Re: RELIGION: Some books about evolution and civilization - beer

[Guest guest]

,

You may appreciate Harrod Buhner's " Sacred and Herbal Healing

Beers " which has a lot of information about different " beers " made in

history. Evidently the first was meade from honey and water, which

seems to have been boiled to get the honey out of the comb which was

often in a hollow log or some other difficult place. Buhner says the

venom of the angry bees left in the hive when it was boiled wound up

in the beer, along with royal jelly, pollen, larvae, and whatever

else was in the hive. This was believed to increase fertility and

the chances of having a boy (hence the " honey moon - month of

drinking meade before conceiving a child).

Other beers were made from heather, spruce, juniper berries, etc.

And many had medicinal properties, even if they had been boiled. He

makes the point (I think it was him) that the ancient beers had live

yeast in them (modern beer has been decanted off of the yeasty

sediment to keep the beer clear, and sterilized to keep the flavor

uniform) which contained most of the nutrition needed to digest it

and they were indeed " food " to many who drank them.

--- In , " webriter " <webriter@...>

wrote:

>

>

> Is this how we got on the subject of grain for beer? I have a

comment about your commentary below, [an excellent one btw] Ancient

Romans drank a bit of wine in their water to help kill off some of

the pathogens, remember 's admonition to that every

alcoholic knows by heart? It has been posited that the instruction

was for a hard self-taskmaster, to add some germ killing wine

to his water for safety [for the stomach's sake] When I was a baby

and we lived in Germany [just post WW2] we had either beer or wine

with our dinner. Milk and water was too polluted for children to

drink, then.

> The sweater comment was funny.

> Perhaps we haven't gone far enough in adaptations, [i don't believe

in any of the Theories of evolution] to tolerate grains but meat

seems to agree with us like we were born chewing on it.

> wrote

> Yes, she posits monotheism first, but this god was too remote, so

we then created more accessible gods [pantheism] that interacted

directly with man. Perhaps this helps support the theory the history

is cyclical and not linnear. I am not even sure that the early God of

Abraham had anything to do with this original monotheistic god. In

fact, it is more like Abraham chose Jahweh out of a pantheon of gods

and claimed him to be invisible yet personal.

>

> Let's not get to picky about herding being outside the hunter

gather lifestyle. They can all be nomadic so perhaps I should have

used that word. Nomadic vs. the creation of cultivation and staying

put in cities. It makes sense that herding would be the direct

offshot of and co-existed with the h-g lifestyle.

>

> Perhaps while in the Garden Adam and Eve didn't eat meat. But by

the time of Cain and Able, they were no longer in the Garden. And if

they weren't eating meat, what was Abel herding for, milk and wool?

And if that were the case why give god the cooked meat as an

offering, why not a sweater? And if it were truly the case that there

was no meat eating until after the flood, shouldn't the story of Cain

and Abel come later with the son's of Noah?????

>

> Ancient beer was nutrient rich, unlike the beers/ales of today. I

don't know much about beer making, but if heat is involved it would

have killed organisms in the water and would have been safer to drink

than most common water sources. I don't think ancient beer had a

strong alcohol content either since even children drank it.

>

> The fact that all human groups crave altered states may not have

had anything to do with the original cultivation of grains, but I am

sure that it was a side benefit they appreciated considering how

tough life is.

>

>

>

> Re: RELIGION: Some books about evolution and

civilization

>

> Hi ,

>

> > Some years ago, a book called " Ismael " by Quinn, put

forward the same

> > thing, via the story of Cain and Able. Cain representing

everything bad

> > about agriculture and Able, the more noble and purer hunter

gatherer. The

> > controversy over that book is still going on. There is also a

theory out

> > there that the only reason " man " began to cultivate grains was

to make beer.

> > I don't doubt it. The need for humans to escape reality is

strong,

> > probably something to do with our acute awareness of our

impending

> > non-existence.

>

> Abel was a sheep-herder, neither a hunter nor gatherer. In the

> Biblical chronology, no one ate meat until after Noah's flood, so

> hunting can't be associated with Eden either, as a previous post

> suggested.

>

> > there is plenty of confirmation out there that

historically

> > polytheism predates monotheism and the Hebrews may have picked

up the notion

> > from Egypt.

>

> Apparently this is controversial. I Googled " monotheism polytheism

> which came first? " without the quotes. The first article cites

> scholarship dating back to 1931 indicating that in ancient Sumeria

> monotheism gave way to polytheism. The next article is a Biblical

> exposition rather than scholarship. Then there is an article

tracing

> polytheism giving way to monotheism within Hindu texts, but not

on a

> global scale. I admit I'm not well versed in the archaeological

> evidence, but it looks like this is an assertion that needs to be

> supported rather than taken for granted.

>

> > As for pre-history, no one is quite sure which arose first,

>

> Well what is the point of claiming that historically polytheism

came

> first, if pre-history came before history? Obviously if pre-

historic

> man was monotheist and then polytheist, and historic man was

> polytheist and then monotheist, then the single answer to which

came

> first is monotheism.

>

> > but

> > I can recommend an interesting book by Armstrong

called " A History of

> > God " , that posits that it was we who created God and then Gods.

>

> So she asserts, then, that monotheism came first?

>

> > And as

> > long as we are at it I highly reccommend her book " A Short

History of Myth " ,

> > that brings home the human need for myth even, especially today.

>

> Thanks. I don't foresee being able to read any of these books any

> time soon, though the previous one sounds more relevant to the

> question of whether monotheism or polytheism came first.

