Archive for prehistory

Number Games in Holy Texts

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, faith, Hebrew scripture, prehistory, random, religion, scriptures, theology with tags , , , , , , , , on November 13, 2014 by chouck017894

In scriptural tales, when numbers were included in the texts, they invariably relayed hidden meaning to those trained in the art of sacred language. In ancient cultures, long before the rise of Judaism among the Hebrew tribes, numbers were considered to carry mystical significance. Virtually ignored by believers today is the fact that precise calculations were vital for many ancient observations and constructions which required several steps of computation which had to include and combine spherical geometry and trigonometry. As obvious as this should seem, the common opinion of the ancients has been that they understood only fundamental mathematics. Any fascination of mathematical exercise in prehistory cultures is thought to hold little implication. The number of persons such as is claimed within each of the Israelite tribes, however, do hold hidden significance for those trained in sacred language technique. Consider some other examples.

The number six, as in the six days of Creation, was regarded in ancient cultures as a balanced number, a “perfect” number, for 6 was seen as representative of Creation’s bearing principle–or the feminine aspect within Creation activity. Influenced by prehistory Creation lessons which had been given using various constellation illustrations, 6 was regarded as the first feminine number, for it represents the energy involvement out of Source which will “go forth and multiply.” In zodiac depictions we should note that the astrological sign Virgo is the sixth from Aries and tradition says Aries represents the head; also note that Virgo is the only female illustration in major zodiac signs. In the Genesis myth we are told that all Creation was whipped up in just six days. The number six was thus considered by the 8th century BCE priest-authors in Jerusalem as the number of God. And the sixth day of Creation was held as especial because man, considered as God’s highest achievement, was created on the sixth day. (The number 6, some have noted, holds the outline of a fetus in gestation.) Not so coincidently in Christian lore Jesus has credited to him as his sixth miracle his own transfiguration. This just happens to correspond to the sixth plane of energy involvement in prehistory Creation lessons which were in regard to primal energies moving into development as matter.

Interestingly, the ancient regard for the number six was eventually explained by the Greek philosopher-mathematician Pythagoras (c.582?-500 BCE). The number six was the first number among several that the followers of Pythagoras were taught as expressing the perfection upon which all that exists is anchored. It was their belief that numbers express the true nature of things. A number was regarded as “perfect” if it is equal to the sum of its proper divisors. A proper divisor is a number which divides another number exactly, and the number six, for example, equals 1+2+3. Other numbers regarded as “perfect” are 28, 496, 8128, and 33440336.

Augustine, the Christian saint, expounded upon the mathematical endowment of the number six (never mentioning Pythagoras) saying, “Six is the number perfect in itself, and not because God created all things in six days: rather the inverse is true; God created all things in six days because this number is perfect. And it would remain perfect even if the work of six days did not exist.”

Another number from prehistory Creation accounts is the number four (4). In prehistory Creation lessons the fourth stage involvement of primal elements concerned creative energy as it flowed toward manifestation as defined matter. In scriptural versions this fourth elemental energy involvement was commonly disguised with a zero added. Examples: 40 days of rain in the Noah account, the 40 years of wandering in the Moses epic, and in each case they attained their destiny after passing through four elementary energy developmental stages. This is also the coded meaning in the account of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead after Lazarus had “…lain in the grave four days already” (John 11). It is not accidental that there are four canonized Gospels either, each providing developmental phases of the Life Principle, personified as Jesus, who represents the universality of all life. Nor is it accidental that the supposed authors of those Gospels are symbolized with the four deliberately jumbled divisional signs from the zodiac. Matthew is signified with the Ox (Taurus), Mark is symbolized with the Lion (Leo), Luke is represents with Man (Aquarius), and John is represented with the eagle, which in Jewish astrology symbolized Scorpio. And in Christian accounts there are the four horsemen of the Apocalypse (Revelations 6:1-8), which were deliberately jumbled by color descriptions to disguise the symbolism borrowed from prehistory lessons on Creation’s elementary involvement.

In Genesis 32:14, where the dishonesty of Jacob is celebrated, other numbers convey disguised meaning. Jacob is portrayed as indulging in a schemed peace-making deal with his brother Esau from whom he had earlier stolen the “birthright” blessing of their father. As a peace-offering Jacob is portrayed as giving Esau “…two hundred she-goats and twenty-two he-goats” as a token of his good will. That number 220 happens to be the first among particular numbers which were regarded by Pythagoras to be charged with “friendly” vibrations. The reason for this respect was that certain numbers, such as 220 and 284, are each equal to the sum of the proper divisors of the other. [The proper divisors of 220 are: 1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 20, 44, 55, and 110. These are numbers which divide evenly into a number, including 1, but excluding the number itself.]

