Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 41
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun Page 2 of 5    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

Easter is derived from early Greek Christianity.

From Wiki
The estrous cycle (also oestrous cycle; derived from Latin oestrus and originally from Greek οἶστρος meaning sexual desire) comprises the recurring physiologic changes that are induced by reproductive hormones in most mammalian placental females. Estrous cycles start after puberty in sexually mature females and are interrupted by anestrous phases or pregnancies.

Interesting, but I am still going with this etymology:
bef. 900; ME ester, OE ēastre; c. G Ostern; orig. name of a goddess and her festival; akin to east

O.E. Eastre (Northumbrian Eostre ), from P.Gmc. *Austron, a goddess of fertility and sunrise whose feast was celebrated at the spring equinox, from *austra-, from PIE *aus- "to shine" (especially of the dawn). Bede says Anglo-Saxon Christians adopted her name and many of the celebratory practices for their Mass of Christ's resurrection. Ultimately related to east. Almost all neighboring languages use a variant of Latin Pasche to name this holiday.

If Jesus was born on 25 Dec or 21 Dec or even 6 January he had to be conceived at Easter.

But even Christian scholars admit that he wasn't born on the solstice. As I explained, his birth date was adapted from preceding deities born on or around the solstice, including Mithras.

Easter is 3 seasons before the Winter Equinox
The use of 3 appears in the Trinity and 3 wise men.

The number 3 is a sacred number in every religion/mythos that I have read or studied. It far predates Jesus.

In addition, the three wise men--the magi--were most likely Persian Zoroastrians--Christianity has Zoroastrian overtones, especially with the idea of a one god with an intermediary between the god and humans: Ahura Mazda and Mithra.

Paul was fresh from Greek colony Taursis where they worshipped Mithras, half man half bull.

Mithras (the Roman adoption of the Persian/Indian god Mithra/Mitra) was not half bull and half man: he had human form, but in the most prevalent piece of iconography in which he is depicted, he is performing a tauroctony.

But I agree with you: Paul jumped on the bandwagon and, in reality, Christianity as we know it should be called "Paulinity." It has been suggest that Paul was a follower of Mithras before he was struck with hysterical blindness (mind you, I don't believe the account of his experience). Christian beliefs share quite a bit with Mithraic beliefs.

However, as a mystery religion, Mithraists did NOT record their practices or beliefs, and pretty much everything we know about them is from secondary sources. If new research proves that they ate flesh and drank blood, I would like the source!

I am not sure that children were physically sacrificed to Molech or Ba'al: it could have been a symbolic sacrifice. Aliens seeing a baptism could easily think the preacher is trying to drown the person being baptized.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 43
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/7/2011 7:52:06 AM
Ouch, Gershwin! For some reason, POF decided to put all the javascript explanations of your smilies, making the post hard to read.

The entire Christian Scripture is suspect, and many of the people within have been mythologized even IF they ever existed. I have not heard of Judas being a non-person before, but I find the concept interesting.

The idea of Jesus surviving the crucifixion is an old one, but I dunno: the Romans were pretty thorough in their duties.

I did find a tidbit and wish that I had noted where I read it. The Jews did not close the "door" to a tomb for three days--probably to make sure that the dead person was really dead and not in a coma. When the women returned to Jesus's tomb on the third day and the door of the tomb had been rolled away, no big deal!
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 46
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/10/2011 12:47:17 PM
tall2012 wrote:
so here we have christ supposedly overcome death but saying he can't yet be touched does this imply that some hidden bio logical process was still occuring ? if so what could it of been

it's strange because on the evening before he has yet to ascend to the father he lets Thomas who doubted him put his hand inside the wound on his body ?

im yet to get a satisfactory explanation to this query from one of the believing flock.

I doubt that there is a satisfactory explanation for this! For one thing, how would they touch him AFTER he had ascended to his father?

I haven't heard the flock's explanation for this, but I have a couple of my own.

1. Their touch would defile him. Yup, he's been dead and resurrected, but because he had not yet ascended, perhaps the possibility of being tainted still existed.

