Archive for creationism

Parting the Waters

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, faith, Hebrew scripture, random, religion, scriptures with tags , , , , , , , on April 1, 2013 by chouck017894

Creation began, according to the biblical book of Genesis, with God parting the elements, which the authors symbolized as “the waters.”  That choice of wording is science being told in mythic style.  In the opening chapter of Genesis, verse 2, it is declared that the spirit of God “moved upon the face of the waters” (upon the primordial energies).  We have to understand that the 8th century BCE authors of Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) were not particularly prone to theoretical thought, and consequently interpreted some prehistory teachings that they possessed and used (perhaps stored away in some ark?) in terms that their followers could wrap their heads around.  So the primal energies that the authors equated with “waters” were divided. 

Today, in the field of quantum mechanics it is understood that duality extends into this energy dimension which we think of as matter.  Scientists determined in 1924 that subatomic particles (of the lepton family) should be regarded as not only individual particles but also as being associated with systems of waves.  Science has named the most elementary charge of negative electricity and constituents of all atoms as electrons.  An integral part of modern quantum mechanics happens to involve wave mechanics.  We are talking of the subatomic levels which gives rise to all matter forms, which is to say the causation or starting point of  all material objects, as the opening of Genesis attempts to explain.

Much of what is widely regarded as historical narratives in the Bible books which follow Genesis are often also constructed on the Creation formula used in Genesis and are passed off as historical documentation. Consider Moses parting the waters: Joshua parting the Jordan River flow: Elijah dividing the waters: Elisha dividing the waters, etc.  And every such “holy” event was a one time deal for each of them.  That is because every character of scriptures then passed over from primal energy conditions into the purpose that they were meant to fulfill.

There is more text devoted to the activities of Moses than there is to any other timeframe in Israel’s biblical “history.”  Following immediately after the book of Genesis, we should take note how the Moses tale seems something like a modification of the Creation story.  Moses was saved from water–remember Exodus 2:3-6–and thus having been accounted for he was positioned in circumstances which permitted him the protection to develop.  As the story goes, he increased in power, did away with a confining situation (killed an Egyptian), and eventually divided the waters of the Red Sea allowing followers to pass over a shallow sea.  This was a one time deal for him, and the primal creative elements chosen by the Creator in Genesis have been recycled and personified as the Israelites.

Moses, with God’s help, allegedly divided the Red Sea (just as the Creator divided the “waters”).  Tradition, which is totally improvable, says it was the Red Sea. Why?  Because, like Adam who was supposedly formed from red dust in Scriptures, the color red symbolized the elementary elements (atoms, electrons, particles, etc.) from which all matter is made manifest.  And as Noah is said to have spent 40 days in the ark riding upon the Deluge, Moses is alleged to have led the Israelites through the “wilderness” for 40 years.  In any myths where the number 40 is at the core, drop the zero: the number always refers to the first four primal energy dimensions (out of seven energy dimensions which are active as Causation) which involve/evolve toward manifestation.  Because Moses personifies the Life Principle within creative energy action through the primary energy dimensions before creative action passes over into visible form it is claimed that he is not permitted by God to enter “the Promised Land.”  And with this it is claimed that the historical books of the Old Testament therefore extend from Joshua to Esther inclusive.

Joshua, the next in command of the Israelites (personifying elementary energies), is also alleged to have parted the waters of River Jordan (river of life) in Joshua 4:18.  It, too, was a one time deal which allowed him and the Israelites to pass over into the next developmental dimension of creative energy.  Joshua is presented as parting the waters of River Jordan so that the “…soles of the priests feet” remained dry, and the “waters of the Jordan returned unto their banks…” and Canaan then came under siege.  Thus Joshua, the personification of the violent conditions active within the primal stages of Creation, is then portrayed as violently taking the “Promised Land” with holocaustic fervor.

