babylonian andmedia were two important region of persian,,and baghdad is the capital of iraq,,is the persian world that means the sity that god give it to us,,thats why that we all are brother and like themselves,,we are hate of america and israel because wana distroy our relationship,,but we are brother forever with eachother,,,,
@persianboy434 "we are hate of america and israel because wana distroy our relationship," You mean you hate the governments. It's not black and white. There is evil from both sides. Only a secular society has a chance of ensuring peace. Religion and belief in god destroys man's common sense.
many years ago iraq belong to persian,,,persian also create te system of watering to the trees in one sity in iran that name is esfahan,,if you want to understand how water goes up without having any pump,,go and have trip to iran-esfahan,,,the sity that noone say anything about it this days,,,,esfahan is one ofthe most beautiful sity in the world,,try to visit it during your life,,it will worth
@persianboy434 "if you want to understand how water goes up without having any pump,,go and have trip to iran-esfahan" No need. We have trees where i live. Capilliary action utilising the surface tension of water pumps water from the ground to the leaves. In fact this happens with most plants. But i would love to visit as i love places of beauty and history (even myths).
@pilgrimpater The OT could have been translated several years or centuries after it was first written. And what about before it was written. were there interpreters in that time?
You said "always". So, again how would you know that. You can't.
@Gabrielprog In the OT (after Babel) the Israelites communicate with other tribes including Egyptians. How do you propose that they did that without translators?
How do you propose that we can translate years later if there were no translators at the time? Besides the difference in langauges is clearly a result of evolution of langauges. You can trace the evolution of English from it's many sources.
@pilgrimpater You said "always". You can't be sure of that. You tried to claim that your statement was absolutely true without having any proof. Of course, after Babel most surely there were people trying to translate between languages but common sense dictates that that was not an instantaneous achievement. Too much for "always". Man, it took me YEARS to learn english even with the bunch of help we have today to learn a new language. Imagine learning a new one at that time.
@Gabrielprog "You can't be sure of that. " So how did different tribes trade? You demand proof yet you support a story from an ancient bronze age book. You do not have the slightest piece of evidence that this story is remotely true. Are you saying that one minute only Hbrew existed and the next God randomly enforced Spanish on random Babylonians? Really? Anybody who studies languages will tell you how they evolved.
@pilgrimpater You failed to prove your initial statement: "But there have ALWAYS been interpreters." You said that in an arrogant tone and you didn't have any real proof. What ppl who studied languages say is not proof. (There is not even a consensus among the scholars about the origin of language). Which leads me to believe that you do that often: asserting things that are just your opinion but without having any proof whatsoever.
Bab el = Heavens gate in Sumerian.The purpose of this tower was to act as a testament to the people under Nimrud whose name means "let us rebel"it is typical of mans desire to aquire equality with God.It also interfered with Gods plan to populate the earth not just Sumeria this is because the lord had a master plan to redeem the human race.
ur knowledg about the different civilisation was so less and rediculous as this video like because there was tall building in dobai arab speaking people made that ???!! u idiot the western english speaking engineers build that
@MrNewkingjames such funny question why language are iffer then look eve in same country there are different accent differ in language is higher level of differ in accent so the reason cat be the hypocratic story u said is based on environmental factors
The Tower of Bable is a coined phrase used to represent mans ascent to spiritual enlightenment and as man is more stupid than he lets on, the plans to build this tower got confused by too many people speaking there own versions at once and so we never got there. Hence the derived word babble.
@MrNewkingjames Cont. Wearing of clothes? what does that have to with it? Clothes are part of culture but in practical terms are a response to the environment. You don't weraaanimal skins in the Carribean. You don't wear mini skirts in Moslem countries. You don't wear a grass skirt in Siberia. It's obvious. What a stupid question. Some ciltures wear no clothes.
As for 7 days a week then this roughly follows the phases of a lunar month. There has to be a global standard just as there is with GMT
@MrNewkingjames That explanation is totally implausible & worthy of Tolkein. The explanation is easy. There are so many parallels (not 100%) to biological evolution. As populations seperate then their cultures & languages diverge & you get a tree, similar to the tree of life. We have North European languages similar to each other but different to Latin languages which are similar to each other. Then we have English which is a mixture of other languages because of our mixture of cultures etc etc.
One of the main purposes of confusing the language was to cause a dispersal of peoples thruout the world (A monolithic form of government was premature in Gods estimation) "In the days of PELEG was the earth divided"When you find a scripture in the bible that you don't understand, assume it is your lack of knowledge rather than that God is an idiot.Remember that what we don't know can fill a wharehouse and truth is stranger than fiction.
@MrNewkingjames What a coincidence that all the swarthy looking citizens were made to speak Mediterranean languages and the fair skinned ones were made to speak Nordic langauges?
What is wrong in a monolithic government especially if you can get it to worship you (as god)?
It's not that i don't understand passages in the bible but more a case of ppointing out the absurdities.
"truth is stranger than fiction. " I'd say more interesting.
@pilgrimpater ahaha are you implying i can't speak english? haha what a cheap fuck you are, thats the best you got? anyways, got better things to do than talking to some random uneducated prick.
when I see remaining of great babylon in middle of desert all our readings about history became unable to answer a big questions about human civilization and now I'm confusing about all historic theory about babylon but I'm sure about one reality that these remaining tells "a great climate changes led to death of great babylon"
God-Willing you all will check out this new series 'The Arrived', all praises to God, it clears up many things. Part 7 of this weekly series is coming out very soon God-Willing, you do not want to miss this. To watch this new documentary series, you can go to the youtube user account.....HashemStudioscom
Do people still honestly believe in this nonsense?! My parents also took the bible very literally. They hopped to church every Sunday on one leg and then hopped all the way back. Unfortunately - it later transpires - their bible had an unforgivable 'typo'. It taught them Faith, HOP, and charity.
Still in any case, the premise of your vid assumes that God struck the tower because of its altitude. Forgive the trite wording, but it was the attitude of the tower, not its altitude.
@SpencahD "Forgive the trite wording, but it was the attitude of the tower, not its altitude."
No forgiveness needed. That's a great play of words. I like it.
But i have to spoil things by stating that the attitude was to gain altitude to reach heaven.
Oh hell, talking of attitude, that reminds me of a really corny joke that i may be able to fit in 500 characters but i promise you it will make you groan.
@pilgrimpater to say that a tower's height was to reach the heavens is nothing more than a turn of phrase - like unto the term 'skyscraper' (I hope our progeny don't assume we actually thought to be scraping the sky) But hey, I like bad jokes, shoot me a message on my page if it's too long for here....
A man was walking in a gale when a sudden violent gust blew away his hat. Another man was walking his dog and the dog chased and caught the hat and proceeded tearing it to shreds. The man remonstrated with the dog owner who dismissed the affair as trivial. The hatless man said "I don't like your attitude". The dog owner replied "No, it's your 'at he chewed".
the bible is very clear about this. so is many other old writings. the oldest is Sumerian. that is where much of the bible is handed down from. the oldest known civilization. they tell the story of the anunnaki. how they came in there space ships for gold. how they created the first Adam,(man) how they planted the Eden. how they destroyed the tower. how they fought one another for power. they first came to earth 450 thousand yrs ago. they have been here ever since. controlling us.
@dicktheguncheney Yes, that all makes a lot of sense (says he choking on his cornflakes).
I do think the Anunnaki have a massive chance of winning the World Cup in the near future and for many years to come but rumour has it, that in private, they have a tendancy to cross dressing yet flatulence would appear to be their major problem.
so... man was created to mine for gold and grow food for the anunnaki. this went on for thousands of years. up until this very day in fact. the next time they come will be 2012. the will want there gold. that is why so much is stored up. that way it will be ready for them.
man himself was a scientific project by the anunnaki. man was created to mine gold for niberu's dying atmosphere. they needed monotonic gold in there atmosphere and the only place they found gold was on earth. they have a 3600 yr orbit around our sun. so when the attempted to mine it for them selves, the became ill. and many of the heroes that came to earth where complaining that the task was to much for them. so enki with other leading scientist decided to create a primitive worker. man.
fool, the tower they where building was no skyscraper. it was a space craft launching tower. they where attempting to make a trip to niburu. the anunnaki didint like this so they came down and destroyed the launch tower. it was a reverse engineering project. the anunnaki lead by their king then took man and spread him throughout the earth teaching them different languages. after some time none could understand the other from different parts of the earth. just as they had planed.
@lococavasa "it is are self realization that makes us differnt." Yes i agree with that totally. Good point. It's the enhanced capacity for thought and the ability to communicate that thought to others. I feel we only disagree how that came about.
@pilgrimpater 1 other thing the idea that brain size increases iq is nothing more than your wishful thinking To give credit were credit is due. Albert Eisenstein had an average size brain Brain size does not increase with iq.Iq has something to do with problem solving rationalization the ability to store concepts An average person of high iq can go through 100 times more information than a person who iq is on an average scale. Iq translate to something like ability to process info not brain size
@lococavasa "the idea that the brain size increases iq is nothing more than your wishful thinking "
Within one species maybe you could be right but across species e.g. our superior brain capacity compared to other apes leads to greater intelligence and of course, as we agree, self awareness and ability to reason.
@pilgrimpater well ill just make this simple i do not agree. I do not think animals rationalize life and death i do not believe they understand how to come up with there own arts and sciences further more u say its all in relation to the size of the brain then what what about animals with larger brains? even if they had the same size brain they would never be like us because there design is 100 percent differnt this is a dead argument.i will not put myself on that level
@lococavasa Bigger animals (e.g. whales) have bigger brains than us but not necessarily in relation to their body size. Also we have evolved frontal lobes (but i am not sure if some other animals have too).