2. But that doesn't explain why Thomas could touch him and the women couldn't. Perhaps women are less clean than are men! This has some basis; for example, menstruating women were unclean. When the Jews were wandering in the desert, during menstruation, women were sent to their own tent. They were prohibited from doing many activities so they wouldn't taint food, etc.

3. Archetypally speaking, gods were not to be touched. When Zeus approached a mortal, he always hid his form (or turned into an animal) because the women the seduced (or raped) would be die at his touch. Psyche couldn't look at Eros because of his glorious appearance. Maybe the women would have been zapped if they had touched him.

But that still doesn't explain why Thomas could touch him.

I take it as another Biblical contradiction.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 48
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/10/2011 9:04:26 PM

Why is there a contradiction? What you are doing is applying "rules for gods" of other "gods" to jesus, and saying that since HE didn't live up to those rules, it is a contradicion. Whatever Zeus or Eros did or didn't do has nothing to do with Jesus........

The contradiction applied to the question of why the women couldn't touch Jesus because he hadn't ascended, but later in the day, Thomas could touch him. He hadn't ascended then, either. I was not speaking of a contradiction that connected him to other deities.

Please do not take what I say out of context and read more closely.

But as for what Zeus or Eros did, well, they have "something" to do with Jesus--as do other pagan deities.

For one thing, Zeus impregnated Danae without having sex with her: an "immaculate" conception, if you will. Mithra was born of the virgin, Anahita. The Roman Mithra had a dinner with his disciples and ascended to heaven. He was born on December 25.

Jesus has "something" to do with Inanna, who was killed and remained dead for three days. In fact, Jesus has "something" to do with every dying and resurrected deity. Dionysus was hung on a tree and his followers ate his flesh and drank his blood.

Each "new" religion is built on the backs of the religions preceding them: Christianity draws from Judaism (which draws from older religions), but it also draws from the Greek and bodies of myth found in other cultures.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 51
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/11/2011 8:38:18 PM

maybe from thinking about it the term "touch me not" wasn't ment in a don't touch me at all situation? but rather in a don't cling to me mary and go and tell my brethren im back ?

But he didn't say, "Don't cling to me because I need you to go tell the guys that I have returned."

He said:
"Jesus saith to her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father: but go unto my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God. Matthew 20:17
American Standard Version

The New American Standard Bible words it differently:

Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"

(The semicolon is incorrectly used in the above passage. The colon in the first passage is marginally correct and really should be a comma in both instances.)

Even from the angle of semantics, the sentence can't be manipulated to mean that she shouldn't touch (or cling to) him because she should run tell the guys, but because he had not ascended to the father.

These different translations do point out inherent problems with the Bible being the word of god: to say "don't touch me" is quite different from "stop clinging to me." The former indicates she didn't touch him, but the latter indicates she was already clinging to him.

So, which is it? I don't read Greek so I can't translate it for myself.

I'll tell you what it means, though: it means that people will interpret the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures to fit their own needs and wants, and to conform with what they have been taught or want to believe. And, like King James, will have translators deliberately translate incorrectly for a gain.

Humans! Go figure!
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 52
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/11/2011 8:56:22 PM
Hey, Paul, I have spent years studying myth and religion--with an emphasis on archetypal myth and images. What I say is based on people who have studied the same topic(s) even longer than I have.

It doesn't matter if all religions are based on faith: they share commonalities that serve as empirical evidence to their common base. The flood, the dying and resurrected deity, and creation myths are three common motifs in many, many religions that have the same characteristics. I don't discuss faith: I discuss what can is shown by research and empirical evidence. Some of what I discuss is theory, but logical theory based, again, on research.

When you have spent over a decade reading, writing, and teaching about archetypal myth, then we will have something to discuss.

Truth is subjective, relative to time periods, cultures, and individuals. People with faith have their "truths," but it is not necessarily the "TRUTH," yet very few Christians have ever told me that their beliefs are anything but the absolute truth, given to them by their god.