>

> Chris

>

>

[Guest guest]

Here's an interesting take on the origin from a First Nation's perspective, it's

called Red Earth, White Lies, by Vine Deloria, Jr.

http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/cat/deloria/

it's a bit angry but it shows another idea....

Katy

,

You may appreciate Harrod Buhner's " Sacred and Herbal Healing

Beers " which has a lot of information about different " beers " made in

history. Evidently the first was meade from honey and water, which

seems to have been boiled to get the honey out of the comb which was

often in a hollow log or some other difficult place. Buhner says the

venom of the angry bees left in the hive when it was boiled wound up

in the beer, along with royal jelly, pollen, larvae, and whatever

else was in the hive. This was believed to increase fertility and

the chances of having a boy (hence the " honey moon - month of

drinking meade before conceiving a child).

Other beers were made from heather, spruce, juniper berries, etc.

And many had medicinal properties, even if they had been boiled. He

makes the point (I think it was him) that the ancient beers had live

yeast in them (modern beer has been decanted off of the yeasty

sediment to keep the beer clear, and sterilized to keep the flavor

uniform) which contained most of the nutrition needed to digest it

and they were indeed " food " to many who drank them.

>

>

> Is this how we got on the subject of grain for beer? I have a

comment about your commentary below, [an excellent one btw] Ancient

Romans drank a bit of wine in their water to help kill off some of

the pathogens, remember 's admonition to that every

alcoholic knows by heart? It has been posited that the instruction

was for a hard self-taskmaster, to add some germ killing wine

to his water for safety [for the stomach's sake] When I was a baby

and we lived in Germany [just post WW2] we had either beer or wine

with our dinner. Milk and water was too polluted for children to

drink, then.

> The sweater comment was funny.

> Perhaps we haven't gone far enough in adaptations, [i don't believe

in any of the Theories of evolution] to tolerate grains but meat

seems to agree with us like we were born chewing on it.

> wrote

> Yes, she posits monotheism first, but this god was too remote, so

we then created more accessible gods [pantheism] that interacted

directly with man. Perhaps this helps support the theory the history

is cyclical and not linnear. I am not even sure that the early God of

Abraham had anything to do with this original monotheistic god. In

fact, it is more like Abraham chose Jahweh out of a pantheon of gods

and claimed him to be invisible yet personal.

>

> Let's not get to picky about herding being outside the hunter

gather lifestyle. They can all be nomadic so perhaps I should have

used that word. Nomadic vs. the creation of cultivation and staying

put in cities. It makes sense that herding would be the direct

offshot of and co-existed with the h-g lifestyle.

>

> Perhaps while in the Garden Adam and Eve didn't eat meat. But by

the time of Cain and Able, they were no longer in the Garden. And if

they weren't eating meat, what was Abel herding for, milk and wool?

And if that were the case why give god the cooked meat as an

offering, why not a sweater? And if it were truly the case that there

was no meat eating until after the flood, shouldn't the story of Cain

and Abel come later with the son's of Noah?????

>

> Ancient beer was nutrient rich, unlike the beers/ales of today. I

don't know much about beer making, but if heat is involved it would

have killed organisms in the water and would have been safer to drink

than most common water sources. I don't think ancient beer had a

strong alcohol content either since even children drank it.

>

> The fact that all human groups crave altered states may not have

had anything to do with the original cultivation of grains, but I am

sure that it was a side benefit they appreciated considering how

tough life is.

>

>

>

> Re: RELIGION: Some books about evolution and

civilization

>

> Hi ,

>

> > Some years ago, a book called " Ismael " by Quinn, put

forward the same

> > thing, via the story of Cain and Able. Cain representing

everything bad

> > about agriculture and Able, the more noble and purer hunter

gatherer. The

> > controversy over that book is still going on. There is also a

theory out

> > there that the only reason " man " began to cultivate grains was

to make beer.

> > I don't doubt it. The need for humans to escape reality is

strong,

> > probably something to do with our acute awareness of our

impending

> > non-existence.

>

> Abel was a sheep-herder, neither a hunter nor gatherer. In the

> Biblical chronology, no one ate meat until after Noah's flood, so

> hunting can't be associated with Eden either, as a previous post

> suggested.

>

> > there is plenty of confirmation out there that

historically

> > polytheism predates monotheism and the Hebrews may have picked

up the notion

> > from Egypt.

>

> Apparently this is controversial. I Googled " monotheism polytheism

> which came first? " without the quotes. The first article cites

> scholarship dating back to 1931 indicating that in ancient Sumeria

> monotheism gave way to polytheism. The next article is a Biblical

> exposition rather than scholarship. Then there is an article

tracing

> polytheism giving way to monotheism within Hindu texts, but not

on a

> global scale. I admit I'm not well versed in the archaeological

> evidence, but it looks like this is an assertion that needs to be

> supported rather than taken for granted.

>

> > As for pre-history, no one is quite sure which arose first,

>

> Well what is the point of claiming that historically polytheism

came

> first, if pre-history came before history? Obviously if pre-

historic

> man was monotheist and then polytheist, and historic man was

> polytheist and then monotheist, then the single answer to which

came

> first is monotheism.

>

> > but

> > I can recommend an interesting book by Armstrong

called " A History of

> > God " , that posits that it was we who created God and then Gods.

>

> So she asserts, then, that monotheism came first?

>

> > And as

> > long as we are at it I highly reccommend her book " A Short

History of Myth " ,

> > that brings home the human need for myth even, especially today.

>

> Thanks. I don't foresee being able to read any of these books any

> time soon, though the previous one sounds more relevant to the

> question of whether monotheism or polytheism came first.

>

> Chris

>

>