As i said, it's only our superior brain & power of speech that gives us an advantage (including the luxury of art & philosophy e.g. pondering about our existence) where other features in other animals give them different advanatges. We've more similarities with chimps than dissimilarities.
@lococavasa "will u got me" I have total admiration for that. Creationists are often struck dumb when in response to something they say i come up with "I don't know".
No, we are apes. Other apes are merely our evolutionary cousins. There is a very well documented list of fossil finds that show examples of develpment along our human lineage. "Is it complete?" you may ask. Well no, and maybe never will be but there are enough pieces in the jigsaw to show us what the picture is.
@pilgrimpater Another important question is quite simple. if we are not the creators of are awesome design then who are what is? The way we interpret things can come out quite differently than the way it comes in. Another words one thing can be perceived 1 way while the intent is actually quite differnt and another important question is. If we are not the creators of are design the who taught us language? The ancient gods? Seems crazy but fact is life is a mystery.
@lococavasa Even further down the rabbit hole is how we even got here evolution is a theory in a wormhole itself it cannot work for itself why because there is no proof to evolution & i didn't evolve from a monkey lol. Although i do believe past civilizations were probably dumb and monkey like but man and monkey r 2 different things. We have religion awareness of environment on levels animals do not.
@lococavasa "there is no proof to evolution ". 100% incorrect. The fossil sequence (increasing complexity over geolical time) and biogeography (isolation causes diversification as observed today) are powerful proofs of evolution. That is the what so don't waste your time asking the "how" because even Darwin didn't know that.
We have awareness as do most other higher order animals. Ours is the pinnacle because of a larger brain & advanced power of language. Hope that helps.
@lococavasa "Another important question " I'd prefer you answer mine before asking more but to respond to you, then language has evolved (in many ways similar to biological evolution). You can see this in the various languages of the "Latin" countries or seperately in the Nordic counties. English is an exception as it is a bastardisation of multiple languages. Of course higher order animals have language too but cannot develop it without a vocal chord. It's no mystery.
@pilgrimpater No don't you get that one nation literally is controlled by one people. If that nation split when the tower of babel fell people all around the world would evolve accordingly to there environment. Quite possibly the spoken word also plays a great role here. Not i am saying so much this is it but that's how i interpret the message. My big question is then how did man appear before the fall of babel.
@lococavasa Are you seriously stating that there was only ONE nation because after the alleged flood Noah and his offspring were instructed to head in different directions to populate the Earth? May i also remind you that the Language aspect is a major part of god's punishment in the Babel story. It was not just about scattering people (how were they scattered anyway, by family?).
@lococavasa true don't get me wrong i do believe they have a very no verbal way of communicating i just do not believe they have the self awareness of man. Man as a human animal far exceeds those of who walk on 4 legs i just simply do not see the same gift of sight in non human animals. You will almost never see a animal use a tool other than monkeys and certainly never see them use those tools to the efficiency we as human beings can.
@lococavasa Birds of pray have far far superior powers of sight than humans. Gorillas are far more powerful than men. Bears have far superior senses of smell than humans. Animals on 4 legs do not suffer the same back problems as us. Humans ahave a "design" flaw with the appendix which although redundant can burst and kill you. AS for our advantage over our animal cousins? A larger brain and the power of speech.
@pilgrimpater ok ok now your just taking this way out of context u make it sound like there just as much of a human as us other than the fact we have a bigger brain brain and speech clearly sight also goes on 2 levels spiritual and physical this is way over kill if u want rationalization that's cool but in no way do i put myself on the level of a animal Please do not make this a debate of to put humans on the same level as animals. an 8 yrld can figure out the difference this is just plan crazy
@lococavasa No we ARE animals. We share the same body plan as other members of our phylum. We all eat & breath through the same orifice (bad design), we all have two eyes, one nose, two ears. We all have a blood system circulated by a heart. We all have four limbs. We all have similar digestive systems. We all have the same sexual aparatus. Everything is a variation on that theme. Ours is the larger brain & power of language. The so called "spiritual" is merely a guess with no evidence.
@lococavasa No we are animals. We share the same body plan as other members of our phylum. We all eat & breath through the same orifice (bad design), we all have two eyes, one nose, two ears. We all have a blood system circulated by a heart. We all have four limbs. We all have similar digestive systems. We all have the same reproductive aparatus. Everything is a variation on that theme. Ours is the larger brain & power of language. The so called "spiritual" is merely a guess with no evidence.
@pilgrimpater honestly i didn't even mean to cauze all his crazy babel i just was stating a well known fact humans and animals can be seen on 2 levels i guess u were just thinking sight but seeing is not restricted to the eyes seeing can imply using the mind which is precisely what iwas referring too
@lococavasa Well we are drifting from topic and that is just as much my fault but i will repeat that your "2 levels" is not a given. The physical level, none of us can deny but the spiritual level is way up in the air for debate as to whether it even exists or not. The one thing i would say is that human brain has evolved so much that it can speculate.
Like I said, Tower of Babel was required for everyone to understand each other. God destroyed it for a reason remember that. Babel means:
1. A confused noise, typically that is made by a number of voices.
2. A scene of noisy confusion.
We would understand each other but it would be in different language. Speaking in babel yet one would understand what it means. I wouldn't blame god for destroying it, Cause it had a satanic influence involved. Remember be with YWHW and his son, :P
@SurveyForGold So a South Amerindian the other side of the world spoke babel but the second it was demolished (& he could never have known about that) he spoke a different language but coinicidentally all the members of his tribe spoke the exact new language while further North a tribe of Eskimos had a completey different new langauge which again coincidently all members of his tribe also spoke? Yet again poor old Satan gets the blame even though not being mentioned anywhere near the incident.
@pilgrimpater Why couldn't heaven be on the ground as opposed to the earths stratosphere? What does height have to do with heaven? It's incorporeal. The builders of this tower knew this and just wanted to say, Oh isn't it glorious, this is where our god lives, up there in the penthouse. And he's all ours! The people will worship this and we'll become kings! Otherwise why not just go climb a mountain. Get with the program man. This is the first and last of your video's I will watch.
@pilgrimpater Oh you are just incorrigible. I bet you'd be right along there building that mythical tower along with the slavemasters that whipped the populous chattle into submission.
@pilgrimpater Okay I'll try - please I ask honestly, simply hear what I say and do not interpret it through what you have heard from others:
The people were told to scatter and fill the earth - they didn't. They decided to 'build a tower whose heights would reach the heavens' - They said that it would reach the heavens. They said, not God.
God saw what they did and said: '...nothing they propose to do will be withheld from them...'
Please consider that they proposed a city, (see next)
They thought to build a city whose populous was the majority of the population. They were in 'Babel' (confusion in the hebrew, door of god in the summarian) Babel was run/founded by Nimrud. Babel was a dictatorship ruling most of mankind. God had forbade a 'population center' with the command to fill the earth. Nimrud, whose name means 'let us rebel' had another idea - despotism. MOST of mankind was subject to a rebel - most of mankind was worshiping a man. That is why.
@pilgrimpater Mankind did not spread as was commanded. The families of Noah left the mountians of Ararat (Urartu - in Hebrew 'RRT') and came to the plain of Shinar. Shinar is Sumer-Babylon-Iraq. Mankind did not spread, save for some of the sons of Shem who did. Most of mankind wandered from the mountains, likely along the Caspian and Black, into the valley.
@SpencahD So where in the Bible does it say the whole population ended up at Babel? Also the Caspian and Black Sea are a long way from Southern Iraq where Babel is situated.
@pilgrimpater Neither I nor the Bible said that. I said 'Most' and the Bible says Shinar - Shinar is the region, Babel was the chief city - the two are essentially interchangeable for these purposes. In any case, geographic distance has little to do with the narrative. Urartu is north-northeast-east-northeast of The Dardanelles. It is likely to expect one to 'walk easy' and this 'easy route' roughly flows north, northeast, east, southeast, south, and finally east.
@pilgrimpater Neither I nor the Bible said that. I said 'Most' and the Bible says Shinar - Shinar is the region, Babel was the chief city - the two are essentially interchangeable for these purposes. In any case, geographic distance has little to do with the narrative. Urartu is north-northeast-east-northeast of The Dardanelles. It is likely to expect one to 'walk easy' and this 'easy route' roughly flows north, northeast, east, southeast, south, and finally east.
@pilgrimpater In any case this epic took place between 2100BC and 2300BC, with 2250 being the closest estimate. You will find this information in the geneologies if you wish. You may also cf. Josephus though most do not. I would also direct your attention to Semiramis and Ninnus. A great source is 'After the Flood' available free, in full text online.
@SpencahD "n any case this epic took place between 2100BC and 2300BC, " I'm confused as we have evidence of Sumerian and Ancient Chinese cultures dating back to circa 10K yeras ago. So weren't these part of the human race?
@pilgrimpater There are a plethora of individuals who state that "we have evidence" and then proceed to "prove" whatever it is that they wish. Whether it is one fossil above another, or someone's date imposed upon a tablet, or even a synthetic variable extracted from some carboniferous smutz...
Suffice it to say that 'evidence' proves very little in absence of testimony. The first 'civilization' is known as Sumer, and Sumer was Babel. 2250BC or so take it or leave it, it isn't a majority matter
@pilgrimpater I would also like to add, for my own part as a humble amature linguist, that the Babel narrative, aside from alien stuff, is the only functional explanation for the currently observed diversity of languages. Yes I said it, the Tower is essentially the only decent working theory for the observed myriad of tongues found today. Worse than that, it is becoming more apparent to me that Proto-Hebrew was the 'original' tongue.
@SpencahD "is the only functional explanation for the currently observed diversity of languages." You must be kidding my friend. Linguistic evolution is analogous to Biological evolution. There are specific languages that have evolved from Latin along the Southern Med. All Nordic languages are different but similar & again linked by geography. We have a group of countries that use Greek alphabet. Chinese & Japanse are linked. English is the bastardised language as it takes from all quarters.