As for allowing religions to set their own rules . . . um, haven't they done so? I can't remember the last time that I set any rule for a Christian, Jew, Muslim, or Hindu. In fact, none of them consulted me as to what it is he/she believe.

I find it laughable that you tell me to give them the "courtesy" not to change what they should believe. Christians are in these forums dispensing the word of their god: I was indoctrinated by Christians since I was old enough to understand the spoken word.

I have never gone door-to-door handing out religious tracts trying to get people to believe what I believe. I have never approached total strangers in restaurants to tell them the good news of Jesus Christ. I have never stood on a street corner preaching to the people passing by. I have never told my neighbor or friend that he/she should believe what I believe. I have never stopped my car in the middle of the road to tell someone working in his/her yard about Jesus. I have never told ONE person that he/she should be executed because he/she didn't believe like me. I have never stood outside a funeral home, shouting horrible things to the bereaved. I have never told a gay person that he/she should suffer for being gay. I have never advocated one religion over another. I have never tried to abridge someone's constitutional rights because he/she is of a certain faith, nor lobbied to make my belief a law of the land.

I have had all these things done or said to me and witnessed others. So, please, don't preach to me about courtesy and respect.

In addition, I am not trying to take anyone's faith away, but when someone in a forum puts forth a biblical truism as "fact," I have the right to counter, eh?
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 54
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/12/2011 5:54:08 PM

What you have here are SIMILARITIES, and some of them are a bit too far to be even recognized as similarities. For you to say that because there are similarities, which is all you have, because Mithra was born of a virgin, or that Jesus had "something to do" with every dying and ressurreted "deity", is beyond a stretch. That is like saying that every child born in a rain storm has "something to do with" every other child born in a rain storm.

Paul, you just don't get it, and I am just not willing to spend anymore time presenting information that you will shoot down because you don't understand my points (and don't want to understand them).

I teach archetypal myth, and for seven years, I have been filling college students' heads with the connections that you can't make.

They make the connections, even the Christians. Even Christian apologetics "get" it, though they propose outlandish theories to explain the connections, including the claim that Satan knew Jesus would be born and started the myths to discredit Jesus when he got here.

Again, when you have studied archetypal myth for over a decade, then we'll resume the conversation.

If I didn't recommend it already, read JF Bierlein's book Parallel Myths; it's a good start.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 56
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/16/2011 8:02:02 AM

On-topic: Yes it makes sense the Romans were thorough. OTOH we (maybe) have a battle of wills. (I saw "The Robe", a gory thing about 1st Century columseums-and-you-know-what.) The wills of some not-completely-bright soldiers vs a sometimes-acknowledged-to-be Xtra bright person with direct influence from the Maccabbee movement -- and his will.

Oh and there is (in The Robe) the politics among the soldiers there. (Who could get this seamless outer garment. And in one gospel, talk of jessup or something which would do a numbing -- offered

Ah, but my dear friend Gershwin, although the gladiatorial games where real, the circumstances of that movie were totally fictitious!

I am by no means an expert on the Roman army and its soldiers, but I know the army was highly effective; in part, this was because the soldiers knew their place and performed accordingly. A soldier's duty was to obey the commands of his superior. Soldiers didn't have to be smart, only able to understand and obey orders, strong and able to fight. The common soldier was not from the upper ranks of society; in fact, I would wager a brilliant man would not have made a good foot soldier in the Roman army.

Any experts on the Roman army here?
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 59
view profile
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/17/2011 4:38:01 PM
I agree with Paul K, dear Gwendollyn. You cannot argue with faith, by merely using factual history with people who refuse to consider another source than their own echo chambers. So what if all the mythology of the Bible was borrowed/plagerized by traditions thousands of years prior. New publishers, authors, publicists, and pundits will always win over uncopyrighted materials from millenia prior. Works today as it always has, forever and ever, amen. Then they had swords and the we have nukes and the cross...and drones..and mercenaries from Haliburton and Xe, Joel's Army, Reverend Beck and Mother Sarah, the War On Christmas, and a host of other actors to keep the Sun/Son at the forefront of perfection at gunpoint. Praise JEESUS.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 60
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/18/2011 7:21:08 AM

Again, similarities do not connections make. Seven years of mythical studies? Oh, I get it much better than you realize, but am willing to say to you that just because there are similiarities, that doesn't mean that they have all somehow evolved from the same myth.