We today tend to forget that many ancient cultures were highly sophisticated and were well acquainted with mathematics, medicinal, scientific, geometric, astronomical and psychological principles. The principle known in mathematics as pi is commonly thought to be of rather recent understanding. But it is interesting to note that ancient Babylonian and Egyptian mathematicians were quite familiar with the fact that the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle is a constant, or what we know as pi. And they understood also that pi is no ordinary constant, for its precise value can never be known, and thus the constant holds the special status of being transcendental. This is so because not only is it a decimal that does not repeat, but neither does it terminate.

The prehistory mathematicians were well aware also of other numbers which shared the baffling properties of pi. As an example, the ratio of the diagonal to the side of a square is also a decimal that neither repeats nor ends. And a diagonal line drawn through a square results in two right triangles whose hypotenuse is the diagonal with the sides of the square which act as the sides of the two triangles. Such a diagonal division of space within a square which is symbolized in this manner is therefore mathematically equivalent to the division of light from darkness in Genesis 1:4, the division of waters from waters in Genesis 1:6, and even the provisional division as male and female in Genesis 1:27. And the ratio of two intergers[1] is calculated by a decimal which neither repeats itself nor ends, and it is this “irrational number” which can be said to be representative of God in the seemingly irrational scriptural storytelling. [1 An integer is any number or a set of positive whole numbers, such as 1, 2, 3 and zero.] Major “prophets”–Elijah for example–are portrayed as parting waters, and multiplying life essentials (bread, fish, oil, etc.), each in a one-time-only creation deal. This represents the division of energy for positive/negative exchange which makes for multiplication of creative energies.

Persons who are prone to regard biblical tales as having been written by or dictated by God become a bit upset when the authors of holy word seem to get tripped up by principles of mathematics. The account of the resplendent temple allegedly erected by King Solomon (1 Kings 7:23), for example, falls a wee bit short in the calculations of the “molten sea”–a huge circular tank which is said to have held water for religious ceremonies. That holy holding pool is described as being “…ten cubits from one brim to the other…and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.” This would mean that the value of pi is casually rounded off as three–somewhat at odds with the true value of 3.14159+. The contention presented in this tale thus exposes the fraudulent claim that direct divine wisdom was being relayed to seekers, for it is impossible to make a circle which has a diameter of ten cubits and a circumference of an even thirty.

Not surprisingly the obsession of using numbers as an indication of divine purpose was carried over by the Roman Empire authors of the New Testament as another technique aimed to attract Jewish converts. It is not exactly coincidence therefore that Jesus is depicted as having been crucified on the 6th day of the week. And there is the miracle of Jesus multiplying five loaves of bread and two fishes (Pisces) to feed followers (Matthew 14:19), which, we should remember, occurred after he had improved upon the miracle of parting waters by walking upon them. Speaking of fish consider, in the book of John 21:11 (written c. 105-106 CE), the number of fish allegedly caught by disciples at the Sea of Tiberius (better known as the Sea of Galilee) was 153. This happening is depicted as having taken place after Jesus had shown himself for the third time after his crucifixion. The peculiar number 153 in this professed happening is another which happens to be mathematically special. It is known as a triangular (three-sided) number, for it is equal to the sum of the integers from 1 to 17. In other words, if a triangle was a diagram with figures of fish, and the triangle measured 17x17x17, it would contain exactly 153 same-sized fish. Nothing miraculous here, nothing supernatural–just a mathematical exercise used in storytelling to imply their faith systems’ divine power over natural forces. From such as this we are indebted to “revealed” sacred truth.

Solomon’s Majesty

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, Christianity, culture, faith, life, prehistory, religion with tags , , , , , , on August 4, 2009 by chouck017894

In The David Saga it was pointed out that the “history” storyline of the character of David followed advanced pre-Hebrew teachings of energy formation into matter.  Part of those ancient lessons on cosmology had to do with the luminous stage of material development—which brings us to the scriptural character of Solomon.

Since David was used allegorically to represent the earlier stages of energy involvement toward matter, it is a natural continuation that the development of the luminous stage of matter would be incorporated into the concocted “history” of Israel.  The continuation of matter development thus became the “son” of David, so the character of Solomon personifies the sun-stage in cosmic development.  This is teasingly hinted in the name Solomon, for it is derived from combining three unrelated cultural addresses to the sun: Sol from the Roman word for sun (“Sol Invictus, unconquerable sun:” remember, these books were edited in early Roman times), Om (or aum) from the Hindu mantra characterizing supreme power, and On the Chaldean-Egyptian address to the sun. 

