Ancient Civilizations

[sooda]

You have an interesting and imaginative belief here.

I only know of one science and it has been sufficient to to achieve the level of knowledge and technology that we now possess.

If there is no recorded history prior to 4,000 years ago, how do you know any of the claims that you made here regarding developments older than that date actually happened as you claim?

If humans had used modern science, 14,000 years ago to invent agriculture, it would have radically changed the last 14,000 years and probably eliminated a lot of mythology. Agriculture developed through trial and error and not through a formalized process of the scientific method. I recognize that a form of science can be and has been used by cultures that are not technologically advanced, but I do not agree with your claims of modern science.

I have read that purposeful agriculture spread very rapidly when the Black Sea was breeched and people were on the move. To me that means they were smart enough to pick up on new technologies.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They weren't dummies.. In your travels have you seen how ancient peoples coped with their environment? They were damned clever and probably as inherently intelligent as we are.

I would not expect ancient people to be morons either. They were ignorant compared to the knowledge we have access to, but not stupid and very capable given the knowledge they had. In fact, they possessed knowledge of technologies that I could not replicate without specialized training. There are a few people knapping flint for a hobby, but largely that technology is gone from modern minds, for instance.

This understanding of the intelligence of ancient people is often misrepresented by creationists.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I have read that purposeful agriculture spread very rapidly when the Black Sea was breeched and people were on the move. To me that means they were smart enough to pick up on new technologies.

I would imagine that recovery from a disaster like that would necessitate rapid adoption of new ideas.

 

[sooda]

I would not expect ancient people to be morons either. They were ignorant compared to the knowledge we have access to, but not stupid and very capable given the knowledge they had. In fact, they possessed knowledge of technologies that I could not replicate without specialized training. There are a few people knapping flint for a hobby, but largely that technology is gone from modern minds, for instance.

This understanding of the intelligence of ancient people is often misrepresented by creationists.

Oh you said the magic word...…….

 

[sooda]

I would imagine that recovery from a disaster like that would necessitate rapid adoption of new ideas.

Well, it was a slow moving flood so they had time to pack up and walk their herds to higher ground, but it coincides with the rapid development of agriculture elsewhere.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well, it was a slow moving flood so they had time to pack up and walk their herds to higher ground, but it coincides with the rapid development of agriculture elsewhere.

I have a book around here somewhere about the breech of the Black Sea, but I have not taken time to read it.

Some creationists once left me a comic book about the flood of Noah. It was hilarious. In one panel, you see the ark floating on the rising water and there is the top portion of an animals head in the water around the boat. I was puzzled and could not figure out what animal it was supposed to be. Then it came on me all at once. It was the top of T. rex head. Looking closer, the elephants depicted on the shrinking land had long, thick fur and highly recurved tusks. Those amusing creationists and their imaginations.

I was under the impression that the initial phases of the Black Sea flooding would have been fairly rapid and catastrophic, but this would have diminished with distance, and some time would have been required for the water to drain off as well.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Oh you said the magic word...…….

???

 

[sooda]

???

Absolutely. You caught it immediately.. Maybe I should have said magic woid…..

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Absolutely. You caught it immediately.. Maybe I should have said magic woid…..

I was just lucky to be old enough to have seen clips on TV and then doubly lucky to find a picture with that word on it.

 

[cladking]

What are you defining as recorded history?

Non fiction writing.

 

[cladking]

If there is no recorded history prior to 4,000 years ago, how do you know any of the claims that you made here regarding developments older than that date actually happened as you claim?

Because there is non fiction writing that implies how the pyramids were built and it is in complete agreement with known science and evidence. This writing implies extensive knowledge that would have required thousands of years to accumulate with a science based on observation > logic upon which it is based.

The non fiction writing is misinterpreted to be mere incantation where it is actually a silly little book of ritual.

 

[cladking]

If humans had used modern science, 14,000 years ago to invent agriculture, it would have radically changed the last 14,000 years and probably eliminated a lot of mythology.

