- Myth - God - Religion - Christianity -

- Myth - God - Religion - Christianity -

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

May 26th, 2011, 4:33 pm #1


A.F. Alford, When The Gods Came Down, Hodder and Stoughton, 2000
Myth - God - Religion - Christianity


It is widely presumed that myth and religion are two different things. To the extent that religion involves a whole array of non-myth elements - a moral code, a faith in a supreme being, and an obedience to the Church - this is true. However, if we focus on the primary element in religion, the Supreme Being (or God), then religion and myth become synonymous. Indeed, the conclusion of extensive study of religion is that God is actually the personification of myth.

Huh? God the personification of myth?



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

May 26th, 2011, 4:35 pm #2


 

Myth

The idea will sound weird to manier ear, and many religious people will think that it is denigrating the Supreme Being. After all, the word "myth", in modern linguistics, is held to be synonymous with a fiction or a lie. But this is not the definition of myth. Far from it.

In fact, the word "myth" derives from the ancient Greek word "muthos", which meant simply an "utterance" or a "traditional tale". And these utterances, or traditional tales - usually concerning Gods and heroes - were generally considered to be true stories.

But in what sense can a myth be true?

For the past two centuries, mythologists have been fixated by the idea of historical truth. They have sought to understand ancient myths as poetic portrayals of events in human history. But this is a fundamental mistake.

Prior to Greek times, ancient civilisations had very little interest in history as we understand that term. Rather than seeing the past in terms of a linear history, they saw it as a repeating pattern of cycles - the day, the month, the year, the reign of the king, and the periods of the planets and stars. At the beginning of each of these cycles, the creation was renewed and time began again.

As for human beings, their machinations served only to validate this great cosmic mystery play. As Mircea Eliade writes in "The Myth of the Eternal Return":

"The past is but a prefiguration of the future. No event is irreversible and no transformation is final. In a certain sense, it is even possible to say that nothing new happens in the world, for everything is but the repetition of the same primordial archetypes; this repetition, by actualizing the mythical moment when the archetypal gesture was revealed, constantly maintains the world in the same auroral instant of the beginnings."

History and historical truth were thus alien concepts to the ancient mind. For the ancient myth-makers, truth lay rather in the primordial cosmic drama in which the Universe had been created and brought to life. The only true story in town was the myth of the genesis of the earth, the heavens, and all living things. In short, the myth of creation.


All ancient civilisations had their creation myths. The stories in the Old Testament Book of Genesis are mere reflection of much older myths that were told in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia from at least 3000 BC. Indeed, the further back we go, the more dominant the creation myth becomes - to an extent that has yet to be fully apprehended by scholars.

Behind the creation myth lies the Supreme Being, who was worshipped by the ancients under a variety of names and guises. This Great God - or indeed Goddess - was the Creator of all things, and thus the cognate of Religion in the sense that He/She bound mankind back to its origins (the word "religion" derives from the Latin religare "to bind back").

Who, or what, was this Supreme Being? In what sense was He/She the Creator of the Universe and mankind?

Put out of your mind all those images of God as an old man with a beard. Consider instead the evidence from the worlds oldest civilisations - Egypt and Mesopotamia.

Here, in the creation myths, the Great God, or Goddess, personifies the formative cosmos. He, or She, is identified with the death of the old cosmos; with the fall of the sky and the seeding of the earth; with the chaos of the primeval earth and waters; with the separation of the heavens from the earth; and with the new-born Sun, Moon, and stars. In short, the God and Goddess personify the entire myth of creation and the entire created Universe.

Here lies the key to the modern concept of God.



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

May 26th, 2011, 4:36 pm #3


 

God

As the Creator, God by definition becomes his creation. He becomes a Sun-god, a Moon-god, a star-god, a nature-god, a god of this river and that river, a god of this tribe and that tribe. But He is always much more than his visible manifestations, and he is mysteriously greater than the sum of his parts.

