The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby MAG » Wed May 04, 2016 10:20 am

Norman wrote:Isn´t this funny? You believe firmly in myths when it comes to the "planetary catastrophic matters" - but you ignore my posted mythical quotes, even if they are in clear text and their meaning are fairly obvious?


Not really 'funny' at all. People have interpreted the myths differently. You have done the same 'funny' thing, by ignoring what many believe to be clear text and meanings that show the catastrophic birth of those myths.

It's ok that others don't agree with you.
~Matthew
MAG
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 4:01 pm

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Wed May 04, 2016 2:50 pm

Both sides of this debate are making the same fundamental mistake that everyone makes about myth. A myth means story; in contradistinction to logos (rational account/narrative). In other words, it just a method of conveying information. The actual information can be about anything. Just as a given body of information can be conveyed via prose or verse.

Many, if not most, of the myths relating to stars etc are conveying information about navigation rather than catastrophe. e.g.
http://phys.org/news/2016-04-ancient-ab ... ghway.html (courtesy of our very own Seasmith)

and
https://kfswood.com/

These are just a couple that I had to hand. Stories such as the physorg one turn up every few months and other ancient texts such as the Mahabaratta are chock-full of astronomical data.

The Celts/Gauls laid out their major settlements acoording to a grid locked into the axes provided by the sun on its travels to the winter solstice and the summer. One axis runs NW-SE and the other NE-SW.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Lloyd » Thu May 05, 2016 5:14 am

I briefly counter the claim that myths were not about world catastrophes at http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16025&p=113292#p113292.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Sun May 08, 2016 1:33 am

@MAG,
Thanks for your reply.
MAG wrote:
Norman wrote:Isn´t this funny? You believe firmly in myths when it comes to the "planetary catastrophic matters" - but you ignore my posted mythical quotes, even if they are in clear text and their meaning are fairly obvious?


Not really 'funny' at all. People have interpreted the myths differently. You have done the same 'funny' thing, by ignoring what many believe to be clear text and meanings that show the catastrophic birth of those myths.

It's ok that others don't agree with you.

Of course it´s OK for others to disagree with me.

IMHO, I´m very familiar with the "catastrophic theories" of Velikovsky and of the theory and assumption of "a once different alignment of some planets", but my interpretations of the involved myths are very different. The used myths derives from the numerous cultural stories of creation and this includes of course much more than planetary matters.

I´ve posted several links and texts to myths in this topic which clearly and logically speaks of Milky Way matters. Just read through the topic.

These myths are used by the Velikovsky followers in attempts to describe planetary matters only. This is a HUGE underestimation of the ancient astronomic and cosmic knowledge and this "planetary interpretation" distorts both the ancient myths as well as their astronomical meanings.

When one can find actual text which connects and equalize the Roman goddess Venus to the Greek goddess Aphrodite and to the Egyptian goddess Hathor, who specifically is associated with the Milky Way, all logics does not speak of planetary matters as assumed by Velikovsky and his followers.

The proponents of the catastrophism theories have forgotten the fact that planets were given their names from the Roman Pantheon of superior deities of Creation. Then we of course can discuss where to locate the Roman Pantheon in cosmos.

My qualitative guess is: In the Milky Way realms.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Sun May 08, 2016 2:32 am

Hello Grey Cloud and thanks for your reply.
Both sides of this debate are making the same fundamental mistake that everyone makes about myth. A myth means story; in contradistinction to logos (rational account/narrative). In other words, it just a method of conveying information. The actual information can be about anything. Just as a given body of information can be conveyed via prose or verse.

I think we can agree that the interpretative method and result all depends on the interpretators overall world picture and on his/hers mythical comparative skills?

In this sense a genuine myth is "just a story" until one finds it´s correct information and connection. Then it is knowledge of something.

