@Robert Tulip,
Thanks for your reply. (It seem that we timely “cross-posted” our last replies and if you wish to have a reply on some specific issues, just let me know.)
- When reading of myths from a culture with a long period of mythological telling, I´m quite sure you too are aware of the fact that we see a lot of overlapping deities throughout the different cultural periods. Sometimes one are left to nothing else than to simply compare the deity qualities and their attributes and if finding a lot of similarities, one can assume that we are talking of a younger deity taking over the mythological telling and qualities from an older deity – just like it is said and written about Isis taking over the role of Hathor. And when Hathor is clearly connected to the Milky Way, Isis logically also must have this primary Milky Way connection.
Regarding Isis
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis#Depictions
“In art, originally Isis was pictured as a woman wearing a long sheath dress and crowned with the hieroglyphic sign for a throne. Sometimes she was depicted as holding a lotus, or, as a Sycamore tree. One pharaoh, Thutmose III, was depicted in his tomb as nursing from a sycamore tree that had a breast.
After she assimilated many of the roles of Hathor, Isis's headdress is replaced with that of Hathor: the horns of a cow on her head, with the solar disk between them. Sometimes she also was represented as a cow, or a cow's head. Usually, however, she was depicted with her young child, Horus (the pharaoh), with a crown, and a vulture. Occasionally she was represented as a kite flying above the body of Osiris or with the dead Osiris across her lap as she worked her magic to bring him back to life.
Most often Isis is seen holding only the generic ankh sign and a simple staff, but in late images she is seen sometimes with items usually associated only with Hathor, the sacred sistrum rattle and the fertility-bearing menat necklace. In “The Book of Coming Forth By Day” Isis is depicted standing on the prow of the Solar Bark with her arms outstretched”.
(AD: I´m not sure that we here are talking of a “Solar Bark” because if Isis is connected to the Milky Way, these mythical ships represents the Crescent Milky Way half hemisphere contours with a radiant light symbolized as a star in the middle of the ship. Read also: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Turkey#Le ... ry_origin)
The Primordial Mound
The 4 primordial elements/deities in the telling of the creation story are of course ALL in play when it comes to the formation of the Primordial Mound in the Milky Way centre, and therefore ALL the 4 elementary deities are connected to this mound as described below.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogdoad
“The eight deities were arranged in four female-male pairs: Naunet and Nu, Amaunet and Amun, Kauket and Kuk, Hauhet and Huh. The females were associated with snakes and the males were associated with frogs. Apart from their gender, there was little to distinguish the female goddess from the male god in a pair; indeed, the names of the females are merely the female forms of the male name and vice versa. Essentially, each pair represents the female and male aspect of one of four concepts, namely the primordial waters (Naunet and Nu), air or invisibility (Amunet and Amun), darkness (Kauket and Kuk), and eternity or infinite space (Hauhet and Huh).
Together the four concepts represent the primal, fundamental state of the beginning, they are what always were. 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 deities, created all other things”.
AD: The 4 basically deity elements having both male and female deity qualities, interacts in the swirling formation process in the Milky Way centre and thereby the physical formation takes place, “forming everything” out form the Milky Way centre, inclusive the first major deities belonging to the contours of the Milky Way itself, the Great Goddess belonging to the southern hemisphere and the Great God belonging to the northern hemisphere. http://www.native-science.net/Forefather.Worship.htm
- The last sentence above the AD is very interesting indeed: “When the entity (in the Milky Way centre creation. Native) opened; it revealed Ra, the fiery sun, inside. After a long interval of rest, Ra, together with the other deities, created all other things”.
It really states that the first creation is RA, “as the fiery Sun”. That is: RA represents the mytheme of the First Light of the Milky Way because this telling deals with the creation of the First and glorious Light on/in the Primordial Mound, the luminous Milky Way centre – long time before the creation of the solar system. Therefore RA is very likely not a “sun-god” but a Milky Way god.
- In the scholarly interpretation, this light mytheme is confused because the scholars for some reason or another ignore/fails to connect the right mythological telling with the right cosmological object. Knowing nothing or very little of the Milky Way creation, some scholars confuse the supreme Milky Way First Light of the Primordial Mound with the light of the Sun which of course gives a mythological and cosmological distorted telling that lacks logics.
