In Genesis the heavens and the earth are deities capable of having children. Adam and Eve are their children and they represent the sun (Adam) and the moon (Eve). The whole idea that they were real people is just nuts.
The idea that A&E are real people isn’t nuts.
I suppose believing in the talking serpent is a sane belief as well? The serpent was the constellation of Draconis. This is the constellation that was in the celestial polar region at the time. The tree in the garden is the Celestial Pole. The story represented the age of Gemini. The Exodus is a metaphor for the crossing of the age of Taurus into the age of Aries.
I didn’t allude to that in any way. The story of a talking serpent sounds nuts, not so the existence of Adam and Eve depending on context.
So you want to pick apart the story and decide for yourself what is real and what isn’t. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. Plus when you do that you miss the whole point of the story. This is the basis of religion: not understanding what you’re reading.
Nice goalposts shifting. From what’s “nuts” to what’s “real”, two completely different situations. Something that seems nuts can be real and vice versa.
Human evolution is probably the best established science we have. Ignoring the facts of evolution is nuts. You can be excused for not having a clue about the astrological basis for the biblical narratives. Most people don’t.
Where are you getting this, and what sort of evidence is there?
I have read and studied the Bible which gives me a distinct advantage over those who believe it. People indoctrinated with religion have trouble telling the difference between fact and fiction or what’s nuts and what isn’t. My sources are the Septuagint and the New Testament. Also “Oedipus Judaicus: Allegory in the Old Testament” by William Drummond and “The Devil’s Pulpit” a collection of sermons authored by Robert Taylor. Although these books were published around 200 years ago they are still valuable tools in the study of New Age religions which both Judaism and Christianity are.
None of that seems responsive to my question, at first blush. I’m suspecting you of being a crank with a pet theory, which is a new addition to your resumé.
Have you actually read through the Bible yourself? Let me help you along here.
Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years,
Psalm 19:1-4 The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night declares knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard; yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In the heavens he has set a tent for the sun, which comes out like a bridegroom from his wedding canopy, and like a strong man runs its course with joy. Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them; and nothing is hid from its heat.
Romans 10:18 But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have; for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.”
Now what kind of a voice could be understood by everyone regardless of what language(s) they speak? “He who has ears, let him hear.” - Matthew 11:15
Sorry, but that’s a very crank-like selective sequence of quotations. It doesn’t support your thesis about the meaning of Genesis.
Okay, let’s see your explanation. It’s not my thesis. It’s a widely held view among experts in the study of astrotheology and has been for 2500 years. Like the biblical writers for example. The biblical narratives borrowed from Homer also, which is neck deep in astrotheology as well
If this thesis is “widely held view among experts”, then perhaps you should have cited those experts rather than semi-random Biblical verses.
I am having a hard time establishing whether “astrotheology” has any significant acceptance and/or authority within Christian theology more generally. The fact that you claim that Homer is “neck deep in astrotheology” adds further to the question whether astrotheology is part of orthodox Christian Theology. It does not help that the term seems to have been used for a number of (apparently only loosely related) ideas over time.
I did. “Oedipus Judaicus: Allegory in the Old Testament” by William Drummond and “The Devil’s Pulpit” a collection of sermons authored by Robert Taylor.
The Death of Hector and the Crucifixion of Jesus
Iliad — Mark 15:21-41
Iliad: The audience already knows Achilles will kill Hector.
Mark: The audience already knows the Romans, at the behest of the Jewish leaders, will kill Jesus.
Iliad: Apollo’s beloved Hector had evaded death several times.
Mark: God’s beloved Son Jesus, had evaded death several times.
Iliad: Hector’s troops fled Troy and left Hector to face his enemies alone.
Mark: Jesus’ disciples fled Jerusalem and left Jesus face his enemies alone.
Iliad: Zeus had passed judgment that Hector must die. Achilles taunted Hector
Mark: Pilate had passed judgment that Jesus must die. The soldiers taunted Jesus .
Iliad: Hector called his brother Deiphobus for help, but he had disappeared.
Mark: Some in the crowd thought Jesus was calling to Elijah for help.
Iliad: Hector accepted his fate because the gods had forsaken him.
Mark: Jesus accepted his fate but asked why God had forsaken him.
Iliad: Hector’s soul went to Hades. Dante considered Hector to be one of the few truly virtuous Pagans and so in The Inferno Dante wrote that Hector was in Limbo rather than Hell.
Mark: Jesus gave a loud shout and died.
Iliad: The Trojans mourned Hector as though Troy had been destroyed “from top to bottom.”
Mark: Jesus’ death foreshadowed the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple; the veil was rent “from top to bottom.”
Iliad: Achilles bragged that he had just slain the one the Trojans considered a god.
Mark: The centurion bragged that he had just killed he who was “truly” the son of God.
Iliad: The women of Troy watched Hector’s death from their walls.
Mark: The women watched Jesus’ crucifixion and death from a distance.
No Boris. A two-centuries-old book by a figure whose principle employment was Politics and Diplomacy, rather than Theology or Biblical Studies, and which has been described as “most scandalously, a highly unorthodox form of allegorical biblical interpretation” and the 150yo “Sermons” of a self-proclaimed “Infidel” do not count as “expert” sources in the field of Theology. They are at best highly fringe sources, and archaic ones at that.
Taylor may have termed his claims “astrotheology”, but I have seen no indication of modern acceptance of his appropriation of that label. In its modern sense, “astrotheology” appears to apply rather to theological reactions and commentary on Space Sciences such as Astrobiology (a field that didn’t even exist in Drummond’s and Taylor’s times).
Lengthy, and utterly beside the point. Let me repair your brutal contextomy of my original statement:
Nothing of your mind-numbingly tedious recitation of Mark and the Iliad is in any way responsive to this “question” I raised.
As far as I can see, none of these speculations have achieved any wider acceptance in either Theological, or Biblical Studies, circles. Thus, they are an irrelevant sideshow.
Did I say otherwise?
Did I ignore any facts of evolution? If yes, state it.
An ancient existence of A&E can be factual and still not clash with evolution. Haven’t you heard of GAE?
“Experts in the study of astrotheology” seem to be a small group of fringe workers. That’s like saying that the phlogiston theory is a widely held view among experts in the study of phlogistonology.
This is the problem with religion. You and other religionists value the opinions of people most of whom believe in magic and fairies and have a religious agenda they want to protect, as well as their jobs at any cost - facts and truth be damned. And you value these opinions over those who have actually done actual unbiased studies of the Bible and where its stories actually came from. You not only haven’t read these books, you didn’t even know they existed until I told you about them and then you Googled them. Then you post ad hominem attacks on people you never heard of. I went to college so I don’t have to rely on Professor Google. As an atheist I want to be as far away as possible from “expert” sources in the field of theology as this field is the study of nothing - a subject without an object. The fact that you found my comparisons of the Bible to Homer “mind-numbing” instead of interesting tells me all I need to know about your “orthodox” follow the leaders view of the Bible and Christianity which is truly an irrelevant sideshow.
No it cannot. There’s no such thing as the first two of any species. The change from predecessor species to more modern ones is so gradual it is impossible to tell where to draw a line, because there is no line.