Archive for Solomon

Allegory of Solomon

Posted in belief, Bible, faith, Hebrew scripture, history, random, religion, scriptures with tags , , , , , , on December 21, 2012 by chouck017894

The last character in holy scriptural accounts to whom god allegedly appeared visibly was Solomon.  There is a reason for this, and it is traceable to earlier Pagan scientific knowledge.  In the development of energy into the stage of visible matter, the first visible phenomenon of that activity is a focused point of light.  And that concentrated light shines as a transformational marker in the development of dense matter, and ancient Pagan teachings referred to that in-between stage as etheric matter, which they symbolized with the Sun.

So significant is the energy change out of the etheric matter stage that a whole eight chapter book is dedicated to it in the Bible.  It is the Old Testament book known as the Song of Solomon, which tends to embarrass the “experts” on religious meanings.  What these “songs” were metaphorically drawn upon was the creative principles where energy figuratively becomes enamored with the generative involvement as dense matter.   The “songs” were fashioned on lyrics that came down in oral tradition long before priests in Jerusalem gathered them into canonical form.  Despite all their titillating imagery, the real meaning in the lyrics has nothing to do with physical sexual attraction, but uses that  suggestively because everyone can relate to that attraction.  So the uptight “experts” can relax.

The mythic character of Solomon, the mythic son of the unverifiable David, personifies that etheric nature of the Sun which radiates and rules over the life force active in the dimensions of energy as matter.  Allegorically, Solomon therefore is depicted as Lord or king over the dense matter dimensions of energy.  The Sun, being visible but not developed as a dense matter object, is a logical marker of energy poised between prototype matter and defined matter.  Once the scientific basis of Pagan symbolism is understood, it becomes obvious that Solomon represents solar power and all the claims presented for the alleged character of Solomon become clarified.

In regard to Solomon being the last character in holy scripture to allegedly see the Creator visibly, the ancient Pagan teachings should be consulted.  When the development of energy into dense matter form is achieved, the primal stages of development of that energy involvement cease to be seen.  Figuratively, the Sun, as the first stage of visible matter, therefore may “see” that primal creative energy which is personified as the Creator God.  For this reason the scriptures record no more personal appearances of the personified Creator as being seen by any of the subsequent scriptural characters.  All the succeeding characters that merit storytelling space gain their “divine” insight only through visions and/or dreams, not from any direct encounter with the deity.

It must be remembered that the books of 1 and 2 Kings, in which Solomon is featured, were written centuries after the timeframe of the purported events.  The author was most likely Baruch ben Nerian, the scribe to the “prophet” Jeremiah.  The name Solomon was derived from the Roman word Sol, ie the Sun; and Om (or Aum), the Hindu mantra characterizing supreme power; and On, the Chaldean-Egyptian address to the Sun.  (Yes, the priests of Yahweh in Jerusalem were aware of Hindu belief.)  As the representative of the Sun which rules over the solar family, it becomes obvious why Solomon was characterized as having unparalleled wisdom, for light has always symbolized wisdom.  And knowing that Solomon is representative of the Sun, the enormous wealth that he is alleged to have possessed has rationality.  The legendary “mines” from which he is alleged to have drawn that enormous wealth is none other than the Sun itself.

Past generations have been more cognizant of the fact that biblical tales often placed great importance on numbers.  Indeed, numbers bandied about in holy tales served as symbols that, in themselves, tell the initiates a far different story than they do to those who take each tale at face value.  Authors of scriptural tales often played with those numbers, disguising them within myths.  The Hebrew word yod, for example, is the number six, and it signified God at the sixth dimension (“day”) of Creation.  When yod was repeated three times it was a (magical) devotional address to God.  That numerical code is found in the myth of  Solomon in the allegation that his gold mines yielded “…six hundred threescore and six talents of gold” per year (1 Kings 10:14).  Thus the gold value is disguised as yod repeated three times, or 6+6+6.

The Hebrew/Judaic regard for the devotional three-time recitation of yod was therefore inverted by this New Testament author as beast 666.  As a result Revelation 13:17 equates the claimed yearly financial excess of Solomon’s gold in Hebrew scriptures with the pursuit of greed and evil, saying, “And that no man might buy or sell, save that he had the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”   However, the “name” or “mark” or “number” is intentionally made ominous by not being clearly explained.