Once the meaning in the name is known, all the many questions raised regarding this fabled king of Israel begin to provide sensible answers.  The sun, being the provisional energy constituent for Earth life, explains his alleged unparalled wisdom.  Light has always symbolized wisdom, and it also clarifies the alleged enormous wealth Solomon possessed.  His legenday “mines,” therefore, is reference to the sun itself.  His reign is claimed to have been marked by prosperity, prestige, grandiose building projects, and cultural transformation.  The world can sustain life only through benefits of the sun, so of course the world renown claimed for Solomon is understandable—even though such a king  is confirmed nowhere in genuine history.

There is a curious connection of Solomon’s wealth to verses in Revelation.  1 Kings 10:14 relates: “Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of gold.”  Strange is it not that the 666 talents of gold  pop up in Revelation 13:16 as “…the number of a man, and his number is six hundred threescore and six”?

Scripture tells us (1 Kings 11:1 and 3), “But King Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hitties. 3) And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.”  Obviously a  mortal man could not have long performed such sexual indulgences, so the copious amount and variety of women claimed to have been serviced by him refers to the indiscriminate warmth of the sun.  The great shame of the Deuteronomic judgment that was consequently passed upon him by the priest-authors thus deviously vilified and slandered all women—for it is claimed that his indulgences allegedly infuriated god to “…raise up Hadad the Edomite, Rezon of Damascus,” and especially Jeroboam against him.  This leads us to touch briefly on the Song of Solomon that so embarrasses the uninformed experts on religious meaning.  The “Song” is actually a celebration of the creative action of primordial energies becoming involved (or enamored) with the potentiality of matter that is to form from their union.

The fabulous temple of Solomon, the “temple not made with hands, eternal in the heavens,” clearly admits that such a structure never existed on this planet.  Solomon, personification of the Sun,  is its builder and is said to have labored for seven years on its construction (1 Kings 6:38), an echo of the seven “days” of Creation.  So of course “…there was neither hammer nor axe nor any tool of iron heard in the house while it was building…” (1 Kings 5:7).

On the other hand, Solomon is said to have spent thirteen years constructing his own house.  Did he consider that to be more important than the construction in which to honor the Source?  No.  Again it has to do with the ancient pre-Hebrew lessons that taught a scientific understanding of Creation principles: the “temple” represents only one half of the cosmic house, and from the initiation of energy toward matter on through the evolution of life into refined energy conditions accounts for the other half of the cosmic house—hence 13 years.

Strangely, there is mention in 1 Kings 11:41 of a text called “the Book of Acts of Solomon,” but it seems that nothing is known of it.  Perhaps, just perhaps that lost book might have indicated why all that glory seems to have simply burned out  following his son Rehoboam’s elevation to the throne of Judah.

Time and Nothingness

Posted in Atheism, Atheist, belief, Bible, Christianity, culture, logic, prehistory, random, religion with tags , , , , , , , , on July 25, 2009 by chouck017894

Many people in what we regard to be prehistory were knowledgeable of the atomic structure of the universe.  Symbols of atomic energy have been found the world over dating from what we regard as prehistory.  Also there are passages from the Vedas, for example, the most ancient sacred writings of Hinduism, that allude to beings with such understanding.  And in cultures such as the Celts, Gauls, Mayans, and others there were what we might term “initiates” who demonstrated their comprehension of atomic structure.

As late as the fifth century before our Common Era (CE), the Greek philosopher Leucippus spoke of the atom and the “corpuscular universe.”  So too did the fourth century BCE Greek philosopher Democritus, whose name is associated with the  first exposition of the atomic theory of matter according to which all matter is composed of single, indivisible atoms.  His theory was that the atoms, the space within which they move, and their motions within that space, are eternal.  This would mean that there is no point at which it can be said to have served as a “beginning.”

Both religion and science pursue the theory that if the fundamental “law” of the universe can be discerned, and the initial condition of the universe could be discovered, then all purpose for Creation would be known to man.  What is steadfastly ignored is the fact that neither time nor space function as a principle of  Creation: they are effects, and the fundamental “law” and initial condition they seek is to be found in the eternal now.  Because the potentiality for everything has always existed within the primal energies we think of as Source, and which religion insists upon personifying as “God,” it is only the  fundamental energy particle active as Source that could ever authoritatively announced “I Am.”