Nebulae or Milky Way formation
The mythological telling of the Creation states an expulsion AWAY from the central Garden of Eden.
Regarding your thoughts of the formation of the sun/solar system out from local nebulae instead out from the Milky Way centre, the solar system is a rotating part in the Milky Way and is therefore connected to the general formation in the Milky Way. Modern cosmologists are claiming that everything in our galaxy is drawn into the centre of the Milky Way by a huge contractive force – but the stories of creation states the opposite motion: That everything was created in the “garden of Eden” and the telling of “the expulsion from the Garden of Eden” describes that everything is created in the Milky Way centre and leaving this centre, everything is moved out in the galactic surroundings in the Milky Way winged disc.
- This outgoing motion in our Milky Way galaxy instead of the cosmological/scientifically inwards attraction consensus is the reason for the cosmological/scientifically “galactic rotation anomaly” that contradicts and discard the Newtonian laws of gravity regarding the hypothesis motion of celestial bodies around gravity centre.
That is: The motion in our galaxy contradicts the Newtonian hypothesis and the actual motion around the Milky Way centre confirms the mythological telling of an outgoing motion, “out of the central Garden of Eden”. This creation story of course also deals with the creation of our solar system out from the Milky Way galaxy centre instead of the modern scientific telling of local nebulae separate formation.
If not already read from my linking above, you can find more Mytho-Cosmological explanations in my 2 combining articles here: http://vixra.org/author/Ivar_Nielsen
Cheers Native
-
In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 813 on Mon Apr 15, 2024 11:52 pm
Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
- Attachments
-
- The 2 hemisphere Milky Way Crescent contours also represents the Male and Female Heavenly Ships.
(The Milky Way crescent is also confused as being the Moon Crescent) - Milky Way Explanation.jpg (149.87 KiB) Viewed 11418 times
- The 2 hemisphere Milky Way Crescent contours also represents the Male and Female Heavenly Ships.
- FTL99
-
Float like a butterfly, post like a bee!
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:32 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 57 times
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
Wikipedia is just not very reliable when anyone can go in there to edit and add whatever personal pet project or obsession they want and then quote it on their website to make it appear that their claims are supported when, in fact, they are not. Christians do this quite often or they'll remove evidence that proves them wrong.
Milky way myths are significant but not as primary as are solar/lunar mythology. Milky way myths do not give us the 12+12 24 hour day cycle, the average 28 day lunar monthly cycle, the 365 ish day yearly solar cycle, the four seasons, the solstices, equinoxes etc. The ancients recognized these cycles and created very important myths about them and passed the information along to the next generation. Calendars are solar &/or lunar based.
We wouldn't have a problem supporting Native's website on milky way myths AFTER all the false claims are removed. Until then, we cannot. I have already pointed out as just one example that the Trundholm sun chariot claim of symbolizing the milky way is utterly false but, Native completely omitted it and got mad at me for pointing out the obvious instead. I pointed out that it should be taken as constructive criticism. The Trundholm sun chariot claim is just one utterly false claim among many on Native/Ivar Nielsen's website. If Native/Ivar Nielsen were more open to accuracy and substantiating claims with valid evidence we'd get along fine but, he insists on making wild claims that are known to be false and then attempting to force them and his dreams down our throats. It appears that even small children understand solar mythology just goto youtube and look for "Teletubbies sun baby" video clips.
Robert, thanks for your great post above, however, I was hoping that Native would've provided us with his very own knowledge of milky way myths that exist throughout Christianity, or any other major modern religion for that matter, to see what he really knew for himself without help. I still don't think Native/Ivar Nielsen understands the point of Acharya's work at all - probably because he has never actually read it. I suppose that needs to be thoroughly explained to him.
Milky way myths are significant but not as primary as are solar/lunar mythology. Milky way myths do not give us the 12+12 24 hour day cycle, the average 28 day lunar monthly cycle, the 365 ish day yearly solar cycle, the four seasons, the solstices, equinoxes etc. The ancients recognized these cycles and created very important myths about them and passed the information along to the next generation. Calendars are solar &/or lunar based.