@pilgrimpater Evolution expects an increase in complexity, or rather 'a getting betterness' It is simple to demonstrate that each tongue today is less complex, less 'better' than their predecessors. That some have come from one is great - linguistic evolution still has no originating tongue - and it cannot explain diversity of tongues without such a mother tongue. Linguistic isolates, spoken by humans who can procreate with others, require a mother tongue. Even evolution requires a mother tongue
@SpencahD I think you took my analogy too literally. It is that with seperated populations, the earlier the seperation, then the greater the difference but, the later the seperation, then the lesser the difference. Hence we have the Latin languages all similar as geographically close yet Chinese & Latin are poles apart. It is easy to see the evolution of connected languages, even English, Anglo Saxon with Celtic, Latin, Norse, Jewish, Indian, French etc, is markedly different to Shakespeare.
@SpencahD I think you took my analogy too literally. It is that with seperated populations, the earlier the seperation, then the greater the difference but, the later the seperation, then the lesser the difference. Hence we have the Latin languages all similar as geographically close yet Chinese & Latin are poles apart. It is easy to see the evolution of connected languages, even English, Anglo Saxon with Celtic, Latin, Norse, Jewish, Indian, French etc, is markedly different to Shakespeare.
@SpencahD "Evolution expects an increase in complexity" Wrong, Evolution actually expects increase, decrease & zero change in complexity. That's what we have with language. How complex would you describe the "Click" language of the hunter gatherers in Namibia? On the other hand we have Bryonic language similar between the Welsh, Cornish and Bretons echoing exactly the known historical migrations of which was one people. NO increase in complexity but a gradual divergence.
@pilgrimpater An amino acid is more complex than a codon, a cell more than an amino acid. That is the evolutionary consensus path (the amino acid soup experiment as a point.) Evolution expects an increase in complexity, as a single cell is claimed to preceed the multi. The 'Click' tongues are equally complex to our own. Their vocabulary and syntax are astounding. The point is that the ancient tongues are far more developed than the modern. Lingustics demonstrates this as a stipulation.
@SpencahD "Evolution expects an increase in complexity, " No it expects an adaption by those best duited. The basics of amino acids & cell complexities are nigh on the same for all eukaryotes whether they evolve (being selected for) or become extinct. You are talking at the wrong level.
I never made any comment on the complexity of "click" language but more on it's uniqueness. Why are there no other versions between Namibia and babel? Such a unique language would be mentioned in the BIble.
@SpencahD "Evolution expects an increase in complexity, " No it expects an adaption by those best duited. The basics of amino acids & cell complexities are nigh on the same for all eukaryotes whether they evolve (being selected for) or become extinct. You are talking at the wrong level.
I never made any comment on the complexity of "click" language but more on it's uniqueness. Why are there no other versions between Namibia and babel? Such a unique language would be mentioned in the BIble.
@pilgrimpater The click tongue may well be a vestage of one of the original 72 but, as with any well written text, dialects and distinct details of tongues are not discussed in the Bible as it is outside of the Bible's focus.
As for the other, my point is that lingistics has shown time and again that languages degrade over time, becoming more lazy, slurred, and less structured - not more so.
@SpencahD "tongues are not discussed in the Bible as it is outside of the Bible's focus."
Ah yes, that old convenient chestnut.
Languages, like biological evolution, do not degrade. They merely evolve and adapt. Check any dictionary of any civilised nation and notice how thicker they have become over the years. Some degredation. Languages are gaining all the time while borrowing words from others.
@pilgrimpater It is said that 'specific languages evolved from Latin' I put it another way - Latin fractured into several tongues, each of which are less than the first. Syntax, Vocabulary, Grammatic function all have become increasingly 'lazy' in each new dialect of the daughter - High German is much more expressive and complex than modern, Italian-French-Spanish-Romanian are all near blubber in comparison to Latin. Yes out tongues come from others - they are degraded left-overs.
@SpencahD "Latin fractured into several tongues" I disagree. Latin is only detectable in those nations that are geographicaly close and yet again mirroring the history of population movement or invasion i.e. the Roman Empire. The language evolution mirrors documrented history. You won't find any Latin in those countries, even in Europe, that were not part of the Roman Empire.
"Yes out tongues come from others - they are degraded left-overs." Is Italian more degraded than Spanish or Portuguese?
@pilgrimpater Latin fractured into several tongues. Why disagree when you name three? As for degredation, as Dawkins put it with his fish example - their level of degredation is equivalent. And you do indeed find Latin in non-Roman regions, though these are borrowed words rather than decended vocabulary.
@SpencahD "Latin fractured into several tongues. " But why do we have no Latin languages to the East towards Babel. You would expect Latin to have started in Babel then fracture (your term) as it spread Westwards. We don't find this of course.
"As for degredation, as Dawkins put it with his fish example - their level of degredation is equivalent." I don't understand your point here.
"And you do indeed find Latin in non-Roman regions, " Only as people mix as in England.
@pilgrimpater Latin is not one of the original tongues of Babel, it is a derivative of one of them. Latin is descended from Javan-ish, it is of the same origin as 'Estruscan' and possibly the Basque, though neighboring influence is certainly found in the mix
@pilgrimpater As for the greek alphabet, this is taken from the phoenecian, which is taken from the 'northern semitic' which is taken from the Hebrew. Even the word 'alphabet' demonstrates this decent (vis. Aleph Beit) Proto Hebrew predates all of the 'occidental' character sets - and all of the occidental sets (with the exception of the modernly created cyrillic) decend directly from the Hebrew, with noticeable "transcription errors" leading to a degraded facsimile of the original. Degeneration
@pilgrimpater And finally in regards to English: It is indeed the bastard child of Babel. In the plain 72 tongues were made, with the extinction of a few and the splitting of a few, and the degradation of a few, we come to 6500 give or take. American English (not English-English which is its own tongue) is nothing less than the Adversary's answer to Babel - God broke the tongues, so Satan took some of them all and made his own new one.
@SpencahD Respond to this video... "God broke the tongues, so Satan took some of them all and made his own new one. " So ancient Egyptian was the same as Ancient Chinese was the same as Sumerian? Centuries of Archaeological evidence state otherwise. Btw i don't believe in Satan either but that is not for this video's thread. Btw 2. Thanks for the sub but why?
@pilgrimpater What is a sub? Sumerian, Chinese and Egyptian, at least the ancient varieties to which you refer, are some of the original tongues of Babel: Egyptian is Mizraim, Chinese is Sino, and Sumerian is Akkad, though the last may be Assur.
@SpencahD "What is a sub?" Subscription. "Sumerian, Chinese and Egyptian, at least the ancient varieties to which you refer, are some of the original tongues of Babel: " You'll need some evidence for that because they couldn't be more different. Not to mention the thousands of dialects of Chinese.
@pilgrimpater The dialects of Chinese are simple - that is what happens when parochial tribalism reigns supreme. As for Mizraim, Sino, and Ashur (or Akkad) they are very divergent because they are of the original 72 tongues - they are not related in substance, only in location and chronology. Each of the original 72 are unique, unrelated languages. You will not find similarities between them. Them being so divergent is what requires the Babel epic in explaining linguistic demographics.
@SpencahD Of course dialects are simple but they don't necessarily understand each other. That is not the point as dialects are variations on an original. Again a very good parallel with biological evolution. Thus the languages could not have been magiced into existence at the wave of a wand by god in an instant. The demographics follow the geographical & historical demogrpahics.
@pilgrimpater I think you took my analogy too literally. It is that with isolated populations, the earlier the isolation, then the greater the difference but, the later the isolation, then the lesser the difference. Hence we have the Latin languages all similar & all geographically close but Chinese & Latin are poles apart. It is easy to see the evolution of connected languages, even English which is Anglo Saxon with Celtic, Latin, Norse, Jewish, Indian, French etc & has evolved since Beowulf.
You do realize how complex life, the universe and realtiy as a whole is dont you? Far too complex for natural occurances. Science can't explain thousands of things. Yet the notion of a God does. Ockham's Razor. The simplest answer is usually the correct one.
@RamrodAI You do realise that you have have done is merely transferred the issue of complexity to another level and a guessed level at that. Such a baseless statement as yours gets us nowhere. The simplest answer is that if you do not know something, you strive to find out but you don't play at wishful thinking with "God dunnit". Well not until you can provide some proof for any god or godess or whatever.
@WhyBondy Thankyou for your kind words but by typing them out you used up even more precious time from your busy life. If you have nothing meaningful to say then bugger off.
Science is its self a religion and people do place "blind faith" in science as well. Darwin theory of evolution is hardley any more credible than any religious claim. Do your research what they taught in school is the whole truth. At the end of Darwin's life he admitted to "wishing he had never went public with his theory" having learned in the years after the announcement that the slow gradual progression from one form to another is impossible. Cont
@jc7997aj pt 2 These intermediate forms would not be as adept as their former selves and not yet suited for their new roles in the food chain. Thus logically would have died out. Also mutations are rarely good most being deadly or impacts optimal living. Saying all that to say this mankind needs comfort and a moral compass religions do that fairly well cause even though you may not believe in any of them the society of your country of origin likely does so your moral compass will reflect that.
@jc7997aj Re part 2. Intermediate forms are too many to list but just think of it this way. The fossil record shows a distinct increase in complexity over geological time. Evolution is the only possible explanation for this and the fossil record is exactly the opposite of what we would expect of a global flood. Most mutations are neutral. Bad mutations to the genes of the body plan would be lethal. However, there are more than enough good mutations to cause allele change in a population.