No, because this is exactly how it happened. It actually created the mythology.

We can't see the science. It based on logic and we no longer have logic. The logic of language became too complex and it collapsed.

The realities of science and history were confused and became alchemy, religion, mythology, and almost everything else. The entire modern world and science itself in very real ways are founded on the confused ruins of ancient science. We have come forth from the ruins of the tower of babel.

 

[cladking]

The realities of science and history were confused and became alchemy, religion, mythology, and almost everything else.

Even our vocabularies were taken straight from the vocabulary of Ancient Language.

This is why the word "mother" is so similar in most languages; they all sprang from the universal metaphysical language.

 

[gnostic]

My beliefs are irrelevant. The location in time and space of the origin of the Tower of Babel is irrelevant.

What is relevant is how ancient civilization arose and thrived. What is relevant is why "recorded history" didn't begin until 1200 years after the invention of writing.

How would you propose affecting a field of study where each individual believes reality is determined by vote and only peers have a say or a vote?

No, it is very relevant...if you claiming the tower existed in history, and that people BEFORE the Flood and BEFORE the Tower of Babel all spoke only in one language.

The 4th and 3rd millennia BCE, hence respectively the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, in both Egypt and Mesopotamia spoke different languages and have different writings systems.

And then there were the early Semitic people, the Akkadians and the Amorites in the later half of 3rd millennium BCE, didn’t have their writing systems, until Sargon of Akkad, established the Akkadian dynasty in ancient Sumer. But the Akkadian spoken language might be intelligible to Sumerian, but the written language (Akkadian cuneiform) is almost completely identical to Sumerian cuneiform, that because the Akkadians adopted Sumerian cuneiform, which continued to be used in the Hellenistic period, even though spoken Sumerian died out by 1900 BCE.

A more archaic form of cuneiform as inscriptions were found in temple in Uruk, which archaeologists referred to as proto-Sumerian. The inscriptions along with the temple have been dated to around 3400 BCE. Hence these predated the Sumerian civilization which started in 3100 BCE, the Jemdet Nasr period.

Uruk is far older than 3400 BCE and the Sumerian civilization, and yet the author of Genesis say that Uruk or Erech didn’t exist until after the Flood, by Ham’s grandson Nimrod who supposed found and built other cities in Babylonia and Assyria.

The Nimrod story as a history, is total BS, because all the cities that Genesis mentioned, were archaeologically built in different times.

Uruk in 5000 BCE, but flourished as urbanized city from 4000 to 3100 BCE, which was why archaeologists named this Uruk period. Uruk ceased to be important after the fall of the 3rd dynasty in late 3rd millennium BCE.

Babylon and Akkad (Accad) around 2600 and 2400 respectively. The earliest for Nineveh is 3400 BCE.

So, no, cladking. No one by the name of Nimrod exist in Sumerian and Akkadian history. And there is no Tower of Babel anywhere in Mesopotamia, and certainly not in Babylon. The tallest buildings in Mesopotamia were the Ziggurats found in different cities.

Proper writings began with Sumerians in the Jemdet Nasr period (3100 - 2900 BCE), where most records were of bookkeeping in nature, before actual literature.

And the earliest Sumerian literature began in 2500 - 2000 BCE, with not only religious hymns and myths of their records, but also hymns to their kings, some of which were legends and some of were actual history.

The earliest stories of Gilgamesh and the Flood, were found in Sumerian cuneiform on clay tablets as early as 2100 BCE.

Even when the 3rd dynasty of Ur collapsed in 2004 BCE, that spelt the end of the Sumerian civilization, Sumerian writing continued to exist, by the 1st dynasty of Babylon, some historians would therefore called it the Amorite dynasty in Babylon.

This dynasty were the Amorite people who adopted the older Akkadian spoken language, but wrote in Sumerian cuneiform, just like the Akkadians did before them. Therefore, the spoken Akkadian dialect became known as Old Babylonian language, which marked the 1st dynasty in Babylon as “Old Babylonian period”, 1830 - 1531 BCE.

