Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Astrotheology


Herbert Sanders

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, rashore said:

Ok, I get your meaning with astrotheology now I think. Your lore-house isn't mine, and frankly a lot of your details are still going way over my head..  but I get what your astrotheology is better now. 

:tu:

Give it a few days, it will sink in.

Main take-away:

Lore/philosophies are grafted onto a time based chain of "events", because each moment is a unique moment a story's identifiers help us find the correct time based "snapshot".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

:tu:

Give it a few days, it will sink in.

Main take-away:

Lore/philosophies are grafted onto a time based chain of "events", because each moment is a unique moment a story's identifiers help us find the correct time based "snapshot".

I'm more of a migratory patterns of Europeans and spooky, and true crime/historical backbones for spooky, the oddities of translocating and conflagration lore... that area does not have a good term for it. 

But I get the framework you are trying to work. It needs a lot of work. But keep working on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, rashore said:

I'm more of a migratory patterns of Europeans and spooky, and true crime/historical backbones for spooky, the oddities of translocating and conflagration lore... that area does not have a good term for it. 

But I get the framework you are trying to work. It needs a lot of work. But keep working on it. 

Thank you for the positive feedback.

Btw what do you mean by spooky? Like a ghost group as in ghost dna?

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Thank you for the positive feedback.

Edit: what do you mean by spooky? Like a ghost group as in ghost dna?

Ghosts, cryptids, UFO events.. weird lights and strange. A lotta lore is baseless. A bunch of lore is a scramble of a lotta trying to connect crap. Sometimes it works better, like overlaying highway crimes with ghost legends of the era and how they connect or not. You seem to be trying for a star maps and deities and lore tripping connection and stringing like that. 

Your lore-house still isn't mine.. but Ive seen enough of this sort of thing to try to understand where you are stringing from. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

:tu:

Give it a few days, it will sink in.

Main take-away:

Lore/philosophies are grafted onto a time based chain of "events", because each moment is a unique moment a story's identifiers help us find the correct time based "snapshot".

Except you tend to purposely ignore what the peoples of disparate cultures wrote or believed so you can play fast and loose with same. That’s pretty much the definition of intellectual dishonesty IMO. 
 

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Except you tend to purposely ignore what the peoples of disparate cultures wrote or believed so you can play fast and loose with same. That’s pretty much the definition of intellectual dishonesty IMO. 
cormac

Hey Cormac, don't forget to stop believing in science like he advised, so you can open your mind and believe... in nonsense.  

  • Like 2
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Except you tend to purposely ignore what the peoples of disparate cultures wrote or believed so you can play fast and loose with same. That’s pretty much the definition of intellectual dishonesty IMO. 
 

cormac

I assume no one knows anything for certain. I simply read the stories, myth, lore whatever you want to call it and look to the skies.

Everything outside the scope is inadmissible at this stage that includes what cultures wrote or believed outside of the myths that are subjected to this theory.

It needs to stand on its own first, mature, develop etc.

21 minutes ago, Hyperionxvii said:

Hey Cormac, don't forget to stop believing in science like he advised, so you can open your mind and believe... in nonsense.

You are clearly making the same error. My theory is not based on anything supernatural. There is no divination, no higher influence. It is simply the art of storytelling. The supposition that lore is created by the influence of celestial observances is not crazy.

Werewolves were said to be humans that turned into wolves during the full moon... You are framing it to say I believe in full moon werewolves, while I am only saying people were fascinated by the moon as evidenced by the story.

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

I assume no one knows anything for certain. I simply read the stories, myth, lore whatever you want to call it and look to the skies.

Everything outside the scope is inadmissible at this stage that includes what cultures wrote or believed outside of the myths that are subjected to this theory.

In needs to stand on its own first, mature, develop etc.

You are clearly making the same error. My theory is not based on anything supernatural. There is no divination, no higher influence. It is simply the art of storytelling. The supposition that lore is created by the influence of celestial observances is not crazy.

Werewolves were said to be humans that turned into wolves during the full moon... You are framing it to say I believe in full moon werewolves, while I am only saying people were fascinated by the moon as evidenced by the story.

I assume, based on your own posts, that you know nothing useful about many of the cultures whose culture, history and beliefs you bastardize in order to create your fantasy. You are an insult to those very cultures IMO. 
 

cormac

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

I assume, based on your own posts, that you know nothing useful about many of the cultures whose culture, history and beliefs you bastardize in order to create your fantasy. You are an insult to those very cultures IMO. 
 

cormac

I do not need to. It would only be a hindrance as you are clearly demonstrating.

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Orestes_3113 said:

I do not need to.

Writer’s forum is several levels below this one. Fiction belongs there. Your theme is neither an ancient mystery nor alternative history. 
 

cormac

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cormac mac airt said:

Writer’s forum is several levels below this one. Fiction belongs there. Your theme is neither an ancient mystery nor alternative history. 
 

cormac

It is not fictional. It is analysis within strict conditions. What you think you know simply falls outside of the scope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Writer’s forum is several levels below this one. Fiction belongs there. Your theme is neither an ancient mystery nor alternative history. 
 

cormac

Personal fictions random applied to cherry picked and constantly occurring events in the sky.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

It is not fictional. It is analysis within strict conditions. What you think you know simply falls outside of the scope.

It is irrelevant to the cultures you’re trying to pin it on. Therefore fiction. 
 

cormac

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

:tu:

Give it a few days, it will sink in.

Main take-away:

Lore/philosophies are grafted onto a time based chain of "events", because each moment is a unique moment a story's identifiers help us find the correct time based "snapshot".

While some other parts if your analysis are certainly problematic, this strikes me as a perfectly reasonable starting point for theorizing, and worth building upon. 

I’d love to hear others’ views. About this, specifically. I’m not so much interested in the “everything this person espouses is hopeless” routine. I get it — I do — but I want to push myself a little to see past my usual positioning. 

—Jaylemurph 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

Lore/philosophies are grafted onto a time based chain of "events", because each moment is a unique moment a story's identifiers help us find the correct time based "snapshot".

Can you clear up some of these questions.

These first three I view as core questions.

Do you believe that the heavenly bodies have been put in place by God.

If the answer to the above is yes, was this done to influence us on Earth.

Do you believe that myths are our intrepretations of what we see in the heavens, and are not based on possible real events.

 

These next are specific to 18th Dynasty Egypt, and I would understand if you wish to ignore them, but I ask as you have included this dynasty in your posts, so should be able to have a go. If the details of some of the questions seem too "esoteric", I'll be happy with a straight yes, no or don't know.

Do you believe that a persons name is influenced by celestial events, ie, Thutmose, and if so, can your proove this.

If you believe that the name Thutmose was used by four 18th Dynasty kings because, as you believe, the Moon had become of specific importance, can you proove this, or at least show your workings in a way that is easily understood.

You tried to link Akhenaten into all of this, and I see that you have withdrawn from that, however, if you still contend that the Moon was of specific importance in the 18th Dynasty, he cannot be ignored. Therefore, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, do you see a connection between Hermopolis and Akhetaten, just down the river.

Would chariots used by a king have any bearing on any of this in relation to the Moon.

Given that a number of chariots were found in KV62, do you think it odd that a specific type of chariot was absent from the tomb, a type of chariot which was discovered in the tomb of Thutmose IV.

Lunar influences, which of course do exist as the Moon was always important, seem to become less evident a few years into the reign of Tutankhamun, and I suggest this occured at his name change. So could celestial events have occasioned this potential change in the Moon's status with royalty, and do you see any myth here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Do you believe that the heavenly bodies have been put in place by God.

No. There is no need for God. I speak of God as a secular theologian. They are a part of nature, physics, natural law... this direction. Any influence should the be one would need to be scientifically determined but for my scope it is irrelevant.

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Do you believe that myths are our intrepretations of what we see in the heavens, and are not based on possible real events.

Almost. They are not even interpretations because that would be a form of downloading so to speak. Fetching the idea. 

My position is that we ascribe ideas to them for us (meaning ancient people) to remember like uploading. I could ascribre ideas to a simple rock if I wanted. This rock would then carry cultural information such as myth. Now this is simple with the planets we can build complex ideas like myth.