More clues to the occult meaning of the character of the scriptural Solomon are hidden in other aspects of the tale as well, such as the name given for Solomon’s mother, Bathsheba.  And also in the story feature that the Queen of Sheba is said to have come to Solomon for his blessing.  The word “sheba” signifies “seven,” and in ancient Pagan teachings based on scientific principles, the seventh plane of energy development is the achievement of visible matter, symbolized with the Sun—the creative purpose or blessing of energy involvement.

When the more ancient (and scientifically based) Pagan symbolism is consulted, it becomes clear why, in spite of all the claims made of Solomon’s wealth and his alleged worldwide recognition, he was never mentioned in any records of any of the nations that supposedly interacted with him.  All the deeds, fabulous wealth and eccentricities of Solomon are to be found only in Hebrew scriptural myth.

There is a curious feature in scriptural storytelling lineup, which is that in the timeframes that followed the unverifiable Solomon, no one, not even the “prophets,” ever encountered so much as an angel, let alone receive their “revelations” directly from a visible deity.  The closest that any “prophet” came to seeing even an angel is the minor “prophet” Zechariah, and he saw that angel only in a vision.  The belief in angels is traceable to Pagan wisdom also.  The ancient lessons on Creation were in regard to the available units of creative energy which are drawn upon from the non-manifest (quantum) conditions in the Source by all matter-forms.  Those creative energies necessarily accompany and sustain every faction of consciousness; thus everyone and everything in the visible plane can figuratively be said to have their “guardian angel.”  They do, however, have the frustrating characteristic of remaining invisible to us.

(Related post: Solomon’s Majesty, August 2009)

31 Comments »

More on Solomon Myth

Posted in agnoticism, Atheist, belief, Bible, Christianity, culture, faith, Hebrew scripture, history, Inspiration, life, random, religion, thoughts with tags , , , , on July 1, 2011 by chouck017894

The last character in holy scriptural accounts to whom god allegedly appeared visibly was to Solomon.  There is a reason for this, and it is traceable to earlier Pagan scientific knowledge.  In the development of energy into the stage of visible matter, the first visible phenomenon of that activity is a focused point of light.  And that concentrated light shines as a transformation marker in the development of dense matter, and ancient Pagan teachings referred to that in-between stage as etheric matter, which they symbolized with the Sun.

So significant is the energy change out of the etheric matter stage that a whole book is dedicated to it in the Hebrew Bible.  It is the Old Testament book known as the Song of Solomon, which tends to embarrass the “experts” on religious meanings.  What these “songs” were drawn upon were in regard to creation activity where what they referred to as etheric matter figuratively becomes enamored with the potentiality of dense matter.  The “songs” attributed to Solomon were fashioned on lyrics that came down in oral tradition long before priests in Jerusalem gathered them into canonical form.  Despite all their vivid imagery, however, the lyrics really have nothing to do with physical sexual excitement, so the “experts” can breathe a sigh of relief.

The mythic character of Solomon personifies that etheric nature of the Sun which radiates and rules over the life force active in the dimension of energy-as-matter.  Allegorically, Solomon therefore is depicted as lord or king over the dense matter dimension of energy.  The Sun, being visible but not developed as a dense matter object, is a logical marker of energy poised between prototype matter and defined matter.  Once the scientific basis of Pagan symbolism is understood—that Solomon represents the solar power—all the claims presented for the character become clarified.

In regard to Solomon being the last character in holy scripture to allegedly see the Creator visibly, the ancient Pagan teachings should be consulted.  When the development of energy into dense matter form is achieved, the primal stages of development of that energy cease to be seen from that advanced form.  Figuratively, the Sun, as first stage of visible matter therefore may “see” that primal creative energy which is personified as the creator-god.  For this reason the scriptures record no more personal appearances of the deity to be seen by any of the subsequent scriptural characters.  All the succeeding characters that merit storytelling gain their “divine” insight only through visions and dreams, not from any direct encounter with the deity.