Among the earliest writings of the Old Babylonian, were not only the Epic of Gilgamesh and Epic of Atrahasis, but also the oldest codification of laws, by Hammurabi.

In any case, the 3rd millennium BCE Sumerians and Akkadians did record reign of kings, just as the 1st Babylonian dynasty did, in the 1st half of the 2nd millennium BCE.

So historical records did predated your claim of 1200 BCE writings. The problem with your claim of 1200 bce, is that we’re no Hebrew recordings of history until King Josiah (640-609 BCE). Writing did exist in the 10th century BCE, but none of them have to with biblical literature (eg Gezer Calendar).

 

[gnostic]

No, because this is exactly how it happened. It actually created the mythology.

We can't see the science. It based on logic and we no longer have logic. The logic of language became too complex and it collapsed.

I have the highest respect for ancient knowledge and their achievements, but i also understand that there are limitations of what they know and what they can know.

And you got it all backwards, cladking.

Ancient science is very limited.

The logic is limited and rudimentary at the best of time, during ancient times, and the further back in time you go, like in prehistoric times, hence before writings, there are no ways to know how logical people were, their capacities for intelligent reasoning, simply they have left very little behind. Some tools, some ornaments and figurines, some pottery and some paintings, some forms of shelters they have built, and if not lost or destroyed over times, perhaps their remains and signs of funerary customs.

There are only so much we can do with these objects and places they left behind, if writings haven’t been invented to record what they have in mind.

Some ancient writings were found like 3400 BCE, archaic form of cuneiform in Uruk (Uruk IV period, and in which the Bible referred to as Erech, in Genesis 10). By Jemdet Nasr, 3100 - 2900 BCE, the cuneiform evolved into more simplified that archaeologists and historians recognized as “Sumerian” cuneiform, which have 3000 years history.

The late 3rd millennium Akkadians used this same cuneiform their own East Semitic language, and continued to be used even after Sumerian ceased to be a spoken language. At the start of 2nd millennium BCE, two Akkadian dialects developed - Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian, and they were still using Sumerian cuneiform.

Other kingdoms, east and west of Babylonia, influencing Elamite and Ugaritic cuneiform in Ugarit. Cuneiform were widely used in the Levant in this millennium before the development of the alphabet in this region in the very late 2nd millennium BCE.

Even when it competing against the alphabet during the Iron Age, and large populations began adopting the Aramaic as a spoken language, including within the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian empires, the Sumerian-Akkadian cuneiform persisted, as can be seen in the clay tablets that survived in the Library of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh, dated to 7th century BCE.

Among the mountain of clay tablets in the Library, were the 11 tablets of Epic of Gilgamesh, which modern scholars have used to translate into English, German and French.

You talk of logic, but as much as admired their achievements, logic played very little, with your Tower of Babel myths.

No writings existed of the Bible in the Bronze Age (3100 - 1050 BCE), especially in Genesis and Exodus.

It only implied to exist in King Josiah’s reign, because the Silver Scrolls were ground in the cave at Ketef Hinnom, dated to late 7th or early 6th century BCE. The Silver Scrolls have the oldest inscriptions of biblical texts, a couple of verses from Numbers 6.

You talk of logic, but such logic (and certainly no science) doesn’t exist when you read Genesis creation or the superstition-filled God’s replies in Job. Logic and science were the furthest things from the authors’ minds.

And it become even more ridiculous when you think the Tower of Babel actually exist historically.

If the Tower then where is it?

 

[cladking]

Ancient science is very limited.

There is no such thing of science outside metaphysics. No ancient metaphysics is known therefore (per Egyptology) it's impossible they had science.

There are only so much we can do with these objects and places they left behind, if writings haven’t been invented to record what they have in mind.

It's not being done. Egyptology is not applying modern science to studying the pyramids and haven't in a very long time.


There are only so much we can do with these objects and places they left behind, if writings haven’t been invented to record what they have in mind.

.You talk of logic, but such logic (and certainly no science) doesn’t exist when you read Genesis creation or the superstition-filled God’s replies in Job. Logic and science were the furthest things from the authors’ minds.

Logic is not scientific today. When science was invented they knew full well that one man's logic was different than another's so logic was intentionally omitted from metaphysics.

The Bible is a confusion of ancient science so it is not "logical" from our perspective.

The Bible is merely an attempt at the preservation of ancient holy books. These holy books were ancient writings but especially interpretations of ancient writings. Since Ancient Language can't be translated into modern languages it's not always easy to see the difference.

If the Tower then where is it?

How many times did I say this is irrelevant? The word "confusion" has a meaning.

I'd guess there was about a 15% possibility that the "tower of babel" occurred in... ...drumroll please... ...Babel, a 10% chance that it took place at Meidum, and a 75% chance that I don't know. But it is wholly irrelevant to the fact that the story is just a confusion of reality. It's a confusion of something that actually took place in an unknown location.

 

[sooda]

There is no such thing of science outside metaphysics. No ancient metaphysics is known therefore (per Egyptology) it's impossible they had science.

It's not being done. Egyptology is not applying modern science to studying the pyramids and haven't in a very long time.


There are only so much we can do with these objects and places they left behind, if writings haven’t been invented to record what they have in mind.



Logic is not scientific today. When science was invented they knew full well that one man's logic was different than another's so logic was intentionally omitted from metaphysics.

The Bible is a confusion of ancient science so it is not "logical" from our perspective.

The Bible is merely an attempt at the preservation of ancient holy books. These holy books were ancient writings but especially interpretations of ancient writings. Since Ancient Language can't be translated into modern languages it's not always easy to see the difference.



How many times did I say this is irrelevant? The word "confusion" has a meaning.

I'd guess there was about a 15% possibility that the "tower of babel" occurred in... ...drumroll please... ...Babel, a 10% chance that it took place at Meidum, and a 75% chance that I don't know. But it is wholly irrelevant to the fact that the story is just a confusion of reality. It's a confusion of something that actually took place in an unknown location.

There were watch towers built all over the ME.. Jericho had a watch tower. There are watch towers in Arabia.

Most English Bibles do not read “according to the number of the sons of God” in Deuteronomy 32:8. Rather, they read “according to the number of the sons of Israel.” The difference derives from disagreements between manuscripts of the Old Testament. “Sons of God” is the correct reading, as is now known from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Frankly, you don’t need to know all the technical reasons for why the “sons of God” reading in Deuteronomy 32:8–9 is what the verse originally said. You just need to think a bit about the wrong reading, the “sons of Israel.”

Deuteronomy 32:8–9 harks back to events at the Tower of Babel, an event that occurred before the call of Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel. This means that the nations of the earth were divided at Babel before Israel even existed as a people.

It would make no sense for God to divide up the nations of the earth “according to the number of the sons of Israel” if there was no Israel.

What Really Happened at the Tower of Babel? - LogosTalk

 

[cladking]

No, it is very relevant...if you claiming the tower existed in history, and that people BEFORE the Flood and BEFORE the Tower of Babel all spoke only in one language.

The 4th and 3rd millennia BCE, hence respectively the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, in both Egypt and Mesopotamia spoke different languages and have different writings systems.

And then there were the early Semitic people, the Akkadians and the Amorites in the later half of 3rd millennium BCE, didn’t have their writing systems, until Sargon of Akkad, established the Akkadian dynasty in ancient Sumer. But the Akkadian spoken language might be intelligible to Sumerian, but the written language (Akkadian cuneiform) is almost completely identical to Sumerian cuneiform, that because the Akkadians adopted Sumerian cuneiform, which continued to be used in the Hellenistic period, even though spoken Sumerian died out by 1900 BCE.

A more archaic form of cuneiform as inscriptions were found in temple in Uruk, which archaeologists referred to as proto-Sumerian. The inscriptions along with the temple have been dated to around 3400 BCE. Hence these predated the Sumerian civilization which started in 3100 BCE, the Jemdet Nasr period.

