PROVE ME NOW HEREWITH
The preachments of the prophets and of the Bible would not sound so idealistic; so unrealistic and so unattainable in the "real world," if mankind actually knew that such had occurred among other men in history.
That thought struck me as I was reading the sermon, "The man who was a fool," by Martin Luther King, Jr., earlier today.
In it he used a text from Luke 12:20 to bewail certain of the rich who confuse the "means" of life with the "ends" of life. Being overwhelmed with wealth building and with vain wealth preservation, some die rich in wealth, but poor in love or charity.
Instead of using their surplus to enrich the "commonwealth" of mankind, they have, instead, sequestered massively superfluous wealth for themselves, which shall soon dissipate, with them, upon their deaths. King calls such ones, "fools."
I was wide-open and amenable to this thought, since I had just wondered, "when was the first war in recorded history?" It occurred in 2700 BC between Sumer and Elam, I quickly discovered from online research.
Well, since, certain historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists place mankind's origin in Africa anywhere from 250,00 years ago to 1.5 million years ago, war is just a baby in comparative terms. War is an infant, an "enfant terrible," to be sure, but still new.
This critical fact strongly implies that mankind has long cooperated with each other and has cohabited the globe, peacefully for eons, before war was ever known. If a state of "non-war" was possible once, indeed was extant based on current research, might not that much desired status recur again?
Can mankind replicate this praxis?
The same test goes for hunger, nakedness, and poverty. If history, archaeology and science can show and prove their absence in history prior to and before the past 5,000 years, like war, might not such empirical knowledge spur mankind to seek to replicate that prior happy status if it is also proven to be true?
I would think so. How about you?
Sunday, June 1, 2014
PROVE ME NOW HEREWITH
PROVE ME NOW HEREWITH
The preachments of the prophets and of the Bible would not sound so idealistic; so unrealistic and so unattainable in the "real world," if mankind actually knew that such had occurred among other men in history.
That thought struck me as I was reading the sermon, "The man who was a fool," by Martin Luther King, Jr., earlier today.
In it he used a text from Luke 12:20 to bewail certain of the rich who confuse the "means" of life with the "ends" of life. Being overwhelmed with wealth building and with vain wealth preservation, some die rich in wealth, but poor in love or charity.
Instead of using their surplus to enrich the "commonwealth" of mankind, they have, instead, sequestered massively superfluous wealth for themselves, which shall soon dissipate, with them, upon their deaths. King calls such ones, "fools."
I was wide-open and amenable to this thought, since I had just wondered, "when was the first war in recorded history?" It occurred in 2700 BC between Sumer and Elam, I quickly discovered from online research.
Well, since, certain historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists place mankind's origin in Africa anywhere from 250,00 years ago to 1.5 million years ago, war is just a baby in comparative terms. War is an infant, an "enfant terrible," to be sure, but still new.
This critical fact strongly implies that mankind has long cooperated with each other and has cohabited the globe, peacefully for eons, before war was ever known. If a state of "non-war" was possible once, indeed was extant based on current research, might not that much desired status recur again?
Can mankind replicate this praxis?
The same test goes for hunger, nakedness, and poverty. If history, archaeology and science can show and prove their absence in history prior to and before the past 5,000 years, like war, might not such empirical knowledge spur mankind to seek to replicate that prior happy status if it is also proven to be true?
I would think so. How about you?