cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.


My patience is at an end and I will not take this ignorant nonsense from you any longer, go book yourself into a clinic.