Clay pots didn’t receive seals. Do you actually know what a seal is?
Clay pots receive the IMPRESSION. They take on ‘form’. Clay under a seal.
They clay itself was used AS a seal, much like wax was used later. You don’t(and they didn’t) seal pots.
Seals are flat. How the hell could you put a flat impression on a round pot? And where are you getting this from, anyway?
How is clay ‘turned’ if it is applied flat to a flat seal?
Have you never heard of cylindrical seals?
Wrong. The ‘seal’ is the cylindrical engraving. The impression was transferred by turning the pot against the cylindrical seal.
“It takes on form like clay under a seal…”
The “clay” in that passage does not refer to pots but to the flat tablets used to receive imprints from cylinder seals.
Here – this is what is being referred to. See how the seal rolls out over the tablet and leaves an impression? That’s what they’re talking about. They didn’t do this with pots. They did it with official documents.
Please show me an example of a pot that was “sealed” using this method.
If you’d bothered to click your own link, you’d have seen that while the seal is cylindrical, the clay is flat. This is because the seal is used like a rolling pin. I believe there are newspaper printing plates that work the same way.
If you tried to do this on a pot that was being shaped on a wheel you’d smoosh it. You’d have to do it afterwards, when the spinning is stopped, and the resulting surface would inevitably be flat - even when you did it to a portion of the side (or lid) of a jar.
If you were deliberately trying to prove that you were wrong, you couldn’t do a better job.
"Thus cylinder seals have two components: the cylindrically-shaped seal itself and the impression it leaves on some other material. Archeologists sometimes find the seal itself, sometimes just its ancient impression.
Impressions have been found most commonly on clay tablets (ancient documents) and their clay “envelopes,” bricks, ceramics such as storage jars (clay pots), doors, and bales of commodities for sale."
But ancient cylinder seals had far more uses than just as signatures or tamper-proof seals. They also stood for the owner and thus had a secondary use as amulets to protect the wearer from harm or use in medical and magical rituals. Often, they had a decorative function when stamped on clay pots, etc.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/ancient_texts/cylinder_seals.shtml
The odds that this was done on any spinning jar is zero, given that that would destroy the pot.
Most typically, the seals were used on flat tablets. You have no basis at all for insisting that this passage referred to clay pots. That would be atypical even if not unheard of. It’s also VERY clear that it’s the SEAL that’s being turned in that metaphor, not the earth. It’s actually ridulous to read this metaphor as referring to anything but the commonly understood (for the contemporary audience) of a cylinder seal being turned on a tablet.
This is the oddest effort to invent an explanation I have seen in a very long while.
There is no mention of “pots,” at all. It just mentions clay. You are adding a spurious meaning that is not supported by the text. ANY soft clay will accept an imprint from a seal and there is no reason to inject a claim for there being a wheel-turned pot. It does nothing to enhance the metaphor (that God imprinted the wearth with his design) and it certainly says nothing about the shape of the earth.
However, since you are going to continue to make up claims to support your errors, I am going to let this drop, (unless someone from the peanut gallery actually expresses the notion that he or she believes you, in which case I would be forced to come back to correct them).
It is also flat. The earth, however, is round in three directions, while a circle is not. Any reference to “the circle of the earth” has to be a reference to a flat earth encompassed by the visible horizon and not to the rough sphere of the actual shape of the earth.
And you have still not found a “scientist” (or even a philosopher subsequent to Aristotle) who argued for a flat earth, so you remain doubly wrong.
No it wouldn’t. The posts make it clear what was done.
You need to regain some balance.
There have a been a number of false claims made by your colleagues here that you have chosen to ignore, such as “Seals are flat” by Czarcasm, and “Clay pots didn’t receive seals. Do you actually know what a seal is?” by Diogenes.
I await with interest you refutuation of these comments now they have been proven to be incorrect.
No it doesn’t, unless you choose to interpret it that way.