We wouldn't have a problem supporting Native's website on milky way myths AFTER all the false claims are removed. Until then, we cannot. I have already pointed out as just one example that the Trundholm sun chariot claim of symbolizing the milky way is utterly false but, Native completely omitted it and got mad at me for pointing out the obvious instead. I pointed out that it should be taken as constructive criticism. The Trundholm sun chariot claim is just one utterly false claim among many on Native/Ivar Nielsen's website. If Native/Ivar Nielsen were more open to accuracy and substantiating claims with valid evidence we'd get along fine but, he insists on making wild claims that are known to be false and then attempting to force them and his dreams down our throats. It appears that even small children understand solar mythology just goto youtube and look for "Teletubbies sun baby" video clips.
Robert, thanks for your great post above, however, I was hoping that Native would've provided us with his very own knowledge of milky way myths that exist throughout Christianity, or any other major modern religion for that matter, to see what he really knew for himself without help. I still don't think Native/Ivar Nielsen understands the point of Acharya's work at all - probably because he has never actually read it. I suppose that needs to be thoroughly explained to him.
"In the field of comparative religion and mythology, we have focused largely on the most obvious and widespread practices, which are significantly solar and lunar. The solar mythology itself is so extensive and vast, in a enormous variety of languages dating back thousands of years, that it will take many years just to catalogue it all. The same can be said of the moon, as well as planets, stars and constellations, etc. There is a good-sized body of literature also about the planets Venus and Saturn, for example, as well as the "Seven Sisters" or Pleiades, which are now seen as six. All of these subjects are fascinating in their own right.
However, the most obvious and visible "lights in the sky" that drew the most prominent attention of the majority of ancient cultures are the sun and moon. These two celestial bodies are so obvious and prominent that they have affected a huge percentage of humanity - a very basic understanding even a child could fathom. Indeed, much of humanity follows a cult that falls within the solar and/or lunar category: Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism are largely solar, although they incorporate the moon as well; Judaism and Islam are largely lunar, although they have some solar symbolism.
I am interested in other aspects of astromythology or astrotheology, giving them the same degree of attention, more or less, that they were given by the ancients. Again, depending on the location and era, the ancients themselves were mainly focused on the sun and the moon. They created entire cultures based significantly on these celestial bodies, such as the Egyptian and the Inca, two of the most obviously solar cultures. There's no mystery here that these cultures were mainly SOLAR. Hence, we study the mythology of the sun when discussing these cultures.
I see other aspects of astral mythology such as the Pleiades, Venus, Saturn, Sirius, Orion or the Milky Way as secondary adjuncts, as did most of the ancient cultures. Again, they are interesting in and of their own right, but they are not more important than the sun and moon, which played the central role in most of these cults.
If someone wants to share research with me in a professional manner, I am always open to it. However, I am not interested in responding to those who approach in a hostile, obnoxious, disrespectful and antisocial manner. Nor can I consider seriously the efforts of those who cannot grasp the simple concepts I have outlined above."
- Acharya S
- Robert Tulip
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6502
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
- 18
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 2721 times
- Been thanked: 2665 times
- Contact:
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
It looked to me like Native wrote the Milky Way material in the Hathor and Ogdoad wikipedia pages. They line up with Native's views but not with any other sources I have seen.
- FTL99
-
Float like a butterfly, post like a bee!
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:32 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 57 times
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
I thought so too. It's sad and frustrating because when a mythicist does that it really reflects poorly upon the reliability and credibility of all mythicists. No matter how wrong it is critics will perform the broad stroke generalization of putting all mythicists into that dishonest camp and ruin it for us all. It simply gives WMD ammo to the critics of mythology. It makes our job so much more difficult to regain credibility. The integrity and character of mythicists needs to be outstanding in order to convince academia and the general public of the case for mythicism.
I was actually hoping Robert would've proven my suspicions false. I'm really disappointed as I was hoping it wasn't true.
I was actually hoping Robert would've proven my suspicions false. I'm really disappointed as I was hoping it wasn't true.
Robert Tulip wrote:It looked to me like Native wrote the Milky Way material in the Hathor and Ogdoad wikipedia pages. They line up with Native's views but not with any other sources I have seen.
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
Freethinkaluva22,
Just note this: I don´t claim to have some arguments removed here or otherwhere if I don´t agree on the context, because this is only up to the authors themselves to judge if one meets better and more logical argumentation and explanations on a certain issue.
The very same would be a polite thing for you to do.
If you are so clever on the Trundholm Wagon subject, you perhaps could give me a mythological/scientifical/logical explanation how anyone can depict the sun being drawn in the daytime sky of a horse and make a myth out of it? Don´t give me any link to someone, but give me your own logical explanation, please.
- Otherwise I am stunned that a Forum moderator can argue in these terms:
Freethinkaluva22 wrote:
If Native/Ivar Nielsen were more open to accuracy and substantiating claims with valid evidence we'd get along fine but, he insists on making wild claims that are known to be false and then attempting to force them and his dreams down our throats. It would seem that even small children understand solar mythology just goto youtube and look for "Teletubbies sun baby" video clips.
AD: I really don´t omitt any questions or critique, but in your case I can´t stand your unpleasent method and personal judging tone, and I refuse the very idea of you asking me to remove anything from my website just because you think different. So that´s why I prefere to ignore you as much as possible until you changes your attitude.
Question: Have you had any personal out-of-body-visions? If you have, why do you devalue mine? If you haven´t, how can you then judge the content and meaning of mine?
- And how can you judge anything to be wrong in the Milky Way Mythology, if you "only" are an expert on solar/lunar mythology?
- I have no troubles understanding the solar or lunar ideas at all but my approach to mythology is focused on the Milky Way Mythology and the Stories of Creation and so be it.
As stated several times before: Give me some logical arguments on any cases if there is something that you don´t agree on - instead of your upleasant approaches that is discusting.
Pay some respect on my ideas before dealing with them, please.
Maybe then I´ll take you serious.
Just note this: I don´t claim to have some arguments removed here or otherwhere if I don´t agree on the context, because this is only up to the authors themselves to judge if one meets better and more logical argumentation and explanations on a certain issue.
The very same would be a polite thing for you to do.
If you are so clever on the Trundholm Wagon subject, you perhaps could give me a mythological/scientifical/logical explanation how anyone can depict the sun being drawn in the daytime sky of a horse and make a myth out of it? Don´t give me any link to someone, but give me your own logical explanation, please.
- Otherwise I am stunned that a Forum moderator can argue in these terms:
Freethinkaluva22 wrote:
If Native/Ivar Nielsen were more open to accuracy and substantiating claims with valid evidence we'd get along fine but, he insists on making wild claims that are known to be false and then attempting to force them and his dreams down our throats. It would seem that even small children understand solar mythology just goto youtube and look for "Teletubbies sun baby" video clips.
AD: I really don´t omitt any questions or critique, but in your case I can´t stand your unpleasent method and personal judging tone, and I refuse the very idea of you asking me to remove anything from my website just because you think different. So that´s why I prefere to ignore you as much as possible until you changes your attitude.
Question: Have you had any personal out-of-body-visions? If you have, why do you devalue mine? If you haven´t, how can you then judge the content and meaning of mine?
- And how can you judge anything to be wrong in the Milky Way Mythology, if you "only" are an expert on solar/lunar mythology?
- I have no troubles understanding the solar or lunar ideas at all but my approach to mythology is focused on the Milky Way Mythology and the Stories of Creation and so be it.
As stated several times before: Give me some logical arguments on any cases if there is something that you don´t agree on - instead of your upleasant approaches that is discusting.
Pay some respect on my ideas before dealing with them, please.
Maybe then I´ll take you serious.
FTL99 wrote:Wikipedia is just not very reliable when anyone can go in there to edit and add whatever personal pet project or obsession they want and then quote it on their website to make it appear that their claims are supported when, in fact, they are not. Christians do this quite often or they'll remove evidence that proves them wrong.
Milky way myths are significant but not as primary as are solar/lunar mythology. Milky way myths do not give us the 12+12 24 hour day cycle, the average 28 day lunar monthly cycle, the 365 ish day yearly solar cycle, the four seasons, the solstices, equinoxes etc. The ancients recognized these cycles and created very important myths about them and passed the information along to the next generation. Calendars are solar &/or lunar based.
We wouldn't have a problem supporting Native's website on milky way myths AFTER all the false claims are removed. Until then, we cannot. I have already pointed out as just one example that the Trundholm sun chariot claim of symbolizing the milky way is utterly false but, Native completely omitted it and got mad at me for pointing out the obvious instead. I pointed out that it should be taken as constructive criticism. The Trundholm sun chariot claim is just one utterly false claim among many on Native/Ivar Nielsen's website. If Native/Ivar Nielsen were more open to accuracy and substantiating claims with valid evidence we'd get along fine but, he insists on making wild claims that are known to be false and then attempting to force them and his dreams down our throats. It appears that even small children understand solar mythology just goto youtube and look for "Teletubbies sun baby" video clips.
