Thank you, Norman.
Well done Jesus! We indeed need to focus more on the female principles and qualities in the world.
Very interesting with these spiritual inspirations and perceptions, to which I agree are possible and common. Yes I know Nuit/Nut represents the female wisdom of the creation. I´m sceptic of the Nuit as the "Holy Ghost", but never mind that for now.
Wondered how you might take that. You are very understanding.
I can understand your point here, because the connection to the "Saturn Model" and the Stories of Creation is never mentioned in this theory. All planets are given names from the Roman pantheon which deals with primeval deities who creates everything in the ancient known world, which includes knowledge and symbols of the Milky Way at it´s largest.
When using some of the context of these pantheon deities in order to construct the planetary Saturn Model, this model is of course build on Myths of Creation.
I don't think the model came together until all the cultural myths were examined and cross referenced.
When they got the views from different perspectives from around the globe, they were able to get a "3D" picture, so to speak.
Been there and done that. Immanuel Velikovsky is the main cause to the widespread planetary confusion by his "worlds in collision", for the same reasons of the Roman naming and deification of the planets. He wasn´t aware of the mythical extension of the ancient symbolism and knowledge of the creation, but interpreted it all as having planetary matters only, just like his followers.
He was the pioneer. There were many more unknowns back then.
You speak as if you know way better than him,
yet every reference in every myth is the Milky Way, for you.
What reason do you give that men would make so many divergent stories all about that one celestial object?
Thanks for that link. Haven't read that yet.
Yes, there are of course many mythical comparisons, but they are connected to the incorrect celestial objects.
This seems to be your opinion.
As a one time amateur astrologer, they certainly seem like the correct assignments to me.
Is planet Venus a "she"? What are the logics of describing a planet as a woman? And what are the logics of describing other planets as a male gender? Here we are at the very core of the interpretative problem of the Roman naming of planets, given from their pantheon deities of creation.
This is actually a strong point of the model.
Whilst we now cannot see how genders are assigned to planets, globally the myths concur very strongly on the genders. Particularly with Venus and Mars. And therein was a big clue for Talbot and the others. The genders obviously came about by the roles they played, and so he had to come to understand those roles. In understanding those roles, the polar configuration took shape.
There is no logical way anyone can imagin a planet having gendered shapes. You have to have a celestial shape of some kind, a star constellation or the contours of the Milky Way in order to imagine gendered shapes in the Sky. This is why, amongst many other cultures, the Egyptians imagined the Milky Way contours on the southern hemisphere as a "Great Woman in the night Sky".
That is, if the current night sky was even visible. With so many planets so close by, the stars and milky way would hardly have been visible.
This Milky Way "Mother Goddess" had different names through different cultural periods in Egypt, as for instants Nut/Nuit and Hathor. Hathor is equal to the Greek goddess Aphrodite and to the Roman Goddess Venus and as Hathor is specifically connected to the Milky Way contours, the Occam´s Razor principle also states goddess Venus to be a Milky Way goddess - and THEN the myth of Venus fits to the mythical context and to the correct celestial object of a female-looking shape in the Sky. Link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hathor
In your last post, you said they were calling the milky way Father-God.
Just by me calling Venus She, you have launched into saying the milky way was the female diety.
The thing is, the milky way is nothing to write home about, or make up stories for your children about.
But a comet that came into Earth's vicinity, and was hurling thunderbolts at the Earth, definitely was something to make up stories about. That was history, and a warning for future generations, of what they perceived was a possibility of occurring again.
A "fight" between Venus and Mars made the mythological headlines all around the world.
How do you read stuff like that in the Milky way?
Why did some cultures know Mars as "scarface"?
Why did they all say of Mars that he is the warrior, and the god of war?
And of Venus, that she is the mother goddess, and the god of love? (before she changed into a dragon, and rained destruction upon Earth)
These same archetypes are repeated faithfully all around the world.
We can all be excused for having a theory which interests us deeply - but there is no excuses when not taking all informations and logics into account for the theory - or for not wanting to do this.
Hey, I'm trying to take what you say into account.
It just isn't very convincing to me.
You've referenced mythology from only two cultures, Egyptian and Roman.
You state things like "wrong assignments" and "This Milky way ... had different names", but they are pretty empty statements.
If they were not always only referring to the Milky way (which to me is much more likely),
then you are the one missing the correct assignments.