His pure essence is thus said to be the Divine Soul, or Spirit, or Intelligence. In this aetheric and quintessential form, God stirred himself to life, created the Universe, filled it, and surrounded it. Thus He became immortal, invisible, omniscient, and omnipresent - visible and yet invisible, closer than we can possibly conceive, and yet further away than we can possibly imagine.

So, God is not a person. Rather, he is a personification. He personifies the "true" story of the creation of the Universe. In this sense, God is the personification of myth.

Now, the ancients worshipped God under many different names and guises, since each region or city had its own local traditions. Thus in Egypt the Creator-God was known variously as Atum, Re/Ra, Khnum, Amun, Osiris, Horus, and Thoth, while in Mesopotamia He was known variously as Anu, Enlil, Enki, Utu, and Nannar. And for each God there was a corpus of myth which described how He had created the Universe.

The same went for the Goddess too, who was known in Egypt as Hathor, Isis and Neit, and in Mesopotamia as Ninharsag, Mami and Inanna. This is only to mention the most popular names.

But behind this multiplicity there was only ever One God, One Goddess, and One Creation - by definition. The ancients knew this well, and would have much to say about the modern-day bickering between the devotees of Judaeo-Christianity and Islam.

Here lies the key to the future unity of all Gods and all religions.




rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

May 26th, 2011, 4:38 pm #4


 

Religion

God did not appear with the establishment of Judaism, nor with the establishment of Islam, nor with the earlier cults of Egypt and Mesopotamia. No, as the Creator of the Universe, God existed from the beginning of time, by definition.

By knowledge of this eternal, ever-unchanging axiom, the chasm between pagan religions and modern religions can be bridged, and the scattered "truths" of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam can be reunited into the One Great Truth of the One Great God - a God who by definition cannot be the God of one tribe or the other but must be the God of all humanity.

This principle is straightforward enough, and many people intuitively will know it to be the truth.

The difficult part, though, is to resolve specific points of disagreement between the religions. For example, was Jesus Christ the Son of God, as Christianity maintains, or just another prophet, as Islam maintains?

To do this, there is only one way forward and it involves going backwards - into the past. If we can understand how religion evolved over the millennia, then we stand our best chance of reconciling the modern-day differences, deciphering the meaning of the worlds ancient religions, notably those of Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Greece.

It has become apparent (as it has to many scholars) that Judaeo-Christianity and Islam stem in very large part from these older religions. But it has also become apparent that all of these religions can be unified if we look beyond their differing exoteric forms to perceive the sameness of their innermost esoteric meanings. And the key to this potential unification is the understanding that God, in all of his many names, personifies the myth of creation, in all of its many forms.

God is not a myth in the sense of a fiction or a lie, but a myth in the sense of a true account of the most glorious concept imaginable to the ancient mind - the creation of the Universe, of life, and of mankind.



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

May 26th, 2011, 4:39 pm #5


 

Christianity

At the heart of Christianity lies the miraculous story of Jesus Christ how he was crucified but came back to life, and in so doing saved mankind from its sins. The Church insists - and millions of Christians believe - that Jesus was a real human being and that his crucifixion and resurrection were historic events, played out in the city of Jerusalem some two thousand years ago. God became man, it is said, and sacrificed his flesh and blood in order that we all might see the light and join the heavenly kingdom of God.

But is this really what happened two thousand years ago, or has the Church deceived us all by rewriting myth as history?

The essential story of Jesus Christ - his crucifixion and resurrection - follows a millennia-old myth in which God himself "died" but returned to life as a prelude to the creation of the Universe.

In this myth, which was told and retold continually for more than three thousand years prior to the formation of the Church, God personified the death and rebirth of the Universe. It was the sacrifice of this Great Gods body - of his cosmic flesh and blood - followed by the resurrection of his spirit which saved the world and washed away the sins of the first generation of mankind.

