1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Science and Symbols of Creation

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by Native, Feb 10, 2019.

  1. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    We have numerous cultural Stories of Creation, which very much seems to be similar to each other but how do we interpret these stories? Can they possibly be interpreted into modern terms and give some modern scientific sense?

    In the following I´ll use the Egyptian Story of creation as written here - The Ogdoad, which has two variants from different cultural periods.

    I am interpreting the Creation Myths as describing the pre-conditions and the factual creation of our Milky Way (and Solar System) and using concepts and descriptions from modern cosmological science in order to compare and evalue the ancient and modern knowledge. (My remarks in between with blue font)


    1) The Basics.
    In Egyptian mythology, the Ogdoad are the eight deities worshipped in Hermopolis. The gods of the Ogdoad were mostly seen as humans with their animals' heads, or just depicted as snakes and frogs. They were arranged in four male-female pairs, with the males associated with frogs, and the females with snakes.

    Male and female represents opposite but complementary qualities of creation, Snakes and frogs represents cyclic creation. (This opposite and complementary force can ONLY be achieved by the Electromagnetic force with its opposite polarities)

    The Egyptians believed that before the world was formed, there was a watery mass of dark, directionless chaos. In this chaos lived the Ogdoad of Khmunu (Hermopolis), four frog gods and four snake goddesses of chaos.

    "Watery mass" represents the modern term of "clouds of fluent gas and dust" i.e. plasmatic elements.

    These deities were Nun and Naunet (water), Amun and Amaunet (invisibility), Heh and Hauhet (infinity) and Kek and Kauket (darkness).The chaos existed without the light, and thus Kek and Kauket came to represent this darkness. They also symbolized obscurity, the kind of obscurity that went with darkness, and night.

    These are some principles and basic stages of creation. "Infinity" points towards an eternal and cyclical creation in the Universe i.e. not a Big Bang.

    The Ogdoad were the original great gods of Iunu (On, Heliopolis) where they were thought to have helped with creation, then died and retired to the land of the dead where they continued to make the Nile flow and the sun rise every day.

    "Heliopololis" represents the "Cosmic Forces" et all and not a location on the Earth.. "When "deities dies", this mean they participates in the tranformation of elements and forces. (The last sentense of the Nile and Sun does not refer to the geographic Nile and neither to the Sun in our Solar System).

    2) Creation Myth
    "Together the four concepts represent the primal fundamental state of the beginning, they are what always was. In the myth, however, their interaction ultimately proved to be unbalanced, resulting in the arising of a new entity. When the entity opened, it revealed Ra, the fiery sun, inside. After a long interval of rest, Ra, together with the other gods, created all other things. There are two main variations on the nature of the entity containing Ra".

    "The beginning" does not IMO refer to the beginning and creation of the entire Universe because the four male/femal concepts "are what they always was", which speaks of an eternal stage. When these four concepts came together, they resulted in a new entity (usually a central Mound of mud or soil).

    When the entity opened, it reveals Ra, the fiery Light (NOT the Sun) inside. After a long interval of rest, Ra, together with other creative forces, created "all other things".


    3) Egg Variant
    "The original version of the myth has the entity arising from the waters after the interaction as a mound of dirt, the Milky Way, which was deified as Hathor.

    The primeval dirt/mud or soil is created on the "Central Mound" which symbolises the Milky Way center represented by the Goddess Hathor who is a stylized figure of the Milky Way on the so9uthern hemisphere.

    In the myth an egg was laid upon this mound by a celestial bird. The egg contained Ra. In the original version of this variant, the egg is laid by a cosmic goose (it is not explained where the goose originates). However, after the rise of the cult of Thoth, the egg was said to have been a gift from Thoth, and laid by an Ibis, the bird with which he was associated".

    The Egyptian use of Egg and Bird is a natural way of decribing both the eternal creation and where it takes place, namely in the Sky.

    4) Lotus Variant
    "Later, when Atum had become assimilated into Ra as Atum-Ra, the belief that Atum emerged from a (blue) lotus bud, in the Ennead cosmogeny, was adopted and attached to Ra. The lotus was said to have arisen from the waters after the explosive interaction as a bud, which floated on the surface, and slowly opened its petals to reveal the beetle, Khepri, inside. Khepri, an aspect of Ra representing the rising sun, immediately turns into a weeping boy - Nefertum (young Atum), whose tears form the creatures of the earth.

    The assimilation between Ra and Atum-Ra constitutes a huge scholarly discussion. Ra is usually iinterpreted as the Sun in our Solar System, but Atum-Ra belongs to the prime forces of creation long before even the Solar System was formed, so we have to differ between Atum-Ra of the Milky Way and Ra as representing the Sun. Kephri, the beetle, is another Egyptian natural symbol of eternal creation.

