MYTH AND REALITY
No serious scientist today, nor any other knowledgeable individual,
would question that the mathematical formulae of chromosomes determine
the characteristics and features of biological creatures, including man.
Scientific evidence accumulated over the past century, especially in recent
study of genetic structure, is extensive and weighty.
We also know from massive scientific data that life has progressed in
successive stages through time from the earliest single-celled protozoa
to the complex biological structures called man. Sedimentary rocks all
over this planet show the most simple forms of life at lower level of deposited
strata, more complex forms above them, and so on. It would be contrary
to common sense to believe that life did not evolve through a continual
chain from the most elementary to the most complex. Such evolutionary sequence
not only is attested in the physical record of our planet; it also is a
sequence which appeals to the logic of our minds. For more than two billion
years some force has been at work to create an upthrust in biological development
which brought about the complex ecological system we enjoy today.
But the cause of genetic change is subject to great controversy. Many
postulates have been offered for mutations, including cosmic radiation,
chemical forces, alterations in environment, and so on. There is no general
consensus of scientific opinion concerning the processes which led to the
continual changes in the chain of creatures. A fairly broad spectrum of
scientific opinion among biologists in recent years is slowly coming around
to the view that Darwin's original concept of slow drift through environmental
influence is not sufficient to explain the sudden appearance of new species,
although it does explain how species adapt to environment -- which we observe,
for example, in the long-term development of the horse, and which was so
evident to Darwin by the many specie adaptations on the Galapagos Islands.
But Darwin jumped too far, too fast. His theory was a tautology, a theory
that proved itself.
Man early recognized that the planet seemed to be organized on a grand
scale. One readily identifies discrete forms of life; insects, fish, birds,
and mammals. Furthermore, each type shows distinctive differentiation;
frogs, alligators, and snakes. There is no close overlap from one animal
to another; a beaver is different from a fox, which is different from a
raccoon. Each contributes to a variety of expression in the total portraiture
of living things. This evident variety among discrete creatures led prior
generations to believe the world was a special creation, designed not only
for variety, but also for beauty and pleasure. The diversity among living
things is a striking fact.
The evolutionist will tell you that natural conditions could not support
a blending together of species, that variety was a natural consequence
of evolutionary forces. When a new specie appeared it made a niche for
itself in the ecology and eliminated all its near specie neighbors through
competition. When the distance between specie relatives widened sufficiently
each became comfortable in its respective ecological niche. Natural processes
produced the many families and genera, to build the ecology of the planet,
in mutual life and support, well-balanced, thriving in stability.
If one looks upon this phenomenon as due entirely to natural evolutionary
processes, without intervention by intelligent agencies, all is happenstance,
purely the result of accident in the mighty flow of undirected time. Not
only are the mutations pure accident; the upward thrust to ever more complex
forms is also a continuing chain of accidents.
I am not qualified to calculate the probabilities of happenstance, and
perhaps no man is qualified because of the many unknowns, but they must
be utterly remote, in a series of amazing coincidences from the first formation
of living substance, to the mutational series, and on through the entire
chain of lifeTIU.
But if one considers this fantastic process as the handiwork of intelligent
agencies one can perceive a totally different and far more acute view of
the accomplishment of some divine purpose. Evolution is a technique used
by far-seeing intelligence for fostering not only the unique being we call
man, but also for building him a beautiful garden home. Such process entails
the formation of life and the development of species in a womb of creation
which derives not only from the planet but also ultimately from the solar
system and the stars, in temperature, atmosphere, water, and numerous other
factors. The development of man is tied to a schedule that involves the
formation of the galaxies, the origin of the sun, the spawning of the worlds,
and the slow unfolding of geophysical time to the far-off days when, according
to common views, the sun will slowly fade and death will come to this grand
miracle. On the other hand, if a master intelligence is behind the formation
of the universe, creation will continue to those far-off days when God
will bring all evolutionary processes into master stability to endure through
the untold reaches of future eternity.
On the planet more elementary forms come first. They develop an ecology
which makes the environment suitable to support the next step of life.
They also serve as a food source for the more complex forms to follow.
When the environment is ripe a sudden burst of mutation produces a new
level of life with many competing varieties. This is evidenced by the sudden
appearance, in succession, of fish, reptiles and mammals. New forms which
cannot adjust to the competing pressures from their fellow mutants become
extinct until only a few of the new species remain. In turn the new forms
help condition the environment for the next step up.