Robert, thanks for your great post above, however, I was hoping that Native would've provided us with his very own knowledge of milky way myths that exist throughout Christianity, or any other major modern religion for that matter, to see what he really knew for himself without help. I still don't think Native/Ivar Nielsen understands the point of Acharya's work at all - probably because he has never actually read it. I suppose that needs to be thoroughly explained to him.
"In the field of comparative religion and mythology, we have focused largely on the most obvious and widespread practices, which are significantly solar and lunar. The solar mythology itself is so extensive and vast, in a enormous variety of languages dating back thousands of years, that it will take many years just to catalogue it all. The same can be said of the moon, as well as planets, stars and constellations, etc. There is a good-sized body of literature also about the planets Venus and Saturn, for example, as well as the "Seven Sisters" or Pleiades, which are now seen as six. All of these subjects are fascinating in their own right.
However, the most obvious and visible "lights in the sky" that drew the most prominent attention of the majority of ancient cultures are the sun and moon. These two celestial bodies are so obvious and prominent that they have affected a huge percentage of humanity - a very basic understanding even a child could fathom. Indeed, much of humanity follows a cult that falls within the solar and/or lunar category: Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism are largely solar, although they incorporate the moon as well; Judaism and Islam are largely lunar, although they have some solar symbolism.
I am interested in other aspects of astromythology or astrotheology, giving them the same degree of attention, more or less, that they were given by the ancients. Again, depending on the location and era, the ancients themselves were mainly focused on the sun and the moon. They created entire cultures based significantly on these celestial bodies, such as the Egyptian and the Inca, two of the most obviously solar cultures. There's no mystery here that these cultures were mainly SOLAR. Hence, we study the mythology of the sun when discussing these cultures.
I see other aspects of astral mythology such as the Pleiades, Venus, Saturn, Sirius, Orion or the Milky Way as secondary adjuncts, as did most of the ancient cultures. Again, they are interesting in and of their own right, but they are not more important than the sun and moon, which played the central role in most of these cults.
If someone wants to share research with me in a professional manner, I am always open to it. However, I am not interested in responding to those who approach in a hostile, obnoxious, disrespectful and antisocial manner. Nor can I consider seriously the efforts of those who cannot grasp the simple concepts I have outlined above."
- Acharya S
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
@Robert Tulip,Robert Tulip wrote:It looked to me like Native wrote the Milky Way material in the Hathor and Ogdoad wikipedia pages. They line up with Native's views but not with any other sources I have seen.
You are wrong in assuming me to be the Wikipedia author in this or other cases, because I´ve never have written anything on Wikipedia, but thanks for the credit anyway.
- I don´t understand if you haven´t seen any other sources with the same context that I posted above!?
Just make a google search on "Ogdoad+Mythology" and you´ll find a lots of links (133.000 results) that more or less describes and confirms my posted context on the matter of Stories of Creation and the supreme primordial/elementary and Milky Way deities.
Cheers Native
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
@FTL99,
- Now when proving both Robert and you wrong regarding the Wikipedia text on Ogdoad, you´ll politely of course offer me an apology for the wrong claims and suggestion, right?
- And in the future you´ll of course respect me for having my very own ideas and explanations that apparently correspond with other official texts, right?
AD:I don´t care of what you "don´t think" or what you "probably" states at all. Just as you don´t care how many times I write that I am recieving the Freethoughtnation Newsletters and read everything with great interests, you still say that I don´t.Robert, thanks for your great post above, however, I was hoping that Native would've provided us with his very own knowledge of milky way myths that exist throughout Christianity, or any other major modern religion for that matter, to see what he really knew for himself without help. I still don't think Native/Ivar Nielsen understands the point of Acharya's work at all - probably because he has never actually read it. I suppose that needs to be thoroughly explained to him.
- Now when proving both Robert and you wrong regarding the Wikipedia text on Ogdoad, you´ll politely of course offer me an apology for the wrong claims and suggestion, right?
- And in the future you´ll of course respect me for having my very own ideas and explanations that apparently correspond with other official texts, right?
