in defence of astrotheology

[GakuseiDon]

Let's have some REAL Astrotheology!

While he [[Vitellius]] was behaving in this way, evil omens occurred. A comet was seen, and the moon, contrary to precedent, appeared to suffer two eclipses, being obscured on the fourth and on the seventh day. Also people saw two suns at once, one in the west weak and pale, and one in the east brilliant and powerful. On the Capitol many huge footprints were seen, presumably of some spirits that had descended from it. The soldiers who had slept there on the night in question said that the temple of Jupiter had opened of itself with great clangour and that some of the guards had been so terrified that they fainted.

2 Eclipses!!! 2 Suns!!! 'N not just Signs in the Sky. Giant FOOTPRINTS!
You can't get much more Astrotheological than that! Don't forget that Vespasian was voted a god by the Roman Senate. Those were powerful men who knew what they were doing!

You simply have to be convinced based on this evidence! How could you not be convinced?

(I'm assuming there are [/sarcasm] tags above!) That's my problem also, and the reason I gave the quote from the Fourth Century CE author Sallustius earlier in this thread. There is no doubt that people looked to the skies for omens and signs about the present and the future. But there is no evidence that they built religious views from this, which seems to me to be the grounding of astrotheology. But such things seem to be covered by either astrology or Platonist allegory. There is no need to posit a belief in 'astrotheology' -- it doesn't explain anything that isn't already explained.

I hesitate to introduce the 'P' word here, but if, as Robert Tulip maintains, Christianity was a result of reading the sky of 21 CE, how then do astrotheology proponents explain elements of Christianity existing 5000 years ago?

[Leucius Charinus]

What astrolotheology is NOT:

• Observation of the heavens for purposes of astronomical or even astrological interest or "science".
• Observation of the heavens to determine a calendar and various festivals, seasons, etc.
• Speculations about the nature of the heavenly bodies and how they work.
• The use of astronomical or even astrological images and symbols in narratives that are unrelated to the worship of the heavens.

I don't necessarily agree with this statement. On the basis of discussions above a definition of astrotheology is simply "theology based on astronomical objects". It seems obvious that one cannot simply carve out the astronomy and leave the theology adrift. In the ancient world no such specialisation was really entertained. What is termed "science" above was the study of "physis" [nature]. We can call it proto-science if you like but it still had a working interface to theology. The world was thought to be literally filled with gods and/or "spirits' and/or "daimons". Hierarchies of these entities intermediated between the "Guardian Spirit" of each man (and presumably woman) to the celestial gods in Hermes, Venus, Sol, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn --- the planets and moon Luna - and the One [God] above them all (see Apollonius on Sacrifices as cited in Eusebius)

Although it may be perceived today as valid, in antiquity I think this statement is invalid. Presentism?



LC

[MrMacSon]

I'd like to see some comments that address the evidence mentioned by Price (link above) in defence/support of astrotheology ....

• Extracted and numbered from D.M. Murdock (Acharya S.), Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection.
  Reviewed by Robert M. Price

LC

• D.M. Murdock (Acharya S.), Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection. Stellar House Publishing.
  
  Reviewed by Robert M. Price

[Leucius Charinus]

Let's have some REAL Astrotheology!

While he [[Vitellius]] was behaving in this way, evil omens occurred. A comet was seen, and the moon, contrary to precedent, appeared to suffer two eclipses, being obscured on the fourth and on the seventh day. Also people saw two suns at once, one in the west weak and pale, and one in the east brilliant and powerful. On the Capitol many huge footprints were seen, presumably of some spirits that had descended from it. The soldiers who had slept there on the night in question said that the temple of Jupiter had opened of itself with great clangour and that some of the guards had been so terrified that they fainted.

2 Eclipses!!! 2 Suns!!! 'N not just Signs in the Sky. Giant FOOTPRINTS!
You can't get much more Astrotheological than that! Don't forget that Vespasian was voted a god by the Roman Senate. Those were powerful men who knew what they were doing!

You simply have to be convinced based on this evidence! How could you not be convinced?

(I'm assuming there are [/sarcasm] tags above!)

Let's see. Charles Wilson?

Yes. Auto-insert [/sarcasm] tags. LOL

[/humour-alert]



LC

[GakuseiDon]

I'd like to see some comments that address the evidence mentioned by Price (link above) in defence/support of astrotheology ....

• Extracted and numbered from D.M. Murdock (Acharya S.), Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection.
  Reviewed by Robert M. Price
  
  (1) Hercules’ twelve labors surely mark his progress, as the sun, through the houses of the Zodiac; why do Jesus circumambient twelve disciples not mean the same thing? And so on.
  