@jc7997aj Religions can provide a moral compass but are not necessary for a moral compass. There is no good act that a religious person can do that a non religious person can do. The trouble with religious morals is that there is no definitive unambiguous place where they can be accessed.
religions get a bad rap because of the people in them and there actions. Most religions ideas and concepts if followed will let you have a happy life (I wont include Islam as it is truly a book about one people one nation conquering the world no tolerance for other idea's) so if it comforts the hearts of the masses let it be for it was the masses that brought it into being in the first place. A religious or scientifically minded person who loses hope will surely die.
@jc7997aj "Most religions ideas and concepts if followed will let you have a happy life "
Which of the thousands of Christian denominations were you thinking of. How many wars have most religions caused? Answer? Too many to list. It is true that if every one lived to exactly the same religion there would be no conflict but that doesn't make that religion the truth. That would work for Islam as well so you have contradicted yourself. Hope is of no use if it is a false and unfounded hope.
@pilgrimpater was thinking of most religions not just christian I happen to believe western christianity to be "lost in translation so to speak". I excluded Islam because of its inherent intolerance and most of the world's violent christians live in countries where muslims are busy at war with anyone who disagrees and will not convert. Seriously what kind of atheist are you all you've retorted back with is pro-islam shit and not mention christians war mongering stopped in the dark ages cont
@jc7997aj Islam is more tolerant to itself than christianity. It only has two divisions i.e. the Sunnis & Shias where Christians have countless demominations & untold attrocities committed by Catholics & Protestants on each other. Take a trip to Norrthern Ireland or even Glasgow if you want to witness intolerance at it's worst. Not many Muslims in either of those two places. I'm not pro Islam but you clearly talk nonsense about them. You even worship the same god & Jesus is a prophet to them.
@pilgrimpater ha i dont worship any god i do have a certain distaste for islam ill admit to that. Have read the koran and understand that it was written by one man over the course of his life and he was peaceful at first and became increasingly more warlike and it is said that if any conflict occurs you are to abid by the latter (the more violent tennents) and its not written in chronological order you have to know how to read it properly its also how a muslim is brought up
@pilgrimpater the muslims continue to this day i'd say their body count is higher. Darwin's theory is just that a theory to many holes in the theory and we have went to far down this road sooo many blindly believe it rather than look at other options (and not refering to "GOD") of where we came from. Archeological evidence has shown that we are older than current teachings say. Imagine being Galileo trying to inform the world of his beliefs
@jc7997aj Darwin's Theory has very few gaps (extra intermediates would always be welcome but what we do have is compelling). The few "gaps" that exist are not enough to puncture the main body of evidence for and boy is there plenty of evidence for. Archeological evidence cerrtainly proves that we are many thousands of years older than the Bible would have us believe. So i guess we agree on that one.
@pilgrimpater ah well i was referring to the first civilization you must admit many cities and structures around the earth are being reported as old as 12,000 bc thats even before the sumerians puma punku for instance
@jc7997aj Yes i agree. The first civilisation would be circa 12,000 BC but what does that have to do with anything because homo sapiens was around way before the first civilisation and yet is still an extremely late comer on the scene. Btw we know for sure that the Sumerians and Egyptians had their own language that was different to Hebrew (and Aramaic) so it seems there already were different languages before the Tower of Babel.
@pilgrimpater and being persecuted so to today as modern scientists archeologists and others discover evidence contrary to popular belief they get snuffed out. Historical inertia is hard to beat so we continue to teach things as truth when they are just theory and not giving alternative theories is wrong to our youth. You must think im some right wing wako christian but im not we could agree on alot of things but you have to understand most people are sheep and they that
@pilgrimpater comforting blanket called religion you and i and others like us can live sanely knowing that the real truth to the age old questions lie behind an as of yet undrawn curtain. You wanna take their hope away i really dont care if it is all lies if the people believe and live up the "standards of their religion" is that so bad as long as there isnt total anarchy. There has and always will be wars sure some are fought in religions name but the motive is always greed
@jc7997aj "You wanna take their hope away i really dont care if it is all lies if the people believe and live up the "standards of their religion" is that so bad as long as there isnt total anarchy"
You can get the same effect by taking drugs. I am sure that Nazi Germany would have gone on to live in total harmony once all the Jews had been exterminated. That is not good.
Sorry but the truth is important. You as a religious person is no more moral than myself.
@pilgrimpater once again im not a religious person i have been studying it since i was 13 (am 31) but for the sake of education and understanding not faith. It is glimpse into the people and culture for which i study. What would your "no religion" world have and how much better off would humanity be? would you grab a five year old and shake the belief in santa out of him? In all regards that is what you would do to humanity.
@jc7997aj Science is a religion & people place "blind faith" in it? You mean the "blind faith" that eradicated smallpox, produced man flight, sent probes to the outer recahes of the solar system, performs heart transpants, brings heating & lighting & fresh clean water to our homes? That science? Evolution is a fact & the TOE is the best explanation for it. No blind faith needed. Religion is based totallly on a never seen invisible being & a 3000 year old book written by bronze age goat herders.
@pilgrimpater but when your science fails and your father is on his death bed and all hope is gone......even a prayer from an atheists lips will bring comfort to your heart. Reality is subjective i honestly believe a people with out the heart to believe in the impossible would be a dead people where would the creativity be the imagination to literally create something from nothing as any artist/musician?
@jc7997aj Sorry but Atheists don't pray. It is a form of talking to one's self. I can see it is a comfort if you believe but nothing comes of it. The fact that praying is a lottery (answered or not the believer trots out the "it's god's will" excuse) should tell you much about the practice. How many people sincerely pray in unison for world poverty to end, yet still nothing. Yet in the Bible JC says that if you truly believe then you can move a mountain. Creativity does not need religion.
@pilgrimpater most people who go to church now go to be seen not pray. if the rapture happened (or equivalent to any applicable religion) i doubt more than a handful would go. I say that to say this the road to perfection is more important than the destination. Regardless of how we do it we all should strive to be the best "..." we can be and religion has always presented rules to live by so that 1. we can act civilized 2. be part of a group (i e sheep) 3. Have hope it all was worth it
@jc7997aj Yes the gossip & bitching after church services belies that which they preach. Of course religion provides rules but that will be tens of thousands of different sets of rules. In reality sets of rules are nothing to do with religions but merely the scocieties & cultures of which the religion is a part. Thus god/godesses are not necessary. Don't worry about the reason for the sex life of plants. The history can be traced & the evolution of the eye is one of the most easiest to explain.
@jc7997aj Darwin said no such thing. He agonised over publishing his findings as he was worried about the effect on his ultra religious wife. However, his hand was forced when Russell Wallace independently arrived at exactly the same conclusions as Darwin but via different evidence. Darwin published his work for fear that Wallace would publish his first. Darwin NEVER had any regrets on his Theory which has been vindicated 150 years later & all creationist attempts to discredit it have failed.
@pilgrimpater do some research on darwin and flowering plants. There was no reason asexual plants with all greenery should divide into two (m and f) separate plants (gotta admit asexual reproduction is the most effective) and have flowers which also need wind and insect assistance to reproduce. Seems unlikely to me. Also the eye also brings up a lot of questions if you devolved an eye until it began on some hapless creature what would it be a light sensitive spot? how effective would that be?
time for pornhub.
youthank8 4 days ago
babylonian andmedia were two important region of persian,,and baghdad is the capital of iraq,,is the persian world that means the sity that god give it to us,,thats why that we all are brother and like themselves,,we are hate of america and israel because wana distroy our relationship,,but we are brother forever with eachother,,,,
persianboy434 3 weeks ago
@persianboy434 "we are hate of america and israel because wana distroy our relationship," You mean you hate the governments. It's not black and white. There is evil from both sides. Only a secular society has a chance of ensuring peace. Religion and belief in god destroys man's common sense.
pilgrimpater 3 weeks ago
many years ago iraq belong to persian,,,persian also create te system of watering to the trees in one sity in iran that name is esfahan,,if you want to understand how water goes up without having any pump,,go and have trip to iran-esfahan,,,the sity that noone say anything about it this days,,,,esfahan is one ofthe most beautiful sity in the world,,try to visit it during your life,,it will worth
persianboy434 3 weeks ago
@persianboy434 "if you want to understand how water goes up without having any pump,,go and have trip to iran-esfahan" No need. We have trees where i live. Capilliary action utilising the surface tension of water pumps water from the ground to the leaves. In fact this happens with most plants. But i would love to visit as i love places of beauty and history (even myths).
pilgrimpater 3 weeks ago
Having a lot of different languages and dialects in the world is a problem for communicating with each other until this day.
Gabrielprog 1 month ago
@Gabrielprog But there have ALWAYS been interpreters.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater how would you know that? And then again, the problem is still there.
Gabrielprog 1 month ago
@Gabrielprog who do you think interpreted the OT if there were never interpreters in the fist place?
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater The OT could have been translated several years or centuries after it was first written. And what about before it was written. were there interpreters in that time?
You said "always". So, again how would you know that. You can't.
Gabrielprog 1 month ago
@Gabrielprog In the OT (after Babel) the Israelites communicate with other tribes including Egyptians. How do you propose that they did that without translators?
How do you propose that we can translate years later if there were no translators at the time? Besides the difference in langauges is clearly a result of evolution of langauges. You can trace the evolution of English from it's many sources.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
@pilgrimpater You said "always". You can't be sure of that. You tried to claim that your statement was absolutely true without having any proof. Of course, after Babel most surely there were people trying to translate between languages but common sense dictates that that was not an instantaneous achievement. Too much for "always". Man, it took me YEARS to learn english even with the bunch of help we have today to learn a new language. Imagine learning a new one at that time.