Biblical accounts intentionally pervert the energy sequences of Creation dimensions in order to disguise it as Israel “history” and use the subsequent dimensions of Creation’s energy development in matter formation by presenting the next intermediate dimension as the cruel “prophet” Elijah.  Of course he too must part the waters to pass over into his purpose.  To assess the characterizing of the “prophets” Elijah and his successor Elisha, we should study the meanings in the names.  The prefix Eli means “God,” and any suffix indicates an aspect of life development; in this case, Eli, meaning “God” is combined with jah, which refers to Yahweh.  Elijah was allegedly sent by God to confront King Ahab (c. 875-853 BCE), but Ahab actually represent the Babylonian storm god Adad—the rain maker.  Thus in 1 Kings 18:41-45 Elijah supposedly counseled the king of an approaching storm.  But Ahab’s wife, Jezreel, wanted Elijah killed, which caused Elija to flee into–where else?–“the wilderness”–which is to say back into the intermediate energy dimensions of Creation, just like Moses was depicted as fleeing into the wilderness after slaying an Egyptian.  And there in the wilderness Elijah lingered for the typical 40 days and nights, just like Noah, and the 40 years in the Moses tale.

Of course Creation must continue, and so Elijah was directed by God to “Go, return…”  And on his journey back, since he was passing that way anyway, God directed Elijah to anoint Hazael as king over Syria, and to anoint Jehu as king over Israel, and to anoint Elisha as prophet to succeed Elijah.  In other words, the Creator of the universe found nothing of interest in universal affairs and so was dabbling in the political affairs of 8th century BCE Israel!  This meant that Elijah had venture out of the”wilderness” again.  Thus in 2 Kings 2:8 it says, “And Elijah took his mantle, and wrapped (it) together, and smote the waters, and they were divided hither and thither, so that they two went over on dry ground”–just like Moses at the Red Sea and Joshua at the River Jordan,  This is history? 

Elisha, the successor of Elijah, is another biblical character which represents the Life Principle advancing into the next intermediate dimension of primordial energy development.  Thus this unpleasant character is a wee bit more refined than Moses and the violent Joshua, but like them Elisha too must “part the waters”–the pre-physical energies–to pass over into energy conditions which allow prototypal formation to mass.  Thus in 1 Kings 2:14, the priest composed “history” relates: “And he (Elisha, whose name means “God has granted salvation”) took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the Lord God of Elijah?  And when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither: and Elisha went over.”  This is history?  Elisha represents the prototypal energy into visible matter, and the myth follows the sacred language tradition where a name-change occurs.  This time from Elijah to Eli-sha (as Abram to Abraham, and Jacob to Israel) to signify the transformation into visible matter substance, which is recorded as “…and Elisha went over.”  And then  Elisha hightailed it straight to Bethel: beth happens to mean “house,” and el means “God.”  Oddly Bethel also happened to be the same spot where Abram is alleged to have had his name changed, and also where Jacob watched angels climbing up and down a ladder and had his name changed.  Again, this is history?

The only bit of physical description ever given for this holy character of Elisha is that he was bald.  As Elisha approached Bethel “…there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head, go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them and cursed them in the name of the Lord.  And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tore forty and two of them (1 Kings 2:23-24).  Forty-and-two adds up to six, or yod, which in Jewish tradition is representative of God, i.e. the Life Principle.  In this priest written holy tale what is dramatized is the prototypes (children) being reconstituted so that the Life Principle (symbolized with Elisha) may proceed into full matter manifestation.  Elisha is characterized as bald because he represents the naked Earth–the no vegetation stage of Earth development, which is also why Noah was seen naked after getting drunk on the wine of life after landing on Mount Ararat.