    In later Egyptian history, as the god Khepri became totally absorbed into Ra, the lotus was said to have revealed Ra, the boy, rather than Ra being Khepri temporarily. Sometimes the boy is identified as Horus, although this is due to the merging of the myths of Horus and Ra into the one god Ra-Herakty, later in Egyptian history".

    ----------------
    When studying Comparative Mythology, it is obvious to me that scholars have huge difficulties with interpreting the numerous Stories of Creation. So what is really described in these sentenses?

    I don´t think the story deals with the creation of the entire Universe, because of the "eternity statements" which points towards a cyclical formation and creation in the Universe. If the story deals with the creation of our Solar System, indicated by the scholarly interpretation of Ra =The Sun, why is it then that the Milky Way is mentioned and symbolized with the goddess Hathor?

    if taking the informations seriously, we have to make the connection between the pre-conditions of the creation and what really is created initially and this cannot be The Sun. It isn´t the Sun which "creates everything" in the ancient known part of the Universe, which apperently includes the Milky Way and everything in it.

    The Standard Explanation of the Solar System formation.
    The Solar System is assumed to been made in a local cloud of gas and dust which coalesked via "gravity" into the pre-solar sphere until the pressure was to big and the Sun exploded into small bits and pieces which again via "gravity" coalesked into planets.

    Despite of the Solar System location in the Milky Way, modern cosmology don´t consciously connect the formation with the formation and motion in the Milky Way. Modern science assumes the Sun to hold the "gravitaitional center" because of the orbiting planets but they don´t make the same assumptions/conclusions regarding the center of the Milky Way around which the entire Solar System is orbiting. In this way modern science misses the real explanation of the Solar System formation.

    The Egyptian (and the entire cultural mythology) explanation of the Solar System formation.
    As noted above, the Egyptian Story of Creation deals with the pre-conditions and factual creation of the Milky Way and it´s central Light of Creation, named Atum-Ra, from where "all things is created in the Milky Way". Here the Egeyptians, as with all other cultural stories of creation, locate the creation in the Milky Way center from where everythhing is created, and this of course includes our Solar System.

    So how is it that our Solar System now is located some 26.000 ly from the Milky Way center? One can somewhat provoking say it is because the Solar System just follows the observed rotation curve in the Milky Way which surprised the sceintists who then thought that with this the orbital velocity, the stars would be slung away from the galaxy - and then they invented "dark matter" to hold the stars inside the Milky Way.

    In fact, the formative motion in the Milky Way REALLY goes from within the center and OUTWARDS in the galactic surroundings and there is nothing "dark matter" can do about this fact. This is an observable and scientific fact. This also confirms the Egeyptian explanation of the formation via Atum-Ra, the initial Central Light, from where everything was created in the Milky Way. And it furthermore confirms the biblical telling of the "expulsion from the central Garden of Eden", where the biblical creation intially was described.

    I notised above that sholars have huge difficulties with interpreting the ancient myts of creation. They conflate the central Milky Way Light with the Sun; the conflate the crescent Milky Way symbol for the Moon and they conflate the Earth axis Polar Wheel with the "Sun-Wheel" - all because of excluding the Milky Way from the myths and because of lack of astronomical obsevations in realtime on the night Sky.

    Just think of it: It is scholarly interpreted of myths by most academics that "The Sun is transported over the Sky by a Ship or drawn by a Horse"! How on Earth can anyone imagine such a scenario by watching the Sun? The fact is that the mythical Ship is connected to the Milky Way as a stylized and crescent figure - and the Wheel and Horse represents the Earth´ celestial axis of rotation and the Horse represents a star constellation close to the celestial pole area.

    General remarks
    I know from discussions in other topics here on Religioius Forum how diffiicult it can be for some "consensus persons" to take in such a huge alternative mouthfull of informations. To you in concern, I can inform and comfort you that it has taken me about 35 years to grasp - and it STILL provides me more informations all the time.

    I claim our ancient ancestors to have had a very genuine information and knowledge of the Creation in the Milky Way and of our Solar System, NOT as specific as in some cases with modern science, but with a better overall explanation compared to modern cosmology - and this also goes for the discussion of the formation in the Universe where our ancestors claimed it to be an eternal and cyclical process.

    Well here we go then :) What are your thoughts about this?
     
  2. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    2,951
    Ratings:
    +2,065
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    More bilge. :rolleyes:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Libertarian Capitalist Atheist Bokononist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    141,638
    Ratings:
    +38,207
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    It's imaginative interpretation of vague stories so
    as to comport with modern scientific thought.
    What cannot be disproven by this method?
     
  4. Altfish

    Altfish Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    6,502
    Ratings:
    +5,336
    Religion:
    Humanist
    It is very simple. The stories are just that...stories.
    They were explanations for things that ancient cultures could not explain. What is the sun? What is the moon? What are the stars? What is an eclipse? Why are we here? Why do people get ill? etc. etc.
     
  5. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,411
    Ratings:
    +3,363
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    I see no reason to correlate these stories with science, since they were never intended to illuminate the ACTUAL means and methods of creation, but were instead intended to illuminate the nature of existence as we currently experience and interpret it. It's like trying to measure a sunset with a ruler. Not only is it a silly thing to do, it's also pointless, as it will reveal nothing of any importance.
     
  6. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    For the time being, I could have a similar level of qualitative reply in a Facebook comment :)
     
  7. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,051
    Ratings:
    +2,110
    "Can they possibly be interpreted into modern terms and give some modern scientific sense"

    Obviously not due to morphology.
     
  8. PureX

    PureX Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    10,411
    Ratings:
    +3,363
    Religion:
    Philosophical Taoist/Christian
    Of course, it's all the same people.
     
  9. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,051
    Ratings:
    +2,110
    "They were explanations for things that ancient cultures could not explain."

    So they are early science? So the bible actually is a science text but outdated? I certainly know factually that creationista insist the bible is science facts.
     
  10. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    How do you define morphology?
     
  11. Altfish

    Altfish Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    6,502
    Ratings:
    +5,336
    Religion:
    Humanist
    The equivalent of science I would accept. But science is structured and has ways of verifying ideas. There was no such systemic method. Just 'ideas' that were banded about and some were written down and became legend.
     
  12. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    Shouldn´t we expect some deeper and thoughtfull discussions here on Religious Forum? Or can´t we?
     
    #12 Native, Feb 10, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2019
  13. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    Except that I´m NOT a creationist. I´m working with Comparative Mythology as well with the observations from modern cosmology and I have NO troubles comparing ancient and modern knowledge.
     
  14. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,051
    Ratings:
    +2,110
    In linguistics, morphology (/mɔːrˈfɒlədʒi/[1]) is the study of words, how they are formed, and their relationship to other words in the same language.[2][3] It analyzes the structure of words and parts of words, such as stems, root words, prefixes, and suffixes. Morphology also looks at parts of speech, intonation and stress, and the ways context can change a word's pronunciation and meaning. Morphology differs from morphological typology, which is the classification of languages based on their use of words,[4] and lexicology, which is the study of words and how they make up a language's vocabulary.[5

    The problem arrises of bias. Certainly theology has explored and attempted to deal with morphology but it really cant because we are dealing with a particular region of the brain scientifically self labeled "higher functioning." that too is a false, subjective, non scientific bias of that region of the brain.
     
  15. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    Oh yes but there as systemic method. I´ts called Comparative Mythology and Comparative Religion.
     
  16. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    @David T,
    Thanks for the elaborated definition :)
    Would you say that bias governs the very similar cultural Stories of Creation from all over the World?
     
  17. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,051
    Ratings:
    +2,110
    You distinguish by WHAT is understood.I am saying i see no differnce between you and creationism in HOW you both understand. Certainly a creationist would point to their differences of what they understand as distinguishing characteristics. And thats exactly what you said as well.
     
  18. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,051
    Ratings:
    +2,110
    Now the conversation gets really interesting native! I mean suddenly we have to start talking about consciousness. The problem with that discussion like talking about neurology is that conciousness is in the conversation as we attempt to create an un biased perspepctive of consciousness.

    Some one here had to point out they had a phd in anthropology study of religion. I said i have a phd in in the study of anthropology study of religion and we as a group have concluded that the whole anthropology group behave in rather predictible pavlovian like behavior. They write papers and get treats like tenure, and professor, positions!.

    So back to your question. Yes but we are talking about sub concious and unconscious aspects that are not "scientifically" accessible other than simplistic observations. We can observe it but do we understand it? I just point to religion and laugh because the answer is obvious. No.
     
  19. Ponder This

    Ponder This Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2014
    Messages:
    975
    Ratings:
    +274
    Religion:
    i am not
    I think that the modern bias is that ancient people were weren't as smart because they didn't have access to modern technology.

    We are constantly viewing older information through the obfuscating lens of our own modern perspective.

    But supposing that ancient people really understood, through their Creation Myths, genuine realities that we take for granted from our modern "scientific" perspective. What significance is that? I suppose that, generally speaking, people have an interest in their origins.
     
  20. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,503
    Ratings:
    +176
    Religion:
    Shamanism
    Ok I follow you, But then we have to extend the concept of consciousness to an Universal level and ponder over the possibility for the human "electrical mind" to correspond with the electric energies in cosmos which contains informations of the creation.
     
Loading...