From: David Weihe (weihe@gsidanet.danet.com)
Date: Mon 11 Nov 1996 - 20:34:33 EET
Nick Effingham vs Peter Metcalfe
> >>>I'm saying that the Orlanthi version of Godtime IGNORES time,
> >>>completeley. Utterly.
> >>Wrong. What were those KoS fragments that I just quoted at you?
> > The fragments were all written by someone with a perspective of Time.
> But the fragments are still the beliefs of the Orlanthi. Thus your
> statement is wrong. You can't just drop all statements that say
> that the Orlanthi believe in timely godtime and then conclude
> from the remainder of the corpus that that the Orlanthi believe in
> a timeless godtime when in fact they do.
None of those statements had an reference to a GodTime chronos-time,
only to chairos-time. These are both Classical and Koine/Biblical Greek
terms for the single English word "time", but "chairos" (rhymes with
"pyros") is event-based time, as in "at the appropriate time" or "in the
fullness of time", compared to chronos (mundane time), such as "in the
2000th year of Yelm's reign" or "two years after that", etc.
Almost all prophecies in the Bible use chairos, rather than chonos, for
example. Chairos is also analogous to the PseudoTime of HeroQuesting, or
the fact that when Orlanth speaks in the GodTime, the first word of his
sentences occurs before the subsequent words (note, there is nothing to
prove that the sentence wouldn't occur within a heartbeat, or that the
words were not separated by several minutes).
All the examples given were of chairos, rather than chronos. The example
> Your hypothesis that the Orlanthi statements have been contaminated
of Orlanth following Mastakos' path of two steps, which a man would take
18 days (I think that's the period) *I* think refers to a man of our own,
post-Time, period. If it was that "Orlanth took two seconds, where now a
man would take two weeks" then that *would* imply Chronos Time in the
GodTime "period". At least in the Teller's mind.
> by an exposure to time to insert timely markers in their mythology
> is unproven and doubtful.
I would say that the examples are, in fact, supportive of the negative.
The problem is with the inability of English to fully distinguish between
different different Time-like ideas, except via circumlocution.
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:53:36 EEST