In other words, Creation’s energies could never have evolved ex nihilo, out of nothing. Energy can exist without manifesting as form, but energy cannot be generated out of a state of non-existence.  As Stephen Hawking has proposed, much to the dismay of cosmologists and religionists, there really could never have been a point “t=O” to mark a “beginning.” 

A “Big Bang” does not explain the beginning  of Creation: the only thing that theory can be said to demonstrate is that energy is creative.  Energy has to be active in some capacity if anything like a “big bang”  could be initiated; it simply could not explode unless there was activity present to fuel it.  Religionists, of course, will say that it was “god” who stirred up the whole mess.  But any pre-schooler has common sense enough to ask, “Then who created god?”

We are faced with the reality that is always up to each individual pattern of energy as to where it wants to begin to measure the timely circle experienced as Creation.  To define Creation in terms of a time when everything “began” is an attempt to impose limitation upon that which is without limits.  That has left science in the awkward position of never having been able to explain what it is that we experience as time.  Indeed, science and religion simply accept that time just emerged ex nihilo, out of nothing.  That idea got kicked in the head when Albert Einstein introduced to the world the theory of relativity.  The paradoxes of special relativity was that time can be measured at a different rate by two clocks in different situations.  A clock moving in outer space, as compared to a stationary one on Earth, will measure involvement with Creation  forces differently.  That little discovery changed forever man’s concept that time was something constant, unalterable, and observed identically everywhere in the universe.  The indistinct qualifications of what constitutes “time” therefore casts serious doubts on any timescale that religionists claim from “revealed wisdom,” and even clouds the timescale that cosmologists theorize in an attempt to deduce the exact “time” of the imagined “big bang.”

Maybe we should rethink our concept of time.  Age-old concepts of  “time” did not regard time as a linear measure as we have been conditioned to regard it, but thought of it as a broadly arked, ever-shifting energy flow in which we each reflect our relationship with quantum activity.

Science on Clay Feet

Posted in history, prehistory, science with tags , , , , , , on April 4, 2009 by chouck017894

Unfortunately, science shares a number of nasty little habits that religion and politics have indulged in for millennia: the practice of suppressing or even disposing of evidence that runs contrary to the line of belief (theories) that they have put in place as being unquestionable fact. As in religion and politics, it is the fundamentalists of science that labor at obscuring truth to protect their financial and directional authority.

Making dogmatic pronouncements by persons held to be authorities in their field of interest betrays their loyalty to that discipline by doing so, for no line of science can remain a true research branch if it closes and locks a door of investigation. If the theorists truly hold a key to some truth then they should have no fear of questions or of further investigation. Equally deplorable are the scientists who refuse to look through–let alone step through–a door into something that is prejudged by them as too “outrageous” to even consider. More often than not such scientists–like the religionists and politicians–haven’t actually bothered to study the proposed investigation that they so freely criticize.

In the disciplines of archeology and anthropology, for example, it is held as fact that the anatomically modern human species could not have existed any longer ago than a few hundred thousand years. The theory has been that if such human beings existed million of years ago in parallel with primitive humanoids, then physical remains should have been found from sites known to be 300,000 to 400,000 years old, which could suggest the possibility of anatomically modern human’s being present before that time.  That theory of timeline for human development on this planet seems a bit too compressed, however.  But peer review literature acts as a knowledge filter which slowly and cautiously makes update corrections–a process that is constantly repeated. As example, in 1970 a new dating techinque revealed that tools found at a site in Ethiopia were at very minimum 176,000 years old–which set human presence on Earth back another 80,000 years.

A few little questions are raised in the opening of Time Frames and Taboo Data: A History of Mankind’s Misdirected Beliefs that anthropologists and archeologists shrug off. There have been found in 2.8
billion year-old rocks from South Africa hundreds of sphere-shaped metal objects, some slightly flattened on opposite ends and with three perfectly formed grooves encircling their center. There are two types of these objects. The more oval type is bluish-red with fiber-like flecks in the metal. The truly awesome thing about this type of sphere is that they were fashioned to be held in the hand and they have the ability to revolve on its own axis!

Okay, so that’s way too early for any intelligent exploration of planet Earth, right? Well then, what about a mere 200 million years ago? The Triassic Period? How could an imprint of a shoe sole–complete with tracing of stiches–exist in calcareous rock of that period? But it does: in Fisher Canyon in Pershing County, Nevada!

And what about a stele found at Quiriga in Guatemala that bears computations for its erection dated only 90 million year ago?

Are puzzles like these going to be scientifically pursued anytime soon? Don’t hold your breath.