If lacking something here, for instants astronomical knowledge and observational rutines, this narrows down the possibility to find the correct mytho-cosmological answers. And if finding any contradictions or illogical and unnatural conclusions in a mythical interpretation, the interpretators overall world picture is most likely too narrow.
Many, if not most, of the myths relating to stars etc are conveying information about navigation rather than catastrophe. e.g. http://phys.org/news/2016-04-ancient-ab ... ghway.html (courtesy of our very own Seasmith)
and https://kfswood.com/

Yes, and in the case of interpreting otherwise, disastreous and distorted theories naturally occurs.
These are just a couple that I had to hand. Stories such as the physorg one turn up every few months and other ancient texts such as the Mahabaratta are chock-full of astronomical data.

The Celts/Gauls laid out their major settlements acoording to a grid locked into the axes provided by the sun on its travels to the winter solstice and the summer. One axis runs NW-SE and the other NE-SW.

Yes this practice of making terrestrial markings and buildings of the celestial realms and motions is very common in many ancient cultures.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Sun May 08, 2016 3:28 am

@Lloyd,

You earlier asked me to keep out of your topics. By your own intervention in my topic here, shall I take this as an invitation to participate freely in your topics anyway?

You replied to Grey Cloud:
Lloyd wrote:I briefly counter the claim that myths were not about world catastrophes at http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16025&p=113292#p113292.

In the same link you states that:
I'm not familiar with star myths, but most myths were about the planets, Saturn, Venus and Mars, I believe, and they were often about catastrophes. Here's some background.

Oh yes? Give me just 1 logical/natural reason for imaging and naming a white dotted planet in gendered terms and ascribing all kinds of cosmic forces and attributes to planets. (Do you believe in planetary Astrology too?)
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Mon May 16, 2016 5:19 am

Subject: Revision of my critical approach to the mythical interpretations in the TBP.

Abstract:
Throughout this topic I´ve stated the mythical interpretation in the TBP to be "misinterpretations". This is really not a fair statement. A more precise approach of critique is needed.

The gathering of cultural myths in the TBP is a huge work and the mythical comparisons from different cultures are also a fine work. But there are some points of critique regarding the cosmological meaning and the celestial connection in the used myths:

1) Some myths, which seemingly/obviously contradicts the prime hypothesis, are not taken into account.
2) The interpretation of the single myth in question deviates from the full context in the used myth.
3) The mythical forces, attributes and symbols are logically inconsistent with the chosen celestial objects.
4) The planetary interpretation significantly reduces the ancient World Picture, which includes the Milky Way.
5) When ascribing all myths to planetary matters, a distortion of myths and their other astronomical objects takes place.

# 1: For instants the myth of the Egyptian goddess Hathor and the Hindu myth of Mount Meru which both tells of a Milky Way connection.
# 2: The focus points are excludingly on the catastrophic issues even though the overall myth generally speaks of the creation as such.
# 3: Planets with gendered names and attributes and superior creative forces are impossible to imagine logically.
# 4: This reduction doesn´t fit the overall idea of the Electric Universe which scientific and mythic hypothesis should include the entire creation of the local galaxy and thus fit the mythical stories of creation.
# 5: For instants can anyone still observe the revolving Saturnus on the northern Sky today - as the crescent Milky Way lightened figure.

Both the ancient and present World Picture of course contained/contains much more than planets, no matter where these planets assumingly may have been positioned and moved in the Sky. The Sun, the Moon, some significant stars, star constellations and the very contours of the Milky Way have given rise to numerous myths, which of course are similar all over the world because they describe the very same creation and it´s celestial motions.

I hope this revision of my critical approach will soften everything up a little bit :D
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Fri May 20, 2016 12:10 pm

Subject: Saturn or Saturnus?

When reading of the mythical “Saturn issues”, the text and its interpretation is very often contradictive and inconsequent.

Saturn, the Embodiment of the whole Universe
“In Sumero-Babylonian cosmology Saturn was conceived as the embodiment of the whole universe, the various deified astral and natural phenomena imagined as members of this divine body. Saturn’s epithets included the term Kaainu, which means ‘pillar’ and kittu, ‘justice’. These associations pre-date and echo much of what we today associate with Saturn in a natal chart. But just what were the roots of some of these associations?

Comment: Saturn as the embodiment of the whole Universe? Planet Saturn? Which celestial objects can be associated with the term “pillar”? Not the “wandering stars”, the planets. One specific star can be associated with the celestial pillar. Several other stars and constellations can be associated with the celestial pillar as orbiting this center. And the revolving crescent contours of the Milky Way can also be associated with this pillar.

