel and Judah? As far as I can tell, it was written sometime since the time of Christ.

[Marduk]

Umm, if you're going to ascribe the work of someone born and raised in Egypt to Greece just because he was an ethnic Greek, should I understand that the UK gets the credit for most US patents? :p

yes, all of them except Microsoft English (US)
:D

You're disqualifying him on account of his race?
Isn't that a little... racist? :p

(What's this thread about again? I forget.)

I'm disqualifying him because he wasn't Egyptian, Egyptian is not a race.
:rolleyes:

[godless dave]

Until now, many scholars have held that the Hebrew Bible originated in the 6th century B.C

I know of no scholar who ever claimed that. Parts of the Bible are definitely older than that. This is not news.

[Marduk]

I know of no scholar who ever claimed that. Parts of the Bible are definitely older than that. This is not news.

I think hes confusing "originating" with "compiled"
:p

[Skeptic Ginger]

What will the Creationists do?

~~ Paul
Dang, that makes the YEC math all wrong, doesn't it. ;)

[Skeptic Ginger]

to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?
what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?

lunacy
according to mr nobody?

well then
lets have more lunacy
its clearly a GOOD thingOh my.... you have a bit of explaining to do.

All those thousands of years of theist explanations for how the Universe works amounted to no more than superstition.

Science, OTOH, has cured diseases, developed jets and space vehicles, allowed men to walk on the Moon, and sent a Rover to Mars which is still functioning years later. Science is how we came to understand geology, and biology.

We know how life evolved, we can manipulate genes to cure cancers and correct genetic defects, we can produce vaccines from yeast cultures.



So what thousands of years of believing in superstitious 'lunacy' is it you claim 'science' came from?

[Skeptic Ginger]

.....
Keep denying that Theism is the most powerful force in humanity.
.....This relies entirely on how you define MOST powerful force.

If you define is as most responsible for war and prejudice and perpetuating ignorance, maybe theism does deserve the honors.

If you define it as advancing humankind along in achievement, my money's on science.


As for all theists being lunatics, I agree with you there, it is a completely false claim.