It must be remembered that the books 1 and 2 Kings, in which Solomon is featured, were written centuries after the purported events.  The author was most likely Baruch ben Nerian, the scribe of the”prophet” Jeremiah.  The name Solomon was derived from the Roman word Sol, i.e.the Sun; and Om (or Aum) from the Hindu mantra characterizing supreme power; and On, the Chaldean/Egyptian address to the Sun.  (Yes, the priests of Yahweh in Jerusalem were aware of Hindu belief.)  As the representative of the Sun which rules over the solar family, it becomes obvious why Solomon was characterized as having unparalleled wisdom, for light has alway symbolized wisdom.  And knowing that Solomon is representative of the Sun, the enormous wealth that he allegedly possessed has rationality.  The legendary “mines” from which he is alleged to have drawn his wealth is the Sun itself.

Past generations have been more cognizant of the fact that biblical tales often hold great importance on numbers.  Indeed, numbers served as symbols that, in themselves, tell the initiates a far different story than they do to those who take each tale at face value.  Authors of scriptural tales often played with these numbers, disguising them within myths.  The Hebrew word yod, for example, is the number six, and it signified god at the sixth dimension (“day”) of Creation.  When yod was repeated three times it was a (magical) devotional address to god.  That numerical code is found in the myth of Solomon in the allegation that his gold mines yielded “…six hundred threescore and six talents of gold” per year (1 Kings 10:14).  Thus the gold value disguised 6+6+6, or yod repeated three times.  The Hebrew-Judaic regard for the devotional three-time recitation of yod was therefore inverted by the Christian authors and cast into Beast 666 in the jumbled book of Revelation.  Such is the spiritual value of “revealed word.”

Clues to the occult meaning of the character of the scriptural Solomon are hidden in hints such as the name given for Solomon’s mother: Bathsheba.  And there is the story feature that the Queen of Sheba is said to have come to Solomon for his blessing.  The word sheba means “seven,” and in ancient Pagan teachings the seventh plane of energy development is the achievement of visible matter (symbolized with the Sun), which heralds energy involvement as dense matter.

When the more ancient (and scientifically based) Pagan symbolism is consulted, it becomes clear why—in spite of all the claims made of Solomon’s wealth and world recognition—he was never mentioned in any records of any of the nations that supposedly interacted with him.  All the deeds and eccentricities of Solomon are to be found only in Hebrew scriptural myth.

There is a curious feature in scriptural storytelling lineup, which is that in the timeframes after the unverifiable Solomon no one, not even the “prophets,” ever encountered so much as an angel, let alone receive “revelations’ directly from a visible deity.  The closest that any “prophet” ever came to seeing even an angel was the minor “prophet” Zechariah, and he saw that angel only in a vision.

The belief in angels is also traceable to Pagan wisdom also.  The ancient lesson on Creation taught of available units of creative energy which are drawn upon by all matter-forms from the  non-manifest conditions of Source.  Creative energies necessarily accompany and sustain every faction of matter-life; thus everyone and every thing can figuratively be said to have their “guardian angels.”  They do, however, have the annoying habit of remaining invisible.

  • Related post: Solomon’s Majesty, August 2009.

2 Comments »

Priest-Style History

Posted in agnoticism, Atheism, Atheist, belief, Bible, culture, faith, history, humanity, life, politics, random, religion, thoughts with tags , , , , , , , , , on June 25, 2010 by chouck017894

After the little kingdom of Israel fell to Assyria, c. 722 BCE, the more rugged central hill country of Judah south of Israel experienced an influx of refugees and the modest village of Jerusalem burst forth in sudden expansion c. 720-718 BCE.  Until this time Jerusalem had covered no more than ten-and-a-half acres, but it quickly expanded outward from its narrow ridge site to engulf the entire western hill and envelop one hundred and fifty acres with closely packed residences, workshops, businesses and public buildings.

In this timeframe Jerusalem was not yet regarded as a “holy city”—except, perhaps, by the priests of Yahweh who had long dreamed of making their temple in Jerusalem the center of political spirituality.  The common understanding has long been nourished that Jerusalem and the region around it was always devoted to belief in one god and one god only.  In truth there was a widespread diversity of worship practices throughout Judah, and there was a widespread mixing of other gods with that of Yahweh in the Jerusalem Temple.  Archaeology finds have shown conclusively that the claimed golden age of tribal and Davidic fidelity to Yahweh was not a historic reality.  Indeed, cults of various gods and goddesses were prevalent throughout Judah.  So diverse were the customs of the people that some of them regarded the Ugaritic mother-goddess Asherah as the consort of YHWH.  This, of course, was deemed blasphemous by the priests of Yahweh.

Scriptural accounts of coexisting kingdoms of Israel and Judah (as noted in the previous post Scriptures’ Contrived History, June 16) is priestly fabrication, for Judah developed extensively only after Israel’s fall to Assyria.  The priest account of defensive forts said to have been erected by Solomon’s son Rehoboam were actually erected 200 years later than the implied c. 931-914 BCE date as II Chronicles 11:5-12 would have us believe.  The same is true of the palaces and gates that Solomon is claimed to have commissioned.

The political minded priests in Jerusalem recognized that they had to blend the popular Creation myths known in Israel with their own myths if they were to lure the refugees into becoming part of the “chosen people” of Yahweh.  Thus chapters one and two of Genesis present noticeable differences in Creation sequences, as well as the different versions that Adam and Eve allegedly played in the Creator’s scheme of  things.  The two accounts are mismatched enough that Bible scholars refer to them as the “J” and “E” versions.  The “J” version was written by priests in Judah whose God was addressed as Yahweh: the version that was known in Israel is referred to as the “E” account because the authors of that tale referred to the Creator as Elohim.

It should be noted that the “J” version of Genesis does not exactly make it clear as to whether or not Yahweh was the sole creator of heaven and earth and Man.  In trying to bond the two accounts the authors of the revision suddenly have God muse aloud, “Let us create man in our image…” (Genesis 1:26).  But in the second chapter it says, “God (again singular) formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life…” (Genesis 2:7).  The political reason for this description of man being fashioned from dust was to block any idea that man might share some divine attributes of the Creator as other cultures believed.  The “J” authors were determined to bind the act of Creation to ordinary time, which allowed themselves the liberty to compose a “history” in which those who believed in Yahweh could be presented with the status of having been “chosen.”  And with the characters of Moses and Abram/Abraham there was set in place the means by which they could claim the special destiny of owning the land of Canaan. 

For the fundamentalists who assert that every word in scriptures is to be taken as God-sent, it might be wise to note that the uncertainty that is revealed in the two patched together Creation myths is reason to pause for reassessment.  That the scriptures were written with political intent, not spiritual enlightenment, is only faintly disguised somewhat later (in II Kings) with the priestly assessment of Manasseh who came to the throne of Judah at age 12, c. 692 BCE, after his father, Hezekiah, revolted against Assyria and was defeated (even though priests assured him that God approved his policy of religious purification).  It was up the Manasseh to pick up the pieces and try to restore Judah to an operational kingdom.  His subjects were primarily country folks and few of them had ever embraced Yahweh as the one-and-only God that the priests demanded.  As a result, religious pluralism returned.  The priest authors in Jerusalem were a spiteful group, and in their writings expressed only denunciatory outrage at Manasseh for letting this happen.  True to the revisionist style of history making, we find Manasseh being presented by the priest authors as the most sinful monarch that the kingdom Judah ever had (II Kings 21: 1-18).

Archaeological evidence reveals that Manasseh was nothing of the sort.  Under Manasseh the kingdom of Judah was revived and prospered.  For the sake of the kingdom and the people Manasseh became a vassal of Assyria—and went on to reign for fifty-five years—the longest, most prosperous and most peaceful reign of any Israelite or Judean king.  The population grew and the nation flourished under his policies.  But the priests continued to fume with jealousy over the blessings enjoyed under his rule—all of which occurred without the benefit of priestly intercession with Yahweh. 

Fundamentalists, take note:  The settlements and cities that were established during Manasseh’s reign survived and thrived after his death.  Indeed, it was only after the priests had again finagled themselves into political influence that Judah fell c. 587 BCE.

1 Comment »

Scripture’s Contrived History

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, culture, faith, history, random, religion, thoughts with tags , , , , , , , , , , on June 16, 2010 by chouck017894

According to scriptural accounts a Jewish kingdom of Israel was welded in the land of Canaan by David, and his kingdom is portrayed as having prospered as a great unified kingdom under David’s son, Solomon.  That account was long accepted as a given truth by biblical scholars until the science of archaeology showed conclusively that the claimed powerful kingdom said to have been ruled from Jerusalem could not have existed as portrayed in the priest-writings.  No hard archaeological evidence has ever been found to support the priest compiled story, but has revealed instead that Jerusalem was simply a modest, economically borderline village in the era when David, Solomon and Rehoboam (son of Solomon) are claimed to have ruled. 

Archaeology has revealed that the territory north of Jerusalem in the claimed timeframe was considerably more populated and flourishing economically than the region around Jerusalem.  However, in biblical myth the northern territory is claimed to have broken away from the alleged unified kingdom under Solomon’s son (c. 931-913 BCE), and developed as the kingdom of Israel.  Both territorial areas did worship YHWH among other gods, spoke dialects of Hebrew, and wrote in the same script, but the southern territory (Judah) became more developed much later than the northern; it had remained sparse due to its more rugged terrain.  The bond of blood kinship of the northern and southern territories was openly acknowledged, but they had become politically divided.  Until the northern kingdom of Israel fell to the Assyrians (c. 734 BCE), the little “kingdom” of Judah languished in the shadow of Israel.  The fall of Israel was a blessing for the priests based in the village of Jerusalem who had long lusted to impose their method of religious observance upon all Hebrew people and wished to make the temple in Jerusalem the holiest place of their faith. 

Josiah, son and successor of Judah’s King Amon, came to the throne at the age of eight (c. 639 BCE), and was tutored by priests during his youth.  Because of this background Josiah soon reestablished the worship of Yahweh/Jehovah.  And it was during Josiah’s reign, apparently by divine providence, that a book of law was allegedly discovered by the high-priest Hilkiah when workmen were repairing the temple (as recorded in II Kings 22).  Josiah was inspired by the miraculously produced writing which has ever since been accepted as the book of Deuteronomy, supposedly the work of Moses.  Deuteronomy only recapitulated the law already recorded in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, but the framework in which the laws are set is notably (suspiciously) different from that of the other codes.  Notable in Deuteronomy is the contention that the Exodus version of the Covenant with Yahweh/God at Sinai was not made on the basis of the Decalogue; instead it is implied that only ten laws (Commandments) were given to the people at Sinai, with the rest delivered to Moses alone, and promulgated later at the Jordan.  This conveniently allowed enormous leeway for the high-priest Hilkiah to restructure and reform religious practice that gave greater prominence to themes of God’s sovereignty, justice, mercy and love rather than to outward observances of ritual and ceremonial emphasis.  In the discovered sermon of Moses it reads, “For you are a people consecrated to Yahweh your Elohim; it is you that Yahweh our Elohim has chosen to be his very own people out of all the peoples of the earth.”  This happily aligned priestly ambitions with that of Josiah’s inherited  dominion, and just happened to inspire a narrow national outlook.

With Israel reduced to secondary power and refugees fleeing south into Judah, the priests devoted to YHWH moved to expand, and they established shrines and sanctuaries at Dan and Bethel.  And as refugees poured in from the north the Yahweh priests in Jerusalem quickly embarked on a prodigious propaganda campaign of rewriting history and codifying material that now makes up the early books of the Old Testament.  Additional books were compiled to promote the impression that the little kingdom of Judah had been divinely ordained.  To account for the alleged split in the united kingdom into rival kingdoms, the blame for it was given with the myth of Solomon having his heart turned from YHWH by his foreign wives.  Sadly, for trusting believers, over one hundred years of intensive archaeology investigation have never been able to confirm David or Solomon as historical persons.

