Astro-theology 101

M

Medicine*Woman

Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!
Valued Senior Member
*************
M*W: First, let me say that I am atheist. I do not believe that one or more gods may have existed. However, billions of others do practice the religion of their choice (and some not by choice). I have always wanted to learn how and why religion has had a major influence on modern man. A lot of people question and ridicule me for my astro-theological interpretation of the christian religion as relating to ancient sun worship. I understand this concept confuses some and scares others, but it is not so far-fetched when you get right down to it. Therefore, I am providing this link for you to refer when I make a statement, or have a theory, about the astrological influence on the human race.

Jordan Maxwell says it better than I can:

http://www.jordanmaxwell.com/articles/astrotheology/astromain5a.html

This is such a fascinating topic (I think), so if there are any comments or questions about this interpretation, I would love to discuss it with you.

~ M*W
 
For the most part is is unsupported supposition and unfounded assumptions regarding coincidental correlations sewn together with a thin thread of truth.
That thin thread of truth is more than enough to convince those who want to believe it.

When authors such as Jordan Maxwell and Acharya S start using something more than armchair conjecture, far-fetched collaboration of myths and blatantly false assumptions about language morphology maybe they will be taken more seriously and be seen as the scholars they view themselves as.

I read The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S in one sitting. I could not put it down because it was so compelling. She has some great facts (many of them correct) and she spins them into an intriguing web. The unfortunate thing is that the jumps she makes in from thread to thread to hold the web together are most often unsupportable, non sequitur drivel.
She, along with Jordan Maxwell and many others of their ilk, present their suppositions and assumptions as fact (or at least accepted theory) - and they simply are not.
 
Medicine*Woman said:
I have always wanted to learn how and why religion has had a major influence on modern man.
Click to expand...
Read Jung, or better yet one of his popularizers, most notably Joseph Campbell. Religion is a collection of archetypes, instinctive beliefs preprogrammed into our synapses by our DNA. Belief in the supernatural is a strong instinct. Like all instincts, it is "knowledge" we have had since birth, and therefore it feels more true than knowledge we acquired later in life by reasoning and learning.

Some instincts are clearly the result of survival of the fittest, such as the instinct not to step off a cliff or the instinct to run from a large animal with both eyes in front of its face. Other instincts may have been survival traits in an era whose dangers we can't imagine. And others are surely random mutations accidentally passed down through a genetic bottleneck like Mitochondrial Eve.

(Jung was not a biologist, and he died before genetics became integrated into human science. My account is a restatement in modern language of his concept of archetypes.)
 
It seems to me that religion started as an attempt to explain phenomena not understood by our distant ancestors.

Humans seem to have a desire to understand the world of their senses. Why do trees grow? What makes the sun shine? Why do things fall down? Why this? Why that?

In prehistoric times, such questions could not be answered until somebody thought up the idea of a god or spirit responsible for trees. One responsible for the sun. One responsible for this & one responsible for that.

In a sense it was an early attempt to develop science. It never lost its mystical aspect & became religion while science developed as a different field of human activity.
 
Fraggle Rocker said:
Read Jung, or better yet one of his popularizers, most notably Joseph Campbell. Religion is a collection of archetypes, instinctive beliefs preprogrammed into our synapses by our DNA. Belief in the supernatural is a strong instinct. Like all instincts, it is "knowledge" we have had since birth, and therefore it feels more true than knowledge we acquired later in life by reasoning and learning.
Click to expand...
I like to think this is probably the case. However, a recent study suggests that may not completely be the case. Religion maybe a reaction to insecurity and in a secure environment even an infant will not grow up to be religion.

I suppose if one wants their child to be religious they should make their life insecure and scary. Like Hell.
 
one_raven said:
For the most part is is unsupported supposition and unfounded assumptions regarding coincidental correlations sewn together with a thin thread of truth. That thin thread of truth is more than enough to convince those who want to believe it.

When authors such as Jordan Maxwell and Acharya S start using something more than armchair conjecture, far-fetched collaboration of myths and blatantly false assumptions about language morphology maybe they will be taken more seriously and be seen as the scholars they view themselves as.