This mythic style of presenting “history” is continued in the New Testament with the personification of the Life Principle, Jesus (a name derived from Joshua), reaching the event of quality change at the waters of the Sea of Galilee. It is the Creation formula played all over again. In Mark 6:48, the first of the NT texts to be written, Jesus is depicted as not just parting the waters, but is alleged to have walked on the waters, which expresses the identical power over Creation principles as did the “spirit” that moved on the face of the waters in Genesis 1:2.
 Now the final twist to this Christian version: remember that every one of the mythic characters who parted the waters in the OT also included the number four (disguised as 40 days or years, and even Noah rode upon the waters for 40 days). The number 4 always refers to the last of the four energy planes which precedes visible matter manifestation. And in chapter six, verse 48 of Mark, Jesus allegedly sees that his disciples on board a ship in the midst of the sea are toiling desperately in the turbulent waters. The verse continues, “…for the wind was contrary unto them: and about the fourth watch of the night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and would have passed by them.” The “night” of this verse alludes to the void out of which Creation occurred. Thus in verse 53 it says, “And when they had passed over they came into the land of Gennesaret, and drew ashore.” The water-walk of Jesus is also related in Matthew 14:22-23, and in John 6:15-21.  That too, like all OT characters who parted the waters, was only a one time deal.  And like them, Jesus then passed over to take up his destiny as Christ, the logos and/or word of God made in the flesh.

34 Comments »

Creation ala Genesis

Posted in Bible, biological traits, environment, faith, Hebrew scripture, life, prehistory, random, religion with tags , , , , , on January 27, 2013 by chouck017894

God’s revealed word assures us that God merely had to say, “Let there be…” this or that, and then this or that just popped into existence.  Thus, without any recipe or formula or thought-out blueprint all the varied components of whatever “he” envisioned just magically came together in its manifested form.  No trials, no errors, just zap.  Apparently God managed to fill up not only the naked Earth but all infinity as well in just six twenty-four hour “days.” No wonder God had to rest on the seventh day: or so the Creationists avow.  However, the authors never bothered themselves to clarify which of the two Creation version they promote, conveniently ignoring that chapters one and two of Genesis give some slightly differing specifics!  And, of course, we are instructed to never ask how God himself came into existence.  Is this imaginative account of how matter and life came into existence really worthy to be taught in school science classes as creationists clamor?

However, in order for all of God’s varied and diverse forms which he had made manifest by talking to himself to be regenerated and maintained, God did have to put in place some system of renewal.  And that renewal system for each and every thing that he had created did require a recipe or formula or blueprint for its continuation. Scientific sleuthing has managed to discover one vital part of that blueprint, and we know that as DNA.  Life, whether micro or macro, each follow specific developmental processes, and even galaxies and the universe itself follow the same constant motions of re-creation.

Cultures that preceded by thousands of years the word of God as “revealed” in eighth century BCE Jerusalem apparently were not privileged to biblical enlightenment, and had to grope about in ignorance of how everything came into existence.  It was up to the self-appointed priests in Jerusalem in the much later timeframe to explain the facts of Creation.  At that time the entire population of the world has been guesstimated to have been around seventy to one hundred million persons, but God was interested in enlightening only a tiny percent of the population about the facts of his acts of Creation.  And that tiny percent happened to be in the habit of agitating everyone around Jerusalem.  Even so, for some holy reason, the particulars of what went into his creative process, like chemical compounds and such, were left unexplained.  Consequently, how he transformed energy into our little planet with its varied and diverse life forms has long served enterprising Bible interpreters as a sacred mystery to be mined and manipulated for their own ends.  Perhaps we should question the Bible style version of Creation against some known facts.

Planet Earth is heavy with chemical components, and it is this chemical heaviness which stands as a major argument against biological life having originated on this planet.  But that, in itself, does not negate the Genesis explanation. Scores of years of scientific research has projected that Earth was formed around four billion five hundred million years ago.  Within a few hundred-million years the simple life forms were already in existence on the infant Earth—a remarkably short time in Creation terms.  To science a few hundred million years after Earth’s formation to have simple life forms appear seems a case of too much too soon.  Ah, but all that was just one “day” in the Genesis account.

If the oldest and simplest life forms were present on Earth well over three billion years ago—and these simple life forms had, as science has found, molecules of biological origin, it is hard evidence that life forms on this planet arose and developed from some source other than from a combination of inert gases and chemicals that were then predominant on the infant planet.  Some of the most abundant chemical elements of Earth’s composition are nickel and chromium.  If biological life originated in such an abundant chemical composition, wouldn’t it seem logical that these more plentiful elements would figure in the composition of any life forms that would originate in the primal stew (biblical “dust”), if not prominently then at least moderately?  But nickel and chromium play practically no role whatever in the biochemical structure of the life forms that thrive on this planet.  Of course they are not needed in the Genesis account.