Gabrielprog 1 month ago
@Gabrielprog "You can't be sure of that. " So how did different tribes trade? You demand proof yet you support a story from an ancient bronze age book. You do not have the slightest piece of evidence that this story is remotely true. Are you saying that one minute only Hbrew existed and the next God randomly enforced Spanish on random Babylonians? Really? Anybody who studies languages will tell you how they evolved.
How long you took to learn English is irrelevant.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pilgrimpater You failed to prove your initial statement: "But there have ALWAYS been interpreters." You said that in an arrogant tone and you didn't have any real proof. What ppl who studied languages say is not proof. (There is not even a consensus among the scholars about the origin of language). Which leads me to believe that you do that often: asserting things that are just your opinion but without having any proof whatsoever.
Gabrielprog 1 month ago
Those 18 dislikes are when you said '' you cannot interpret the bible literally ''.
tECHN9NE1116 1 month ago
@tECHN9NE1116 28 say i can.
pilgrimpater 1 month ago
Bab el = Heavens gate in Sumerian.The purpose of this tower was to act as a testament to the people under Nimrud whose name means "let us rebel"it is typical of mans desire to aquire equality with God.It also interfered with Gods plan to populate the earth not just Sumeria this is because the lord had a master plan to redeem the human race.
MrNewkingjames 1 month ago
ur knowledg about the different civilisation was so less and rediculous as this video like because there was tall building in dobai arab speaking people made that ???!! u idiot the western english speaking engineers build that
neokamran 1 month ago
@MrNewkingjames such funny question why language are iffer then look eve in same country there are different accent differ in language is higher level of differ in accent so the reason cat be the hypocratic story u said is based on environmental factors
neokamran 1 month ago
Comment removed
neokamran 1 month ago
The Tower of Bable is a coined phrase used to represent mans ascent to spiritual enlightenment and as man is more stupid than he lets on, the plans to build this tower got confused by too many people speaking there own versions at once and so we never got there. Hence the derived word babble.
TheRedneckssuckcock 1 month ago
because if the story of Babel was true God would have come back for the other tall buildings.
mytime103 2 months ago
Why can't Both sides be right??
JakeBolt90 2 months ago
@JakeBolt90 One claims something that the other claims as impossible, and they both have their different "arguments".
flxcvz 1 month ago
bible says god is not the author of confusion. so also why he got scared of tower reaching him bullshit bible
sajakram1 3 months ago
@MrNewkingjames Cont. Wearing of clothes? what does that have to with it? Clothes are part of culture but in practical terms are a response to the environment. You don't weraaanimal skins in the Carribean. You don't wear mini skirts in Moslem countries. You don't wear a grass skirt in Siberia. It's obvious. What a stupid question. Some ciltures wear no clothes.
As for 7 days a week then this roughly follows the phases of a lunar month. There has to be a global standard just as there is with GMT
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
@MrNewkingjames That explanation is totally implausible & worthy of Tolkein. The explanation is easy. There are so many parallels (not 100%) to biological evolution. As populations seperate then their cultures & languages diverge & you get a tree, similar to the tree of life. We have North European languages similar to each other but different to Latin languages which are similar to each other. Then we have English which is a mixture of other languages because of our mixture of cultures etc etc.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
jaeger2011 i had 1 wish,please unbann me,i will do anything for you then,btw i know pipemonkey
LEGOreviever 4 months ago
One of the main purposes of confusing the language was to cause a dispersal of peoples thruout the world (A monolithic form of government was premature in Gods estimation) "In the days of PELEG was the earth divided"When you find a scripture in the bible that you don't understand, assume it is your lack of knowledge rather than that God is an idiot.Remember that what we don't know can fill a wharehouse and truth is stranger than fiction.
MrNewkingjames 4 months ago
@MrNewkingjames What a coincidence that all the swarthy looking citizens were made to speak Mediterranean languages and the fair skinned ones were made to speak Nordic langauges?
What is wrong in a monolithic government especially if you can get it to worship you (as god)?
It's not that i don't understand passages in the bible but more a case of ppointing out the absurdities.
"truth is stranger than fiction. " I'd say more interesting.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
eiffel tower was made in 1887 u fucking moron, get ur facts straight.
Jaeger2011 4 months ago
@Jaeger2011 Started in 1887 & and completed and inaugurated in 1889 (didn't you notice the annotation?).
Anyhow:-
a) Get your facts right
b) When you become an adult, let's see if you can grasp the English language and express yourself in a mature manner.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
@pilgrimpater i speak several languages compared to you who only speak 1 you douchbag, get an education.
Jaeger2011 4 months ago
@Jaeger2011 "i speak several languages compared to you who only speak 1 "
May i suggest that you add English to that list?
You never know, it may just come in handy one day.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
@pilgrimpater ahaha are you implying i can't speak english? haha what a cheap fuck you are, thats the best you got? anyways, got better things to do than talking to some random uneducated prick.
Jaeger2011 4 months ago
@Jaeger2011 You can't speak English. If you need profanities to express yourself then part of your brain has to be damaged.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
@pilgrimpater haha yet we are having a conversation :) funny
Jaeger2011 4 months ago
@Jaeger2011 Yes, congratulations on providing your first dialogue that contains no profanities. You are indeed on your way to learning English well.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago 3
@pilgrimpater i pitty you
Jaeger2011 4 months ago
@Jaeger2011 Thankyou, and all very interesting but do you have a point of any relevance to make?
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
you IDIOT! why did you post "The Tower of Babel. Fact or Fiction?" this has nothing to do with that.
Troforso 4 months ago
@Troforso To see what sort of IDIOT leaves comments such as yours.
pilgrimpater 4 months ago
Comment removed
Troforso 4 months ago
@pilgrimpater ooh, pardon me then.
Troforso 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
when I see remaining of great babylon in middle of desert all our readings about history became unable to answer a big questions about human civilization and now I'm confusing about all historic theory about babylon but I'm sure about one reality that these remaining tells "a great climate changes led to death of great babylon"
alikamell 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God-Willing you all will check out this new series 'The Arrived', all praises to God, it clears up many things. Part 7 of this weekly series is coming out very soon God-Willing, you do not want to miss this. To watch this new documentary series, you can go to the youtube user account.....HashemStudioscom
McGowenFilms 5 months ago
Do people still honestly believe in this nonsense?! My parents also took the bible very literally. They hopped to church every Sunday on one leg and then hopped all the way back. Unfortunately - it later transpires - their bible had an unforgivable 'typo'. It taught them Faith, HOP, and charity.
HoratioMoonraker 5 months ago 3
Still in any case, the premise of your vid assumes that God struck the tower because of its altitude. Forgive the trite wording, but it was the attitude of the tower, not its altitude.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "Forgive the trite wording, but it was the attitude of the tower, not its altitude."
No forgiveness needed. That's a great play of words. I like it.
But i have to spoil things by stating that the attitude was to gain altitude to reach heaven.
Oh hell, talking of attitude, that reminds me of a really corny joke that i may be able to fit in 500 characters but i promise you it will make you groan.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater to say that a tower's height was to reach the heavens is nothing more than a turn of phrase - like unto the term 'skyscraper' (I hope our progeny don't assume we actually thought to be scraping the sky) But hey, I like bad jokes, shoot me a message on my page if it's too long for here....
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "to say that a tower's height was to reach the heavens is nothing more than a turn of phrase"
Ah yes the bible is literal until it suits other wise.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@SpencahD Oh yeah that joke. It's really bad.
A man was walking in a gale when a sudden violent gust blew away his hat. Another man was walking his dog and the dog chased and caught the hat and proceeded tearing it to shreds. The man remonstrated with the dog owner who dismissed the affair as trivial. The hatless man said "I don't like your attitude". The dog owner replied "No, it's your 'at he chewed".
Well i did say it was bad.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
the bible is very clear about this. so is many other old writings. the oldest is Sumerian. that is where much of the bible is handed down from. the oldest known civilization. they tell the story of the anunnaki. how they came in there space ships for gold. how they created the first Adam,(man) how they planted the Eden. how they destroyed the tower. how they fought one another for power. they first came to earth 450 thousand yrs ago. they have been here ever since. controlling us.
dicktheguncheney 5 months ago
@dicktheguncheney Yes, that all makes a lot of sense (says he choking on his cornflakes).
I do think the Anunnaki have a massive chance of winning the World Cup in the near future and for many years to come but rumour has it, that in private, they have a tendancy to cross dressing yet flatulence would appear to be their major problem.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
so... man was created to mine for gold and grow food for the anunnaki. this went on for thousands of years. up until this very day in fact. the next time they come will be 2012. the will want there gold. that is why so much is stored up. that way it will be ready for them.
dicktheguncheney 5 months ago
man himself was a scientific project by the anunnaki. man was created to mine gold for niberu's dying atmosphere. they needed monotonic gold in there atmosphere and the only place they found gold was on earth. they have a 3600 yr orbit around our sun. so when the attempted to mine it for them selves, the became ill. and many of the heroes that came to earth where complaining that the task was to much for them. so enki with other leading scientist decided to create a primitive worker. man.
dicktheguncheney 5 months ago
fool, the tower they where building was no skyscraper. it was a space craft launching tower. they where attempting to make a trip to niburu. the anunnaki didint like this so they came down and destroyed the launch tower. it was a reverse engineering project. the anunnaki lead by their king then took man and spread him throughout the earth teaching them different languages. after some time none could understand the other from different parts of the earth. just as they had planed.
dicktheguncheney 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater it is are self realization that makes us differnt.