I read The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S in one sitting. I could not put it down because it was so compelling. She has some great facts (many of them correct) and she spins them into an intriguing web. The unfortunate thing is that the jumps she makes in from thread to thread to hold the web together are most often unsupportable, non sequitur drivel. She, along with Jordan Maxwell and many others of their ilk, present their suppositions and assumptions as fact (or at least accepted theory) - and they simply are not.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: This is exactly why I created a thread on this subject. People today don't understand the genesis and evolution of religion. By far, there are more than these two authors who have written on astro-theology. I have already published an extensive bibliography of scientists and archeologists who have addressed the topic. The Maxwell website is comprehensive and easy to understand. Otherwise, I am not familiar with his writings. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a book by Maxwell on the shelf. I would guess that Maxwell is a lay author himself, but he has put the myth of religion in an easy to read format.

Your reply is common place among the uninformed about how religion, myth and legend, evolved. I was hoping for more exposure on this forum as to astro-theology as a serious debate on the ancient development of a myth that still lingers today. However, I have never said that astro-theology is the "truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." What I have said is that it is arose from ancient sun worship that was created by ancient humans to try to explain things which they did not understand. You may not believe in astro-theology as a religion, and that's totally understandable. I am not promoting astro-theology as a religion. I am professing astro-theology as the ancient myth that it was. You cannot discount this as there is just too much documentation proving otherwise.
 
There is no truth to it though. Since they looked up and saw millions of stars it is not even remotely possible that they would name them. All they saw was lit up dots and the sun and the moon.

Even worse for this 'theory' is that the planets were named after 'Gods' and there is just no truth to it.
 
There is no doubt that Astro-Theology existed and was the source of many religious belief systems - this I do not deny.
What I do deny is the flimsy cases that people make to claim that Astro-Theology (in some cases practices that we don't have any evidence that ever even existed) was the root of Christianity, and even thet life and times of Jesus.
There is simply not a scrap of evidence to support most of the claims made- and I have read fairly extensively on the subject.
 
Michael said:
I like to think this is probably the case. However, a recent study suggests that may not completely be the case. Religion maybe a reaction to insecurity and in a secure environment even an infant will not grow up to be religion.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think that any one explanation will suffice in accounting for the human predisposition to religious belief; it is very likely a combination of many factors.

What I find interesting is how metaphysics is transformed when people become more sedentary, create cities and "civilizations," and develop hiearchical societal structures. Notions of transcendence emerge which previously were not considered. I think some of the more recent work on Paleothic groups and such suggests something quite contrary to what Jung and, say, Eliade hypothesize.

Interpretation of Paleolithic cave art, for instance, has entailed a whole lotta wild extrapolation and projection on the part of the likes of Joseph Campbell and Mircea Eliade. They seem to relish more in speculation, rather than a critical examination of the actual evidence. Not to suggest that early people were without a "spiritual" life altogether, but rather that we cannot know from the paintings, etc. alone that they actively sought ecstatic and transcendent experiences. And investigation of present day nomadic peoples does not necessarily suggest this either.
 
Last edited:
Medicine*Woman said:
Your reply is common place among the uninformed about how religion, myth and legend, evolved.
Click to expand...

And the response, "if you disagree, then you are ignorant or stupid" is commonplace among those with a myopic viewpoint that have found something to verify what they already believe and consider themselves learned.
Everyone is ignorant but you.
 
There is more than one way to start a religion. I do think the idea that it began using celestial objects as it's key components is rational and supported in many cases by evidence. Early American Indian sites were oriented with painstaking accuracy to stars and compass points. The sun was probably important to farmers. I don't think it's a huge revelation, because religions outgrow their roots. Their purposes change.
 
that is slightly different spidergoat. the op (rather the people writing these books) is\are referring to religions originating in the middle east with a smattering of far east.

native americans were more into the surroundings and that included the stars above, whereas the overwhelming majority, if not all, of the religions the op is focusing on were human form based. This makes sense though and would rather not get into the reasons for it.

the main thing is that i really dont see the point of writing a 400 page book based on a cave doodle. edit: well actually i do see the point-$- and i am not against making a profit but i dont see the point of taking it seriously unless it was backed up by something more than imagination. the main thing here is that the author preface the work with "I think" or sopmething similar.
 