  (2) The tale of Joseph and his brethren is already transparently a retelling of Osiris and Set.
  
  (3) The New Testament Lazarus story is another (Mary and Martha playing Isis and Nephthys).
  
  (4) And so is the story of Jesus (Mary Magdalene and the others as Isis and Nephthys).
  
  (5) Jesus (in the “Johannine Thunderbolt” passage, Matthew 11:27//Luke 10:21) sounds like he’s quoting Akhenaten’s Hymn to the Sun. <snipped>

And you'll notice that only the first one has any ramifications for astrotheology. The rest of the above, even if they are the case, are examples of Christianity copying from Egyptian religion. Now it might be that the story of Isis and Osiris were developed using 'astrotheology', and proponents can explore that side. But did Christianity develop those features independently by looking at the skies? Or only some? If there are similarities between Christian and Egyptian religions, shouldn't we first assume copying? And if it is copying, can we say that at least there is NO direct influence of astrotheology on Christianity, only indirectly via Egyptian religion?

I don't want to 'P' all over this thread, but in fact, as I've pushed for previously in other threads, if the features of Garden of Eden, Christ, virgin mother, resurrection, ascension, Horus, Osiris and Isis can be traced to an ancient culture living in Africa 5000 years ago, why do we need astrotheology at all? Why couldn't all those elements have come from that ancient culture?

[MrMacSon]

Let's have some REAL Astrotheology!

While he [[Vitellius]] was behaving in this way, evil omens occurred. A comet was seen, and the moon, contrary to precedent, appeared to suffer two eclipses, being obscured on the fourth and on the seventh day. Also people saw two suns at once, one in the west weak and pale, and one in the east brilliant and powerful. On the Capitol many huge footprints were seen, presumably of some spirits that had descended from it. The soldiers who had slept there on the night in question said that the temple of Jupiter had opened of itself with great clangour and that some of the guards had been so terrified that they fainted.

2 Eclipses!!! 2 Suns!!! 'N not just Signs in the Sky. Giant FOOTPRINTS!

You can't get much more Astrotheological than that! Don't forget that Vespasian was voted a god by the Roman Senate. Those were powerful men who knew what they were doing!

You simply have to be convinced based on this evidence! How could you not be convinced?

CW

Which temple of Jupiter ?

[MrMacSon]

I'd like to see some comments that address the evidence mentioned by Price (link above) in defence/support of astrotheology ....

• Extracted and numbered from D.M. Murdock (Acharya S.), Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection.
  Reviewed by Robert M. Price
  
  (1) Hercules’ twelve labors surely mark his progress, as the sun, through the houses of the Zodiac; why do Jesus circumambient twelve disciples not mean the same thing? And so on.
  
  (2) The tale of Joseph and his brethren is already transparently a retelling of Osiris and Set.
  
  (3) The New Testament Lazarus story is another (Mary and Martha playing Isis and Nephthys).
  
  (4) And so is the story of Jesus (Mary Magdalene and the others as Isis and Nephthys).
  
  (5) Jesus (in the “Johannine Thunderbolt” passage, Matthew 11:27//Luke 10:21) sounds like he’s quoting Akhenaten’s Hymn to the Sun. <snipped>

And you'll notice that only the first one has any ramifications for astrotheology. The rest of the above, even if they are the case, are examples of Christianity copying from Egyptian religion. Now it might be that the story of Isis and Osiris were developed using 'astrotheology', and proponents can explore that side. But did Christianity develop those features independently by looking at the skies? Or only some? If there are similarities between Christian and Egyptian religions, shouldn't we first assume copying? And if it is copying, can we say that at least there is NO direct influence of astrotheology on Christianity, only indirectly via Egyptian religion?

I don't want to 'P' all over this thread, but in fact, as I've pushed for previously in other threads, if the features of Garden of Eden, Christ, virgin mother, resurrection, ascension, Horus, Osiris and Isis can be traced to an ancient culture living in Africa 5000 years ago, why do we need astrotheology at all? Why couldn't all those elements have come from that ancient culture?

I agree the question/s is/are whether

• 1. Christianity incorporated or copied astrotheology from Egyptian religion, or
  2. Christianity primarily developed Christian astrotheology; or
  3. a bit of both

[neilgodfrey]

What astrolotheology is NOT:

• Observation of the heavens for purposes of astronomical or even astrological interest or "science".
• Observation of the heavens to determine a calendar and various festivals, seasons, etc.
• Speculations about the nature of the heavenly bodies and how they work.
• The use of astronomical or even astrological images and symbols in narratives that are unrelated to the worship of the heavens.

I don't necessarily agree with this statement. On the basis of discussions above a definition of astrotheology is simply "theology based on astronomical objects". It seems obvious that one cannot simply carve out the astronomy and leave the theology adrift. In the ancient world no such specialisation was really entertained. What is termed "science" above was the study of "physis" [nature]. We can call it proto-science if you like but it still had a working interface to theology. The world was thought to be literally filled with gods and/or "spirits' and/or "daimons". Hierarchies of these entities intermediated between the "Guardian Spirit" of each man (and presumably woman) to the celestial gods in Hermes, Venus, Sol, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn --- the planets and moon Luna - and the One [God] above them all (see Apollonius on Sacrifices as cited in Eusebius)

Although it may be perceived today as valid, in antiquity I think this statement is invalid. Presentism?



LC

The only definition that matters, I had thought, was Murdock's. That's what Robert's argument is about, is it not?

Astrotheology is the worship of the sun etc and the related mythology that describes them symbolically.

If we include poetic metaphors and astronomy and calendar etc then everything is astrotheological. But Murdock's meaning is quite explicit.

No-one denies astronomical images in the Bible or the importance of calendars for religions. Those things are not in question.

[Robert Tulip]

Astrotheology is not merely observations of the planets etc. It is the worship of the celestial phenomena -- worship of the planets, sun, moon, constellations. This worship was enabled by the creation of stories to tell the stories of the movements such as the equinoxes and precession, eclipses, etc -- and these stories were the myths that many have interpreted literally. The myths are really symbolic for the movements and characteristics of the heavenly bodies.

Reverence, awe and veneration for the power and glory of nature are themes found in the writings of the greatest scientists, from Leonardo and Copernicus to Newton, Einstein, Darwin and Dawkins. Considering how the ancients saw the stable order of the cosmos as a divine reality readily provide a link to a pietistic and even a magical sense of worship. Such practice was widespread, and was the subject of controversy in the early rise of monotheism, as attested by the destruction by King Josiah of the horses of the sun in the Jewish Temple.

http://biblehub.com/2_kings/23-11.htm He removed from the entrance to the temple of the LORD the horses that the kings of Judah had dedicated to the sun. They were in the court near the room of an official named Nathan-Melek. Josiah then burned the chariots dedicated to the sun.

Earlier in this thread a respondent suggested the Deuteronomic view is definitive for Judaism. However, the clash with the sun worshipers illustrates how contested the patriarchal religion described in Kings really is. This clash includes a large dose of sexual politics, linked to the Exodus 34 injunction to destroy the sacred groves of female religion.

Religious themes such as worship and prayer are highly controversial from a modern scientific perspective. The ethics of positivism suggest we should reject worship on principle. However, the popular scale and comfort of religious practice makes that academic disdain of limited value. My view on the role of astrotheology today is that it enables us to put religious myths onto a scientific footing, by seeing their likely origins in reverence for nature. This recognition has potential to help reform popular religion by making it compatible with science.

Like in Freudian psychoanalysis and Jungian depth psychology, astrotheology sees literal readings of myth as a symbolic corruption of original real insights. Working out what that insight could most probably be is a rigorous scientific research program, with potential also to rehabilitate some grand metaphysical concepts, such as worship, grace, faith and salvation.

[neilgodfrey]

Astrotheology is not merely observations of the planets etc. It is the worship of the celestial phenomena -- worship of the planets, sun, moon, constellations. This worship was enabled by the creation of stories to tell the stories of the movements such as the equinoxes and precession, eclipses, etc -- and these stories were the myths that many have interpreted literally. The myths are really symbolic for the movements and characteristics of the heavenly bodies.

Reverence, awe and veneration for the power and glory of nature are themes found in the writings of the greatest scientists, from Leonardo and Copernicus to Newton, Einstein, Darwin and Dawkins.

I share their sense of wonder and awe but "reverence" (okay, if loosely defined as "wonder and awe") and "veneration"????

What's with this attempt to garner the "great names" to bolster your evangelizing efforts? That's what the fundies do.

Einstein, Darwin, Dawkins "venerated/worshiped" nature/the cosmos? They were into astrotheology? Baloney!

Should we all believe Darwin "venerated nature" and jump on the astrotheological wagon with you because of that?

Why do we need to look to "great names" to feel awestruck by the world and cosmos around us? Can't we feel this sense of wonder without this astrotheological nonsense?

Newton was a bit of a nutter so maybe but I doubt it. Copernicus I also doubt. Leonardo, well we all know he painted coded astrotheological motifs into his great works, don't we! (not)