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa "it is are self realization that makes us differnt." Yes i agree with that totally. Good point. It's the enhanced capacity for thought and the ability to communicate that thought to others. I feel we only disagree how that came about.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater 1 other thing the idea that brain size increases iq is nothing more than your wishful thinking To give credit were credit is due. Albert Eisenstein had an average size brain Brain size does not increase with iq.Iq has something to do with problem solving rationalization the ability to store concepts An average person of high iq can go through 100 times more information than a person who iq is on an average scale. Iq translate to something like ability to process info not brain size
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa "the idea that the brain size increases iq is nothing more than your wishful thinking "
Within one species maybe you could be right but across species e.g. our superior brain capacity compared to other apes leads to greater intelligence and of course, as we agree, self awareness and ability to reason.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater well ill just make this simple i do not agree. I do not think animals rationalize life and death i do not believe they understand how to come up with there own arts and sciences further more u say its all in relation to the size of the brain then what what about animals with larger brains? even if they had the same size brain they would never be like us because there design is 100 percent differnt this is a dead argument.i will not put myself on that level
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa Bigger animals (e.g. whales) have bigger brains than us but not necessarily in relation to their body size. Also we have evolved frontal lobes (but i am not sure if some other animals have too).
As i said, it's only our superior brain & power of speech that gives us an advantage (including the luxury of art & philosophy e.g. pondering about our existence) where other features in other animals give them different advanatges. We've more similarities with chimps than dissimilarities.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater will u got me there but u don't actually believe we evolved from apes do u?
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa "will u got me" I have total admiration for that. Creationists are often struck dumb when in response to something they say i come up with "I don't know".
No, we are apes. Other apes are merely our evolutionary cousins. There is a very well documented list of fossil finds that show examples of develpment along our human lineage. "Is it complete?" you may ask. Well no, and maybe never will be but there are enough pieces in the jigsaw to show us what the picture is.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Another important question is quite simple. if we are not the creators of are awesome design then who are what is? The way we interpret things can come out quite differently than the way it comes in. Another words one thing can be perceived 1 way while the intent is actually quite differnt and another important question is. If we are not the creators of are design the who taught us language? The ancient gods? Seems crazy but fact is life is a mystery.
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa Even further down the rabbit hole is how we even got here evolution is a theory in a wormhole itself it cannot work for itself why because there is no proof to evolution & i didn't evolve from a monkey lol. Although i do believe past civilizations were probably dumb and monkey like but man and monkey r 2 different things. We have religion awareness of environment on levels animals do not.
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa "there is no proof to evolution ". 100% incorrect. The fossil sequence (increasing complexity over geolical time) and biogeography (isolation causes diversification as observed today) are powerful proofs of evolution. That is the what so don't waste your time asking the "how" because even Darwin didn't know that.
We have awareness as do most other higher order animals. Ours is the pinnacle because of a larger brain & advanced power of language. Hope that helps.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@lococavasa "Another important question " I'd prefer you answer mine before asking more but to respond to you, then language has evolved (in many ways similar to biological evolution). You can see this in the various languages of the "Latin" countries or seperately in the Nordic counties. English is an exception as it is a bastardisation of multiple languages. Of course higher order animals have language too but cannot develop it without a vocal chord. It's no mystery.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater No don't you get that one nation literally is controlled by one people. If that nation split when the tower of babel fell people all around the world would evolve accordingly to there environment. Quite possibly the spoken word also plays a great role here. Not i am saying so much this is it but that's how i interpret the message. My big question is then how did man appear before the fall of babel.
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa Are you seriously stating that there was only ONE nation because after the alleged flood Noah and his offspring were instructed to head in different directions to populate the Earth? May i also remind you that the Language aspect is a major part of god's punishment in the Babel story. It was not just about scattering people (how were they scattered anyway, by family?).
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@lococavasa true don't get me wrong i do believe they have a very no verbal way of communicating i just do not believe they have the self awareness of man. Man as a human animal far exceeds those of who walk on 4 legs i just simply do not see the same gift of sight in non human animals. You will almost never see a animal use a tool other than monkeys and certainly never see them use those tools to the efficiency we as human beings can.
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa Birds of pray have far far superior powers of sight than humans. Gorillas are far more powerful than men. Bears have far superior senses of smell than humans. Animals on 4 legs do not suffer the same back problems as us. Humans ahave a "design" flaw with the appendix which although redundant can burst and kill you. AS for our advantage over our animal cousins? A larger brain and the power of speech.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater ok ok now your just taking this way out of context u make it sound like there just as much of a human as us other than the fact we have a bigger brain brain and speech clearly sight also goes on 2 levels spiritual and physical this is way over kill if u want rationalization that's cool but in no way do i put myself on the level of a animal Please do not make this a debate of to put humans on the same level as animals. an 8 yrld can figure out the difference this is just plan crazy
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa No we ARE animals. We share the same body plan as other members of our phylum. We all eat & breath through the same orifice (bad design), we all have two eyes, one nose, two ears. We all have a blood system circulated by a heart. We all have four limbs. We all have similar digestive systems. We all have the same sexual aparatus. Everything is a variation on that theme. Ours is the larger brain & power of language. The so called "spiritual" is merely a guess with no evidence.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@lococavasa No we are animals. We share the same body plan as other members of our phylum. We all eat & breath through the same orifice (bad design), we all have two eyes, one nose, two ears. We all have a blood system circulated by a heart. We all have four limbs. We all have similar digestive systems. We all have the same reproductive aparatus. Everything is a variation on that theme. Ours is the larger brain & power of language. The so called "spiritual" is merely a guess with no evidence.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater honestly i didn't even mean to cauze all his crazy babel i just was stating a well known fact humans and animals can be seen on 2 levels i guess u were just thinking sight but seeing is not restricted to the eyes seeing can imply using the mind which is precisely what iwas referring too
lococavasa 5 months ago
@lococavasa Well we are drifting from topic and that is just as much my fault but i will repeat that your "2 levels" is not a given. The physical level, none of us can deny but the spiritual level is way up in the air for debate as to whether it even exists or not. The one thing i would say is that human brain has evolved so much that it can speculate.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
Like I said, Tower of Babel was required for everyone to understand each other. God destroyed it for a reason remember that. Babel means:
1. A confused noise, typically that is made by a number of voices.
2. A scene of noisy confusion.
We would understand each other but it would be in different language. Speaking in babel yet one would understand what it means. I wouldn't blame god for destroying it, Cause it had a satanic influence involved. Remember be with YWHW and his son, :P
SurveyForGold 5 months ago
@SurveyForGold So a South Amerindian the other side of the world spoke babel but the second it was demolished (& he could never have known about that) he spoke a different language but coinicidentally all the members of his tribe spoke the exact new language while further North a tribe of Eskimos had a completey different new langauge which again coincidently all members of his tribe also spoke? Yet again poor old Satan gets the blame even though not being mentioned anywhere near the incident.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
Dumb. The issue at hand was never about the height of the building at Babylon. Retarded video.
Jbeliski 5 months ago
@Jbeliski Gen 11: "let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven"
The only way to achieve that is through height, unless you would have us believe that heaven is on the ground.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Why couldn't heaven be on the ground as opposed to the earths stratosphere? What does height have to do with heaven? It's incorporeal. The builders of this tower knew this and just wanted to say, Oh isn't it glorious, this is where our god lives, up there in the penthouse. And he's all ours! The people will worship this and we'll become kings! Otherwise why not just go climb a mountain. Get with the program man. This is the first and last of your video's I will watch.
Jbeliski 5 months ago
@Jbeliski "What does height have to do with heaven?
The measure between the ground & "reaching UNTO heaven" can only be construed as height.
"It's incorporeal. " Not to the Babylonians, according to that passage.
"up there in the penthouse" Penthouses ARE high aren't they.
"Otherwise why not just go climb a mountain." There are no mountains within less that 250Km of Babylon.
"This is the first and last of your video's I will watch." Shame, one of my earliest & creotard debunking gets easier
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Oh you are just incorrigible. I bet you'd be right along there building that mythical tower along with the slavemasters that whipped the populous chattle into submission.
Jbeliski 5 months ago
@Jbeliski I'm not into S & M. Well maybe with Rihanna.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Oh man, so hot.
Jbeliski 5 months ago
@Jbeliski "Oh man, so hot."
I know. Anytime i think of her i break the Christian rule in Matthew 5:28.
I'm willing to concede this argument because in Rihanna we have heaven occupying just 5' 8" height from the ground.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
Vey sad that you have taken your own understanding of the why, and derived therefrom the because. Try reading it again.
SpencahD 6 months ago
@SpencahD Try explaining it again.
pilgrimpater 6 months ago
@pilgrimpater Okay I'll try - please I ask honestly, simply hear what I say and do not interpret it through what you have heard from others:
The people were told to scatter and fill the earth - they didn't. They decided to 'build a tower whose heights would reach the heavens' - They said that it would reach the heavens. They said, not God.
God saw what they did and said: '...nothing they propose to do will be withheld from them...'
Please consider that they proposed a city, (see next)
SpencahD 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater cont...
They thought to build a city whose populous was the majority of the population. They were in 'Babel' (confusion in the hebrew, door of god in the summarian) Babel was run/founded by Nimrud. Babel was a dictatorship ruling most of mankind. God had forbade a 'population center' with the command to fill the earth. Nimrud, whose name means 'let us rebel' had another idea - despotism. MOST of mankind was subject to a rebel - most of mankind was worshiping a man. That is why.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD So mankind, having spread out, when did it return to be centralised in Babel?