Leave a comment »

What Marked Jerusalem as Holy

Posted in agnoticism, Atheism, Atheist, belief, Bible, faith, history, prehistory, random, religion, thoughts with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 1, 2010 by chouck017894

What was it about the location that became Jerusalem that inflamed Yahweh priests with the obsession that a temple must be built upon one certain mount in Judaea?  Even before the priests of Yahweh arrived at the mount, the site had been regarded as sacred by inhabitants of the region.  The earliest known name for the site was Ur-Shalem (or Yeru-Shalem), and from as far back as can be traced the hub area of Ur-Shalem encompassed three particular mounts.  The most ancient names of the mounts seem to point to some singular association that is yet to be discovered.  The southernmost mount had the name of “Mount of the Signal” in antiquity; the northernmost peak is said to have been known as “Mount of the Observers.”  The central mount, however, seems to have been central in more ways than one, for it bore the name “Mount of Directing.”  This is the mount which is claimed to have been seen by Abraham from a distance; he is alleged to have  witnessed a heavy cloud over this mount in which the glory of god was seen.  The word Ur translates roughly as fire or light, but the word Shalem is remarkably similar to the Hebrew shalom, the greeting or farewell meaning peace.  Jerusalem has thus been said, rather ironically considering its history of discord, to mean light and peace.  Another speculation is that shalem means something like the perfect place.

Curiously the barren mountain site that would become Jerusalem lacked the basic needs for a center of religious or political pursuits.  There was neither water nor food sources near the site, nor even any trade or military routes anywhere near.  One might be inclined to call it a god-forsaken place!  Around c. 2000-1800 BCE there was little in the region but small sparsely inhabited highland areas.  When the Yahweh priests arrived they were already determined that one particular spot there was marked out as a center that god favored.  What was the supposed special indicator that the place was blessed by heaven?  It was a massive artificially cut rock.  The priests were divinely certain that despite the stone’s antiquity it had all been fashioned just for them.

The sacred rock was  known in Hebrew as Eben Sheti-yah, and translates as the “Stone from which the world was woven.”  This reference seems to hold an intricate relationship to the more ancient names for the three mounts mentioned earlier upon which Jerusalem evolved.  The sacred rock can be deduced as once having served as a kind of platform that was put in place atop artificially cut massive stone blocks—in pre-diluvial times.  The sacred rock at the Jerusalem location has a startling similarity in age and structure to the more massive stone platform located at Baalbeck, in today’s Lebanon.  This sacred rock, therefore, existed for millennia before c 1000 BCE—which is the timeframe when David is alleged to have captured the sparse area (today’s Mount Zion) from the Jebusites (an early tribal league).

Tradition says that the sacred rock was cube-like, with its corners precisely facing the four directions of the compass.  In addition, it is said that two tube-like funnels had been bored out of the rock, and these connected to a subterranean tunnel.  How these feats could have been accomplished in prehistory times, or the purpose they served is unknown.  Tradition has it also that the construction plans for the temple that was erected later had been provided directly by an unnamed source which holy myth, of course, credits to “the Lord.”

We should also note that ancient names of the valleys in the area carried special implication as well.  For example, Isaiah spoke of one of them as the Valley of Hizzayon, which loosely translates as Valley of Vision.  Ugaritic texts tell of divine healers in a valley they called Valley of Repha’im (the healers).  Legends from prehistory times also tell of a subterranean region in “the Valley of Hinnom,” where the entrance could be discerned by a column of smoke that rose between two palm trees. 

Archeological research has shown that the biblical accounts of Canaan-Israel-Judah history are far from reliable.  A brief example: the character of Saul (c. 1025-1005 BCE), the alleged first king of Israel, was supposedly installed by the eleventh century BCE judge and “prophet” Samuel.  This places it in the Iron Age I period.  Nothing has ever been unearthed in archeological digs that even suggests that a prosperous united monarchy existed then.  And no archeological evidence has ever been found of David’s alleged kingdom, and no indication of the conquests attributed to David have been unearthed either.  In fact, evidence reveals that settlements in the Jerusalem region in this Iron Age I timeframe experienced no interruption of Canaanite culture.  Likewise, in regard to David’s alleged son Solomon (time setting c. 970-931 BCE), nothing has ever been brought to light of any monumental architecture in Jerusalem, Megiddo or Hazor in this timeframe as has been attributed to Solomon. 

The holy truth is that precious little reliable priestly accounting of Israel or Judah surfaces until around 800 BCE.  Even then much of the priest-written “history” has been freely embroidered upon.  It is wise to remember that Jews are never mentioned until the Maccabees (Hasmonaeans), a Jewish dynasty of “patriots,” high priests and kings of the 2nd and 1st century BCE who sought to rouse the Jews against their Seleucid ruler.

  •  See related posts, The David Saga, parts 1 and 2; and  Solomon’s Majesty, August 2009.