- Robert Tulip
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6502
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
- 18
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 2721 times
- Been thanked: 2665 times
- Contact:
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
Native, if you provide independent evidence I am open to being convinced. It is just that I have not seen any independent evidence to back your claims around Hathor and Isis being Milky Way Goddesses, or that the primeval mound refers to the Milky Way. These claims are not mentioned in books I have read about ancient Egypt, but I may have missed it. The Wikipedia entries do not provide sources.
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
@Robert,
You wrote:
“Hathor had a complex relationship with Ra, in one myth she is his eye and considered his daughter but later, when Ra assumes the role of Horus with respect to Kingship, she is considered Ra's mother. She absorbed this role from another cow goddess 'Mht wrt' ("Great flood") who was the mother of Ra in a creation myth and carried him between her horns. As a mother she gave birth to Ra each morning on the eastern horizon and as wife she conceives through union with him each day”.
“Hathor, along with the goddess Nut, was associated with the Milky Way during the third millennium B.C. when, during the fall and spring equinoxes, it aligned over and touched the earth where the sun rose and fell. The four legs of the celestial cow represented Nut or Hathor could, in one account, be seen as the pillars on which the sky was supported with the stars on their bellies constituting the Milky Way on which the solar barque of Ra, representing the sun, sailed”.
“An alternate name for Hathor, which persisted for 3,000 years, was Mehturt (also spelt Mehurt, Mehet-Weret, and Mehet-uret), meaning “great flood”, a direct reference to her being the Milky Way. The Milky Way was seen as a waterway in the heavens, sailed upon by both the sun deity and the moon, leading the ancient Egyptians to describe it as The Nile in the Sky”.
AD: This should be very clear: Hathor, and Nut, are directly connected to the Milky Way; Ra in his “boat of millions of years” is also directly connected to the Milky Way and not to the Sun as such.
I can elaborate more on the logics and mythical implications in this text if you like.
- But if you judge Wikipedia as a dependence source that cannot be taken seriously et all, read the links below which more or less states the very same.
On Hathor:
Read “Gods of the Egyptians”, by E. A. T. Wallis Budge. Page 428
Online Link: books.google.dk/books?id=coxXaPPoBUUC&a ... mp;f=false
And: http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/hathor.html
Google and read results for “Hathor+Milky Way”.
On Isis:
experiencefestival.com/a/Isis_-_Mytholo ... /id/593822
Google and read the results for "Isis+Hathor+assimilation"
The logics of the Isis-Hathor assimilation: When Hathor being a Milky Way goddess and Isis culturally assimilates/overtakes the qualities; attributes and the connected mythological telling of Hathor in large, it is of course very logically also to connect Isis to the Milky Way – and to the creation story of the Milky Way itself.
- It is then on the first physical creation of the “Primordial Mound”, in the Milky Way centre, that Hathor/Isis /Mary/Neith/Nut - or other comparative goddesses – gives birth to the luminous Milky Way light of Ra, also mentioned as “The First Light”; The Enclosed Light”, created from the Ogdoad 4 (8) basical elementary deities. Ra is then logically the light of the Milky Way and not the light of the Sun which logically enough is created some time after the creation of the Primordial Mound.
In any myths of Creation that describes a “forthcoming land” or “soil being pushed up from the waters” or "man being created out of clay" etc. etc. this is connected to the creation of the Primordial Mound and to the Milky Way because this creation is started off by the 4 (8) Ogdoad elementary deities that created the first physically creator deities belonging to the Milky Way luminous centre.
The first physical creating is RA emerging as the radiant light of the Milky Way; then creating the 2 half hemisphere “lunar-like-crescent” stylized figures/creators of the vaulting Milky Way, and lastly creating the full Milky Way contour of the "Heavenly Serpent" or the full "Milky Way River" that give origin for the “Flood Myths” all over the world. (Not because of any sin – but just because the river runs in the heaven clearly observable all around the Earth).
Google and read also "Emergence Myths" and "Milky Way Myths"
Cheers Native
You wrote:
From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hathor#Relationsh ... nd_symbolsRobert Tulip wrote:Native, if you provide independent evidence I am open to being convinced. It is just that I have not seen any independent evidence to back your claims around Hathor and Isis being Milky Way Goddesses, or that the primeval mound refers to the Milky Way. These claims are not mentioned in books I have read about ancient Egypt, but I may have missed it. The Wikipedia entries do not provide sources.
