Plato himself writes that too many of the myth-makers were continually fabricating stories in order to connect this or that happening with some new part of the whole 'mythos' they specialized in virtually as a professional activity.
I mean, people write stuff down, sure, but how does anyone know what happened between this 'god' and the other one, unless they were literally there as a witness, or had at least been given the account by, um, let's say, the god themselves. And then, today, we would be stuck with the small matter of 'pics or it didn't happen!' LOL
Ah Calvin, you are tricking us, that's not the 'water-to-wine' thing. Calvin: 'Well, they wouldn't know that back then, now would they??' |
Saint Paul, of the much much later Christian Scriptures-Writing Era, is totally guilty of this kind of thing - and just like the people who look at ancient Greek mythology, the later Christians never pick apart what is really being said and the logic of what is being said...
'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?' Says Jesus to Paul in a vision, and Paul is convinced that the vision is legit and is really a direct message from the god - and then he writes about it, and then also writes down (some) other things he is subsequently told in more visions, and then writes a lot of things he himself has decided to be true from his own thoughts and knowledge of the Jewish religion. He has also a very fine knowledge of the Roman laws and Roman politics and so on so no one much challenges anything he says because, well, they just never have inside of the Christian church at least.
But why are we not given the other side of the coin, in terms of his first vision? Why do we not get told of the vision in which Paul is told:
'Paul, everything you have said and written down is just great. And true. I, Jesus, endorse it.'
You don't get to see that in any scripture because it never happened.
What you actually get is this thing from Jesus: 'And people in later times follow the traditions of men in place of the laws of God.'
Plato criticizes some of the myth writers quite harshly, but in other instances, he simply makes the point that there is 'some disagreement' or 'variations' (in accounts).
He particularly makes one reference to the very founding of Athens after the Flood, and says that the narratives are wrong in some of the names they give - and he gives an alternate view that it was not 'Ericthonius' who founded Athens, but that some people whose only recollection of their first culture and previously high civilization of Atlantis, was their remembrance of their names or family names; and he designates 'Erusicthiones' as one such person or group of people and that in any case, here it wasn't even their actual family name but rather the pre-Greek language description for 'men who rose with their skins red from the mud after the Great Flood.'
Something for the girls... Can't find the nice rosey-colored ones that I really like. But these'll do! |
Standard Greek myth is that a half-serpent being, Cecrops, was the first king of Athens - and that he was a son of Poseidon and he had a son called Ericthonius, and then that son had a son called 'Erusichthiones.'
But one of the problems with the Greek's own mythology is that they themselves (as Plato also noted) were a bit shaky about the whole thing because they also claimed at the same time (as other accounts that he was a son of Poseidon) that Cecrops was 'autochthon' - someone who was 'born from the earth itself' and had no father. Now this may have meant they were the indigenous peoples ('Aboriginals') but then at the same time they also had the very clear myth story of actual civilized people surviving from out of the muddy ground which was left over after the Great Flood of Atlantis.
So it looks like the Greeks cannot make up their minds as to whether they are the descendants of Poseidon, or, that they are 'autocthon.'
The answer is that they are both - and, plus, there is this other group as well that 'came down at Mount Evuron' and built a memorial pile of stones there which reflected an incident concerning one of the gods animating some stones, bringing these to life as 'humans.'
Here is the thing though - Homer says quite clearly, that 'never had a Goddess shown so much favor to a human,' and it was suggestive of some kind of relationship beyond even 'mere favor;' and he really implies something so close as to be a kind of bigamous thing too, since Odysseus had a human wife - Penelope. Funny too, because for various suspect reasons, 'the gods' one way or the other delay Odysseus's return to his human wife for some huge amount of years, during which time he is, in all practicality, if not exactly 'cavorting' with Athena, then he is 'having this strange peculiar close relationship' though, with her, as well as with other demi-goddesses.
'Jukes No's.' Make all kinds of different 'wines.' |
And then added to this, 'Peitho' is the city standard-bearer of Athens (Jesus mentions this word, and everyone thinks He is just using some Greek descriptive word but no, in fact He actually makes it clear this 'word' has Divine Power! ...It's actually someone's name, and not just a 'word.' The meaning part, the 'word' comes about because of the identity of the person with that name). But Peitho is Hermes' daughter from Aphrodite... And the 'Peitho' goes along with the Palladium - 'upon the safe-keeping of which the safety of the city was thought to depend.'
The 'Palladium' is the wooden statue of Athena, part of which came down from the sky. And the statue of Athena, is housed in a temple called the 'Erectheion...' Literally after this 'Ericthonius,' or as Plato would have it 'Erusichthiones.'
And the human person Odysseus...
...is a the great grandson of Hermes.
You see, this is all very complicated yes I know, but, actually you should try to think of things this way: the Greeks had the exact same three-way split of who all these 'gods and goddesses' actually were as the Norse had.
The Norse say - 'Jotuns,' and 'Vanir' and 'Aesir.' All of those can go to Asgard.
And the Greeks say - 'Titans,' and 'Proto-Titans' who were also the allies of Zeus in the Titanomachy, and then the Ouranoids (sons and loyal grandsons of Ouranos). All of those can go to Olympus.
Peitho at the Erechtheion - which is also called 'the Parthenon' of Athena. |
This 'Hephaestos' was from a Titan mother Hera, and he was also born by parthenogenesis. He tried to force Zeus into handing over his daughter. Is this really going to happen, is Athena really going to accept a rather rough Titan? Unlikely.
Whereas Hermes is an actual Olympian, albeit a very young one so hardly an 'Ouranoid' as such, but definitely no Titan in any way at all. Now whereas the Greeks are being explicit about Hephaestus and Athena, they are downright scandalous about what Hermes made for Athena... Which is namely the smooth wooden 'device.'
Hermes is the fastest thinking, and the most accurate communicator, and the craftiest of the male gods, and thus he is or should be the natural consort of Athena. But it's actually 'worse' than that though, because while Athena has outright rejected the Titan-generated 'Hephaestus' and that becomes an 'incident,' she keeps something secret about her relationship with Hermes.
The clarification of what is opaque here, is not readily accepted by too many people, but it is this:
In fact Athena is 'conforming' actual humanity over millennia, to a literal relationship with her. And I mean 'relationship' in that way. The ending of Homer in the Iliad is very much like the implication to the words of Jesus about David - namely, that he lives.
Athena has made an 'Eternal Covenant' with seemingly, an apparent mortal - but then how could that be? This is not like any Abrahamic thing about 'and your children and the future of their offspring shall be like...' Oh no, this says expressly 'and the two made between each other an eternal covenant that she shall for him do... such-and-such, for all time to come.'
The Greek Mount Evuron story is the same story as the Jews' one about Mount Hermon, and the 'angels coming down and cohabiting with mortal women and having children with them.'
Opera mezzo again, Garanca. |
The mounds of stones signifying the creation of 'Athens' from out of animated stones, is a parallel construction myth referring to the people who survived the Flood of Atlantis and were living in muddy red conditions for a long time, and who thus appeared like 'dried red mud,' alongside the incident on Mount Evuron to do with Hermes. And the matter about the so-called 'sacred' phallus of Hermes, well I don't want to go into it but it is a bit of a cheeky jibe (at best, and pretty rude at worst) at the 'maiden' or the 'virgin' goddess. I don't know how they think they could get away with it...!
But you have to remember, there are several 'secret' rites known to the ancient 'mystery cult' religious Greeks - and one of them is to do with Peitho and her sisters and some snakes in some stone jars and so on. And that one is generally claimed to depict the actual 'Eleusinian Mysteries' that for the most part, only young aristocratic women can partake in.
But the other, and related one, is to do with the Hermes matter, and it might be, although I cannot confirm this openly in public here, that it is sanctioned by the Goddess herself albeit only because of what is disclosed within the secret rites themselves and for very good reasons. So that doesn't give people the right to make rude jokes, especially not if they don't actually know what is in those rites.
Now, look, the only people who would really know these things for certain, would in any case be those who had actually undergone those sacred mysteries.
It is said, that Plato had.
Cannot see the Kingdom of God, all right! Unless you have the eyes to see. |
So I am just distilling stuff from his writings. I am not disclosing anything from 'secret rites and rituals.'
But in truth - Hermes delivers messages from Olympus to men, and men (meaning Mankind so that means 'and women') become animated with the Divine Message or 'gift' or whatever you want to say; that is, they are given real Divine life by the Gods, except this is a process, in which Wisdom is both the midwife and then some kind of actual consort in the end.
'Except that a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.'
I really don't know how willing the Jews are going to be giving up that this is really any kind of a Jewish story at all, but instead an Egyptian one, and a Greek, most ancient one, dating from the time as far back as before the Great Flood of Atlantis itself.
I could look at the world through Borg-green colored glasses, for sure.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, as it appears that the West and its cultural & mythological foundations are about to be downfallen, what myths can we look forward to from the West's successor, China? I'm thinking that Chinese myths are probably substantially different from those of Greece and the Middle East, yes?
I deal with this in the text https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/384776361925718780/
DeleteBut in short, the Chinese mythology is exactly the same, with a spin towards the 'remoteness of the gods' thing of Epicurus. And this is possibly because of the influence of the Emperor Shun who banned by law, any interactions by humans with the gods. It is however, difficult to see how Kuan Yin is different to Isis or any of the other major feminine deities around the other cultures of the world, and they also have a Divine General (Guan Gung) who is the same identity as 'Gan' or 'Gung/Gum' in the Indian Vedas (Ganesha). Of course most critics disagree with me and say that the Chinese gods all have slanted eyes and therefore they MUST be different...
There's the modern fantasy literature too. Amazonk Prime has "duoluo continent." 40 episodes. Good stuff. Llamas with single glowing horns coming out their foreheads like unicorns. "Wake up. Wake up. With your authentic self and ceaseless hope, look for the deepest secret in your heart. Wake up. Then you will see your authentic self. Then you can reveal the glossed-over truth. Go through the sincere lies to your innermost thoughts." Etc. Beats the crap out of "the boys" imo.
DeleteI don't know about this one. Because of the vast difference in maturity, intellectual capacity, etc., for a God or Goddess to interact with a human (or any person at a similar place in its developmental trajectory) at a level beyond affection and maternal/paternal love doesn't seem right to me.
ReplyDeleteWell, I agree that it is 'very very problematic.' Epicurus said people should not see them as anything but extremely remote and he even said 'not interested,' or did not listen to prayers at all! He was the first philosopher who expounded the so-called 'problem of theodicy.' And, it is difficult to call him an 'atheist' but in all practicality, he was.He certainly disagreed that the Gods were also anthropomorphic and had or could have what he deemed 'illegitimate' children.
DeleteOn the other hand, Homer was most explicitly clear that Odysseus had an 'unusually' if not indeed unique relationship with Wisdom (and we mus remember that these books by Homer ARE the religious texts of Greece), and that the same relationship is set forth in Psalms (the Book of Tehillim), and that in fact, IN FACT, Christianity is 100% anthropomorphic, having a lead God who is also a human being materially, and physically, and it goes on to teach some kind of 'changing' in the physical structure of the 'apothesed' person. But I mean, let's not kid ourselves this is at all straightforward either to accept or understand - just consider the number problem, the 'individuation' issue: there are billions of individual human people... Yes. Not easy. However my conclusions is that it is nevertheless so, somehow, and that we MUST partner Wisdom whole-ly, and without limitation of any sort. If you do not, you will die. You will remain as a mortal, following the entire path, that 'natural' profile of events and of ultimate certainty of end for all mortal flesh and soul and spirit. You MUST seduce a God, to descend in material form, but not just any God; that one. You rightly said however 'at a similar place in its trajectory.' Now is the right place to be 'born of THE Divine Source of All Life.' Without it, you will die. And this is indeed the actual straight out teaching of, for instance, the Christian New Testament. We can deal with the errant utterances of foolish Paul, later! Right now though, you must seduce a God.
But I'm still just an embryo!
DeleteSure, but who's your mom?
Delete