Leave a comment »

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.

8 Comments »

Pre-Biblical Hebrew Documents

Posted in Atheist, Bible, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 17, 2009 by chouck017894

Long before the Torah account became the official declaration–and well before the version known as the Old Testament became installed as the official accounting of how everything came into being, there were many documents written in Hebrew that were held as sacred but which over time became conveniently lost or purposely suppressed. Among those was a text known as The Book of the Story of Adam, which is alluded to in Genesis 5:1 (where it reads, “This is the book of the generations of Adam”) and which implies that the ten generations from Adam to Noah had been more detailed.

In spite of heavy censoring of pre-biblical texts, a few of those early poetic Hebrew-style writings have been discoverd, but most are known primarily through brief fragments that have been quoted from in authorized books such as Numbers 21:14 (“Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord…”); Joshua 10:13 (“Is it not written in the book of Jasher?”); and in Samuel 1:18 (“…behold, it is written in the Book of Jasher.”)

Among the documents that were shoved into oblivion were epic accounts such as The Book of the Wars of Yahweh; another was known as the Book of Yashar. Both of these covered a more in-depth account of the Israelites’ alleged desert ordeal and a more grandiose version of the invasion of Canaan than the account passed down as the authorized version now found in Exodus and Numbers. From the book of Joshua 18:9 it can be discerned that another seven-part version once existed which glowingly described the coveted land of Canaan and its cities. In the book of Isaiah, 34:16, it says, “Seek ye out the book of the Lord, and read…” The book referred to there was the text known as The Book of Yahweh which was likely a collection of allegorical fables about the habits and traits of animals from which moral significance could be drawn.

Other books which would probably throw a different light on things held sacred by their mythic references might well have been presented in documents known as: 1) Acts of Solomon, 2) the Book of Geneaology, 3) the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, 4) Of Kings of Israel, and 5) Of the Sons of Levi.

It would be up to much later generations to add to the sacred accounts in attempts to clarify Mosaic Law and add moral, historical and anecdotal texts. But they, too, dipped into mythic material to validate the prescribed laws, social customs and rituals. With these little pieces of an ancient puzzle we are privileged to see how the so-called “revealed word of God” evolved.

4 Comments »

Where’s the Proof?

Posted in Atheist, freethought, Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on March 10, 2009 by chouck017894

Intensive modern archaeological research of the “Holy Land” conducted on up-to-date stratigraphic principles has been going on for well over a century. The century-plus search to confirm the claimed biblical past has unearthed absolutely nothing to verify the existence of any of the legendary persons such as Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Saul, David, Solomon, John the Baptist, Jesus or the alleged twelve apostles.

There have been hundreds of excavations conducted through the Near East region, especially modern Israel and Palestine, that did indeed serve to identify numerous sites used as the setting for biblical stories. From those careful digs there have been amassed detailed chronologies that range from the earliest permanent settlements of the Paleolithic Age up to the Late Bronze Age city-states. Atop these there has been unearthed an impressive hoard of material evidence of later Judean kingdoms on through the Roman and Byzantine periods. Even so, there is yet to be found any archeological find that provides evidence that any of the starring characters of the biblical tales were real persons. The names of minor biblical characters have been found, however, on inscriptions, seals and seal impressions. But inclusion of precise atmospheric details such as political names do not attest that the stars of biblical lore were real any more than using world-known personalities of today in some fictional story mean the main characters are real.

Surveys and excavations of early settlement sites on the West Bank which have long been claimed to be of Israelite origin have brought into doubt the scriptural accounts of the ancient “conquest” of Canaan. Territories traditionally claimed as “god given” to the Israelites have yielded nothing to lend verification that the claim carries historical truth. This presents an ominous threat to the traditions of the three major religions of the western world. As another example, there has been nothing unearthed that could support the traditional accounts of the Islamic Conquest; rather the carefully sifted evidence shows that Islamic domination over the region was not the result of a swift military campaign but resulted as a gradual shift in social structure.

What has to be acknowledged is that religious and political “traditions” most commonly arise from storyline manipulation of various events for the purpose of mass control. This in turn demonstrates that religious belief systems are history’s most powerful form of brainwashing.

Leave a comment »