Monday, October 10, 2016

... on Chronological Snobbery, Mainly


1) ... against the concept of "Before History" · 2) ... on Chronological Snobbery, Mainly

6:25
"for the first time" - no. It was a recovery.

renge9909
You know, you could just keep your comments in one post.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
For one thing, they are on successive parts of video.

For another, I tried exactly that on a computer which muddled the line breaks into one paragraph.

And third, this way anyone who wants to comment on ONE aspect of my criticism can comment on that one, and those wanting to comment on ANOTHER can comment on that one.

Lajos Winkler
It had to start at one point. That's what's being referenced in the video - when it actually started for the first time.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
And that is exactly what I disagreed with.

I am no longer sure 6:25 is about agriculture or metallurgy, but I am sure the date given is a misdating for a date after the Flood of Noah and that both arts existed before the Flood.

Agriculture from Adam, Metallurgy from Tubal Kain.

Lajos Winkler
+Hans-Georg Lundahl There was no flood. It's a myth from a book written by cavemen and later edited by the scholars.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Oh, you admit cavemen could write books, then?

Lajos Winkler
+Hans-Georg Lundahl It was a society developed not much more than actual cavemen of Europe. They lived in today's Middle East. They were imagining stories just like any other society, and transfering them by storytelling, later those got written on parchments, paper, etc.

Their crude life and primitive morality got saved in a number of savage stories that make up the holy books of abrahamic religions.

It still has nothing to do with the fact you believe in a myth. You're being irrational.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
You are believing in a myth which is as much a reconstruction and as much untrue as Ginnungagap (see Norse Mythology). How "developed" their society was has NOTHING to do with how reliable they are. Your saying they made up a story does not explain how they came to believe in it as fact, and it is inherent in the Flood Story of the Bible that Flood was to them presented as, not a reconstructed fact, nor a revealed fact, but as a traceable, historic fact, having tangible connexions with their genealogy.

No, the one really irrational about THIS question is you. Among other things, through Chronological snobbism

+ I presume you dare not even show your own name, since it seems you are hiding behind that of a previous known man:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lajos_Winkler

Lajos Winkler
Pills, dude. Take them.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Oh, you are a Commie!

They have their attitude to Christianity and Psychiatry. The kind of thing I hoped the East Block was out off, back in 1990!

(If you are a Commie, that would ALSO explain why you hide behind a screen name taken from a dead man - you didn't say I was wrong on that one.)

No comments: