Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph2ter

It is not so hard to find from where the fish came into play:

But he [Jesus] answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was in the belly of the huge fish for three days and three nights, so the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. The people of Nineveh will stand up at the judgement with this generation and condemn it, because they repented when Jonah preached to them – and now, something greater than Jonah is here!"

Matthew 12:39-41

Sorry, that is incredibly circular!

Why did the gospel writer(s) think these symbols were important? What are the beliefs, the archetypes, the myths that lead to stories about bellies of whales, and then getting them repeated but changed in the passion story - in a similar fashion to West Side Story being a rewrite of Romeo and Juliet?

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Although the general idea of an archetype is well recognized, there is considerable confusion as regards their exact nature and the way they result in universal experiences. The confusion about the archetypes can partly be attributed to Jung's own evolving ideas about them in his writings and his interchangeable use of the term "archetype" and "primordial image". Strictly speaking, archetypal figures such as the hero, the goddess and the wise man are not archetypes, but archetypal images which have crystallised out of the archetypes-as-such.

Jung described: archetypal events: birth, death, separation from parents, initiation, marriage, the union of opposites etc., archetypal figures: mother, father, child, God. trickster, hero, wise old man etc. and archetypal motifs: the Apocalypse, the Deluge, the Creation, etc.

However the precise relationships between images such as, for example, "the fish" and its archetype were not adequately explained by Jung. Here the image of the fish is not strictly speaking an archetype. However the "archetype of the fish" points to the ubiquitous existence of an innate "fish archetype" which gives rise to the fish image. In clarifying the contentious statement that fish archetypes are universal; Anthony Stevens explains that the archetype-as-such is at once an innate predisposition to form such an image and a preparation to encounter and respond appropriately to the creature per se. This would explain the existence of snake and spider phobias, for example, in people living in urban environments where they have never encountered either creature.[4]

Jung also proposed the existence of the Self, the anima, the animus and the shadow as psychological structures having an archetypal nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian_archetypes

I am very puzzled how it is, where religion is clearly dealing with critical psychological issues - life, death, purpose, right and wrong, relationships with the other - and produces very powerful stories and mythological motifs and art - that attempts to build theories about this - as Jung and the mythological approaches are clearly doing - are immediately rejected out of hand.

These ideas do feel like a ghost in the machine but surely it is important to ask what is this ghost about? Interestingly, the wiki article notes Jung as positing evolutionary reasons for archetypes and their cultural expression - religions.

Archetypes and myth are not in the same category as ghosts and ufos and gods.

gods and ghosts are explanations our brains invent to make sense of ourselves and the world. Is it not sensible to tease out commonalities in how we interpret the world and look carefully at them? The interaction of two heavy heavy archetypes, the Christ and fish, is fascinating.

It might give very important clues to the evolution of this strange religion, and its obvious hold on so many minds of this strange species homo sapiens!

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baalazel

The almond shaped segment formed when two circles intersect is known as a mandorla. The symbol signifies the overlap or reconciliation of opposites such as the reconciliation of a righteous God and sinful man.

Remove the proper segments and you have the fish like symbol people stick to the rears of their cars.

Baal

Do you mean mandala?

http://www.mandalaproject.org/

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 02:25 AM

Got it!

http://www.kyrie.com/symbols/mandorla.htm

What are the relationships between mandorlas and mandalas?

grumpytheBright · 10-12-2007, 02:31 AM

One day God strolled into the garden and found Adam breakfasting on bananas and figs.

"Yo, bro," said the Big One. "How they hangin'?"

"I'm all right. You all right?" queried the first man.

"Yeah, I'm finer 'n frog's hair." God glances around. "Where's the bitch?"

"She went for a swim."

"Went for a swim," echoed God. "In the pond where I showed you guys you could swim, or in the river?"

"In the river," reported the umbillically challenged one.

"Me damnit!" exclaimed the All-Powerful. "I told her to stay out of there. Now all the fish are going to smell like that."

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

This sexist piece of shit is so embarassing, I'm not going to sign it. But I'll bet there are some low-life scumbags out there who will find it funny.

Ray Moscow · 10-12-2007, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baalazel

The almond shaped segment formed when two circles intersect is known as a mandorla. The symbol signifies the overlap or reconciliation of opposites such as the reconciliation of a righteous God and sinful man.

Remove the proper segments and you have the fish like symbol people stick to the rears of their cars.

Baal

Yes, the mandorla was a common motif in later Christian art.

I've read that it was also widely used in pre-Christian religious art, but I'm hazy on the details. It's been picked up again in New Age type stuff, like in the vesica piscis.

Did the Christian fish symbol actually come from this root, with the acronym "ichtys" explanation coming in later? I have no idea, really.

Ray

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 04:00 AM

Quote:

It has been the subject of mystical speculation at several periods of history, perhaps first among the Pythagoreans, who considered it a holy figure.[citation needed] The mathematical ratio of its width (measured to the endpoints of the "body", not including the "tail") to its height was reportedly believed by them to be 265:153. This ratio, equal to 1.73203, was thought of as a holy number, called the measure of the fish.[citation needed] The geometric ratio of these dimensions is actually the square root of 3, or 1.73205... (since if you draw straight lines connecting the centers of the two circles with each other, and with the two points where the circles intersect, then you get two equilateral triangles joined along an edge). The ratio 265:153 is an approximation to the square root of 3, with the property that no better approximation can be obtained with smaller whole numbers. The number 153 appears in the Gospel of John (21:11) as the number of fish Jesus caused to be caught in a miraculous catch of fish, which is thought by some[citation needed] to be a coded reference to Pythagorean beliefs.

From wiki above.

This is not a coincidence that 153 appears in a fishy story!

youngalexander · 10-12-2007, 04:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Is there anywhere a proper examination of the history of the use of the fish symbol, without assuming it is some kind of code?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...=1137605908173

The ruins of the Christian prayer hall, which was located inside a Roman villa, date back to the first half of the third century CE, making the chapel the earliest place of Christian worship ever unearthed in the Holy Land

Or indeed anywhere, if true. Far more significant than 'fish symbols'. Exciting stuff!

The building, which is thought to have belonged to a Roman officer, has a rectangular hall with a mosaic floor bearing geometric patterns, a medallion decorated with drawings of fish -

This is of no significance, lots of pagans like fish.

One inscription names an army officer who contributed toward the paving of the floor, the second is dedicated in memory of four women, and the third mentions a woman who contributed a table or altar to
the God Jesus Christos.

This is of huge significance, if true.

Pottery shards and coins found in the excavation date the mosaic to the first half of the third century ...
the Jesus inscription found on the mosaic was one of the first such epigraphic references ever unearthed

Fish? Surely you jest!!

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 04:10 AM

And the square root of three, as everyone who looks at a Gothic Cathedral knows, is God's number!

Quote:

Mathematically, it can be shown that it’s half the square root of three, which is an irrational number. My computer says it’s 0.866025403784 (followed by an infinite number of non-recurring digits), but the mediaeval Gothic masons didn’t know that. They just knew it wasn’t a rational fraction -- and that was enough to convince them it was God’s number and not Man’s. There are no squares in Chartres Cathedral -- just rectangles with sides in the ratio of 1 to 0.866025403784.

http://www.andrew-may.com/mm.htm

Quote:

In philosophy, there is a fundamental dualism between the material and spiritual worlds -- between the physical and metaphysical, between science and religion, between logic and intuition, between rational and irrational. The word "rational" comes from a Latin root meaning to reason or calculate. Its opposite, irrational, is often used as a pejorative but can also mean "ineffable" or "beyond mortal ken".

In mathematics, rational and irrational have a different but curiously parallel meaning. A rational number is one that can be expressed as a ratio of two integers (for example "three-quarters" is the ratio of integer 3 to integer 4) while irrational numbers cannot. In this mathematical sense, the word "rational" is related to "ratio", but ultimately its etymology is exactly the same as the mainstream usage. An irrational number is one that cannot be calculated according to the rules of arithmetic. "Pi", the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter, is irrational, as is the square root of two, or the square root of three.

So where do irrational numbers come from? Are they simply a theoretical abstraction invented by a nerdy little man with thick glasses and a propeller beanie? Far from it -- irrational numbers are actually MORE natural than rational numbers, not less. Arithmetic, that bastion of rationality, is an artificial man-made construct -- but one that is so well-established, and taught from such an early age, that few people realize it. Nature’s own mathematics is geometry, and geometry is all about irrational numbers.

Clivedurdle · 10-12-2007, 04:17 AM

The fish is a symbol here, a representation of our innate knowledge of the existence of irrational numbers in nature.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-12-2007, 02:25 AM	#24
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Got it! http://www.kyrie.com/symbols/mandorla.htm What are the relationships between mandorlas and mandalas?

10-12-2007, 02:31 AM	#25
grumpytheBright Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 61	One day God strolled into the garden and found Adam breakfasting on bananas and figs. "Yo, bro," said the Big One. "How they hangin'?" "I'm all right. You all right?" queried the first man. "Yeah, I'm finer 'n frog's hair." God glances around. "Where's the bitch?" "She went for a swim." "Went for a swim," echoed God. "In the pond where I showed you guys you could swim, or in the river?" "In the river," reported the umbillically challenged one. "Me damnit!" exclaimed the All-Powerful. "I told her to stay out of there. Now all the fish are going to smell like that." ---------------- This sexist piece of shit is so embarassing, I'm not going to sign it. But I'll bet there are some low-life scumbags out there who will find it funny.

10-12-2007, 04:17 AM	#30
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	The fish is a symbol here, a representation of our innate knowledge of the existence of irrational numbers in nature.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.