| |
|
|
HOLY BIBLE
GENESIS
The revelation of God as El Shaddai, Almighty God.
AND when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou per-fect.
2. And.I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will mul-tiply thee exceedingly.
3. And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,
4. As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee. and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
5. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
6. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful. and I will make nations of thee. and kings shall come out of thee.
7. And I will establish my cove-nant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee. and to thy seed after thee.
8. And I will give unto thee. and to thy seed after thee, the land where-in thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan. for an everlasting pos-session; and I will be their God.
9. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant there- fore. thou. and thy seed after thee in their generations.
10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep. between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man / Page 27 / child among you shall be circum-cised.
11. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
12. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your genera-tions. he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
13. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
15. And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah
shall her name be.
16. And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.
17. Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?
18. And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!
19. And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and; thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.
20. And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
21. But my covenant will I estab-lish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
22. And he left off talking with him. and God went up from Abra-ham.
23. And Abraham took Ishmael . his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their fore- skin in the selfsame day, as God
had said unto him.
24. And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his fore-skin.
25 And Ishmael his son was thir-teen years old, when he was circum-cised in the flesh of his foreskin.
26. In the selfsame day was Abra-ham circumcised, and Ishmael his son.
27 And all the men of his house, :born in the house, and bought with money of the stranger, were circum-cised with him.
Who would ask of a baby sun is he male
The Zed Aliz Zed in pursuit of an oblique agenda, shadows certain words
GENESIS OF THE GRAIL KINGS
Laurence Gardner 1998
EMPIRE OF THE COVENANT
A Mother of Nations
Page 162
With the senior Mesopotamian succession from Ham and Nimrod diverted into Egypt, we are left with Shem and his family to provide the Bible's key patriarchal strain from Noah. The parallel lines from Ham and Japhet progressed into Arabia, Anatolia and Greater Scythia by the Black Sea, then eventually across Europe to Ireland. Japhet was indeed Ham's brother, just as the Bible explains. Hence, he was also a son of Tubal-cain, not a son of Noah as related in Genesis. Ham and Japhet were key ancestors of the Scots Gaels and, as correctly determined by the noted scholar Robert Graves,1 Japhet was known to the Greeks as Iapetus - a traditional style within his Titanic strain. In practice, he was Iapetus II, the great Anu having been Iapetus I.
The cursed descendants of Noah's son Canaan were identified as Canaanites, whose Mediterranean boundary was said to extend from Sidon to Gaza, and inland to Sodom and Gomorrah by the Dead Sea (Genesis 10: 19). These cities were ultimately destroyed by Enlil-Jehovah (see Chapter 12) and the Canaanites were generally perceived as enemies of the Hebrews who emerged in the line from Shem.
Very little is told in Genesis about Shem's immediate family, but they are listed through nine generations (11:10-27) and the more detailed stories of the individual patriarchs begin anew with Abraham and his wife Sarai (Sarah). Once again, confusion surrounds this couple, for although the Hebrew legacy was reckoned to have progressed through them, Sarai is said to have been barren during the early years of her / Page 163 / marriage (11 :30). This is not an uncommon feature of the biblical accounts of this family: Rebecca, the wife of their eventual son Isaac, was also described as barren (25 :21), as was Rachel, the wife of Isaac and Rebecca's son Jacob (29:31). It was common practice in those days for girls to marry before childbearing age and it is to the infertile periods of their early married lives that the old texts generally refer.2
The story of Sarai is, none the less, a strange one. First we are informed that she cannot conceive, but then within a few verses we learn that her husband, Abraham, is to be the founding patriarch of a great nation (Genesis 12:2). Subsequently, Sarai presents Abraham with her Egyptian companion, Hagar, 'to be his wife' - but when Hagar conceives she is chastized and banished by Sarai (16:1-16), as if the outcome were unexpected. In due course, Ishmael, the first son of Abraham, is born to Hagar, but it is then announced that his inheritance is to be superseded by a forthcoming son of the hitherto barren Sarai - a son who will be named Isaac.
At this stage in the Old Testament account, three further pronounce- ments are made by Jehovah, who is called El Shaddai in the early texts. First, Abraham is renamed from his former name Abram. Second, the rule of circumcision is introduced for the family heirs. Third, Sarai's Mesopotamian name, meaning 'contentious', is changed to Sarah, denoting a 'princess'.3 In the context of Sarai's change of name, El Shaddai further informs Abraham that the newly designated Sarah will be a 'Mother of Nations' and that 'kings of people shall be of her' (Genesis 17: 15-16). Although Abraham's ancestral family had been influential in Mesopotamia, this is the Bible's first mention of future Hebrew kingship - but no reason is given for such an ostensibly im-portant prospect. In fact, this particular covenant was not actually made with Abraham, but with the unborn Isaac: 'I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him' (17:19).