Saturn as “the embodiment of the whole Universe” must be the very contours of the Milky Way, which encircle the Earth, and then we are talking about Saturnus, the Roman Milky Way deity on the northern hemisphere.

Saturn = Sagush and Saturn = Ninurta
"In early Mesopotamian cosmology, planets were considered gods in their own right and the Babylonian name for Saturn was Sagush and Ninurta was the god associated with Saturn”. From - undi.chttp://www.astromom/documents/SaturnOr ... ations.pdf

Comment: Why would planet Saturn be mentioned by the Sumarians both as Sagush and Ninurta? It is more likely that Sagush really is planet Saturn and Ninurta represents a higher deity of creation, probably a Milky Way god and thus quite a different celestial object than planet Saturn.

Titan Saturn
In the astrological system Ninurta was associated with the planet Saturn, or perhaps as offspring or an aspect of Saturn. In his capacity as a farmer-god, there are similarities between Ninurta and the Greek Titan Kronos, whom the Romans in turn identified with their Titan Saturn. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninurta#Cults

Comment: Titans belongs to the first part of the creation stories as major and superior forces of creation. Even the Solar System is created by these primordial forces, so Titan Saturn cannot be planet Saturn.

Saturn´s Consort
Saturn had two consorts who represented different aspects of the god. The name of his wife Ops, the Roman equivalent of Greek Rhea, means "wealth, abundance, resources. From - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_%2 ... _of_Saturn

Comment: A planet which has female consort? Not very likely. Goddess Ops belongs also to the Titans as a primary deity of creation, which occurs before the creation of the Solar System.

Conclusion: Once again one can read that planet Saturn is confused with other primordial deities – which is understandable since the planets got their names AFTER the primeval Roman Pantheon deities. But this confusion should have been avoided by the use of a consistent comparative method.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Sun Jun 26, 2016 2:11 am

Subject: Rock Art and Plasma Cosmology

Watch this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e0ivLl ... ubs_digest

In 5:20 David Talbott refers to Peratt´s statement:"You can´t deny informations carved in stones".

No, but depending of your scientific, scholarly or laymen approach, you can make all kinds of associations which can lead you far astray from the ancient purpose and meaning of making a specific carving.

There are millions of different rock carving images from all over the world and one can find numerous carved images which never can be replicated in a plasma laboratory. (Cherry) Picking one or a handful Rock Carving images cannot count as a support for Plasma Cosmology. Google "rock art"/images and see for yourself.

Most of the ancient Rock Arts depicts natural images and celestial observations of the STILL familiar Sky we can observe today.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Wed Jul 13, 2016 12:52 pm

Subject: The World Mountain

A response to this ThunderboltProject video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GkgHtm9KbM - under which I´ve posted the following replies and questions:
----------------------
Norman Nelson
The "primeval" term is used several times in these videos. This term refers to the pre-creation and creation of the ancient known part of the Universe, and thus to a stage in time where nothing was created.

This dismiss the very idea of connecting primeval matters to the Solar System at all. These myths doesn´t deal with the Solar System, but with the Milky Way creation itself. The ancient World Mound resembles the first primeval firm soil (the resting place) which is created in the luminous center of the Milky Way, the Central or Enclosed Light on the Primeval Hill or the World Mound (Mountain).
-------------------------
Norman Nelson
If planet Saturn hypothetically once was very close to the Earth, wouldn´t ancient people just make a precise drawing of the planet instead of drawing different human images of a male deity and his attributes as shown in this video? Where or what are the logics in this discrepancy?
----------------------
Norman Nelson
ThunderboltsProject, Please explain logically how you come to the conclusions that a planet can be imagined as a human gender and be "the father of the kings".
----------------------
Norman Nelson
The only way anyone can claim the global myths of the World Mountain to deal with the Earth celestial pole axis, is to ignore the mythical context of this myth.

In Hindu texts it is clearly stated several places that "the Sun and all planets are orbiting the Golden Mount Meru "as one unit". Modern science has observed the Solar System to orbit the Milky Way center, as "one unit".

