|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
This article, Chaos (mythology) should rightly be entitled just [le should be merged here, and this one moved there. All uses of the word stem from this use, and most links on Chaos point here. There is already an excellent disambiguation page explaining the off-stemming uses. Thoughts, anyone? - C. dentata 21:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- Support. A "mythology" section would be better than a whole separate article, considering how short each article is. -Silence 04:32, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- Support Agreed. One article titled Chaos with a mythology section would make the most sense. ♠ Åpeirophobia ♠ 05:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Support --Jordansc 05:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking that Chaos and the World Egg seem to heavily parallel the Big Bang theory's tiny "Singularity" from which the cosmos expanded. Even the areas of the World Egg which deal with the Egg or the creator creature's parts spewing everywhere are similar to the Singularity's distribution of matter in the Universe. --IronMaidenRocks 10:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
of this: ---Chaos is also a character in John Milton's Paradise Lost.--- i mean seriously, how is this relevant ? Tyriel 16:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Chaos in Paradise Lost isn't exactly a "character" in the usual sense, but a personification (sort of) of the chaos discussed on this page. 126.96.36.199 01:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused. Wasn't Uranus spawned from Chaos as well, being Gaia's husband, who then had the children of Cronos, Rhea, Cyclops, 1000-armed men, etc.? I'm not confidently sure on that, so I don't want to put it in until confirmed. Is this right? Orcahuman 22:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
In Hesiod, Ouranos was the son of Gaea NOT Chaos. She was able to give birth to him with no partner. The Titans were their children. Also, this article states that Hesiod calls Gaea a child of Chaos in the Theogony, yet this is not true. It simply says Gaea is the second entity to be created. The first was Chaos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Source for sentence and new article creation
This article says that "Chaos was also personified as a primal deity in Greek mythology, as the first of the Protogenoi and the god of the air." Since Aether is the god of light/sky, I believe a source is needed for the sentence. I never read of Chaos as a god of air before.
The section called "Greco-Roman tradition" also talks about Greek mythology. I think this section should be used to make an article dedicated to Chaos (mythology). Atlas, Iapetus or Themis and many other gods, people and heroes have a dedicated article. I don't see why Chaos shouldn't have one.
Descendants of Chaoskampf
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. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 03:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)