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Mankind did not spread as was commanded. The families of Noah left the mountians of Ararat (Urartu - in Hebrew 'RRT') and came to the plain of Shinar. Shinar is Sumer-Babylon-Iraq. Mankind did not spread, save for some of the sons of Shem who did. Most of mankind wandered from the mountains, likely along the Caspian and Black, into the valley.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD So where in the Bible does it say the whole population ended up at Babel? Also the Caspian and Black Sea are a long way from Southern Iraq where Babel is situated.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Neither I nor the Bible said that. I said 'Most' and the Bible says Shinar - Shinar is the region, Babel was the chief city - the two are essentially interchangeable for these purposes. In any case, geographic distance has little to do with the narrative. Urartu is north-northeast-east-northeast of The Dardanelles. It is likely to expect one to 'walk easy' and this 'easy route' roughly flows north, northeast, east, southeast, south, and finally east.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Neither I nor the Bible said that. I said 'Most' and the Bible says Shinar - Shinar is the region, Babel was the chief city - the two are essentially interchangeable for these purposes. In any case, geographic distance has little to do with the narrative. Urartu is north-northeast-east-northeast of The Dardanelles. It is likely to expect one to 'walk easy' and this 'easy route' roughly flows north, northeast, east, southeast, south, and finally east.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater In any case this epic took place between 2100BC and 2300BC, with 2250 being the closest estimate. You will find this information in the geneologies if you wish. You may also cf. Josephus though most do not. I would also direct your attention to Semiramis and Ninnus. A great source is 'After the Flood' available free, in full text online.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "n any case this epic took place between 2100BC and 2300BC, " I'm confused as we have evidence of Sumerian and Ancient Chinese cultures dating back to circa 10K yeras ago. So weren't these part of the human race?
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater There are a plethora of individuals who state that "we have evidence" and then proceed to "prove" whatever it is that they wish. Whether it is one fossil above another, or someone's date imposed upon a tablet, or even a synthetic variable extracted from some carboniferous smutz...
Suffice it to say that 'evidence' proves very little in absence of testimony. The first 'civilization' is known as Sumer, and Sumer was Babel. 2250BC or so take it or leave it, it isn't a majority matter
SpencahD 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater I would also like to add, for my own part as a humble amature linguist, that the Babel narrative, aside from alien stuff, is the only functional explanation for the currently observed diversity of languages. Yes I said it, the Tower is essentially the only decent working theory for the observed myriad of tongues found today. Worse than that, it is becoming more apparent to me that Proto-Hebrew was the 'original' tongue.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "is the only functional explanation for the currently observed diversity of languages." You must be kidding my friend. Linguistic evolution is analogous to Biological evolution. There are specific languages that have evolved from Latin along the Southern Med. All Nordic languages are different but similar & again linked by geography. We have a group of countries that use Greek alphabet. Chinese & Japanse are linked. English is the bastardised language as it takes from all quarters.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Evolution expects an increase in complexity, or rather 'a getting betterness' It is simple to demonstrate that each tongue today is less complex, less 'better' than their predecessors. That some have come from one is great - linguistic evolution still has no originating tongue - and it cannot explain diversity of tongues without such a mother tongue. Linguistic isolates, spoken by humans who can procreate with others, require a mother tongue. Even evolution requires a mother tongue
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD I think you took my analogy too literally. It is that with seperated populations, the earlier the seperation, then the greater the difference but, the later the seperation, then the lesser the difference. Hence we have the Latin languages all similar as geographically close yet Chinese & Latin are poles apart. It is easy to see the evolution of connected languages, even English, Anglo Saxon with Celtic, Latin, Norse, Jewish, Indian, French etc, is markedly different to Shakespeare.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@SpencahD I think you took my analogy too literally. It is that with seperated populations, the earlier the seperation, then the greater the difference but, the later the seperation, then the lesser the difference. Hence we have the Latin languages all similar as geographically close yet Chinese & Latin are poles apart. It is easy to see the evolution of connected languages, even English, Anglo Saxon with Celtic, Latin, Norse, Jewish, Indian, French etc, is markedly different to Shakespeare.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater huh?
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD Re "huh?"
Huh?
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@SpencahD "Evolution expects an increase in complexity" Wrong, Evolution actually expects increase, decrease & zero change in complexity. That's what we have with language. How complex would you describe the "Click" language of the hunter gatherers in Namibia? On the other hand we have Bryonic language similar between the Welsh, Cornish and Bretons echoing exactly the known historical migrations of which was one people. NO increase in complexity but a gradual divergence.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater An amino acid is more complex than a codon, a cell more than an amino acid. That is the evolutionary consensus path (the amino acid soup experiment as a point.) Evolution expects an increase in complexity, as a single cell is claimed to preceed the multi. The 'Click' tongues are equally complex to our own. Their vocabulary and syntax are astounding. The point is that the ancient tongues are far more developed than the modern. Lingustics demonstrates this as a stipulation.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "Evolution expects an increase in complexity, " No it expects an adaption by those best duited. The basics of amino acids & cell complexities are nigh on the same for all eukaryotes whether they evolve (being selected for) or become extinct. You are talking at the wrong level.
I never made any comment on the complexity of "click" language but more on it's uniqueness. Why are there no other versions between Namibia and babel? Such a unique language would be mentioned in the BIble.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@SpencahD "Evolution expects an increase in complexity, " No it expects an adaption by those best duited. The basics of amino acids & cell complexities are nigh on the same for all eukaryotes whether they evolve (being selected for) or become extinct. You are talking at the wrong level.
I never made any comment on the complexity of "click" language but more on it's uniqueness. Why are there no other versions between Namibia and babel? Such a unique language would be mentioned in the BIble.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater The click tongue may well be a vestage of one of the original 72 but, as with any well written text, dialects and distinct details of tongues are not discussed in the Bible as it is outside of the Bible's focus.
As for the other, my point is that lingistics has shown time and again that languages degrade over time, becoming more lazy, slurred, and less structured - not more so.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "tongues are not discussed in the Bible as it is outside of the Bible's focus."
Ah yes, that old convenient chestnut.
Languages, like biological evolution, do not degrade. They merely evolve and adapt. Check any dictionary of any civilised nation and notice how thicker they have become over the years. Some degredation. Languages are gaining all the time while borrowing words from others.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater It is said that 'specific languages evolved from Latin' I put it another way - Latin fractured into several tongues, each of which are less than the first. Syntax, Vocabulary, Grammatic function all have become increasingly 'lazy' in each new dialect of the daughter - High German is much more expressive and complex than modern, Italian-French-Spanish-Romanian are all near blubber in comparison to Latin. Yes out tongues come from others - they are degraded left-overs.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "Latin fractured into several tongues" I disagree. Latin is only detectable in those nations that are geographicaly close and yet again mirroring the history of population movement or invasion i.e. the Roman Empire. The language evolution mirrors documrented history. You won't find any Latin in those countries, even in Europe, that were not part of the Roman Empire.
"Yes out tongues come from others - they are degraded left-overs." Is Italian more degraded than Spanish or Portuguese?
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Latin fractured into several tongues. Why disagree when you name three? As for degredation, as Dawkins put it with his fish example - their level of degredation is equivalent. And you do indeed find Latin in non-Roman regions, though these are borrowed words rather than decended vocabulary.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "Latin fractured into several tongues. " But why do we have no Latin languages to the East towards Babel. You would expect Latin to have started in Babel then fracture (your term) as it spread Westwards. We don't find this of course.
"As for degredation, as Dawkins put it with his fish example - their level of degredation is equivalent." I don't understand your point here.
"And you do indeed find Latin in non-Roman regions, " Only as people mix as in England.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater Latin is not one of the original tongues of Babel, it is a derivative of one of them. Latin is descended from Javan-ish, it is of the same origin as 'Estruscan' and possibly the Basque, though neighboring influence is certainly found in the mix
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD I don't think Latin came from Basque. Basque has never been prominent at any time in history.
But what you have described in all your replies is an evolution of languages into other languages over a peeriod of time.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater As for the greek alphabet, this is taken from the phoenecian, which is taken from the 'northern semitic' which is taken from the Hebrew. Even the word 'alphabet' demonstrates this decent (vis. Aleph Beit) Proto Hebrew predates all of the 'occidental' character sets - and all of the occidental sets (with the exception of the modernly created cyrillic) decend directly from the Hebrew, with noticeable "transcription errors" leading to a degraded facsimile of the original. Degeneration
SpencahD 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater And finally in regards to English: It is indeed the bastard child of Babel. In the plain 72 tongues were made, with the extinction of a few and the splitting of a few, and the degradation of a few, we come to 6500 give or take. American English (not English-English which is its own tongue) is nothing less than the Adversary's answer to Babel - God broke the tongues, so Satan took some of them all and made his own new one.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD Respond to this video... "God broke the tongues, so Satan took some of them all and made his own new one. " So ancient Egyptian was the same as Ancient Chinese was the same as Sumerian? Centuries of Archaeological evidence state otherwise. Btw i don't believe in Satan either but that is not for this video's thread. Btw 2. Thanks for the sub but why?
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater What is a sub? Sumerian, Chinese and Egyptian, at least the ancient varieties to which you refer, are some of the original tongues of Babel: Egyptian is Mizraim, Chinese is Sino, and Sumerian is Akkad, though the last may be Assur.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD "What is a sub?" Subscription. "Sumerian, Chinese and Egyptian, at least the ancient varieties to which you refer, are some of the original tongues of Babel: " You'll need some evidence for that because they couldn't be more different. Not to mention the thousands of dialects of Chinese.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater The dialects of Chinese are simple - that is what happens when parochial tribalism reigns supreme. As for Mizraim, Sino, and Ashur (or Akkad) they are very divergent because they are of the original 72 tongues - they are not related in substance, only in location and chronology. Each of the original 72 are unique, unrelated languages. You will not find similarities between them. Them being so divergent is what requires the Babel epic in explaining linguistic demographics.