The luminous center of the Milky Way can be described as a Golden Light of creation. The Milky Way bulge has given origin to the mythical term, the "Primeval Hill" and, because of the Hindu astronomical numbers of this hill and the size of the Milky Way disk, scholars without the knowledge of the Milky Way Mytology, are left to either speculate on a geographical mountain or, as it is the case here with David Talbott´s video series, on the Earth celestial Axis.

- Of course our ancestors DID notice a location in the night Sky around which all stars and the crescent contours of the Milky Way seemingly revolves, but these astronomical fact doesn´t fit the mythical descriptions of the World Mountain.

The Earth celestial axis cannot be observed as a Golden Light and it certainly doesn´t fit into the context of the first moments of creation on the Mythical Hill/Mountain/Mound where the entire Solar System wasn’t yet even created.
-------------------------------
BTW: The planetary Saturn idea here is a misinterpretation of the Roman God, Saturnus, who resembles the Milky Way contours on the northern hemisphere as an imaginative "GREAT MAN OF CREATION" (As well as other archetypical images) The planetary ideas here are all taken from the numerous Stories of Creation and the Milky Way Mythology, but the most of the significant contexts in these myths are heavily ignored and ascribed to planets.

Follow the discussions here about the World Mount Meru - http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/ ... ru.187449/
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:42 am

Subject: Conversation with David Talbott
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GkgHtm9KbM

ThunderboltsProject:
Norman Nelson, the problem is that you're simply repeating a modern-day myth that is entirely disconnected from the dating of the ancient accounts of "creation." Our subject is the myth-making epoch, linked directly to the birth of the first civilizations. There there are no ancient myths of creation that can be separated from that phase of human history. No citation of a contemporary scientific theory about "how it all began" could have any bearing on the fields of ancient evidence we've assembled. It seems that the vast majority of viewers have, in fact, understood this point.
----------------------
My reply:
ThunderboltsProject,
1) I think we can agree that the most elaborated of the numerous global Myths of Creation contains a telling where NOTHING at all was created?

2) I also think we can agree that you, David Talbott (If it´s you behind the ThunderboltsProject profile) uses myths from this very early stage of creation, i.e. the scientifically 4.6 bill. years ago?

3) You replied to me that: "Norman Nelson, the problem is that you're simply repeating a modern-day myth that is entirely disconnected from the dating of the ancient accounts of "creation."

4) I dont think so indeed. By your factual use of myths of creation in this and other videos, you make a direct connection to the stage of creation which of course STILL counts everywhere - or nowhere.

5) You replied: "No citation of a contemporary scientific theory about "how it all began" could have any bearing on the fields of ancient evidence we've assembled".

That´s the BIG question: Why isn´t this logical connection and bearing made by you and others in the ThunderboltsProject (beside me)? It can be made today and fit nicely to the Electric Universe, and this connection was evidently already made by our ancestors all over the World.

6) You: "It seems that the vast majority of viewers have, in fact, understood this point".

Well, I really do understand what you are tell-ing according to your hypothesis. What I don´t understand is your use of (4.6 bill. years) creation myths to explain a supposed celestial catastrophic period which assumingly should have taken place around 10.000-6.000 years ago.

7) You think it has so, because your connection to the ancient Myths of Creation is factually disconnected by yourself, which of course makes it impossible for you to connect the actual celestial objects to the correct myth - and vise versa.

8) OK, I would wish we could have a closer discussion on these matters, which "we" in some sense already has, thanks to your hospitality on your ThunderboltsProject Forum here - viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16207
-----------
David,
Thanks to the Roman Empire, a huge mythical confusion has taken place since planets got their names from the Roman Pantheon deities of Creation, which belongs specifically to the Milky Way Mythology.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:26 am

Subject: Missing commentary replies under the TBP YouTube videos

Hello David Talbott,

Something is very unstable regarding the commentary box under your Youtube videos.

Yesterday I lost 3 comments in our personal conversation here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GkgHtm9KbM - about the topic of "The World Mountain".

Fortunately I´ve copies of everything I write, and this is also the case here.

In comments from other participants there is noticed an amount of replies, but lesser comments can be read.

Do you have any ideas why it is so?
------------
A couple of examples here:

Norman Nelson
ThunderboltsProject,
Please explain logically how you come to the conclusions that a planet can be imagined as a human gender and be "the father of the kings".

ThunderboltsProject
14. jul. 2016
Much of the "gender" identification is a logical component of the reconstruction, starting with the identity of the mother goddess as the Venus-"womb" giving birth to the warrior-hero as the cosmic mountain/phallic pillar. But obviously there is more to it, starting with the social-political-psychological environment of emerging male-dominance in the ancient cultures. All worthy of discussion.

Norman Nelson
14. jul. 2016
ThunderboltsProject,
I fully understand how the building up of components happens via gathering the myths of both genders from the numerous Stories of Creation. This is very logical, yes. BUT:
But in these stories, the Earth is THE ONLY ONE of the planets which is mentioned. All the other planets are not mentioned and cannot subsequently be a logical part of your hypothesis.
Again, you have to know which specific celestial shape gives origin to either a male or female god or goddess and its connected myth before you can make your hypothesis and support this logically.
You cannot make a human shape from any planets no matter how far or close they are from the Earth. You have to find another celestial gendered shapes which fits the myths.
This leaves you only two other options: Star Constellations or/and the shape of the crescent and seemingly revolving Milky Way contours on both hemispheres, of which the southern Milky Way contours resembles a Great Cosmic Woman (Hathor in the Egyptian myths) and the northern contours resembles the Great Cosmic God Saturnus (and not planet Saturn) in the Roman mythology.

This reply is missing

Norman Nelson
13. jul. 2016
If planet Saturn hypothetically once was very close to the Earth, wouldn´t ancient people just make a precise drawing of the planet instead of drawing different human images of a male deity and his attributes as shown in this video? Where or what are the logics in this discrepancy?

ThunderboltsProject
14. jul. 2016
Events in the ancient sky would have readily APPEARED intelligently driven or "purposeful" as discrete formations arose within the electrified plasma environment through which the planets moved. Even today, plasma scientists remind us that plasma appears "life-like."

One can make this observation without resolving the deeper philosophical questions on which most of us have opinions. Cross-cultural evidence makes clear that humans the world over recorded formations not present today, and that fact alone is a compelling invitation to us. It invites us to work with the ground rules for drawing reliable conclusions from converging cross-cultural testimony.

Issues relating to the respective "genders" of the mythic powers are well worth exploring, since the global record offers numerous clues (such as goddess appearing as womb-enclosure giving birth to warrior as masculine pillar). All of the nuances involved in "gender"-related symbolism will be part of these Discourses.

Norman Nelson
14. jul. 2016
ThunderboltsProject,
When you state that planet Saturn once was observed "very close to Earth" it is indeed a philosophical question why our ancestors would depict planet Saturn in the image of a supreme male god in the Sky - and not just the significant shape of planet Saturn.
Or the other way around: It is certainly a philosophical/mythological question how our ancestors spoke of a supreme male god of creation, meaning the non gendered planet Saturn.
It logically takes a celestial human like shape in order to ascribe this shape and all the attributes one can read of regarding the supreme god. This clearly excludes planet Saturn in all accounts IMO. (Edit: And all the other planets too)

This reply is missing
-----------------
Regards
Norman
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Jul 30, 2016 11:37 am

Subject: Missing commentary replies under the TBP YouTube videos


I don't think you will ever figure out what is going on with comments on youtube, many people, including myself, have tried, but it seems there is no single answer. I first noticed that none of my comments were showing up at all unless I was logged in, so I would need to stay logged in for anyone else to be able to see them.
Channel owners can mark accounts as spam, but I doubt thunderbolts would do that, and in such a case I don't think any of your comments would be visible.
The youtube comments are not like on the TB forum either, your youtube comments are loaded dynamically and do not exist permanently. I deleted my Google account and all the posts I had ever made on youtube are now gone, annoying for sure, but not surprising. Some users think the problems started when the Google+ system was introduced, and that creating a new account was necessary to eliminate the problem.
I haven't tried setting up a new account though, as reading about Google/youtube from some IT experts really makes me wary of their corporate MO, the primary concern being "opinion shaping". It would be nice I think to have a service like youtube but independently run, though that is never likely to happen, the costs would be staggering.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2661
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Sun Jul 31, 2016 5:29 am