Last edited:
John99 said:
that is slightly different spidergoat. the op (rather the people writing these books) is\are referring to religions originating in the middle east with a smattering of far east.

native americans were more into the surroundings and that included the stars above, whereas the overwhelming majority, if not all, of the religions the op is focusing on were human form based. This makes sense though and would rather not get into the reasons for it.

the main thing is that i really dont see the point of writing a 400 page book based on a cave doodle. edit: well actually i do see the point-$-and i am not against making a profit but i dont see the point of taking it seriously unless it was backed up by something more than imagination. the main thing here is that the author preface the work with "I think" or sopmething similar.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: The authors I have studied have published their research based on science and archeology for peer review and not for the almighty dollar. When I write about astro-theology, you will notice that I preface it with "I think" or "I believe." The opinions I form are from the science and archeology derived from the serious-minded researchers (not Acharya S or Jordan Maxwell) rather than from anything I've done. Although there are a few sensationialistic works on the market, there are plenty that are credible and published in respected journals.

The problem I have with people who study religion is that they too often discount the astro-theological interpretation of the myth (and they've written holy books that skew the truth).
 
Michael said:
I like to think this is probably the case. However, a recent study suggests that may not completely be the case. Religion maybe a reaction to insecurity and in a secure environment even an infant will not grow up to be religion.

I suppose if one wants their child to be religious they should make their life insecure and scary. Like Hell.
Click to expand...

Religion, IMO, is the attempt by primitive cultures to put some sort of human face on the vagaries of wild Nature. Regarding Hell, one of the theories on the reasons why the early Christian church rejected the idea of reincarnation as a doctrine, was because the Church leaders wanted to gain more control over their followers. The theory being that if you believe in the idea of reincarnation, then you could come back time and time again until your soul became perfected. OTOH, if you believe you have only one chance at life--and if you stuff up, you'll go to Hell and stay there--you're far more likely to obey the dictates of the church leadership.
 
one_raven said:
And the response, "if you disagree, then you are ignorant or stupid" is commonplace among those with a myopic viewpoint that have found something to verify what they already believe and consider themselves learned. Everyone is ignorant but you.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: You are putting words in my mouth that I have not stated. I am not saying this as fact but as theory, but one I see as the truth. So be it that no one else understands it. There is quite a bit of research that has been done on this theory by reputable scientists and archeologists (not Acharya S or Jordan Maxwell). I particularly liked Maxwell's web site, and I figure that Acharya has one as well. I have not seen it. Maxwell's was simply easy to read.
 
one_raven said:
I don't think I am. What is teh difference between "uninformed" and "ignorant"?
Click to expand...
************
M*W: Uninformed is someone who hasn't been exposed to something (let's say a specific theory) by whatever reasons (lack of opportunity, lack of interest, fear, etc.). Ignorance is someone who has been exposed to a specific evidence-based theory (or fact) and chooses not to believe it (for whatever reasons). I guess one would need to consider what is evidence-based and what is not. I choose to believe in the astro-theological theory, because it makes sense to me. From the reading I have done by credible authors (which might be too boring for the average bear), I have formed my opinions of how religion evolved, and the theory of astro-theology is the only logical way as I see it.
 
First of all, ignorant is uninformed - if someone has been exposed is not ignorant.
Secondly, I have already told you that I have read quite a bit on Astro-Theology so, by your definition, you were calling me ignorant.

Regardless, it all comes down to the simple fact that if someone disagrees with you they must either be ignorant or stupid, because you couldn't possibly be wrong.

Furthermore, as I pointed out, I agree with teh basic idea that some religious belief started out as worship of the heavens. People watched tehm closely to understand the planting/harvesting time, to read the weather, to navigate - for may reasons.
Plus they were out of reach and mysterious.
The Gods were in the sky.

What I question is how far reacing it is claimed to be and the point of view that many who claim to study "Astro-Theology" that all religion is based in it, and then they go to great lengths and jump across great chasms to prove that point - when there simply is no real evidence for it. "It makes snse to me", and "I see some correlation" IS NOT EVIDENCE - yet many of these people use it as such.

There are many roots to the countless and widely varying belief systems and rituals and they are not all based on the sky.

What most of the evidence seems to point to is that humans worshipped/feared/admired what held sway over their lives and destinies... what was more powerful than them...

As soon as man gained the capacity to reason that he is mortal, he is vulnerable and he is at the mercy of other forces he looked to gain the favor of what he could not conquer.
There were rain gods, animal gods, sky gods, fire gods... Man, in his self-aware state of insignificance took it upon himself to gain as much self-determination as he could muster.
As he got better and better at it - planting and harvesting crops, raising animals, irrigation, etc - the gods began to diminish and become less important.
The more he understood, the more he could control his surrpondings, the less power the gods had over him, therefore the less he cared to worship them - he didn't need to anymore, because he didn't need them anymore.