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Do you believe that a persons name is influenced by celestial events, ie, Thutmose, and if so, can your proove this.

No, if anything the name is ascribe perhaps due to fashion. If everyone in the scene is talking about thoth thrn why not appropriate his name?

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

You tried to link Akhenaten into all of this, and I see that you have withdrawn from that, however, if you still contend that the Moon was of specific importance in the 18th Dynasty, he cannot be ignored. Therefore, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, do you see a connection between Hermopolis and Akhetaten, just down the river.

I would need to know more about Hermopolis. And although I retracted Akhenaten he is odd I believe Amarna art was made to ascribe an additional layer of meaning as I mentioned before. It simply became too problematic, even for me.

I started with him because he is known to stick out. So if religious rules were broken I saw it as the most likely time to investigate this connection.

However having a go at Senenmut/Seti-I, and of course I could be completely wrong here, perhap Akhenaten merely redefined what was already there throughout the 18th dynasty.

In any case I believe that understanding the moon is more critical then previously assumed.

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Would chariots used by a king have any bearing on any of this in relation to the Moon.

Well if I ascribe the chariot theme to the luminaries then I will see the luminaries as chariots. It would be fashion.

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Given that a number of chariots were found in KV62, do you think it odd that a specific type of chariot was absent from the tomb, a type of chariot which was discovered in the tomb of Thutmose IV.

Ok now I will go off track. 

  • Amenhotep III
  • Akhenaten
  • Tutankhamun

To me this is a religious triad. Much like father, son, spirit. Or Saturn, Jupiter, Mercury. Or in reality Bach, Mozart, Beethoven.

Forgive me the last input but with these masons at the time, who knows how culture was influenced, or coincidental, or there is a logical explanation. I simply try to explain my view.

The second always seems to be the greatest but also the one tarnished. The first a traditional and the last without that momentum a bit crippled.

Now this touches astrology but that is not what I mean. I am looking at it from a sequence of events that is contained by 3.

Sometimes a father creates a safe space for a son to shine... Family wealth is said to last three generations...

In your case 3 generations. You start with Thutmose IV however so maybe not quite fitting. But then perhaps it is the starting point. Above Saturn there is Uranus. And above Abraham there was Terrah who kept many idols.

And so my explanation would be that between Thutmose IV and Tutankhamun there was a "scientific" period with less astrolatry and more astrotheology.

  • Amenhotep Saturn
  • Akhenaten Jupiter

Father & Son (as in christianity)

So I would look for connections that confirm these links. These are the two slow planets set aside from the other.

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Lunar influences, which of course do exist as the Moon was always important, seem to become less evident a few years into the reign of Tutankhamun, and I suggest this occured at his name change. So could celestial events have occasioned this potential change in the Moon's status with royalty, and do you see any myth here.

Influences in culture sure. But we need to be certain what we mean by influence. Influence in the sense of astrology... no. Influence in the sense of fashion yes.

I think lesser people came to power, a lack of understanding. Sometimes smart people leave a vaccuum and then you go into a cultural dark age.

I can only see myth if the myth is presented in some form. There are signifiers that you can look for, it is very intuitive. I have been looking at these things for over a decade so I have become sensitive to these patterns that other cannot see.

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another angle, if we graft a philosophy of what we understand to be eternal truths onto planetary motions, which follow natural law and are eternal, and if one is consistent with the other.

Then we can transfer information down the ages. This first individual "uploads" his ideas and all subsequent interpreters "download" these ideas.

As long as the doctrine is consistent with what is "eternally true" (following natural law, planetary cycles), this could be a subjective and thus a false doctrine, veracity is not the point here, what matters is consistency within doctrine according to the motions, or good craftmanship. Then culture could build upon it sequentially, always the same.

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

While some other parts of your analysis are certainly problematic, this strikes me as a perfectly reasonable starting point for theorizing, and worth building upon. 

I’d love to hear others’ views.... I want to push myself a little to see past my usual positioning.

That's a perfectly reasonable position: one I'm certain most respondents adopted early on in these threads.  Considered - and rejected, for reasons fruitlessly articulated to the OP ad nauseam.

This next bit is just my current view; I am open to criticism and persuasion:

I believe that most ancient stories contain a core of history, hidden under unknown layers of myth, exaggeration, confusion, religion, conflation and superstition.  That's not to say we can't look for facts, but we're unlikely to know with certainty when we have reached any part of the truth. 

If we look at one small example from one book I am a little familiar with - the hostilities between Saul and David in the Books of Samuel:

  • I believe the kernel of truth there is that there was once a king Saul, who was eventually displaced by a younger, charismatic rival David.  (It makes an interesting read, if only for the unnecessary detail recorded in the narrative, such as Johnathan's elaborate plot to warn David (1 Sam chp. 20).) 
  • A religious Jew might agree with this understanding, but with the added conviction that these verses record precise events, in order, as willed by God.
  • Orestes argues that these stories have no historical foundation.  They are really the coded astronomical observations of a sun cult spanning millennia, maybe back to Gobekli Tepe or beyond.  

and of course there will be other interpretations presenting varying levels of evidence and commanding apposite levels of support.

I'm just Tom the nobody, with nothing to gain from proving any theory right or wrong and no specific training in history, religion, mythology, astronomy or any similar field pertinent to this discussion.  But if I were Orestes, promoting a very detailed and specific theory, I would make a really determined effort to:

  1. present my theory clearly, succinctly and comprehensively, not drip-feed titbits as though my audience were incapable of analysing my concept in its entirety
  2. present my evidence in an organised, comprehensible fashion, rather than sharing repetitive, uninformative star charts and seemingly random accompanying text
  3. listen to the centuries of accumulated wisdom and the constructive criticism of those with specific training in relevant fields
  4. explain intelligently why data that do not fit my theory are incorrect or can be overlooked, rather than changing those data by stating without proof 'those ancient people wrote it down wrong' every time
  5. adapt my theory to accommodate new evidence, ideas and feedback, and not bludgeon on arrogantly imagining my theory is complete and perfect because I thought it up
  6. treat my audience as intelligent, and not insult them by suggesting they are too blinkered, indifferent or stupid to understand my theory

Orestes has absolutely failed to achieve any of these quite reasonable steps, most obviously by refusing to consider steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6.  I guess that's why so many people here have given up attempting reason and argument and why the discussion often deteriorates into exasperation or ridicule - it deserves no better.

Edited by Tom1200
punctuation
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Orestes argues that these stories have no historical foundation.  They are really the coded astronomical observations of a sun cult spanning millennia, maybe back to Gobekli Tepe or beyond.

Not necessarily true. As with Akhenaten where I tried to find myth behind a man so too can the story Saul/David then be enhanced through myth to create an ideal form of "history" in actuality theological doctrine. I propose this in the same sense as Amenhotep III and Akhenaten mentioned above. Not that I know of a myth here, but this duo would be a perfect candidate for such myth.

Cult spanning millennia, correct. I am lead to believe this. But it could also simply be a gradual evolution of theology resembling a cult.

Considering point 1 to 6. The hostility newcomers face around here when they present ideas, or undeveloped theories is harsh. It is logical that polarity is the result which is then very hard to overcome.

To the best of my abilities I am trying to explain my views and I do take ideas from forum members into consideration. But when it comes to my views, I am the arbiter of what is admissable and what is not. If I were to take in all criticism then I would accept error and for what? Ego of the established? Example the atrology/astotheology non-discussion.

So no I have to distrust you guys and consider what is palatable on my terms, and you have to consider what you think is palatable on your terms. We can be miles apart right now but that ok, we are narrowing the gap as we continue.

I drip because we need to get adjusted. Mature in the conversation. I still see this as the best way forward. Again the example where we disagree between astrology/astrotheology. By hashing it out, different views within the conversation we get content that I could not set out on my own. In short I need the battle.

Also my views have changed considerably since we first started. You might not be aware if it because you haven't really lend an ear. And so I am not set in stone, but of course the premise itself I cannot simply chuck away because a few scholars disagree. Especially if they have trouble discerning definitions or appreciating probabilities. 