In this light, it should be assumed - unless it can be proven otherwise - that the "death" and "resurrection" of Jesus Christ, as told in the gospels, retells the age-old myth of the death and rebirth of the Universe. Or, in other words, Jesus Christ is synonymous with God.

Support for this hypothesis is found in the gospel of John, which begins with the following statement:

In the beginning was the Word [Christ], and the Word was toward the God, and the Word was God. He [the Word] was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made... And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

The idea was that Christ, the Word, had descended from Heaven at the beginning of time, and that his spirit had entered into the world and mankind, thereby "becoming flesh".

Further support for the myth of this primeval Christ is found in the Old Testament, Psalm 22 and Isaiah 52-53. In the former, a worm-like being is crucified in the underworld in a remarkably similar manner to the supposedly historic crucifixion of Jesus Christ in the gospels. In the latter, "the righteous servant" of God is sacrificed for the transgressions of all mankind, and bears his unjust treatment in a remarkably similar manner to the supposedly historic treatment of Jesus Christ in the gospels.

These Judaic scriptures, far from being prophecies of the New Testament (as the Church insists), allegorise the suffering of the saviour of mankind at the beginning of time.


The real meaning of Christianity is thus to be found in the myth of the creation of the Universe, according to which an earlier Universe, personified by God-Christ, was sacrificed to pave the way for the creation of the present Universe. The gospels in their entirety would therefore be an esoteric parable for the myth of creation.

As for the Churchs assertion that Jesus, a humble human being, died and came back to life in a crucifixion in Jerusalem two thousand years ago, a possible explanation is that this historic Jesus was an actor in a Passion Play, in which he sought to re-enact the myth of creation (a widespread and popular tradition in the ancient world). This would, of course, explain why the evidence for the existence of "the Son of God" two thousand years ago is so sparse.

The crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ is myth, not history. It relates the story of the "death" and "rebirth" of the Universe; it personifies the myth of creation.


 

www.eridu.co.uk 



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

May 26th, 2011, 4:42 pm #6

how sad that I spent so many years talking to such an intelligent man who only knows how to "speak of what others WROTE" and has NO INNER experience of MYTH or God or THE WORKINGS OF THE UNIVERSE that are "personified" by these:
every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

May 26th, 2011, 5:27 pm #7


<em>how sad that I spent so many years talking to such an intelligent man who only knows how to "speak of what others WROTE" and how sad that I spent so many years talking to such an intelligent man who only knows how to "speak of what others WROTE" and has NO INNER experience of MYTH or God or THE WORKINGS OF THE UNIVERSE that are "personified" by these:
</em>

'Argument by Omniscience' is not a valid response; it's a fallacy, quite a common one too.

Example:

<em><strong>"All people believe in something. Everyone knows that."</strong></em>

 

There's only two ways for the arguer to actually know what is claimed:

Either, the arguer has consulted all people about it ( which the arguer hasn't - the arguer wouldn't have the time to argue when trying to establish such a feat )

Or, the arguer is omniscient ( which the arguer isn't - (s)he'd be the most famous person on earth )

 

Example:

Claiming on an internet forum that a poster <em><strong>has no inner experience of myth or God or the workings of the universe that are "personified" by these:</strong></em>



 

The arguer can only know to be true what is being said here about the poster when the arguer has consulted the poster in question in person ( which the arguer hasn't, I can vouch for that :^D )

and the arguer would need to be some sort of omniscient to know about the nature of 'God', as implied, and know how the universe works, as implied, the arguer knows ( which the arguer isn't - as far as we know, no one has been declared omniscient yet 8^D )
<p align="center"><a rel="nofollow"><img border="0" alt="" src="http://images.bravenet.com/common/image ... t.gif"></a>



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Quote
Like
Share

PAUL
PAUL

May 26th, 2011, 7:26 pm #8

A.F. Alford, When The Gods Came Down, Hodder and Stoughton, 2000
Myth - God - Religion - Christianity


It is widely presumed that myth and religion are two different things. To the extent that religion involves a whole array of non-myth elements - a moral code, a faith in a supreme being, and an obedience to the Church - this is true. However, if we focus on the primary element in religion, the Supreme Being (or God), then religion and myth become synonymous. Indeed, the conclusion of extensive study of religion is that God is actually the personification of myth.