Self-reliance kills gods.

So yes, there were sky gods and that is the root of quite a few differen traditions and religious beliefs, there are many which are not rooted in the same.
All I have read trying to link Christianity with "Astro-Theology" has failed miserably because there is no link that can be validated at all.
As I said in my first post, most of the "evidence" cited by those trying to do this is gross speculation, misled conjecture and poor examples of attempting language morphology analysis - and I have seen you cite MANY of these pathetic, pseudo-scholarly examples over the years.
 
This is my first post. I was searching for info on astrotheology and saw this post and thought I'd add my two cents.

Basically my sense is that astrotheology is about is the application of 'symbolism' stuck onto the human-invented patterns of the stars (constellations), and the positions of the planets, Sun, Moon to be a framework allowing a visual understanding of important relationships of ideas within human thought about the human condition and about Reality (at least as can be perceived by humans). It does not mean that the mentally projected patterns attached onto the actual sky are "physical realities" in an absolute sense (as the constellations themselves are inventions of humans and their stars are most often not even near each other in actual 3-dimensional space) but are a symbolic system meant to understand something else.

However, if one sees various levels of patterns within Reality as basically a range of magnification levels within a "fractal" Reality (so various levels resemble each other in some fundamental manor which may not seem obvious but upon decoding, perhaps can show a relationship), then representations expressed on one level of thought (as ideas of certain deities, heroes, stories, myths) may correlate to seemingly unrelated levels one normally would feel were unrelated (like a concept of nature or reality - maybe even something like "sacred geometry" - google that). So as a whirlpool of water may look like a spiral galaxy or a tree may resemble the branching capillaries within the lungs (and oddly, performing sort of similar functions!), stories about Heracles may represent some aspect of Reality as expressed in human stories (so if we theoretically strip away all cultural aspects of the story, we may come to a basic almost 'mathematical equation' at the root of that story. Another culture may have this same root equation but the cultural details upon it make it appear like it is different).

As for Heracles 11th labour of defeating the dragon Ladon which was twined around the tree of the Golden Apples of Hesperides ('Hera's orchard in the west, where either a single tree or a grove of immortality-giving golden apples grew'), this could be like Saint George defeating the dragon and this could represent the concept of defeating the untamed primal forces of basic human nature in order to progress towards enlightenment from the ego-based dualism (and this in itself could be a representation of a stage within an almost 'yogic' understanding of human "spiritual feeling" [for lack of a better term] ultimately reaching activation of the 'third eye' or pineal gland of the brain. The dragon Ladon being like the "kundalini (sanskrit for 'coiled') serpent)

An interesting (and not astrotheological) thing to consider is the location of a very large statue of a pine cone at the Vatican. Pine cone motiffs also exist on papal staffs but also on staffs in older Greek use. If research by John Anthony West into symbolic Egyptian understanding is correct, they too had an understanding of the pineal gland as being the basis for human mystical experience (sometimes called 'cosmic consciousness', 'Christ consciousness', even 'I and the Father are One' could be what Christ was supposedly referring to [with the patriarchal word 'father' really meaning the concept of base level of all of Reality that is experienced when transcending ordinary consciousness in this way] - of course most Christians would find this totally incorrect but then again I feel it's possible Christ learned yogic and Buddhist ideas and experience and even survived crucifixion attempt and ended up in Kashmir - google "roza bal" - so I guess I'm a heretic!). The absolute feeling of being fully one and not separate from the whole Universe is an understood goal of yogic and Asian religions - but apparently a blasphemous thing to say or think in the monotheistic religions of the west)

Of course my idea of Heracles (Hercules) defeating the dragon Ladon (constellation Draco?) as representing something like this is just an idea at present. But there is a line of ascent from Scorpius, north through Ophiuchus (the Serpent handler and healer and representation of the Greek Asclepius -whose "Rod of Asclepius" is still the medical symbol today... actually this is a hidden zodiacal constellation with the Sun being within it even longer than in Scorpius) and into Hercules whose foot is upon Draco. Next in line is the north celestial pole. I am trying to research if there may be something represented in this line of constellations to the north celestial pole. It's very interesting to wonder about such things but given the myth of Heracles and the apples of Hesperides, I do wonder!


