Warwick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cladking Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It is you who suggests that a translation of
> > something has no meaning.
>
>
> What I suggest is that if YOU question the
> translation you cannot begin to interpret it
> correctly

I do not "question" the translation. I question the interpretation of its meaning.

> > It is you who suggests that no deductions can
> be
> > made from a translation.
>
>
> I suggest no such thing. I question your
> deductions because they are BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION
> based on flawed translation

Once you actually understand author intent then you can see some of the flaws. So long as you believe "neter" is an imaginary consciousness that affects mans' destiny then you can't see author intent. "Neter" didn't mean imaginary consciousness it meant natural phenomenon.

The grammar in ancient language required a natural process or phenomenon ion every sentence. Egyptology believes there was an imaginary consciousness in every sentence!!! No wonder they think the people were highly superstitious.

> > It is you who suggests word meaning can't be
> > derived from context.
>
> Wrong It is I who have tried to point out to you
> that the Utterances of Unas have to be considered
> in context. That includes where within the
> Pyramid they appear.

No! I meant word meaning must be determined by context. Egyptologists used the book of the dead to determine word meaning.

This is why they are wrong.

> I have ne ver considered them bumpkins. Neither
> does Egyptology think them so. That is just
> another of your interpretations of what I and
> Egyptology actually thinks

You believe that the ancient believed in life after death, a 6 1/2 million ton tombstone, and using a god in every sentence!!!! Call it by any name you choose but these people are being portrayed as ignoramuses on a biblical scale.

> > So you won't argue the words of the builders
> > themselves just like everyone else because you
> > know their words support what I say. What I
> say
> > is derived from what they actually said.
>
> But you don't know what they say.

Nonsense. They have been translated into English. Just because Egyptology admits they can't understand it doesn't mean I can't.

> You just say
> they mean what you think because you think that
> because most of Egyptology believes that Inclined
> plane technology was employed by the AE's, then by
> extension everything else Egyptology concludes is
> wrong.

I was told by a very wise man that I couldn't understand the pyramid builders until I understood the Pyramid Texts. I went into it looking for ramps or anything else and saw nothing the first few times I read it. After I read it thirty or forty times it started to make a little sense. After following every lead and leaning more science through google it started to make a lot of sense. Everytime I read it another thought, line, word, or sentence becomes clear. It's really not that complicated, it's just different.