Jump to content

Talk:Chaos (cosmogony)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Descendants of Chaoskampf

[edit]

This section appears to stretch the motif beyond recognizability. The notion of the crucifixion as a Chaoskampf is unexplained and hard to credit. To squeeze "conquering sin and death" into a primordial myth about a hero battling a serpentine chaos it is first necessary to strip from the gospel stories any of the meaning given it by the tellers. Then it is necessary to ignore the nature of the Chaoskampf as a primordial myth, and apply it to a story more in the category of historic legend. The Chaoskampf happened before the beginning of time, in the moment of creation. The crucifixion can be dated by outside sources and contemporary historians with an accuracy of +/- a decade. Not remotely the same form of story. I speak as a lover of folklore, not a theologian.

Similarly, that a ANE myth should make it to Japan, the burden of proof rests heavily upon the claimant. "By way of Buddhist influence" rather flies in the face of the complete lack of any notion of battle between good and evil in Buddhist thought. The source credited appears to be a book review, which is hardly adequate for such an outlandish claim.The creator of this section appears to be confusing (remote) similarity with causality. I'd edit the offending sections directly, but I cannot recall authoritative sources to support my argument. It is difficult to find a serious refutation of a silly argument. 64.222.119.56 (talk) 03:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chaos (cosmogony). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

There should be a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos on the top of the page for other uses of Chaos. (I came here looking for the amoeba genus. 19:11, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I've added a hatnote to the article. But how did you ever wind up here while looking for the amoeba? You surely didn't type in "Chaos (cosmogony)" did you? Paul August 21:36, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tartarus and windy-gap

[edit]

Some scholars believe that Tartarus and the windy-gap in Theogony is a later interpolation. Chaos cannot be the gap created after the separation of the earth from the sky. In Theogony first came Chaos and then (probably from this space) Earth and Eros. Earth bore Heaven. Jestmoon(talk) 14:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chaos (mythology)

[edit]

It seems that at some point in the past, Chaos (mythology) was merged into this article; however, with some looking, I can't seem to find the merge discussion (was there such a discussion?). There isn't anything at Talk:Chaos (mythology), and while there is a discussion on this talk page from 2006, it seems that the article in question existed as recently as 2018, and had its content removed from that article, and then moved here. I'm not sure I can see what was wrong with the original article, surely the figure in Greek mythology is notable enough to warrant its own article? – Michael Aurel (talk) 22:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]