The whole sky of invented constellations contains mainly mythological representations (mainly Greek but much go further back to older times and some the ancient Greeks didn't even know where their root was from). Whole segments of the constellations have mythological stories attached to them (constellations Andromeda, Perseus, Pegasus, Cepheus, Cassiopeia is a whole main story attached to the sky by human imagination. The sacrifice of the King [Cepheus] and Queen's [Cassiopeia] virgin daughter [Andromeda] to a sea monster [Cetus] or water spirit which is defeated by a hero [Perseus] is the pattern seen in other culture's myths). Many of these constellations and even their stories go back much further and the names may change but often the basic ideas don't (so the constellation Hercules kneeling with a foot upon the dragon Draco does appear to correlate to the older sun-god Izhdubar and the dragon Tiamat (Izhdubar being associated with Nimrod, and even King Gilgamesh of the Sumerians - a basic symbolic story passing through different cultures and renamed)

(there is the idea of Hercules [really, the Greek Heracles] as a solar diety and his twelve labours as symbolic of the solar journey through the zodiacal constellations)

------------

The 12 zodiacal constellations are along the ecliptic and are the apparent path of the Sun throughout the year. There have been alterations throughout history which I haven't fully investigated. Apparently at one time, Scorpius, Libra and Virgo region were of one group. Later Scorpius included the stars of Libra as a larger Scorpion - that area being the claws of the Scorpion as revealed in these star names within Libra today:


Zubeneschamali - altered Arabic for "northern claw"

Zubenelgenubi - altered Arabic for "southern claw"


Eventually Libra as the scales was envisioned.

--------------

Obviously, in the Northern hemisphere, to cultures which had agriculture based upon the the typical four seasonal changes, their activities were centred around the apparent power (and height in the sky) of the Sun throughout the year.

At one point, Leo was the site of the Summer solstice ( ie, when the Sun attained it's apparent highest altitude in the sky). Around 2350BC, the bright star Regulus was very near the Summer Solstice.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Four Evangelists of the Bible as the Four Zodiacal seasonal points
--------------------------------------------------------------

Regulus was one of the ancient Royal Stars. Roughly around 2350BC, these four stars were near the four zodiacal points

1. Fomalhaut (Piscis Australis the 'southern fish') - Winter Solstice. Actually this is below Aquarius and the solstice was within Aquarius
2. Regulus (Leo the lion) - Summer solstice
3. Aldebaran (Taurus the bull) - Vernal Equinox
4. Antares (Scorpius the scorpion) - Autumnal Equinox


Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning" (Richard Hinckley Allen) - Quote from the section on Scorpius

"Sir William Drummond asserted that in the zodiac which the patriarch Abraham knew it was an Eagle"


1. Matthew symbol is the angel and human (Aquarius) - Winter Solstice
2. Mark symbol is the Lion - (Leo the lion) - Summer solstice
3. Luke symbiol is the Ox - (Taurus the bull) - Vernal Equinox
4. John symbol is the Eagle - (Scorpius) - Autumnal Equinox


It's interesting that the reference of Scorpius with an Eagle (or Phoenix - the bird which becomes resurrected) seems to correlate the symbols of the Four Evangelists with these four older zodiacal constellations

These evangelists are represented with these three animal figures and the angel (so these 3 animals and a human). From various sources, they state a correlation of these principle points on the zodiac to these four evangelists which are named for the four books of the New Testament.




Medicine*Woman said:
Jordan Maxwell says it better than I can
Click to expand...

I heard Jordan Maxwell discuss some of this but I didn't listen to all of his recordings. I did hear his explanation of 'precession of the Equinoxes' and it was not correct but it doesn't mean the other ideas are false.

He mentioned the cause being the Sun physically moving throughout the stars of the galaxy but that is definately not the cause of the precession of the equinoxes (The Sun does have a motion around the centre of the actual galaxy but this is not the cause of precession of the equinoxes). Precession of the equinoxes is due to the slow almost 26000 year "wobble" of the direction of the Earth's rotational axis. The angle remains roughly the same but it performs basically a slow circular wobble like a spinning top might wobble whilst still spinning (as example). This appears to be caused by gravitational forces such as from the Moon upon the tidal bulge on the Earth. The visual result )as seen by humans on Earth) is a very slow apparent shift of the solstice and equinox points in the sky over the span of almost 26000 (I can't recall the exact number) years.

This concept is very important to any concerns about astrotheology as it means that over millenia, the whole symbolic representation of what the constellations signify as relating to agricultural cycles, times of spring, summers, autumn, winter (etc) will change.