SpencahD 5 months ago
@SpencahD Of course dialects are simple but they don't necessarily understand each other. That is not the point as dialects are variations on an original. Again a very good parallel with biological evolution. Thus the languages could not have been magiced into existence at the wave of a wand by god in an instant. The demographics follow the geographical & historical demogrpahics.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
@pilgrimpater I think you took my analogy too literally. It is that with isolated populations, the earlier the isolation, then the greater the difference but, the later the isolation, then the lesser the difference. Hence we have the Latin languages all similar & all geographically close but Chinese & Latin are poles apart. It is easy to see the evolution of connected languages, even English which is Anglo Saxon with Celtic, Latin, Norse, Jewish, Indian, French etc & has evolved since Beowulf.
pilgrimpater 5 months ago
You do realize how complex life, the universe and realtiy as a whole is dont you? Far too complex for natural occurances. Science can't explain thousands of things. Yet the notion of a God does. Ockham's Razor. The simplest answer is usually the correct one.
RamrodAI 6 months ago
@RamrodAI You do realise that you have have done is merely transferred the issue of complexity to another level and a guessed level at that. Such a baseless statement as yours gets us nowhere. The simplest answer is that if you do not know something, you strive to find out but you don't play at wishful thinking with "God dunnit". Well not until you can provide some proof for any god or godess or whatever.
pilgrimpater 6 months ago
Fiction.
MSoltan1992 6 months ago
this was a waste of my time
f u
WhyBondy 7 months ago
@WhyBondy Thankyou for your kind words but by typing them out you used up even more precious time from your busy life. If you have nothing meaningful to say then bugger off.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
Science is its self a religion and people do place "blind faith" in science as well. Darwin theory of evolution is hardley any more credible than any religious claim. Do your research what they taught in school is the whole truth. At the end of Darwin's life he admitted to "wishing he had never went public with his theory" having learned in the years after the announcement that the slow gradual progression from one form to another is impossible. Cont
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj pt 2 These intermediate forms would not be as adept as their former selves and not yet suited for their new roles in the food chain. Thus logically would have died out. Also mutations are rarely good most being deadly or impacts optimal living. Saying all that to say this mankind needs comfort and a moral compass religions do that fairly well cause even though you may not believe in any of them the society of your country of origin likely does so your moral compass will reflect that.
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Re part 2. Intermediate forms are too many to list but just think of it this way. The fossil record shows a distinct increase in complexity over geological time. Evolution is the only possible explanation for this and the fossil record is exactly the opposite of what we would expect of a global flood. Most mutations are neutral. Bad mutations to the genes of the body plan would be lethal. However, there are more than enough good mutations to cause allele change in a population.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Religions can provide a moral compass but are not necessary for a moral compass. There is no good act that a religious person can do that a non religious person can do. The trouble with religious morals is that there is no definitive unambiguous place where they can be accessed.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
ment to say isnt the whole truth sorry!
jc7997aj 7 months ago
religions get a bad rap because of the people in them and there actions. Most religions ideas and concepts if followed will let you have a happy life (I wont include Islam as it is truly a book about one people one nation conquering the world no tolerance for other idea's) so if it comforts the hearts of the masses let it be for it was the masses that brought it into being in the first place. A religious or scientifically minded person who loses hope will surely die.
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj "Most religions ideas and concepts if followed will let you have a happy life "
Which of the thousands of Christian denominations were you thinking of. How many wars have most religions caused? Answer? Too many to list. It is true that if every one lived to exactly the same religion there would be no conflict but that doesn't make that religion the truth. That would work for Islam as well so you have contradicted yourself. Hope is of no use if it is a false and unfounded hope.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater was thinking of most religions not just christian I happen to believe western christianity to be "lost in translation so to speak". I excluded Islam because of its inherent intolerance and most of the world's violent christians live in countries where muslims are busy at war with anyone who disagrees and will not convert. Seriously what kind of atheist are you all you've retorted back with is pro-islam shit and not mention christians war mongering stopped in the dark ages cont
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Islam is more tolerant to itself than christianity. It only has two divisions i.e. the Sunnis & Shias where Christians have countless demominations & untold attrocities committed by Catholics & Protestants on each other. Take a trip to Norrthern Ireland or even Glasgow if you want to witness intolerance at it's worst. Not many Muslims in either of those two places. I'm not pro Islam but you clearly talk nonsense about them. You even worship the same god & Jesus is a prophet to them.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater ha i dont worship any god i do have a certain distaste for islam ill admit to that. Have read the koran and understand that it was written by one man over the course of his life and he was peaceful at first and became increasingly more warlike and it is said that if any conflict occurs you are to abid by the latter (the more violent tennents) and its not written in chronological order you have to know how to read it properly its also how a muslim is brought up
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater the muslims continue to this day i'd say their body count is higher. Darwin's theory is just that a theory to many holes in the theory and we have went to far down this road sooo many blindly believe it rather than look at other options (and not refering to "GOD") of where we came from. Archeological evidence has shown that we are older than current teachings say. Imagine being Galileo trying to inform the world of his beliefs
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Darwin's Theory has very few gaps (extra intermediates would always be welcome but what we do have is compelling). The few "gaps" that exist are not enough to puncture the main body of evidence for and boy is there plenty of evidence for. Archeological evidence cerrtainly proves that we are many thousands of years older than the Bible would have us believe. So i guess we agree on that one.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater ah well i was referring to the first civilization you must admit many cities and structures around the earth are being reported as old as 12,000 bc thats even before the sumerians puma punku for instance
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Yes i agree. The first civilisation would be circa 12,000 BC but what does that have to do with anything because homo sapiens was around way before the first civilisation and yet is still an extremely late comer on the scene. Btw we know for sure that the Sumerians and Egyptians had their own language that was different to Hebrew (and Aramaic) so it seems there already were different languages before the Tower of Babel.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater and being persecuted so to today as modern scientists archeologists and others discover evidence contrary to popular belief they get snuffed out. Historical inertia is hard to beat so we continue to teach things as truth when they are just theory and not giving alternative theories is wrong to our youth. You must think im some right wing wako christian but im not we could agree on alot of things but you have to understand most people are sheep and they that
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater comforting blanket called religion you and i and others like us can live sanely knowing that the real truth to the age old questions lie behind an as of yet undrawn curtain. You wanna take their hope away i really dont care if it is all lies if the people believe and live up the "standards of their religion" is that so bad as long as there isnt total anarchy. There has and always will be wars sure some are fought in religions name but the motive is always greed
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj "You wanna take their hope away i really dont care if it is all lies if the people believe and live up the "standards of their religion" is that so bad as long as there isnt total anarchy"
You can get the same effect by taking drugs. I am sure that Nazi Germany would have gone on to live in total harmony once all the Jews had been exterminated. That is not good.
Sorry but the truth is important. You as a religious person is no more moral than myself.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater once again im not a religious person i have been studying it since i was 13 (am 31) but for the sake of education and understanding not faith. It is glimpse into the people and culture for which i study. What would your "no religion" world have and how much better off would humanity be? would you grab a five year old and shake the belief in santa out of him? In all regards that is what you would do to humanity.
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Science is a religion & people place "blind faith" in it? You mean the "blind faith" that eradicated smallpox, produced man flight, sent probes to the outer recahes of the solar system, performs heart transpants, brings heating & lighting & fresh clean water to our homes? That science? Evolution is a fact & the TOE is the best explanation for it. No blind faith needed. Religion is based totallly on a never seen invisible being & a 3000 year old book written by bronze age goat herders.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater but when your science fails and your father is on his death bed and all hope is gone......even a prayer from an atheists lips will bring comfort to your heart. Reality is subjective i honestly believe a people with out the heart to believe in the impossible would be a dead people where would the creativity be the imagination to literally create something from nothing as any artist/musician?
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Sorry but Atheists don't pray. It is a form of talking to one's self. I can see it is a comfort if you believe but nothing comes of it. The fact that praying is a lottery (answered or not the believer trots out the "it's god's will" excuse) should tell you much about the practice. How many people sincerely pray in unison for world poverty to end, yet still nothing. Yet in the Bible JC says that if you truly believe then you can move a mountain. Creativity does not need religion.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater most people who go to church now go to be seen not pray. if the rapture happened (or equivalent to any applicable religion) i doubt more than a handful would go. I say that to say this the road to perfection is more important than the destination. Regardless of how we do it we all should strive to be the best "..." we can be and religion has always presented rules to live by so that 1. we can act civilized 2. be part of a group (i e sheep) 3. Have hope it all was worth it
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Yes the gossip & bitching after church services belies that which they preach. Of course religion provides rules but that will be tens of thousands of different sets of rules. In reality sets of rules are nothing to do with religions but merely the scocieties & cultures of which the religion is a part. Thus god/godesses are not necessary. Don't worry about the reason for the sex life of plants. The history can be traced & the evolution of the eye is one of the most easiest to explain.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Thought i'd clear that up before we get back to topic.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@jc7997aj btw please check 2:56 in this video. Your wayward ramblings are way off topic and you have succeeded in sucking me in to them.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater lol i forgot about the video and hour ago
jc7997aj 7 months ago
@jc7997aj Darwin said no such thing. He agonised over publishing his findings as he was worried about the effect on his ultra religious wife. However, his hand was forced when Russell Wallace independently arrived at exactly the same conclusions as Darwin but via different evidence. Darwin published his work for fear that Wallace would publish his first. Darwin NEVER had any regrets on his Theory which has been vindicated 150 years later & all creationist attempts to discredit it have failed.
pilgrimpater 7 months ago
@pilgrimpater do some research on darwin and flowering plants. There was no reason asexual plants with all greenery should divide into two (m and f) separate plants (gotta admit asexual reproduction is the most effective) and have flowers which also need wind and insect assistance to reproduce. Seems unlikely to me. Also the eye also brings up a lot of questions if you devolved an eye until it began on some hapless creature what would it be a light sensitive spot? how effective would that be?
jc7997aj 7 months ago