"Sumerian and Egyptian texts - particularly those translated by Zecharia Sitchin "
Oh, alas... Sitchin is one of the MOST double-edged swords in all of archeology. I WISH someone(s) would 'teach up' an AI (they're doing it but.....) to read every single Sumerian text, , all million or whatever there are! SHOULD be relatively easy -- the 'letters' (glyphs) are pretty standardized and seem NOT to be curvy or affected too much by human frailty. Then comes the much more difficult problem of "okay, we've got all the LETTERS translated/recorded; now what about the LANGUAGE the letters relate to?"
As a tech editor, I am painfully aware that "translation" (indeed, even word CHOICE) can be a true snake pit of misdirection and confusion. Two examples:
1. When the Gideons, whose mission was (is?) to translate the Bible into every single human language, were working on the Inuit (colloquially: "Eskimo") translation, they hit a real roadblock. They could NOT describe Jesus as "the lamb of God" -- because the Inuit didn't KNOW "lamb." They ended up using the phrase "the pup-seal of God."
(1A. And THENCE came an ASTONISHING eyeopener for me!! Okay "the lamb": so the scholars (or evil misdirectors -- depends on your stances) doing the translation picked the pup-seal to imply -- to CARRY THE LINGUISTIC BAGGAGE of -- small, cute, harmless, appealing, good (equaling WEAK!), and so on. Think little lambs gamboling about in the grass -- SO CUTE! SO HARMLESS!
My brain suddenly went -- "Oh! no no no! THIS was misdirection! Jesus was NOT harmless and weak! These translators (intentionally or not: does that phrase make me look paranoid?) picked the WRONG BAGGAGE!" "The "lamb of God" means a **mete subject FOR SACRIFICE**! The correctly chosen SACRIFICE to God... see Abraham, and Isaac! A LAMB is a fitting sacrifice: not Not NOT a "cute fuzzy pet! For a couple millennia we have been 'taught' that Jesus is weak and harmless and all the peace-love-dove crap! (DIS-arming us!) Any yall's pastors preach this?
There is no connection between a helpless little lambie -- and the JESUS WHO BUILT MIMSELF A WHIP and WHIPPED the money-changers (the grifters!) out of Gods's temple!! And who allowed the Romans and Jews (take your pick) to horrifically whip him nearly to death and then crucify him!! Recalibrate your linguistic baggage about Jesus and HEY! Look at Him NOW!
2. A translation from "Mein Kampf": -- translators, lo these many years, have scratched their heads in bewilderment at Hitler writing about the people being/living like "sheep in the grass." They express their confusion and say, 'well maybe he meant that they were herdlike, or herdable or something.' Turns out -- from a recent translation (without as much bias?)- that "Sheep in the Grass" is (was?) a German CARD GAME! No, I don't remember its association or how it was played or what it was meant to convey: its 'baggage' -- because I was and am mainly interested IN the language use, not so much the desired endpoint.
This is by far the most intriguing of your essays i have read so far.
"Sumerian and Egyptian texts - particularly those translated by Zecharia Sitchin "
Oh, alas... Sitchin is one of the MOST double-edged swords in all of archeology. I WISH someone(s) would 'teach up' an AI (they're doing it but.....) to read every single Sumerian text, , all million or whatever there are! SHOULD be relatively easy -- the 'letters' (glyphs) are pretty standardized and seem NOT to be curvy or affected too much by human frailty. Then comes the much more difficult problem of "okay, we've got all the LETTERS translated/recorded; now what about the LANGUAGE the letters relate to?"
As a tech editor, I am painfully aware that "translation" (indeed, even word CHOICE) can be a true snake pit of misdirection and confusion. Two examples:
1. When the Gideons, whose mission was (is?) to translate the Bible into every single human language, were working on the Inuit (colloquially: "Eskimo") translation, they hit a real roadblock. They could NOT describe Jesus as "the lamb of God" -- because the Inuit didn't KNOW "lamb." They ended up using the phrase "the pup-seal of God."
(1A. And THENCE came an ASTONISHING eyeopener for me!! Okay "the lamb": so the scholars (or evil misdirectors -- depends on your stances) doing the translation picked the pup-seal to imply -- to CARRY THE LINGUISTIC BAGGAGE of -- small, cute, harmless, appealing, good (equaling WEAK!), and so on. Think little lambs gamboling about in the grass -- SO CUTE! SO HARMLESS!
My brain suddenly went -- "Oh! no no no! THIS was misdirection! Jesus was NOT harmless and weak! These translators (intentionally or not: does that phrase make me look paranoid?) picked the WRONG BAGGAGE!" "The "lamb of God" means a **mete subject FOR SACRIFICE**! The correctly chosen SACRIFICE to God... see Abraham, and Isaac! A LAMB is a fitting sacrifice: not Not NOT a "cute fuzzy pet! For a couple millennia we have been 'taught' that Jesus is weak and harmless and all the peace-love-dove crap! (DIS-arming us!) Any yall's pastors preach this?
There is no connection between a helpless little lambie -- and the JESUS WHO BUILT MIMSELF A WHIP and WHIPPED the money-changers (the grifters!) out of Gods's temple!! And who allowed the Romans and Jews (take your pick) to horrifically whip him nearly to death and then crucify him!! Recalibrate your linguistic baggage about Jesus and HEY! Look at Him NOW!
2. A translation from "Mein Kampf": -- translators, lo these many years, have scratched their heads in bewilderment at Hitler writing about the people being/living like "sheep in the grass." They express their confusion and say, 'well maybe he meant that they were herdlike, or herdable or something.' Turns out -- from a recent translation (without as much bias?)- that "Sheep in the Grass" is (was?) a German CARD GAME! No, I don't remember its association or how it was played or what it was meant to convey: its 'baggage' -- because I was and am mainly interested IN the language use, not so much the desired endpoint.