(June 21, 2022 at 8:25 pm)Dragonset Wrote:(June 21, 2022 at 7:31 pm)Jehanne Wrote: No literary scholar or author (including, JK Rowling) would agree with you. While it is true that Hamlet is the leading character of his play's namesake, that is where objectivity ends and subjectivity begins.
As for the Genesis account, virtually all Rabbis and other Christian scholars interpreted that text to mean literal days, at least until the Enlightenment. Try as you may, the exceptions do not prove the rule.
What can I say? That's a really bad argument. In fact, it's a non-argument. An appeal to authority? Do you trust Rabbis and Christian scholars? I sure as hell don't. Anyway, it doesn't matter. If there was an argument by anyone against what I say, they would lose. Rabbi and Hebrew or Christian scholar. Unless, the merit is determined by tradition. What I say goes against tradition. Which has a piss-poor record of accuracy.
Well, gee, go to graduate school, get your PhD, and set the Academy straight. The Hebrews believed in a flat Earth, inherenting their cosmology from the Sumerians. Everyone knows this. The idea persisted throughout the New Testament all the way until the pre-Nicene fathers:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth
Later on when Christian scholars began to have more conduct with the Greeks did the idea of a flat Earth become more unfashionable. As for the Latin Vulgate, no major translation of the Bible is based upon that, the sole exception was the Douay–Rheims, which, outside of traditional Catholics, is read by hardly anyone