The best I am gunning for is a paradoxical situation where two truths can align from a different angle. I am not trying to bring one down in favor for another.

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Orestes_3113 said:

No. There is no need for God. I speak of God as a secular theologian. They are a part of nature, physics, natural law... this direction. Any influence should the be one would need to be scientifically determined but for my scope it is irrelevant.

Almost. They are not even interpretations because that would be a form of downloading so to speak. Fetching the idea. 

My position is that we ascribe ideas to them for us (meaning ancient people) to remember like uploading. I could ascribre ideas to a simple rock if I wanted. This rock would then carry cultural information such as myth. Now this is simple with the planets we can build complex ideas like myth.

No, if anything the name is ascribe perhaps due to fashion. If everyone in the scene is talking about thoth thrn why not appropriate his name?

I would need to know more about Hermopolis. And although I retracted Akhenaten he is odd I believe Amarna art was made to ascribe an additional layer of meaning as I mentioned before. It simply became too problematic, even for me.

I started with him because he is known to stick out. So if religious rules were broken I saw it as the most likely time to investigate this connection.

However having a go at Senenmut/Seti-I, and of course I could be completely wrong here, perhap Akhenaten merely redefined what was already there throughout the 18th dynasty.

In any case I believe that understanding the moon is more critical then previously assumed.

Well if I ascribe the chariot theme to the luminaries then I will see the luminaries as chariots. It would be fashion.

Ok now I will go off track. 

  • Amenhotep III
  • Akhenaten
  • Tutankhamun

To me this is a religious triad. 

Except it’s not really a triad as the line would be some version of Amenhotep III, Akhenaten, Smenkhare, Neferneferuaten, Tutankhamun. That’s NOT a triad. 
 

cormac

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

Except it’s not really a triad as the line would be some version of Amenhotep III, Akhenaten, Smenkhare, Neferneferuaten, Tutankhamun. That’s NOT a triad. 
 

cormac

I know that the line is a bit broken but Smenkhare and Neferneferuaten are less significant. Tumultuous times, he would have been very young if the line was maintained.

I do not see this messy transfer of power as a big problem tbh. Tutankhamun would have beem the crown prince.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

I know that the line is a bit broken but Smenkhare and Neferneferuaten are less significant. Tumultuous times, he would have been very young if the line was maintained.

I do not see this messy transfer of power as a big problem tbh. Tutankhamun would have been the crown prince.

Not under Akhenaten Tutankhamun wouldn’t have been. So we’re back to you fabricating facts to support your agenda. Also DNA has shown that the skull of Tut’s father CANNOT be shown definitively to have belonged to Akhenaten, but just as likely belongs to Smenkhkare. 
 

cormac

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Not under Akhenaten Tutankhamun wouldn’t have been. So we’re back to you fabricating facts to support your agenda. Also DNA has shown that the skull of Tut’s father CANNOT be shown definitively to have belonged to Akhenaten, but just as likely belongs to Smenkhkare. 
 

cormac

So nothing can be stated...

Just as well might be a legitimate son...

8 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Given that a number of chariots were found in KV62, do you think it odd that a specific type of chariot was absent from the tomb, a type of chariot which was discovered in the tomb of Thutmose IV.

This was the question. And my answer would be no. My theory would be that the Amarna period is one of astrotheology not astrolatry.

If so then when Tutankhamun dies I dunno take a chariot from the old tomb move it to a new tomb and forget about Akhenaten. Situation is fubar anyways.

You can critizise me of fabricating facts for an agenda (lol), I am simply speculating for the sake of answering a question.

Do I have a definitive answer? No... my idea is as good as any, but the question was directed at me. And I admitted to go off track for it did I not?

To give an answer... damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Edited by Orestes_3113
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Orestes_3113 said:

So nothing can be stated...

Just as well might be a legitimate son...

Actually what can be stated is that the DNA from the skull of Tutankhamun’s father does not match what would be expected for Akhenaten, so no direct line relationship between the two. So again, not remotely a triad. 
 

cormac

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Orestes

Why is you theory only good for Christian and parts of Egyptian history when people like Genghis Kahn or Alexander the great were very influential in changes?

jmccr8

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.