On the other hand, the element molybdenum, a metallic element of the chromium group is quite rare on this planet, but nonetheless that rare element plays a pivotal role in enzymatic reactions that are vitally necessary to all Earth’s biological life!  Furthermore, if biological life arose on this planet, whether from the “dust” of Eden or in a simmering primeval stew, logic suggest that a variety of genetic codes would have developed.  But that did not happen either.  Instead, all life forms on planet Earth developed from a single genetic code.  All life forms share a single genetic composition.  To religionists, of course, this genetic singularity can be brushed aside as proof of God’s commandment.

Some ancient Sumerian cuneiform texts, far older than the priest-written Genesis fable, provide information in regard to the puzzle of life’s appearance on early Earth, however.  According to the deciphered texts, life on this planet developed billions of years ago from an outer space source; from a huge rogue planet that made at least two passes through this developing solar system.  The Sumerians did not confuse that rogue celestial object with any comet, asteroid or other space object, and the roving  planet that passed through our young solar system was given the name of Marduk.  The Sumerians also referred to this planet, which was obviously not affiliated with our solar system, as “the planet of crossing.”  This information later became reworked and the basis for personification of the Babylonian god Marduk, known in the Bible as Merodach, who was credited with bringing the chemistry of life to planet Earth.  Could that possibly be the god that the post-Sumerian Genesis story refers to as commanding the activation of life?

Oddly, in recent modern science, a theory has been advanced that is remarkably similar to the ancient Sumerian account.  A minority of scientists, risking reputation and government financial support, dared to offer the theory that life on this planet may have been seeded from miniscule organisms given off by some free-wheeling planet that once brushed close to the primordial Earth.  Perhaps that planetary lovemaking is what took place over the biblical “six days” of Creation?  Or was God just playing a solo game of billiards that “day”?

3 Comments »

Time-Warps, Planets & Creationism

Posted in Astronomy, Atheist, Bible, history, humanity, logic, prehistory, religion, science with tags , , , , , , , , on July 9, 2009 by chouck017894

Creationists, using priest-written texts of “revealed” knowledge, choose to think that creation began only a few thousand years ago.  However, under that format they are hard-pressed to explain how so many remarkable advancements of man could have been crammed into such a meager time slot.  In the Mesopotamian region in the time frame of the Creationists’ “beginning,” for example, the human species was startlingly advanced.  Somehow in in this period of time the newly created humans were already building cities with multistoried buildings, complex street systems, market places, schools, banking systems, and a sophisticated judicial system! They were also making use of weights and measures, dabbled in international commerce, made use of ships that sailed to and from wharves in well-tended harbors, and who used wheeled chariots as a common means of transport.  This is the land mentioned as the “land of Shin’ar” in biblical stories.  Of course a concept of evolution is out of the question for them: God would neither want nor need to labor over refining any basic idea of something.  Instead, everything is believed to have been installed as perfect from the start.  That way he would never again have to be bothered with it all.  On the other hand, if change seemed desirable to him, he could always clean it up using a flash flood technique.

By Creationist’s calculation the creation of the universe and its supposed central focus, Earth, is vaguely placed as somewhere around 4500 BCE at most.  The funny thing is that their calculation could have a modicum of merit.  Their calculations are based on the Hebrew version of creation drawn from other cultures’ myths, and that version became the condensed and simplified account that opens the book of Genesis in the Pentateuch.  Events on Earth were chaotic back in that general period of mythmaking, with many great cities and civilizations rising and falling as the nomadic Hebrew tribes sought a land of refuge.  Even the heavens seemed to be in turmoil.  This may account why the first year of the Jewish calendar is placed in the year 3760 BCE—around the late Neolithic period in the Canaan region (4500 BCE)—when some measure of stability was taken up by the Hebrews in some methodical manner.  By this period farming collectives were being established across the Middle and Near East, with an intermingling of “racial” types becoming acceptable.  Nomadic herders who  followed their livestock found that cultivating crops allowed them to settle in one region. 