Hello GaryN,
GaryN wrote:
Subject: Missing commentary replies under the TBP YouTube videos


I don't think you will ever figure out what is going on with comments on youtube, many people, including myself, have tried, but it seems there is no single answer. I first noticed that none of my comments were showing up at all unless I was logged in, so I would need to stay logged in for anyone else to be able to see them.
Channel owners can mark accounts as spam, but I doubt thunderbolts would do that, and in such a case I don't think any of your comments would be visible.

I´m aware of the need to be logged in when visiting the YouTube channels and I always am. Yes channel owners can mark accounts as spam, bu then all my comments would disappear, as you said.

As a channel owner myself, I also know of the possibility to delete unpleasant or offending replies, but I´ve hard to imagine this could be the case here as the general TBP Society has the demand of open mindedness and free speech as a prime and necessary principle in order to develop any theories and to get public response to these.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

Re: The Mythical Interpretations in the TBP

Unread postby Norman » Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:55 am

Subject: Milky Way Myths and the Galactic Center

Quotes from “Galactic Center Activity in Ancient Myth” - https://www.academia.edu/3288410/Galact ... cient_Myth - By Christian Irigaray
---------------------------------
A very famous Egyptian symbol is the “Eye of Ra” which was depicted upon Hathor: the cow goddess which symbolized the Milky Way in Heliopolitan cosmology. The starry Nut was considered to portray the Milky Way in Egyptian lore before she adopted the image of a heavenly cow as Hathor.

De Santillana and Von Dechend comment:

Mother Nut is changed into a cow and ordered to „carry Ra.‟ (It is, by the way, a „new‟ Ra: the older Ra made it quite clear that he wanted to retire for good, going somewhere „where nobody could reach‟ him).

Ra is no “sun-god” or “solar deity”: he is a depiction of Light, but not that which comes from the Sun alone. This can be observed in the Egyptian Book of The Cow (aka The Legend of the Destruction of Mankind) where the Eye of Ra burns the world with its terrible power when it is used by Hathor.

My comment: Ra (Atum-Ra) represents the mythical "Central Sun", "The Enclosed Sun", i.e. the central Milky Way light. Goddess Hathor is equal to the Greek Goddess Aphrodite and to the Roman goddess Venus. Subsequently and logically, all references to the Venus myths shall naturally be connected to the Milky Way – and NOT to planet Venus.

The Milky Way goddess is transformed into the terrible Sekhmet and unleashes a devastating force through this Eye of Ra. We often take for granted that the Egyptians are relating a past event, but we rarely consider that it may very well be a prophecy of what is to come. That this mysterious Eye of Ra is the luminous “eye” of the Milky Way needs no further clarification.

Another myth that mentions this Eye is the Ancient Egyptian myth of the battle between Horus and Seth describing how Horus lost his eye in battle:
Horus has moaned because of his eye; Set has moaned because of his testicles.The eye of Horus sprang up as he fell on yonder side of the Winding Watercourse, to protect itself against (or, free itself from) Set. Thot saw it on yonder side of the Winding Watercourse. The eye of Horus sprang up on yonder side of the Winding Watercourse, and fell upon the wing of Thot on yonder side of the Winding Watercourse.

For those interested in ancient mythology and astronomy, it should be evident what the “Winding Watercourse” is. This battle between Horus and Seth began after Osiris (Horus‟ father) had been killed and cut into pieces. The fractions of his body were sealed in a coffin or chest and thrown into the Nile River where they voyaged to a far off land and came to rest under a heath plant that grew quickly into a great tree that surrounded the chest.

My comment: The mythical term, "Winding Watercourse" is an eminent description of the rotating and radiating formation of the Milky Way galaxy. Especially as the Milky Way contours also are named as "The Heavenly River" in several cultural myths.

Plutarch mentions that Osiris‟ body was thrown through a “mouth” of the river, and also mentions that Isis wept at a well. The location of Osiris‟ resting place may be found in the fact that the Ancient Egyptians commemorated Osiris‟ death when the Sun entered the Scorpio constellation and conjoined Galactic Center in the heavens.

The image of Seth was sometimes replaced with a serpent named Apep (aka. Apophis in Greek) which Horus had to battle against every day, as it was believed that Apep, a “Monster of the Nile” or “World Encircler” wanted to swallow Ra (Light). The myth portrays a legendary battle between Time (Horus) and Apep/Seth, which can be found to be depicting our Babylonian Tiamat, or the Greek Okeanos: the Milky Way. The fact that Plutarch named Seth as Typhoon in his De Isis & Osiris shows us that the myth was related to the Ancient Greek legend of Zeus battling the terrible Typhoon: a myth described by Hesiod in our reference to the Greeks.

My comment: The mythical term, “World Encircler” also corresponds to the Midgaard Serpent in the Norse Mythology where this serpent surrounds the Midgaard, the home of the humans, the Earth. The Milky Way contours can be observed all around the Earth as the World Serpent or the Heavenly River, also representing the global World Flood Myths which of course doesn´t refer to any ancient catastrophic disaster. This mytho-cosmological Flood runs OVER the Earth up in the night Sky and not ON the Earth.

The Phoenix myth of the Egyptians refers to Galactic Center once more by describing how that bird had its nest upon the Ben-Ben: a stone that had the shape of a pyramidion or capstone and was kept in the Temple of the Phoenix at Heliopolis. The Egyptians told how the Ben-Ben stone was the source of all things created, and was also considered the place where the soul rested in the Tuat or underworld.

My comment: The mythical term, "The Underworld", only and simply refers to the Earth southern hemisphere and its celestial imagery. The many goddesses of the Underworld refers to the southern hemisphere Milky Way contours. It´s as simple as that.

In his research of the Phoenix and the Ben-Ben stone, Robert Bouval states:
It is also often argued that the phoenix, a mythical bird, which was said to appear at dawn perched on a pole extending from a Benben, was representative of the sungod‟s self-creating power (Breasted, p.72). But the phoenix’s cosmic identification was by no means exclusive to the sun. In the Middle Kingdom, for example, the phoenix was also said to be the soul of Osiris, as well as the moon and sometimes the „morning star‟ i.e. Venus (Rundle Clark, p.246-9). The phoenix thus was symbolic of the rebirth at dawn not only of thesun-god, but of cosmic beings in general.

My comment: As goddess Hathor is equal to the Roman goddess Venus, “the morning star” does only refer to planet Venus, which got its name from the Roman Milky Way goddess, Venus.

In The Book Of The Dead, Chapter 83 entitled „Spell For Becoming The Phoenix (Bennu) Bird‟, the phoenix claims: “Iam the seed corn of every god…” (Rundle Clark, p.249). His power of self-creation clearly symbolised the emerging (rebirth) of celestial bodies (gods) at dawn from the underworld, the tenebrous land of the dead below the horizon.

The myth of Osiris and his resurrection as a falcon (Horus) is linked to the myth of the phoenix bird, and that is rather obvious;, but that Osiris‟ resurrection relates to Galactic Center activity will require another essay altogether.

We will finish this short exposure of Egyptian mythology by stating that Egyptologists are no experts on astronomy, and neither do they see the links to Galactic Center activity among Ancient Egyptian myths, because the notion is completely absent from their minds.
--------------------
My comment: I´ll second this and add: Scholars, who have no astronomical knowledge and no ideas of the Starry Sky and Milky Way appearances on both Earth hemispheres, are not able to decipher the ancient myths and make the correct connection between the myth and their cosmological or astronomical realms.

This is unfortunately also the case with the Immanuel Velikovsky and the mythcal and interpretative understanding of his followers and this will harm the strict scientifically EU and PC until the mistake of confusing Milky Way matters to deal with planetary matters is abandoned and corrected.

The ancient myths did only describe the then known 5 planets as “wandering stars” and described the planets only by their natural appearances and motions. Besides this, the planets were never mentioned in the ancient myths, except from the Earth itself of course.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Norman
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:18 am

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests