(December 20, 2011 at 2:10 am)Rhythm Wrote: We contend that myths are the product of imagination because thats where evidence leads us. We do have myths that might have some basis in some event. The particulars of the event being lost to time, but more so being lost to the myth itself. I'm not arguing that this cannot be the case, because we do see evidence for this sort of thing. I'm arguing against your interpretation of all cultures myths based off of your interpretation of an egyptian funerary text.The Egyptian texts provide the details of the story that mythology has to say.
Whether my interpretation is correct or not is not so important as the fact that the… Academia, as you call it, is unable to provide an explanation for unexplained human behavior such as deforming artificially the skulls of the infants all over the world.
The excuses given are ridiculous as ridiculous are the excuses given for the killing of the firstborn or amputating infants in order to purify them.
The Absarkoes (Sparrow Hawk), a Plains Indians group wrongly called the Crows, have many versions of a creation myth that features the familiar Old Man Coyote, the trickster-creator.
[…]
Then Little Coyote did something bad. He suggested to Old Man that he give the people different languages so they would misunderstand each other and use their weapons in wars. (David and Margaret Leeming, “A Dictionary of Creation Myths,” Oxford University Press, p.64)
The Pomo Indians of California say the creator was Old Man Madumba.
[…]
After a time he was amazed to learn in his dream that these people, too, were all wrong. Kuku advised Madumba to destroy these people with wind, which he did. Only the ground squirrel escaped in his hole.
Madumba made new people out of willow wands. This time he made many groups that spoke different languages.(ibid p.230)
A magic creation chant of one group of Eskimos:
In the very earliest time,
When both people and animals lived on earth,
A person could become an animal if he wanted to
and an animal could become a human being.
Sometimes they were people
And sometimes animal
And there was no difference.
All spoke the same language.(ibid p.88)
The Mayas say that when the people left Tulan with their gods, they did not speak one language any more but many.
And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech. (Gen. 11:1).
(December 20, 2011 at 2:10 am)Rhythm Wrote: I'm beyond skeptical about the certainty you feel you have demonstrated regarding the subject and I'm to the point of calling you a fanatic, and your theory fantasy.The difference between my fanatism and yours is that mine is based on… common sense!
It was not the Christians that told the Indians about the mother language because the Christians believe that the God tried to destroy humanity once, with the flood, not many times as the Indians say.
Your answer to this… extra coincidence is that men think in the same way and they produce the same fantasies everywhere.
The Egyptians say that the gods, there in the famous Near East, were killing those who did not know how to speak the gods’ language and so all of them were speaking one language.
Which of the two explanations is based on some evidence and seems a bit more reasonable?