But at each step the new species remain and never more evolve, except
to adapt. The insects have been around for millions upon millions of years;
they have remained essentially the same since their first appearance. The
frog appeared suddenly from his near predecessors, as a frog, and has ever
since remained a frog. The dinosaurs attempted to contribute to the growing
wealth of life but their adaptation was inadequate to a changing environment;
they disappeared from the world scene. Thus we observe the development
of new species at each stage which, if adaptable, remain to round out and
help perfect the total ecological system. This process continues until
the time is ripe for man.
Man appeared on the scene as did all the species before him. Those near
simian neighbors who were directly competitive disappeared until only a
few remained. Even now we may be discovering the stages of competitive
pressure of variant man along the Great Rift in the heart of Africa, for
it is along this valley that man appears to have first become the tool
user, and the progenitor of the following million years of mankind.
The evolution of man offers as much mystery as do the lower animal creatures.
We have no adequate explanation for the differences we see in the human
races. Arguments rage around the mechanisms which may have been responsible
for racial differences but again there is little consensus of scholarly
opinion. The time frames are much too short. Unguided and accidental mutation
seemingly is not sufficient to explain the phenomena.
Did the mutations which produced the colored races occur at different
times with one coming after the other over the past million years? Did
they all occur at one time? Is it possible there is a designed association
of skin color with the natural spectrum of light? Red and yellow and indigo
are present but where are the blue, the green, and the orange? Is the white
a blend of all colors? Why did white come last and not first (as far as
A strong tradition of blue comes out of Europe; the social customs cannot
help but make one pause over the possibilities. We all know the blue
bloods are the nobility of Europe. This high social class maintains
a blue book, a register of its social superiority. Do you know a
friend who is true blue? Do you get the blues when you feel
despondent? Why did the ancient Kelts paint themselves blue before
going into battle?
Is it possible the skin colors are not an accident and that the struggle
of time has eliminated the oranges, the greens and the blues? Or perhaps
the infiltration of purple blood has absorbed all the blues and turned
them into white.
Instinctively white is a superior color, the blend of all other colors.
White is light. It is associated with life. But black is the least of all
colors. It is associated with night and darkness and death. There is a
deep psychological bias to skin color we cannot suppress. That reaction
is natural and instinctive. White man feels superior while black man strives
to imitate the white man. One does not observe the opposite process. But
black man still is endowed with dignity. Today he wishes to preserve that
dignity against the oppression of white man. He wants a culture that is
the expression of his black heritage. He wants to associate with his own
kind, just as the white man wants to associate with his own kind. Birds
of a feather flock together; robins do not associate with starlings.
Perhaps God created differences to develop tolerance among races. Perhaps
the purpose is to give us experience in dealing with difference. Perhaps
we shall one day, after we leave this world, be brought into even greater
diversity among the many beings of the heavenly worlds.
We can believe that genetic codes, the origin of species, and the appearance
of man are all accidents of time. Or we can believe there is a grand purpose
behind creation. What we believe will depend upon the clarity of our minds
unconditioned by the delusions of godless theory. Is it an accident that
the calendar now used the world over came out of the life of a white man
who claimed to be God? Every day of our lives we acknowledge the influence
of that man, whether we pray to him or not, and so does every godless person.
We seem to forget where the power lies.
Man is different from animals. He has a spark within him which does
not appear in animals. He not only can articulate; he can reason. He has
physical attributes which set him apart, including the opposing thumb,
upright stature, and binocular vision. But these are not the essential
features which make him special. The spark within him is a piece of the
divine, a longing to know a Creator, and a supreme desire to have purpose
in eternity. He expresses these desires differently, in the creation of
myth and in the production of strange religious practices. He loves symbols
and symbolic representation, whether these are in Last Suppers or in golden
calves. Because he feels lost and alone he also looks for reassurance that
his life has continuity and meaning. He not only explains the cycles of
nature by reference to forgotten gods; he also finds archetypes to tell
himself that his daily practices are approved by divine authority. Christians
observe the Last Supper because it was given by a God who lived among them.
Mircea Eliade outlined this principle, from his godless viewsMER.
