From: Andrew Jarrette
Message: 41290
Date: 2005-10-12
Andrew:
> I actually should have emphasized that the Biblical
> stories of Shem and Japheth and Ham, especially if
> taken metaphorically as descriptions of groups of
> languages, may have a kernel of truth (apart from
> these names actually being used formerly to name
> three language families), since Nostratic theory
> says that Indo-European and Semitic are ultimately
> related.
Personal opinions on emotional interpretations of the
Bible are logically irrelevant because emotions are
invalid means in searching truth beyond one's
personal bias.
Truth, I'm afraid, may be more spartan than you care
to conceive yet. Armor thyself.
-- By "kernel of truth" I actually meant more like "neutron" or "quark" or "muon" or something smaller of truth. I realize now that I over-explained myself, going beyond the original intention of merely making (what was meant to be) a humorous connection to the Bible, to the point of analyzing it deeply to point out what possible "truths" (really beliefs) may actually be contained in the Bible even though most people do not believe it literally, and that isn't it neat or interesting or mysterious how only recently, 3,500 or so years later, there is a coincidence between a Biblical account of central Eurasian language origins, a "primitive" (for my lack of a better word) account, and an ultra-modern, scientific, cutting-edge theory, the Nostratic theory, both of which say that Indo-European and Semitic have a common origin (but in different words). I was in no way trying to suggest that I really believe the Bible, emotionally or otherwise (whether subconsciously or metaphorically I actually do, and am not aware of it), nor that we should take the Bible as truth because of this little coincidence between it and Nostratic theory.I actually believe that truth is personal, i.e. specific to each person, and therefore cannot be found elsewhere than in ourselves. This, I believe, is because we only have our own eyes, our own ears, and our own feelings to believe, and can never fully, completely believe those of people who are not ourselves. You can seek truth beyond one's personal bias, but ultimately only you make the decision of whether you believe or not, not someone else nor the things you decide whether to believe. And can we always trust ourselves, that we will be sure that we have arrived at the absolute truth? There is always doubt, we always have to think again and remember and try to be sure, and with doubt always creeping up can we ever really arrive at truth?
Andrew
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs