Pete Clarke Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And tell me that this is just a literal
> description.

These are my favorite Bible passages perhaps.

It's difficult to know what they mean if they are literally true or were believed to become true in the future. Obviously it are written as though it was expected to become true. If it were knowable that this would become true then new questions open up. Was this the way a primitive person interpreted things for the current time or the future that he didn't understand. Was the monster that ate the newborn merely an MRI or the like?

Or perhaps the writer had a good understanding and couched it in metaphor to impress the more gullible. Perhaps the writer never even believed he nor his muse could see the future but wanted to frighten evil people.

I do see your point though, I believe, as there is extensive ancient writing and there's no reason to suppose that it was all meant literally or that the authors believed that there writing had profound meaning beyond there elegence or symetry. I have little familiarity with any ancient writing except the Pyramid Texts, a little of the Bible, and a little Sumerian legend. The former two I really believe had a great deal of literal intent and this especially applies to the Pyramid Texts. I believe it is the lack of sophistication that makes this writing look so "alien" to modern eyes. The Bible was largely passed down from even older works and most of these probably had a lot of literal intent initially.

I don't feel competent to comment much on the Sumerian material. I glanced over it looking for obvious geyser references or some sort of pattern to indicate literalness and saw nothing. But the Emerald Tablets say IT is the father of all works of wonder in the world so it seems possible the author was aware of at least one other place that IT created a work of wonder.


____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.