Human acts, their meaning, and their value are connected with the reproduction of the primordial act, the repetition of a mythical example. If a garden is planted in the spring it was first planted by a god. If a house is built it is dedicated to the god who first built houses. If a baby is born it is consecrated to the
god who first created man. All human institutions were consecrated in the beginning, illo tempore, "in those days," by the gods. Archaic man did nothing without justifying it on the basis that it had been done first by the gods who came down out of the sky. Neither the objects of the world, nor human acts, had an autonomous intrinsic value. They acquired value and became real because they participated in a reality that transcended them; they belonged to an hierarchy that originated first in the heavens. The symbolism of the center, whether Mt. Olympus, Mt. Manu, Mt. Sumeru, Mt. Zinnalo or Mt. Zion, was always the origin of all things. All objects and all things were referred to that center for it was the source of all.
But Eliade cannot accept that gods came down to this earth. When contact
was terminated, the gods, as we like to call them, were not forgotten.
They were remembered not only in myth story but also in social custom.
Olden people clung to those memories; they continued to imitate that which
was handed down in ages past. However, if we do not have memory of superior
beings preserved in our religions and social celebrations we will create
them. We will create them because man has an innate longing for the lost
gods. Comic books, movies and television offer adequate demonstration.
Scholars fail to appreciate that hero-making is an important human function.
It is not the foundation of myth but a secondary phenomenon deriving from
loss of living contact. Man will invariable substitute for such loss. He
will make heroes out of human mortals and he will dedicate the nearest
mountain to the gods.
Another principle outlined by Eliade is profane history. Historical
time, devoid of active contact with the gods, becomes profane because it
is without destiny, and without purpose. Such history cannot exist for
man in any real sense, simply because man inherently needs purpose for
both time and history. This planet not only must have a meaningful past,
it must also have a meaningful future. As Eliade expressed it, "...modern
man feels himself diminished by the possibility of impersonal survival."
Archaic humanity "defended itself against all the novelty and irreversibility
which history entails."
Eliade could not perceive that olden peoples retained their traditions,
not because they had to defend themselves against the irreversibility of
history, but because they were attempting to remember the former ages.
They clung desperately to the hope of a reality which actually belonged
to their remote ancestors.
A third principle, deriving out of profane history, concerns the regeneration
of time. As a consequence of the ancient loss, archaic societies attempted
to recapture the time of long ago. The division of the year was determined
by rituals which guaranteed the continuity of life and of the community
in all its forms. The cycles of the years were held constant by rituals
repeated throughout the year, year after year. Easter, the celebrations
of mid-summer, Halloween, and Christmas held time stable for all of us.
This periodic regeneration of time is an attempt to abolish history, to
prevent the ever onflowing changes of the world from denying the proper
meaning of time. But Eliade and other godless persons do not perceive these
traditions as due to loss of contact with higher realms, since those realms
do not exist for modern godless man. Nor are they perceived as blind evolutionary
attempt to relate the cycles of life to divine destiny. Modern man has
no knowledge of ancient celestial associations; he knows only undirected
time without purpose. Thus godless history is understood only on its own
terms devoid of function within destiny. From godless views all actions
of men are spurious, random, and without purpose. Now, indeed, all things
are profane. Without a framework built by God there can be no purpose and
no hope. History can only be sinful because it has no relationship with
God, the source of all history.
Godless scholars built their fanciful theories; they thereby helped
seal the desperate fate of man. As Eliade expressed it:
It matters little if the formulas and images through which the primitive expresses "reality" seem childish and even absurd to us. It is the profound meaning of primitive behavior that is revelatory; this behavior is governed by the belief in an absolute reality opposed to the profane world of "unrealities." In the last analysis the latter does not constitute a "world" properly speaking; it is the "unreal" par excellence, the uncreated, the nonexistent; the void.
Hence it is more probable that the desire felt by man to refuse history,
and to confine himself to an indefinite repetition of archetypes, testifies
to his thirst for the real, and his terror of "losing" himself in the dark
void of eternal nothing. Man is overwhelmed by the meaningless of profane
existence; he will reestablish purpose, if only to give it to the One who
brought this profane condition in the first place, that great Rebel.
While we agree with Eliade's assessment of mythological acts as a fact,
we greatly disagree with his reasons. Primitive man rejects profane history
because he knows it does not have the blessing of God; it is the result
of a great default. Therefore he attempts to keep alive that which once
had God's blessing and hence had meaning. Man is terrified of being lost
in the long and lonely night of eternal oblivion. Man knows he has meaning;
he craves to be brought back into the fold of purpose and destiny. His
only recourse is to keep it in memory through ritual, whether it is the
ritual of new planting in the spring time, or the ritual of the body and
the blood of the God who once lived on earth.
So-called primitive man had good reason to cling to the memory of those
old days. Those beings exhibited miraculous and magical powers. Superior
technology is demonstrated as magic to primitive people, but all human
minds are primitive on a relative scale. Our science and technology would
be magical to primitive man. But our current level of scientific achievement
is primitive also. If technologies exist which are vastly superior to us
we might express open skepticism and derision about those celestial powers,
especially if they do not make themselves openly known. Our scientific
pride, exhibited in intellectual arrogance, will not accept what all mythical
history says is true.
1) Superior beings with advanced technologies once were intimate with
the management and operational affairs of this planet.
2) A great fault occurred which forced those beings to retire to their
celestial habitats while other plans are formulated for the future of this
3) They now maintain an observant eye, and a secret management of affairs
which are left mostly to unfold toward some higher evolutionary objective.
4) The isolation of our world, and the secrecy with which the intelligent
agencies now operate, has caused man to engage in much speculation, mostly
5) God, through his agencies, relates to the material worlds in a manner
we can understand in a technological sense, with precise control of the
material world of atoms, biological mechanisms, cultural trends, and planetary
physical status. After all, technical abilities are a matter of relative
power. What we have learned here on this planet is only a faint shadow
of that higher source.
6) There is a divine plan which covers eons of time. The belief in a
millennial cleansing of the earth, the coming of Messiahs (planetary managers),
and the unfolding of the future toward planetary beauty and health, are
simplistic formulations of grand designs for the world and a coming future
Our feeble memories of times past came down to us as folklore, legend
and myth, conditioned by the psyche of poor, lonely man, but founded in
a reality which we perceive now as only a shadow of its former glory. Adam
and Eve are only part of a great body of folk memory. If the reality of
that divine pair can be demonstrated then other elements of myth must have
a similar origin in a reality which is buried in the darkness of remote
People remembered Adam and Eve but their memory was faulty. They attempted
to preserve the essentials of the Adamic fall by embodying those essentials
into stories. The stories were vehicles for maintaining the memory consistent
with the cultural environment of their days. Hence myth has two major components:
details derived from actual events, and flavor derived from man's spiritual
longings and inner psyche. The memory may be poor, the writer may be inventive,
but the attempt is to preserve those ancient realities. Myths do not derive
exclusively from the human psyche; rather they reflect human psyche as
men use the remote realities for their source of inspiration. The folktale
or literary composition is a record, a means of capturing that which came
from the past. First it was preserved as an oral tradition; later it was
put into written form as men recognized the need for maintaining it against
the erosion of time. If myth patterns are universal they come from more
than a common expression of human psyche; they derive from events remembered
Given the fortitude to rigorously examine the wealth of folklore we
can approach myth and the old folk memories with far greater insights.
The data becomes much more instructive, in reality and not in fanciful
theory. We open new vistas into the history of mankind and into our status
on this world today. We truly begin to learn.
As isolated phenomena the myths of the Near East are just that -- myths.
As an isolated case the biblical story is just that -- a story. The ancestral
claims of Europe are not any more revealing than the myths and the stories
of the Near East. Details in each case are missing for clear understanding.
But when we show the living evidence used yet today, in cultural practices
of nobility, in names and titles, in religious rituals, and in the details
of stories compared against one another, we see a pervasive influence which
underlies all racial belief. Our study shows an amazing number of connections
among seemingly unrelated and even disparate data. When we draw the connections
from one area to another, from one era to another, and when we outline
the name and myth patterns, we achieve an integration of knowledge which
otherwise remains incoherent and unintelligible. We initiate new and profound
We would be negligent as serious and intelligent people if we disregarded
the impact of this material upon our beliefs. We are faced with new and
surprising levels of vision. Our minds are awakened to new perspectives
of planetary history buried for untold millennia. We become privy to knowledge
hidden for thousands of years. The knowledge is brought into sharp focus;
we border on revelation.
We shatter conventional views. There is a reality to the life of a pair
of personalities who were mortal and who left their mortal stamp upon all
of us, and yet who were divine and left the imprint of their divinity upon
mankind. We have not been able to forget Adam and Eve; they haunt us from
untold millennia. The stories may be distorted, they may be mythological,
but they are remembered. And somehow this memory is unique to the people
of the Judeo-Christian tradition. The Father and Mother of mankind are
uniquely preserved by both Jew and Christian gentile.
It is a powerful legacy that we probe.