Universities and Ph.D's that fail to learn "ancient speak"

Hello all,

jb] Confusion reigns because historians, archaeologists, etc., don't bother to learn "Ancient-speak!" Ultimately, that is the fault of the universities that fail their duties. By extension, it is the fault of the authors of the text books (who work under the auspices of the universities) that fail in their duties.

We find an example of "Ancient-speak," in the Book of Enoch, Chapter 75, §'s 4 & 5.

"In like manner twelve doors Uriel showed me, open in the circumference of the sun's chariot in the heaven, through which the rays of the sun break forth: and from them is warmth diffused over the earth, when they are opened at their appointed seasons."

1.] "The circumference of the sun's chariot in the heaven" -----> is speaking of the Ecliptic

2.] "In like manner twelve doors Uriel showed me -----> is speaking of the twelve houses of the Zodiac.

3.] when they are opened at their appointed seasons -----> is speaking of the tilt of the earth's axis, and hence the changes of seasons in monthly segments as measured by the 12 houses of the Zodiac that lay along the plane of the ecliptic.

We need a demonstration of responsibility from the universities, and the Ph.Ds that represent them. We need a change in the way our books are written, and if that requires putting that responsibility in private hands - than let's get about to achieve it.

jb
.




[edit on 16-11-2006 by beforebc]

Where have the universities and academics failed, specifically?

Where have the universities and the academics failed?

In answer, let's look at another passage from the Book of Enoch c160 B.C.

This one clearly demonstrates a knowledge of the conservation of angular momentum: Why isn't it common knowledge that this principle may have originated with the Book of Enoch - and not say with Newton?

"And I saw the chambers of the sun and moon, whence they proceed and whither they come again, and their glorious return, and how one is superior to the other, and their stately orbit, and how they do not leave their orbit, and they add nothing to their orbit and they take nothing from it, and they keep faith with each other, in accordance with the oath by which they are bound"

It's not common knowledge because our universities and the academics have failed us.

bc
.

People don't take that as a statement on the conservation of angular momentum....because its not. All its saying is that the luminaries don't deviate from their heavenly paths. ANd if they knew about the conservation of angular momentum, where are their books that teach and detail it explicitly? Where have they made use of it for that matter?

The book of Enoch also says

reluctant-messenger.com...
And again, observe ye the days of summer how the sun is above the earth over against it

The sun is not above the earth. The earth moves around the sun. Academics know that the ancients had detailed celestial knowledge, in terms of the movements of the objects in the heavens, etc. That doesn't require that they actually understood what was going on, that they were on a small planet revolving around one star amoung billions.

Originally posted by NygdanThe sun is not above the earth. The earth moves around the sun.

The Book of Enoch was written during the time of Aristotle and Ptolemy when the geo-centric model (sun orbits the earth) was the science of the times. Hence your statement is a good example of how Universities and academics have twisted thinking to follow their dictates.

You didn't recognize the geo-centric model or the times - so instead you used it as a negative argument.

So too with your statement of the conservation of momentum - you don't understand ancient speak hence you didn't recognize that it was simply the ancient way of saying: Conservation of momentum means that the total momentum of the system before an event (will equal) the total momentum after the event.

(i.e., they add nothing to their orbit and they take nothing from it)

bc
.

Hello all,

The Book of Enoch, tho' written in the time of Aristotle and later Ptolemy's geo-centric world, c360 - c160 B.C., reflects a knowledge that was unknown at that time.

I wish we could find those very ancient books (tablets) so we knew better
what the pre-Dynastic world was all about, and from where the ancient wisdom
originated.

Unfortunately the destruction of the libraries of Alexandria and
Ashurbanipal, and the destruction of the civilization of the Maya in the
Yucatan by the Conquistadors have made same very difficult.

It causes one to wonder - why did the Conquistadors wreck such devastation?
What was there that was so damaging to Europe's well being?

And why the Maya? Because in the Popol Vuh (the sacred word of the Maya-Quiché] we find this:

Popol Vuh - Part III Chapter 3

There were many priests and sacrificers (the) Forefathers of us, the people
of the Quiché. The names .. there in the EAST - Olomán, as they called those
men there in the East .. when he had finished eating they set out toward the
east where the great mountain was.

The Ottoman empire, being Muslim accepted the Book of Enoch within their sphere of scripture.

jb
.

Originally posted by beforebc
The geo-centric model (sun orbits the earth) was the science of the times. Hence your statement is a good example of how Universities and academics have twisted thinking to follow their dictates.

Meaning that universities and academics must untwist their thinking and re-adopt the geocentric model even though it is false?

So too with your statement of the conservation of momentum - you don't understand ancient speak hence you didn't recognize that it was simply the ancient way of saying: Conservation of momentum means that the total momentum of the system before an event (will equal) the total momentum after the event.

Are you sure that you understand the law of conservation of angular momentum, which is what you're talking about? To state that angular momentum is conserved in a frictionless system is not to say that planets don't deviate from their orbits but that they would rotate round their orbital centres more or less rapidly if they did.

I think universities and academics understand what you call 'ancient-speak' well enough; the problem is that some lay people, misunderstanding what scholarship is, imagine that a little half-understood knowledge about a subject is sufficient to make one an 'expert' in it!