Re: OT: Proof of the Bible's Divine Origin?

Gene Ward Smith wrote:
> "Cosmin Corbea" <cosminc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> news:gb1Dj.5753$4q3.3219@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> I will note that those good people penned the word "barbarian" and
>> they divided humans in civilized Greeks and uncultured "others".
>> Athenians used to apply the adjective "barbarian" even to the
>> inhabitats of other Greek cities - so I think they can compete
>> evenly on smugness even with the French
>>
>
> Yes, but it's the Hellenistic world I was talking about, and the idea
> of progress. In classic Athens I think it was the usual
> stuff--Aristophanes complaining about young whippersnappers like
> Euripedes, who can't hold a candle to Aeschylus. Grumble grumble the
> younger generation grumble. Whereas the Frog Enlightenment would say
> dummies like Aeschylus or Sophocles or Euripides or Shakespeare also
> for that matter were nothing compared to the sheer perfection of the
> work of Racine. That's progress!

I understand now - you mean smugness oriented along the time, not space 
axis. Well, for more than a millenium the accepted idea was that the world

degenerates ("Mundus senescit", said Bede); Greek/Latin civilisation was 
considered the peak of human achievement, to the point where "Magister 
dixit" was a valid scientific argument. I can understand therefore a bit
of 
overreaction; and it still happens, especially in the art world - nigh
every 
new movement starts by declaring  the predecessors a bunch of ignorant 
yahoos (and often ends up similarly denigrated by the next generation of 
young turks).
-- 
Regards,

Cosmin Corbea