“Hathor had a complex relationship with Ra, in one myth she is his eye and considered his daughter but later, when Ra assumes the role of Horus with respect to Kingship, she is considered Ra's mother. She absorbed this role from another cow goddess 'Mht wrt' ("Great flood") who was the mother of Ra in a creation myth and carried him between her horns. As a mother she gave birth to Ra each morning on the eastern horizon and as wife she conceives through union with him each day”.
“Hathor, along with the goddess Nut, was associated with the Milky Way during the third millennium B.C. when, during the fall and spring equinoxes, it aligned over and touched the earth where the sun rose and fell. The four legs of the celestial cow represented Nut or Hathor could, in one account, be seen as the pillars on which the sky was supported with the stars on their bellies constituting the Milky Way on which the solar barque of Ra, representing the sun, sailed”.
“An alternate name for Hathor, which persisted for 3,000 years, was Mehturt (also spelt Mehurt, Mehet-Weret, and Mehet-uret), meaning “great flood”, a direct reference to her being the Milky Way. The Milky Way was seen as a waterway in the heavens, sailed upon by both the sun deity and the moon, leading the ancient Egyptians to describe it as The Nile in the Sky”.
AD: This should be very clear: Hathor, and Nut, are directly connected to the Milky Way; Ra in his “boat of millions of years” is also directly connected to the Milky Way and not to the Sun as such.
I can elaborate more on the logics and mythical implications in this text if you like.
- But if you judge Wikipedia as a dependence source that cannot be taken seriously et all, read the links below which more or less states the very same.
On Hathor:
Read “Gods of the Egyptians”, by E. A. T. Wallis Budge. Page 428
Online Link: books.google.dk/books?id=coxXaPPoBUUC&a ... mp;f=false
And: http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/hathor.html
Google and read results for “Hathor+Milky Way”.
On Isis:
experiencefestival.com/a/Isis_-_Mytholo ... /id/593822
Google and read the results for "Isis+Hathor+assimilation"
The logics of the Isis-Hathor assimilation: When Hathor being a Milky Way goddess and Isis culturally assimilates/overtakes the qualities; attributes and the connected mythological telling of Hathor in large, it is of course very logically also to connect Isis to the Milky Way – and to the creation story of the Milky Way itself.
- It is then on the first physical creation of the “Primordial Mound”, in the Milky Way centre, that Hathor/Isis /Mary/Neith/Nut - or other comparative goddesses – gives birth to the luminous Milky Way light of Ra, also mentioned as “The First Light”; The Enclosed Light”, created from the Ogdoad 4 (8) basical elementary deities. Ra is then logically the light of the Milky Way and not the light of the Sun which logically enough is created some time after the creation of the Primordial Mound.
In any myths of Creation that describes a “forthcoming land” or “soil being pushed up from the waters” or "man being created out of clay" etc. etc. this is connected to the creation of the Primordial Mound and to the Milky Way because this creation is started off by the 4 (8) Ogdoad elementary deities that created the first physically creator deities belonging to the Milky Way luminous centre.
The first physical creating is RA emerging as the radiant light of the Milky Way; then creating the 2 half hemisphere “lunar-like-crescent” stylized figures/creators of the vaulting Milky Way, and lastly creating the full Milky Way contour of the "Heavenly Serpent" or the full "Milky Way River" that give origin for the “Flood Myths” all over the world. (Not because of any sin – but just because the river runs in the heaven clearly observable all around the Earth).
Google and read also "Emergence Myths" and "Milky Way Myths"
Cheers Native
- tat tvam asi
-
Reading Addict
- Posts: 1367
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
- 14
- Location: Florida
- Has thanked: 571 times
- Been thanked: 549 times
Re: Christ in Egypt: The Virgin Isis-Mery
Hold on now, you've diverted the subject from Murdocks books to the FTN news letters, which, are not Murdocks books. FTL was saying that you have not read her books and that it shows. It does show actually. Reading the news letters does not amount to reading the actual books. And the point is that if go ahead and read the books you might understand where Murdock is coming from...Native wrote:Just as you don´t care how many times I write that I am recieving the Freethoughtnation Newsletters and read everything with great interests, you still say that I don´t.