Huh? God the personification of myth?



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Will make God disappear....

The fact of God as the creator is the one thing that will always be true...
Quote
Share

PAUL
PAUL

May 26th, 2011, 7:28 pm #9

 

Myth

The idea will sound weird to manier ear, and many religious people will think that it is denigrating the Supreme Being. After all, the word "myth", in modern linguistics, is held to be synonymous with a fiction or a lie. But this is not the definition of myth. Far from it.

In fact, the word "myth" derives from the ancient Greek word "muthos", which meant simply an "utterance" or a "traditional tale". And these utterances, or traditional tales - usually concerning Gods and heroes - were generally considered to be true stories.

But in what sense can a myth be true?

For the past two centuries, mythologists have been fixated by the idea of historical truth. They have sought to understand ancient myths as poetic portrayals of events in human history. But this is a fundamental mistake.

Prior to Greek times, ancient civilisations had very little interest in history as we understand that term. Rather than seeing the past in terms of a linear history, they saw it as a repeating pattern of cycles - the day, the month, the year, the reign of the king, and the periods of the planets and stars. At the beginning of each of these cycles, the creation was renewed and time began again.

As for human beings, their machinations served only to validate this great cosmic mystery play. As Mircea Eliade writes in "The Myth of the Eternal Return":

"The past is but a prefiguration of the future. No event is irreversible and no transformation is final. In a certain sense, it is even possible to say that nothing new happens in the world, for everything is but the repetition of the same primordial archetypes; this repetition, by actualizing the mythical moment when the archetypal gesture was revealed, constantly maintains the world in the same auroral instant of the beginnings."

History and historical truth were thus alien concepts to the ancient mind. For the ancient myth-makers, truth lay rather in the primordial cosmic drama in which the Universe had been created and brought to life. The only true story in town was the myth of the genesis of the earth, the heavens, and all living things. In short, the myth of creation.


All ancient civilisations had their creation myths. The stories in the Old Testament Book of Genesis are mere reflection of much older myths that were told in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia from at least 3000 BC. Indeed, the further back we go, the more dominant the creation myth becomes - to an extent that has yet to be fully apprehended by scholars.

Behind the creation myth lies the Supreme Being, who was worshipped by the ancients under a variety of names and guises. This Great God - or indeed Goddess - was the Creator of all things, and thus the cognate of Religion in the sense that He/She bound mankind back to its origins (the word "religion" derives from the Latin religare "to bind back").

Who, or what, was this Supreme Being? In what sense was He/She the Creator of the Universe and mankind?

Put out of your mind all those images of God as an old man with a beard. Consider instead the evidence from the worlds oldest civilisations - Egypt and Mesopotamia.

Here, in the creation myths, the Great God, or Goddess, personifies the formative cosmos. He, or She, is identified with the death of the old cosmos; with the fall of the sky and the seeding of the earth; with the chaos of the primeval earth and waters; with the separation of the heavens from the earth; and with the new-born Sun, Moon, and stars. In short, the God and Goddess personify the entire myth of creation and the entire created Universe.

Here lies the key to the modern concept of God.



rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!


CD: short for incontrovertible
Its either that or the universe built itself from scratch...

Now thats the worst myth ever...

Only crazy people believe that...
Quote
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

May 26th, 2011, 7:28 pm #10

Will make God disappear....

The fact of God as the creator is the one thing that will always be true...
"Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan

-----------------------------------------------
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion." -- Robert M. Pirsig
Quote
Like
Share