1. You don't read well: I have been teaching myth for seven years but have been studying it much longer. One doesn't sit up one day to say, "I think that I will teach a deep subject such as myth with no background and having done no research!"

2. I told you, when you have spent years and years studying the same topic, get back to me. I expect to hear from you again in about ten years.

3. I base what I say off studies done for a hundred years by reputable scholars beginning with James Frazier, continuing on to Joseph Campbell, Robert Graves, JF Bierlein, Karl Jung, and others.

4. You can be willing to say anything you like.

I agree with Paul K, dear Gwendollyn. You cannot argue with faith, by merely using factual history with people who refuse to consider another source than their own echo chambers.

Earthpuppy, truer words have rarely been spoken in these forums.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 62
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/18/2011 8:18:14 PM

Hey Gwendollyn

I am not questioning your expertise in the area of the mythical, but there is not much difference in substance when it comes to discussing comics and mythology, as neither is founded in fact.

Are there similarities between the disaprate myths? Yes, just as both Batman and Superman had capes........................ So what? What is the point, they are just myths........... I understand that there are actual real college degrees on the study of comic book characters today too. The difference between mythological studies and comic book studies is the age of one versus the other.

As far as pme studying mythology for 10 years, don't hold your breath, it is not that exciting to me. To you it may hold all kinds of interest, and that is fine..........

Thanks for the input about something of which you know nothing.

Joined: 7/12/2006
Msg: 63
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 1/31/2011 11:17:50 PM
The 25th was chosen because it was the Date of Saturnalia

It was the most popular Roman holiday.
below is quoted from the link above
"The Saturnalia was the most popular holiday of the Roman year. Catullus (XIV) describes it as "the best of days," and Seneca complains that the "whole mob has let itself go in pleasures" (Epistles, XVIII.3). Pliny the Younger writes that he retired to his room while the rest of the household celebrated (Epistles, II.17.24). It was an occasion for celebration, visits to friends, and the presentation of gifts, particularly wax candles (cerei), perhaps to signify the returning light after the solstice, and sigillaria. Martial wrote Xenia and Apophoreta for the Saturnalia. Both were published in December and intended to accompany the "guest gifts" which were given at that time of year. Aulus Gellius relates that he and his Roman compatriots would gather at the baths in Athens, where they were studying, and pose difficult questions to one another on the ancient poets, a crown of laurel being dedicated to Saturn if no-one could answer them (Attic Nights, XVIII.2).

During the holiday, restrictions were relaxed and the social order inverted. Gambling was allowed in public. Slaves were permitted to use dice and did not have to work. Instead of the toga, less formal dinner clothes (synthesis) were permitted, as was the pileus, a felt cap normally worn by the manumitted slave that symbolized the freedom of the season. Within the family, a Lord of Misrule was chosen. Slaves were treated as equals, allowed to wear their masters' clothing, and be waited on at meal time in remembrance of an earlier golden age thought to have been ushered in by the god. In the Saturnalia, Lucian relates that "During My week the serious is barred; no business allowed. Drinking, noise and games and dice, appointing of kings and feasting of slaves, singing naked, clapping of frenzied hands, an occasional ducking of corked faces in icy water—such are the functions over which I preside."

This equality was temporary, of course. Petronius speaks of an impudent slave, who had burst out laughing, being asked whether it was December yet (Satyricon, LVIII). Dio writes of Aulus Plautius cajoling his troops in his invasion of Britain. But they hesitated, "indignant at the thought of carrying on a campaign outside the limits of the known world." Only when they were entreated by a former slave dispatched by Claudius did they relent, shouting Io, Saturnalia (LX.19.3)."

When Romans became Christians they merged their culture into the new religion,
changing themselves and the religion in the process. It leaves an odd mix. While Jesus and his teachings are Jewish, a lot of Christian symbolism, holidays, and paraphernalia are of Pagan origin.

Just like in some African churches you will see Black Jesus and African feast days are celebrated with(or on) Christian feast Holidays.
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 64
view profile
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/2/2011 3:24:09 AM
Haven't seen Jesus in a cape yet, but Godman has one.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 65
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/2/2011 3:44:02 PM
Pups, that is hilarious. I bookmarked the page so I can go back and read the tales.
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 66
view profile
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/2/2011 4:02:13 PM
He deals with the "hands-off" delinquent dude quite hilariously. His gospel is every bit as relevant as most of the others. Steve..aka Swami Beyondananda, also covers this space.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 68
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/3/2011 3:03:53 PM

Gregorius's reform moved the calendar back to where it was in Roman times, and reduced the rate of the calendar's steady longterm drift from that position.

I didn't know that--so I did a bit of research! (Not that wikipedia is a great source, but it is quick.)

I found:

The fact that we use the same month names as the Romans encourages us to assume that a Roman date occurred on the same Julian date as its modern equivalent. This assumption is not correct.

How does that affect the lining up of the solstice with ancient calendar dates?

Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 73
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/5/2011 5:03:47 PM

Most human cultures have gone through similar developmental paths, so it only stands to reason that the heritage of cultural development of each nation left the same stamps of important lessons to preserve, in its stories of deital and religious mythologies.

I think this is what Gwndln was trying to tell to K, but she was for some reason or another tongue-tied about it.

This is a forum on Dec. 25 and why Jesus was assigned the birthdate. I didn't realize it would turn into a forum concerning archetypal myth, but I am not tongue-tied.

Jung, of course, said the existence of archetypal myth is ingrained in our subconscious--collectively and personally. They are the result of repeated acts and experiences of our earliest ancestors.

The dispersion or diffusion theory says that there was a central culture with certain beliefs. As the people from this culture migrated over the globe, they took their beliefs with them. As time passed and more distance was put between the immigrants and their core society, the essence of the myths remained the same.

There are other theories, as well, at least for visual symbols such as the swastika and pentagram. The swastika might be a representation of a type of comet seen worldwide.

Maybe it is all three.

I tend more toward the dispersion theory, but where was this culture located? I like Jung's theory, and it might have some validity as evidenced by dreams: we have the same types of dreams--flying, being caught naked in public, etc. Why are some dreams so widely experienced? Dreaming is not a learned behavior; we personalize our dreams, but why the similar ones?

There is much, much more to be said on the topic, but it takes forever to type information and give enough detail for everyone to understand.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 75
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/5/2011 8:04:23 PM

The ingredients missing from certain cultures are a key to understanding that not all cultures are the same, in their mythological development. Or maybe some lost part of their teachings -- hard to believe, but hey, it's possible.

By no means have I studied every mythos of every culture, but the commonalities of certain myths are undeniable--even given the differences in the myths and the cultures.

For example, creation myths--from Egypt to preColumbian America to Africa, they have the same elements: darkness, a void, an abyss, nothingness, chaos, or as the Norse put it, the "grinning gap" or Ginnungagap. The first being arises from the abyss and creates the universe, instilling order. The tales often contain one or several other aspects such as the cosmic or universal egg, a snake/serpent, a world tree, and the separation of the earth and heavens/firmaments. Humans are most often made from clay.

The myths vary according to the culture and geography. Ginnungagap has fire on one side and ice on the other: volcanoes and glaciers. Sometimes the first being is hermaphroditic, sometimes it is female, and with the advent of the patriarchies, it is male. The development of myth in cultures is not as different as one might think.

I never dreamt being caught naked or catching someone naked.

Being naked in public in a dream is usually interpreted as the fear of being caught unawares or exposed. For some, it is a true nightmare, but for anyone who can have this type of dream and it isn't a nightmare, it means that they have learned to deal with the fear.

Dreams of flying are quite common, and they can take the same format. I was surprised once to read about the commonalities of some flying dreams because I had a flying dream that, apparently, others had shared the facets.

The dream of falling is also quite common, but I am not sure if that is not prompted by a physiological reaction.

Our dreams are sometimes personal myths; I have a recurring wave dream (Tolkien and Jung both had at least one wave dream) that has taken many different scenarios, but there is always a wave/water and the danger of being engulfed. While the wave dream is shared by others, it is personalized by each person.

Other dreams are flotsam and jetsam from the day.

I used to do meditations that would veer from my guidance and go in a direction of their own. As I was surprised about the wave dream, I was also surprised to read something Jung wrote--I don't remember in which of his writings I found it, but the steps he outlined for the dream or "waking" dream paralleled one of my own so closely, it was spooky.

I call them archetypes--other people can call them what they will, but they do exist.

Even if you haven't had one!
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 80
view profile
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/8/2011 7:50:48 PM
Jesus, Horus, Krishna, Dionysus, Mithra, et all... Sun Set...
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 81
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/8/2011 8:31:25 PM

Jesus, Horus, Krishna, Dionysus, Mithra, et all... Sun Set...

Gasp! Someone brought the thread back on topic! (Grin.)
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 83
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/9/2011 5:37:55 AM

one thing im not understanding about the video it states that on December 22,23,24 when the sun appears to stop in its decent south that it resides in the vacinity of the Crux constellation or Southern cross

Yeah, that one gave me pause as well. I think, while the presenter is making some valid points, I think he's stretching it quite a bit for the sake of the win.
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 85
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/9/2011 6:37:05 AM

but would the precession of the equinox alter the observed path of the sun through the constellations ? would there be a period of time in the last 26.000 yrs when crux and other constellation would of been in the suns yearly observed path ?

Only in the timings and the height we see constellations in the sky from any particular location on Earth. For instance, 10,000 years ago, several of the southern sky constellations that are invisible in our sky now would be visible above the southern horizon. Meanwhile, some circumpolar constellations would actually set, etc.

I ran a simulation similar to the one you did with astronomy software and, in 2000 BC, the sun was in Capricornus during the winter solstice but, by 11 AD, was closer to Sagittarius. Nowadays, it's closer to Scorpius.

For the actual paths of the planets against the background constellations to change, Earth's orbit inclination or the entire sun's rotation axis would have to change drastically. Since that's not likely to happen without major disruption to...well...everything, it's not going to be a factor.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 86
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/9/2011 7:17:43 AM

Yeah, that one gave me pause as well. I think, while the presenter is making some valid points, I think he's stretching it quite a bit for the sake of the win.

I have seen this video in the past and didn't watch all of it again, though I might later. I don't track the stars, so I don't know about the constellations.

However, when I saw the video, I thought at that time it made some points for the "win" that might not jibe with the "facts."

Damn. Now I will have to watch it to remember what they were.

Regardless, the birth of Jesus was deliberately placed to coincide with the birth of Mithras and other sun deities. Jesus is one more dying and resurrected god in a long line of dying and resurrected gods and goddesses.
Joined: 1/22/2006
Msg: 88
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/9/2011 11:54:10 AM

i heard they were called Celtic crosses and the circle merely represents eternity is this true ?

Circles are generally symbols for eternity, as is the figure 8, particularly when it is on its side. A pentagram becomes a pentacle when placed inside a circle--representing the five elements and eternity.

Maybe the maker of the video had inaccurate information and didn't know it.
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 90
view profile
Dec 25th new Son or new Sun
Posted: 2/10/2011 4:12:29 AM
I start celebrating the solsice on December 11th lately. During the darkest time of the year, I still strive to make it home to watch the sunset as part of my seasonal affective therapy. On Decemeber 10th, the sun sets at 5:29 here. On the 11th, it sets at 5:30 and continues to lengthen from there, even as sunrises come later till the solstice. One gets desparate to celebrate the littlest glimmers of hope in the winters.

The Cross, aka the four directions, have long been around well before christian mythology and independent of that mythology concurrent on different continents. It's just another symbol co-opted for the cause.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >