Corvidius Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The point I am
> making here is that no matter the gap in time
> between my examples and the PT, a liturgy can be
> discerned in the PT, and while the content may be
> radically different from modern liturgy, though in
> it's resurrection texts it has similarities, it is
> still clearly, and I'll stress, clearly a
> liturgy, and this involves incantations and
> incense being wafted about.

"Liturgy" is merely a word. It's one of many words that has been appropriated by modern religions.

There's simply no reason to believe ancient ritual and ceremony (as these obviously are) could not be repeated any given number of times.

Such repetition could have arisen for any number of reasons from being certain they were heard by all to marking a set unit of time. Aspects of ritual can arise for no particular reason.

That this writing was incantation and religion is just assumption. The assumption is that since it looks like the "book of the dead" then it must be an earlier version reflecting earlier beliefs. but there is still no support for the assumption because no writing supports it and our interpretation has made no predictions. I believe the lack of progress is the result of the assumptions being wrong.

____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.