Another deeper meaning is that the various constellations may have been invented by ancient humans to visually symbolize certain ages of different types of conditions over a period of tens of thousands of years.

Usually accepted and promoted history of civilization gives a certain time range of complicated civilization but according to John Anthony West, rain erosion patterns on the Sphinz in Egypt suggest the body (or at least the surrounding enclosure) was created when the rains were last in that region - over 10500 years ago! This goes against modern official history.

The biblical story of the Great Flood is very similar to the one from the much older Sumerian account in the Epic of Gilgmesh. Other stories around the world may point to a very serious catastophe in the distant past. Personally I have a hunch that the common fear of comets in the sky as dreaded omens reflects back to a time when a very bad catastrophe may have reduced advanced civilization back to a primative level. Could it be possible that rather complex civilizations were around over 10500 years BC?

Of course I don't believe it was "God" (as the Bible claims) or the Sumerian gods who sent a Great Flood (according to the Epic of Gilgamesh, their gods didn't like all the noise humans were making so they wanted to destroy humanity LOL) but human culture would attribute such disasters to gods.

What if there are visual symbols of ages past within the constellations. The location of the solstices/equinoxes over 26000 year cycle of precession could hold clues to some hypothetical trends of climate or change that happen cyclically.


---------------------------------------------------------------
Ram's Horn (Aries?) - Golden Calf (age of Taurus?) - Fish (Pisces?)
---------------------------------------------------------------

Some people do point to the changing of where the vernal equinox point is within the constellations as a correlation to various changes of religions over time (example, the story of Moses coming back with the commandments and seeing the people had made a golden calf... this supposedly as a symbolic reference to Taurus and no longer appropriate as this was the transferance into the age of Aries (Ram ... with the Jewish use of the ram's horn symbol).

The Vernal Equinox within Pisces (the fishes) would be the association with the age of Christianity. Around the time between the switch from BC to AD, the vernal equinox is very near 'omicron Piscium' (a star in the constellation west side and generally along the usual visual shape of that constellation's western side). Reading 'Star Names :Their Lore and Meaning" shows some references to Christ with this constellation (including the fishes he fed the masses with). Other references even going back to opinions of Johannes Kepler involving three consecutive conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter within Pisces

google "star names their lore and meaning" and click Pisces



That's a very good reference to star names and also information on the mythological and symbolic background within the constellations


I have this as a book but sometimes it's easier to do a word-search in the online version. It's originally from the 1800's but since it's subject is from distant history, much info is still ok.


----------
----------


There is definately evidence suggesting many mythological gods are solar dieties and their labours or mythological life stories symbolically mirror passage through the zodiac. The whole death and resurrection is many times symbolic of the cyclic changes from dead winter to summer.

Solstice is latin for solstitium "point at which the sun seems to stand still"

This appears (pre-telescopic naked eye observing) to be about a 3 or so day period from what I've read and it does correlate to the length of time of Easter as well as the time from the Winter Solstice to Christmas day. To ancient humans whose lives depend on growing seasons, the observation of the apparently dead Sun (not gaining any altitude in the sky at local noon over several days) finally starting it's gain in daily altitude was a great symbolic event of rebirth of the Sun.

---------------

In my opinion, the greatest series of lectures I have heard on the subject of not only zodiacal astrotheology but as related to the planets known to the ancients (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn) and two luminaries (Sun , Moon) as symbols of understanding the ancient system of seeing Reality, was by Manly P. Hall.



google : manlyphall org ... and click on astrotheology


Anyone interested in this subject should really really listen to all parts of that series including the "Solar Christmas"


-----------------------------------------------
Tarot cards symbolism as a zodiacal solar journey
-----------------------------------------------


Here's something I'm currently wondering more about. The idea that the major arcana of the Tarot cards represents a series of symbolic representations of the solar journey through the constellations (in my researching, not always the zodiacal ones).

As an example the card 'Strength' may be when the Sun transfers from Leo into Virgo ... as the card shows the woman controlling the jaws of the lion (in most decks).


My opinion of Tarot cards are essentially as visual symbolism that can allow the extraction of subconscious impulses into the conscious. So I dont see them as "telling the future" in the normal way but as symbols to grab out the thoughts that are already just below the surface anyway.

--------------

Anyway, to some, this whole post may seem ridiculous but by thinking of things as symbolic representations of things, instead of "literal history" one can gain a lot of insight from religions, mythologies, alchemical symbols and such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top