For a little over two thousand years between c. 3600 to c. 1500 BCE there was a puzzling flurry of megalithbuilding that extended in a wide arc around the coasts of Europe.  If creation occurred only a couple thousand years before that, this is amazing creative ability for the creature man.  It is estimated that over 50,000 such megaliths were built, the most famous among them is known to us as Stonehenge (then in its first stage).  Only something urgent would have inspired such wide-scale constructions that ranged from Malta, Spain and Portugal to Sweden and the Shetland Islands, etc.  And that urgency had to do with a frightening disorder in the observable heavens.  From Egypt to the Indus Valley, from China to South and Central America, detailed layouts and monumental labor went into the careful construction of structures dedicated to the study of the heaven’s movements.  Placid skies do not motivate such commitment.

Then, generations later, c. 3114 BCE, the Mayans tell of the beginning of a new cycle of time which is precisely dated as having begun in a long darkness that occurred on 4 Ahau 8 Cumku, which corresponds to the 13th of August 3114 BCE.  And on the opposite side of the planet the earliest so-called “omen tablets” written on Sumerian/Babylonian tablets also date from this eventful date.

For some reason the celestial body we know as the planet Venus gained a major holy role throughout many widely distant cultures in this time.  Oddly, today’s religions, sciences and even historians avoid investigation of how our disturbed planetary neighbors may have contributed to mankind’s place in the scheme of things.

See related posting, 2012 Doomsday, March 13, 2009.

Leave a comment »

Our Legal Environment

Posted in Atheist, culture, history, life, politics, religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , on June 23, 2009 by chouck017894

Rules of the game: That is what cultures and societies establish and speak of as “laws,” and which, ideally, institute a framework of conduct that presumably serves to protect the majority.  But when a minority faction becomes the majority that occupies the seats of law policy for the nation, the likelihood of impartial interpretation of law becomes dubious.

As noted in the earlier posting, Democracy Under Siege (June 20), perfidious factions (extreme religious right) have for years sought to chip away at the safeguards that were established in the United States Constitution in a disloyal attempt to jam their religious interpretations into government rule.  If a wall is not maintained between church and state the result is theocratic bedlam, and gross orgies of persecution and harassment are enthroned as divine justice.  The clerical rule of Iran through the last few decades is a good example of such a divinely brutal system.

The United States skated close to the edge of disaster through eight years under a president that thought he had been divinely chosen to direct policy and the course of action that the nation should follow.  But his appointment had not been by majority choice of the people as it should have been, but by a Supreme Court that was heavily indebted to a Republican power base which had stacked the court with five doctrinally “conservative” Catholic “justices” out of nine seats.

When that court-elected president neared the end of his detrimental term in office, the US Supreme Court under Chief Juistice John G. Roberts, a doctrinally conservative Roman Catholic, openly indicated that the court was s willing to render wide-ranging decisions that would reverse time-honored trends in jurisprudence.  Those desiring a theocratic takeover of the nation were ecstatic at the decisions of the court that limited citizens’ rights to challenge government support for religion!  Anti-evolution propaganda thus gained muscle to combat well-proven evidence of evolution and inject into schools the biblical myth of creation as “scientific creationism.”  The Supreme Court also chose to ignore medical  evidence as a consideration in some abortion cases thus imposing  theocratic limits upon rules that had been established in 1973 in Roe vs. Wade.   And true to doctrinally conservative interpretation of law, the court increased pressure on scientists and educators to alter or even suppress scientitic research and findings that conflicted with the schema of the religious right.  Religious theory was/is being wedged into government policy.

With the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court the nation is now confronted with having still another Roman Catholic added to the Supreme Court, making the religious beliefs of SIX out of nine justices a drastic imbalance in the court’s point of view.  Having a Latina woman on the court is, in itself, a wonderful declaration of democratic principles.  Unfortunately, we should be excused for wondering can such an ideologically imbalanced Supreme  Court remember that narrow dogma is NOT the mark of wise democratic justice?

Leave a comment »