Myths of Creation = Real Cosmology?

[SpaceTravellor]

Hello everybody,

Mel Acheson posted an article which is linked in the Thunderbolts Update:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/ ... inning.htm

Before the Beginning
Jun 18, 2009
Thomas Hobbes wrote that life in a state of nature was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Ancient legends from around the world spell out the nature of that state before the beginning of society and civilization.
-------------------------------

1. Quote: "The legends are called creation myths because they describe the beginning of time, of the dividing of heaven from earth, of social organization, even of the distinguishing between good and evil. They are told as if the narrator were an eyewitness to the creation event…and they often tell about a prior state".

Question: By what methods could our ancestors supposedly have gained such cosmically knowledge "As if have beeing an eyewitness"?

2. Quote: "Many legends speak of the “waters” or “sea” of chaos that preceded creation. They say that the chaos “whirled.”

Question: What does "waters" and "sea" really means mythological? Could it be, that our ancestors really talked about "a cosmic fluid of hydrogen" in which "rivers" means "cosmic rays" that whirled gas and dust up and thereby telling of a cosmic law of creations as for instants observed in the galaxies?

What do you think of this?

I´ve tried to retell the Norse Creation Myth in the light of modern Cosmology and Astronomy here:

http://www.native-science.net/Creation.Myth.Norse.htm

- What do you think of this? I´m looking forward to any feedback!

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Ivar [pronounced E-var, I believe ]

Before I begin I would like to clear up the creative quoting by Acheson. Thomas Hobbes didn't say that 'life in a state of nature was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” What he actually wrote was:

CHAPTER XIII OF THE NATURAL CONDITION OF MANKIND AS CONCERNING THEIR FELICITY AND MISERY
Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man, the same consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/ ... han-c.html

If Acheson had actually read Hobbes then he would have realised that Hobbes' ideas of the natural state of man contradict the Saturn theorists ideas of a Golden Age.

Question: By what methods could our ancestors supposedly have gained such cosmically knowledge "As if have being an eyewitness"?

Answer 1. Not only were we eye-wtnesses, if one reads the texts which the Saturn theorists cherry-pick their quotes from, then one would understand that 'we' did the creating.
Answer 2. 'Know thyself'.
Answer 3. Look around you and observe Nature.

Question: What does "waters" and "sea" really means mythologically? Could it be, that our ancestors really talked about "a cosmic fluid of hydrogen" in which "rivers" means "cosmic rays" that whirled gas and dust up and thereby telling of a cosmic law of creations as for
instants observed in the galaxies?

Answer. 'Water', as in Earth, Water, Air and Fire, is an analog which seldom refers to H2O although H2O comes under the heading of 'Water'.
Water is a mean between Earth and Air; it has no shape of its own; it (as H2O) can be Earth/solid, Water/liquid or Air/gas; it can carry Earth and Air, and so on.
Water, ocean and sea etc in mythological terms refers to what we moderns would call space. It is the amniotic fluid of the womb/uterus called the Universe.
Put crudely, Water contains all matter (Earth) in solution. That which makes the matter manifest is Mind (Air). (Apologies for the alliteration)

As far as rays go, in mythology these are generally depicted as projectile weapons, typically arrows as in Apollo and Artemis for example.
What we call, for example, the solar wind would in mythological terms be considered a river or stream. I doubt that the ancients restricted themselves to hydrogen however. That the various stellar bodies emitted currents, rays, emanations etc was taken as a given with the ancients. This is the theoretical underpinning of astrology. It is also one of the fundementals of Alchemy - the Art of Transformation.

I enjoyed your Norse creation myth (as always). As you know, I tend to concern myself more with the solar system and the individual, and less with 'deep space', so what I write here in no way contradicts or discounts your take on things. From your website:

In order to distinguish and categorize the Gods and Goddesses, one must concentrate on their specific and common attributes. In this matter, the Comparative Mythology and Religion is of great importance to study.

Amen to that, brother.

Both explanations should of course not be taken literally- and, in my opinion, both tellings should be understood as a "technique" to explain the basics of how creative forces merges the material and later on expands in cosmos in a rhythmic and cyclic movement.

Exactly - 'A picture paints a thousand words'. The ancients used imagery - allegory, analogy, simile, metaphor, symbolism, etc to describe the indescribable. They weren't as stupid as modern experts who have to constantly invent new words or new meanings for old words to describe things. Words are merely labels we use to stick on things in the physical world. In the underlying world of concepts there is nothing to stick the label on.

The Norse creation myth is one of my favourites and I always get the image of a car battery in my head. On a more serious note (and the inside of my head is very funny ) compare the Norse creation myth with human reproduction from the female and male (always ladies first) to parturition. Think in terms of Fire, Air, Water and Earth (though not necessarily in that order).

Audhumbla's milk is Water and Ymir represents Earth (matter, not the planet). Note that a cow is also a mother (and therefore provides for her offspring).

Yggdrasil, or the World Tree generally, can also symbolise the human spine and central nervous system. The branches being the brain and the roots the base of the spine (coccyx?).

Ships, boats, chariots etc serve a similar role as my little friend Ratatosk: they all symbolise movement (dynamism).

The Eagle and the Snake - common motif around the world. The snake/serpent is a complex symbol and can represent several things depending upon the context. In this case, the Snake would represent matter (nothing closer to Earth than a snake's belly) and the Eagle would be Mind. Mind over matter; mental is superior to physical, etc. The snake lives at the bottom of the World Ocean thus representing the matter in the Water - see also the myth of Perseus and Andromeda. The P and A story is about the individual but the symbolism of the snake/sea-monster is the same.

In a world described in circles, it's NOT very likely that our Norse ancestors have a perception of a total end of the World!

Try telling that to an expert. Not being an expert, I'm with you on this one. Everything follows the same four-phase cycle: birth; growth;
maturation/fruition; decline/death (which leads to the next cycle).

Keep up the good work on your websites.

[mague]

1. Quote: "The legends are called creation myths because they describe the beginning of time, of the dividing of heaven from earth, of social organization, even of the distinguishing between good and evil. They are told as if the narrator were an eyewitness to the creation event…and they often tell about a prior state".

Question: By what methods could our ancestors supposedly have gained such cosmically knowledge "As if have beeing an eyewitness"?

The Old had a different concept and lived in a different state of mind.

We do sense a lot. We decide in a fraction of a second if we like someone or not. This is based on chemical "communication". Personally i think we do not only look and smell, we most probably sense (electro)magnetic vibrations and "spiritual" vibrations. Maybe some more frequencies.

If i do eat a strawberry i cant help myself to create a "vision" of it. It has a character. Chilipepper has a very different character. A pear has a bit more noble character then an apple. Chocolate makes the sun shining in your head. Chili hurts, is hot but funny and makes you laugh. Rotten fruits make you crazy and create a hangover.

It doesnt matter if modern science is able to understand that this is all based on chemical reactions of our body. Our mind is quite simple and just stores the associations. Although we can learn and understand what cocoa is doing on a chemical level to us its result is happiness and happiness itself is nothing we can learn, only experience. Even if we have the knowledge about the chemistry it is stored in a different part of our mind and not connected to our associations per default. We know a lot about poisons but still we dont stop producing and distributing them. Thats because there is no default connection between learned knowledge and our "visions" and associations.

Everything is sending signals. In modern science we know about frequencies. The universe is vibration and we are able to sense vibrations.

So, what happens if you chew a piece of a 4000 year old tree ? What kind of chemical communication is happening. What kind of memory do the vibrations of the wood transport ?

Water is cycling. Almost since forever it is evaporating, forming clouds, forming rain and flowing back to its source. What kind of memory is this water storing in its vibrations ? We do drill ice cores for scientific purposes. But those cores do also have memories we can read when melting and drinking them.

All those memories allow us to be "eyewitness" of the past.

The Gaia theory makes it even easier. Gaia is storing all informations since she started to exists. Since all is connected to Gaia all those informations are available for everyone.

2. Quote: "Many legends speak of the “waters” or “sea” of chaos that preceded creation. They say that the chaos “whirled.”

Question: What does "waters" and "sea" really means mythological? Could it be, that our ancestors really talked about "a cosmic fluid of hydrogen" in which "rivers" means "cosmic rays" that whirled gas and dust up and thereby telling of a cosmic law of creations as for instants observed in the galaxies?

Go read the bestseller book from last month. Then the bestseller from 10 years ago, then a book from 1850. Then one from 1500. The more you go back the more the words and letters become distorted. It becomes harder and harder to read them and to understand the author. And at some point on your "travel" to the past it turns into white noise. A whirling ocean of chaos. You do "sense" that the noise may hold informations, but you cant read them. We do know that the waves of our oceans follow physical rules of fluid, but we cant describe them mathematically. Same in astronomy btw. The deeper we look into space the more it turns into white noise and it is also a view into the past.

Same on a spiritual level. We do sense it all might make sense, just we cant fully grasp it.. Depending on our sensors in our body and mind things get blurry the farther they are away from us. We have to move mentally or physically to come closer and be able to read another layer of the chaos.

We have a proverb here which is describing it well: With all those tree standing around its impossible to see the forest.


I do hope this does make some sense to you

[SpaceTravellor]

@Grey Cloud

1. Thanks for correcting Mel Achesons "qualitative" quoting-technique, taking his quote out of context. I guess in order to build up and support the Velikovsky Catastrophism hypothesis? Next time, one apparently have to double-check his quotes.

2.

Answer 1. Not only were we eye-witnesses, if one reads the texts which the Saturn theorists cherry-pick their quotes from, then one would understand that 'we' did the creating.

I aggree that we are a part of Creation and thereby are creating, but I refuse the idea of "we did the Creation in the first place".

Regarding the Saturn theorists, I think they are on very thin ice regarding the Saturn Myth, confusing a very secularized Roman Saturn planetary myth for the Saturnus Milky Way deity. Check
http://www.native-science.net/Mythology ... _Right.htm

Answer 2. 'Know thyself'.
Answer 3. Look around you and observe Nature

"Knowing yourself" I think, must be to discover for your self what forces and elements that has build your body. But "thyself" is not just your body, but also your soul or spirit, and I think one must really be able to operate with the spiritual senses before one mythologically and scientifically can understand "who you are, and what cosmological context you are a part of".

Agree on the Answer 3. As the creation on this Earth is a part of an even bigger creation, it must be possible to study the Nature and gain the greater specific and general mythical and even scientifically knowledge of Cosmos.

Thanks for your explanations on the "water and sea" subject which, I think, very much confirms my own ideas. I´ll ponder more over your description!

The ancients used imagery - allegory, analogy, simile, metaphor, symbolism, etc to describe the indescribable. They weren't as stupid as modern experts who have to constantly invent new words or new meanings for old words to describe things. Words are merely labels we use to stick on things in the physical world. In the underlying world of concepts there is nothing to stick the label on.

With your own words: Amen to that, brother!

The Norse creation myth is one of my favourites and I always get the image of a car battery in my head

- Maybe that´s because you really are a spiritual charged battery?

Audhumbla's milk is Water and Ymir represents Earth (matter, not the planet). Note that a cow is also a mother (and therefore provides for her offspring).

- Thinking of your statement "I tend to concern myself more with the solar system and the individual, and less with deep space", maybe you should make an exception in this matter?

OK, the Milky Way Galaxy is not "deep space", but it is my opinion that the Norse Audhumbla Cow belongs to myth of the Milky Way, depicted by the ancient people as a big cow by it´s southern hemisphere contours, under-stressing the milky symbolism by the whitish colours of the Milky Way river. And, stretching the symbolism a little bit, the arms of the Milky Way fits very well to the 4 "milky way rivers" of the cows udder. http://www.native-science.net/MilkyWay. ... oddess.htm

Yggdrasil, or the World Tree generally, can also symbolise the human spine and central nervous system.

I can very well follow you on this. Naturally, the creative forces of the Earth also corresponds to the human body and mind.

Regarding the Norse Ragnarok Myth, I totally aggree with your: " Everything follows the same four-phase cycle: birth; growth; maturation/fruition; decline/death (which leads to the next cycle)".

Thanks for your answers - Best Regards from Ivar - E-var - Ivor - Ivory

[SpaceTravellor]

@mague,

Thanks! It all makes much sense to me!

"The Old had a different concept and lived in a different state of mind" - that´s why we modern human beings have great difficulties understanding the mythological language, right?

As Grey Cloud stated:

A picture paints a thousand words'. The ancients used imagery - allegory, analogy, simile, metaphor, symbolism, etc to describe the indescribable. They weren't as stupid as modern experts who have to constantly invent new words or new meanings for old words to describe things. Words are merely labels we use to stick on things in the physical world. In the underlying world of concepts there is nothing to stick the label on.

And I really like your:

Everything is sending signals. In modern science we know about frequencies. The universe is vibration and we are able to sense vibrations.

- And the more you are living in the Nature, the more frequences and vibrations you´ll be able to recieve, right?

We do sense it all might make sense, just we cant fully grasp it. Depending on our sensors in our body and mind things get blurry the farther they are away from us. We have to move mentally or physically to come closer and be able to read another layer of the chaos.

This makes one really think of Grey Clouds:

I tend to concern myself more with the solar system and the individual, and less with deep space

- There is much to much to grasp . . . and you´ll never get to the bottom of it, anyway.

Thanks for your efforts and broad-minded answers - All the Best from Ivar!

[nick c]

hello GC,

I read the Mel Acheson quote:

Thomas Hobbes wrote that life in a state of nature was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Ancient legends from around the world spell out the nature of that state before the beginning of society and civilization.

I don't see any conflict with the complete Hobbes text? Nor is Acheson guilty of taking a quote out of context. In the chapter in question Hobbes is saying that the normal state of the human condition is that men are in perpetual competition (at war) with each other over limited resources, essentially living at or below subsistence level, and forced into doing whatever is needed (no matter how base) in order to survive. [A pessimistic line of thought that reached a culmination in the work of Thomas Malthus...human population increases geometrically while food supply increases arithmetically, making famine, war, plagues, etc the inevitable fate of humankind] Acheson then goes on to use this observation by Hobbes to segue into the topic of creation myths. Indeed, the quote is nothing more than a "lead in" to that topic, he could have quoted Malthus or any one of a number of thinkers, making your criticism amount to little more than nitpicking.

If Acheson had actually read Hobbes then he would have realised that Hobbes' ideas of the natural state of man contradict the Saturn theorists ideas of a Golden Age.

Hobbes was not writing about any Golden Age, he was writing about the present (after the fall of man) state of humankind. Achesons' TPOD is not in conflict with the Saturnist interpretation of the myths of the golden age, like Hobbes, he is not writing about the golden age. Acheson is saying that creation myths are not stories of the beginning of the universe, but rather of events that took place in the heavens and were witnessed by humankind. When Acheson writes of the creation of time, he is refering to the measuring of time by humans who were now, after the dissolution of the previous celestial order, able to keep track of time by measuring and comparing the movements of celestial bodies as well as to the new experience of seasons. Humans and the universe existed before "the creation" as told in creation myths. Characters such as Adam, Eve, and the serpent are symbolic representations of celestial bodies. As above so below. It must be remembered that classifying stories as "creation myths" is from an assumption on the part of academic mythologists, that they are stories of the creation of the universe.
Whether or not you agree with the above, is irrelevant (and I don't want to derail this thread into a debate on the Saturn myth) my point being that there is not any contradiction (with Saturn theorists) in what Acheson wrote, nor did he misuse the Hobbes quote.

nick c

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Nick,
I suggest that we agree to disagree on this one. Life's too short, if not not nasty and brutish, to be picking the bones out of Hobbes' Elizabethan English.

[SpaceTravellor]

@nick c,

Humans and the universe existed before "the creation" as told in creation myths.

That is NOT what the stories of creation tells. They tell quite opposite that in the beginning was NOTHING. No humans and an empty space.

When Acheson writes of the creation of time, he is refering to the measuring of time by humans who were now, after the dissolution of the previous celestial order, able to keep track of time by measuring and comparing the movements of celestial bodies as well as to the new experience of seasons.

Am I right in assuming this: We are here dealing with the theory of the Velikovski collisions of the worlds and the supposed changes caused by the Saturn planet?

COSMOLOGICAL NEWS:

- As an alternative mythologist and cosmologist, I´m convinced that our Solar System was born directly out from the centre of our Milky Way, which all creation stories confirmingly describes with the "expelsion of the Eden". Se my explanations here: http://www.cosmology-unified.net/Cosmology.Holistic.htm

Of course there must have been some collisions in this early stage, the pre-Solar System leaving the galaxy centre, but the Solar System have had a very long time to find the actual relative balance without any events that have made some significant changes, as for instants assumed with the theory and myth of Saturn.

Therefore I reject the idea of "resently" major collisions in our Solar System as assumed by Velikovski. And therefore I also reject the very idea of "The Saurn Myth". And not just because of this.

This "Saturn Myth" is in my opinion, really a big confusion, started of by the very secular Roman planetary "mythology" that forgot the real Saturnus Myth which really belongs to the Milky Way myths. This confusion takes place because the scholars confuses the deity qualities of light; bright and the white color. Also Velikovski fell in to this trap - as his later followers. Further explanations here: http://www.native-science.net/Mythology ... _Right.htm

By this major mistake, the total impossible construction of Saturn as a "BRIGHT LIGHT" hoovering over the Earth was started of, in stead of the real myth of the WHITE Saturnus/Kronos deity, constructed by the whitish northern contours of the Milky Way - a big figure that revolves around the north pole centre. This big WHITE figure that rise when the "Sun God" LIGHT goes down. A sentence that gives the followers of the Saturn Myth big logical troubles to explain. Further explanations and illustrations here: http://www.native-science.net/MilkyWay.GreatestGod.htm

NB: I´ve been in contact with both Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott in order to get a discussion on this matter. At one point Dave promised to contact me, but he never did.

- Maybe he will now, reading this honest response which really is an attempt to free the EU and Plasma Cosmology from the load of confused myths which publically redicules an otherwise refreshing Cosmology.

- I´ve posted a part of this comment as a new topic, The Confused Saturn Myth, here: http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... =10&t=1998

[nick c]

hi GC,

I suggest that we agree to disagree on this one. Life's too short, if not not nasty and brutish, to be picking the bones out of Hobbes' Elizabethan English.

Agreed, let Hobbes rest in peace

nick c

[mague]

- And the more you are living in the Nature, the more frequences and vibrations you´ll be able to recieve, right?

I d say it different. Nature is good, because it surrounds you. Much like suncream. Suncream protects from certain frequencies just like nature protects from certain (unnatural) frequencies. In that regard a city is much less effective then a forest as habitat. Please mind that unnatural is not evil, just not suited well for humans or other beings in terrestrial flora and fauna.

Nature and human body/mind/soul interact. We do send sick people to recreation centers which are placed in a natural environment. Many people seek nature on their holidays. Its grounding us, reconnecting us with our natural power source and vibration. As long as we vibrate in our human frequency we stay rather healthy.

The opposite is the Ikarus story. Flying to the sun results in a crash landing. We got legs to stand on them.

Squirrels for example vibrate on a much higher frequency then us humans. If they would try to vibrate in our frequency they would die soon. Of course there is not a fixed frequency. Every being has a band. Some got a small, others a wider one. If the bands wont overlap we couldnt share and interact. We humans have a very wide band. I think this feature is one reason that some of us think we are the crown of creation. But we are not, we got the wide band, our high mobility and our highly developed hands to fill a spot in nature. Not to build rockets, bombs or weapons. Our design is our destination as "animal". Think about it. There is not a single species on the planet that is able to rescue a kitten on a tree. Funny, childish but true. On a more serious level we are one of very few species who are able to remove a rotting corpse from a water hole. A service that is required by any species that needs clean water.
Some are not happy with this honorable niche and want to fly like Ikarus. Leaving their natural frequency and turn mad and destructive.

[SpaceTravellor]

Hi Mague,

This speaks for it self . . . I like that!

Nature and human body/mind/soul interact. We do send sick people to recreation centers which are placed in a natural environment. Many people seek nature on their holidays. Its grounding us, reconnecting us with our natural power source and vibration. As long as we vibrate in our human frequency we stay rather healthy.

But I understress this:

The opposite is the Ikarus story. Flying to the sun results in a crash landing. We got legs to stand on them.

It is a condition of Life to work with at least 2 qualities in the life, namely the physical and the spiritual.

We have feets to stand on, yes - but we also have a spirit to Fly with. The Ancient Ones could not have gained their Stories of Creation without using their flying-spirit-qualities, meeting the vibrations of outher Space. That is: Flying is not an opposite to standing on the ground - it is complementary - and necessary in order to be a complete human being.

- Yoy are fairly rigth on the subject of "humans meeting the higher vibrations". It can be dangerous and it can go bananas and end up in a psyciatric hospital dowsed with drugs, but just if you not are well prepared by the natural ways, which is the ritual Way of the Ancient Ones. http://www.native-science.net/Visions.Dreams.htm

Thanks for your reply - All the Best from Ivar