Uruk is far older than 3400 BCE and the Sumerian civilization, and yet the author of Genesis say that Uruk or Erech didn’t exist until after the Flood, by Ham’s grandson Nimrod who supposed found and built other cities in Babylonia and Assyria.

The Nimrod story as a history, is total BS, because all the cities that Genesis mentioned, were archaeologically built in different times.

Uruk in 5000 BCE, but flourished as urbanized city from 4000 to 3100 BCE, which was why archaeologists named this Uruk period. Uruk ceased to be important after the fall of the 3rd dynasty in late 3rd millennium BCE.

Babylon and Akkad (Accad) around 2600 and 2400 respectively. The earliest for Nineveh is 3400 BCE.

So, no, cladking. No one by the name of Nimrod exist in Sumerian and Akkadian history. And there is no Tower of Babel anywhere in Mesopotamia, and certainly not in Babylon. The tallest buildings in Mesopotamia were the Ziggurats found in different cities.

Proper writings began with Sumerians in the Jemdet Nasr period (3100 - 2900 BCE), where most records were of bookkeeping in nature, before actual literature.

And the earliest Sumerian literature began in 2500 - 2000 BCE, with not only religious hymns and myths of their records, but also hymns to their kings, some of which were legends and some of were actual history.

The earliest stories of Gilgamesh and the Flood, were found in Sumerian cuneiform on clay tablets as early as 2100 BCE.

Even when the 3rd dynasty of Ur collapsed in 2004 BCE, that spelt the end of the Sumerian civilization, Sumerian writing continued to exist, by the 1st dynasty of Babylon, some historians would therefore called it the Amorite dynasty in Babylon.

This dynasty were the Amorite people who adopted the older Akkadian spoken language, but wrote in Sumerian cuneiform, just like the Akkadians did before them. Therefore, the spoken Akkadian dialect became known as Old Babylonian language, which marked the 1st dynasty in Babylon as “Old Babylonian period”, 1830 - 1531 BCE.

Among the earliest writings of the Old Babylonian, were not only the Epic of Gilgamesh and Epic of Atrahasis, but also the oldest codification of laws, by Hammurabi.

In any case, the 3rd millennium BCE Sumerians and Akkadians did record reign of kings, just as the 1st Babylonian dynasty did, in the 1st half of the 2nd millennium BCE.

So historical records did predated your claim of 1200 BCE writings. The problem with your claim of 1200 bce, is that we’re no Hebrew recordings of history until King Josiah (640-609 BCE). Writing did exist in the 10th century BCE, but none of them have to with biblical literature (eg Gezer Calendar).

This is all interesting but I believe that the event we call the Tower of Babel took place about 2000 BC. The last of the ancient scientists (Nephilim?) did die out about 1200 BC.

I don't have all the answers to religion, science, and history. I believe I know the formatting for the questions and some routes that might lead to them.

 

[sooda]

This is all interesting but I believe that the event we call the Tower of Babel took place about 2000 BC. The last of the ancient scientists (Nephilim?) did die out about 1200 BC.

I don't have all the answers to religion, science, and history. I believe I know the formatting for the questions and some routes that might lead to them.

The tower was destroyed about 2242 BC.. The Great Ziggurat of Babylon pedestal was square and 91 meters (300 ft) in height.

Some scholars think it is a metaphor for the collapse of literacy during the Bronze Age.

 

[cladking]

No, it is very relevant...if you claiming the tower existed in history, and that people BEFORE the Flood and BEFORE the Tower of Babel all spoke only in one language.

The 4th and 3rd millennia BCE, hence respectively the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, in both Egypt and Mesopotamia spoke different languages and have different writings systems.

Where are you getting this? All I said about a flood was that it is probably a confusion of something that was real and you probably wouldn't believe what I believe the confusion is. I DON'T KNOW. You have your beliefs and I have mine but you are ascribing others' beliefs to me.