> If you did not intend to use the PT's to support
> your viewpoint, then why did you mention them?
> What was your objective in specifying PT's? You
> used them, coffin texts and the Book of the Dead
> in the same paragraph that you began with "Who
> said there were no "verifiable historic
> records"? You were obviously using the PT's as
> historic records.
Answer me this. Why would anyone in the absence of verifiable historic records assume that the great pyramid of Giza had any religious or spiritual significance? Could it be that the ONLY frame of reference available to them at the time was religious and spiritual? The very same culture that identified fossils of millions of year old extinct species as victims of the great flood. The only frame of reference they had was religion
and the bible, so why not?
Jon is saying that because he believes there are no "historical records" of what a pyramid's function was this led religious antiquarians to impose their Biblical "frame of reference" on the pyramids hence the only reason why today it is believed they had any religious or spiritual significance. This is not true hence my responding:
Jon: "Answer me this. Why would anyone in the absence of verifiable historic records assume that the great pyramid of Giza had any religious or spiritual significance?"
Who said there were no "verifiable historic records"? What is it do you think the AE wrote all over their cemetery walls? The cemetery itself isn't a "verifiable historic record"? What is the PT? The Book of the Dead? The Coffin Texts? 3,000yrs of AE writing, architecture, and culture does not count as a "verifiable historic record"? You are woefully uninformed.
And did it not occur to you that despite this absence of "verifiable historic records" this is exactly the significance it had to the AE themselves? Why did they think of it this way? Apparently you do not understand somehow that antiquarians didn't just stumble upon the pyramids one day and make all this stuff up. The PT, for example, was actually written inside of pyramids you know:
According to the AE, the pyramids, at least in the time of Unas and after, were resurrection machines and served as the engine for the pharaohs cycle of death and rebirth which in general was the foundation of their belief system for thousands of years. We impose this as "religion", and in the true sense of the word it was, but to them this was the reality of the physical world and the afterlife beyond just "faith", and was an integral component of the natural laws of the universe. Before some of your fingers start blindly clacking away to naysay without reading the rest of what is said, regardless of whether the great pyramids were built as "tombs" or not, there is no doubt the AE were convinced the purpose of these pyramids were connected to the afterlife and to facilitate resurrection. No antiquarians required.
A better question to ask- if the great pyramids (or their core structures) were in fact there prior to the OK-what was it about them that made them come to this belief? They would have went inside and seen something that had a profound effect on them that radically changed their outlook on the natural world prompting them to believe that this thing was a "machine" that could facilitate resurrection and their passage through the afterlife. Wonder what it was.
Or, to consider they built them within the Dynastic period-what the hell made them think building these things would work? For the pharoah-a living god who obviously the people knew was just a man. Yet despite the fact they kept getting robbed within decades after completion they just kept doing the same dumb thing over and over again for hundreds of years? Doesn't make much sense, does it?
Jon: "Could it be that the ONLY frame of reference available to them at the time was religious and spiritual? The very same culture that identified fossils of millions of year old extinct species as victims of the great flood. The only frame of reference they had was religion and the bible, so why not?"
Lol. Uhh....no. See above. And do you think the Bible was also Herodotus's, or any of the other Greek writers, "frame of reference"? Or how about the AE they got this information from? This may be your frame of reference, or antiquarian's frame of reference, but it wasn't the ancient's frame of reference who for thousands of years, right or wrong, also thought they served a funerary function. Again, antiquarians not need apply.
What does any of this have to do with "who built what and when"? Jon doesn't say anything about it. I don't say anything about it. Now lets read and compare Origyptian's response:
Thanos, when were the PT written and by whom? What's "verifiable" about that? If you can't "verify" who wrote the PT, or that the PT was written at the time of construction, or that the PT accurately reflects events they've been interpreted as describing, then the PT is also irrelevant to the original purpose and date of construction. Are we also to believe the universe was created in 6 days and is only 6000 years old simply because "it was written"?
? Did the AE write "all over their cemetery walls" of the construction of the pyramids. No, they didn't.
"3,000yrs of AE writing" hold no records of construction.
? How exactly does "architecture, and culture" show a historic record of actual construction.
? Exactly what "significance" did the pyramids have to the AE. Where is this written?
? How do you know what the OK AE thought. How do you know what the builders thought? You presume too much.
? How do you know the PT "actually written inside of pyramids" was written at the time of construction.
Despite the fact you even quote me obviously you did not even read what was originally said and were just going off Origyptian's misguided comments.
I am confident the fault is neither my own nor Jon's here.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 17-Dec-16 22:27 by Thanos5150.