Genesis (15:18) also contains the promise that Isaac's descendants will inherit the Egyptian Empire 'from the river of Egypt, unto the great river, the river Euphrates'. No such promise is made, however, in respect of Abraham's eldest son Ishmael, nor for any of Abraham's other six sons by his additional wife Keturah (25:1-2). Abraham was somewhat bewildered by this and asked about Ishmael's prospects, to which El Shaddai replied that he would 'make him fruitful', but 'my covenant will I establish with Isaac' (17:18-21). This makes it clear that, although Ishmael was the elder of the half-brothers, Isaac was to be recognized as / Page 164 / the ancestor of the future kings. Why, then, did Abraham later concede to slay Isaac with a knife upon the altar at Moriag (22:9)? And why, when putting a stop to the slaying, did the angel refer to Isaac as Abraham's 'only son' (22:11), when we know that he had previously fathered Ishmael?
In considering these two questions, it is of interest to note that the Koran, while relating the same story of the near-sacrifice, does not name the son concerned. Indeed, many Islamic scholars conclude that the intended victim was not Isaac, but Ishmael, the son of Hagar,4 who is described in the Book of Adam as the daughter of a pharaoh in descent from Nimrod.
Researchers have long debated and pondered upon the ambiguity of this whole sequence of events, with particular wonder over why the Empire of Egypt should be the kingdom promised to the successors of Isaac. Historically, this would make sense only if the compilers of Genesis knew that a line of descent from Isaac had become pharaohs of Egypt. 5 Also, another anomaly which has long baftled historians is the introduction of circumcision at this particularly early stage of the Hebrew saga (Genesis 17:10-14).
Herodotus, the Greek cultural writer and Father of Historians, who visited Egypt in about 450 BC, recorded that circumcision (a custom 'inherited' by the Hebrews) was originally performed only in ancient Egypt, as has been confirmed from examinations of excavated mummies,6 and by a bas-relief at Kamak which details the surgical procedure.? This being the case, then not only did Isaac's covenant of kingship promise future Egyptian dominion (from the Nile to the Euphrates), but the covenant of circumcision implemented a hitherto unique Egyptian custom into the Hebrew culture from the days of Abraham.8 Why? What was the nature of the Egyptian influence upon the family at that particular time?
The only Egyptian connection that we are told about is Sarai's entry into the household of the pharaoh who wanted her for his wife, at which point Abraham denied that Sarai was his own wife and claimed instead that she was his sister (Genesis 12:12-15). Then, a little later, we are informed that Abraham and Sarai were both offspring of Terah, and Abraham explains, 'She is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife' (Genesis 20: 12). .
In the Ethiopian chronicle Nazum al-jawahir ('The String of Gems') Terah's wives are given as Tohwait (mother of Sarai) and Yawnu / Page 165 / (mother of Abraham). Tohwait is also recorded in the Syriac M'arath Gaze as Naharyath, who is to be identified with Nfry-ta-Tjewnen, the former wife of Pharaoh Amenemhet I. Her son by this marriage was the succeeding Pharaoh Senusret I - the very pharaoh who claimed Sarai for his wife (see Chart: Egypt and the Tribes of Israel, p:254). This is not surprising, since Sarai was Senusret's maternal half-sister (as well as being Abraham's paternal half-sister) and it was common practice for Egyptian pharaohs to marry their sisters in order to progress the king- ship through the female line. With this in mind, could it be, perhaps, that Isaac was not the son of Abraham after all, but the son of Sarai and the Pharaoh? Let us look again at the sequence concerning Abraham and Sarai in Egypt.
The English translation of Genesis (12:19) quotes the Pharaoh as saying to Abraham, 'Why saidst thou, She is my sister, so I might have taken her to me to wife?' But this is not what the Hebrew Bible says. The same entry translated directly from the Hebrew states, 'Why did you say, She is my sister, so that I took her for my wife?'9 There is a distinct difference here, and the Hebrew writers were emphatic about the fact that Sarai and the Pharaoh were actually married for a time. In contrast to this, both the Hebrew and English texts - when relating to the later period of Sarai's time with King Abimalech of Gerar (Genesis 20:1-6) - make the point that 'Abimalech had not come near her'. But no such statement is made in respect. of her relationship with the Pharaoh.
If Isaac was the son of Pharaoh Senusret, then the seemingly enigmatic details of the covenant would fall very neatly into place. We could then readily understand Sarai's change of name to Sarah (Princess). Similarly, the introduction of the Egyptian custom of circumcision would make sense, as would the prospect of future dynas- tic kingship in the Egyptian domain. It would even explain the relevance of the mysterious 'birthright' that was eventually sold by Isaac's son Esau to his brother Jacob (Genesis 25:30-34).
What we have here is very compelling evidence that Isaac might well have been the son of the Pharaoh and not the son of Abraham. However, the evidence, though convincing and thoroughly rational, is largely cir-cumstantial. Perhaps one day further information will be unearthed which will prove the case one way or the other. Meanwhile, Isaac remains the son of Abraham in accordance with longstanding tradition.
The Genesis story of Isaac and his search for a wife (Genesis 24) paints a rather different picture of Abraham than has hitherto been / Page 166 / portrayed. Quite suddenly, Abraham appears not as an everyday nomad, but as a wealthy ruler with gold, silver, camels, herds and a large house- hold of servants. This fits rather better with his earlier brief portrayal as a military commander (Genesis 14) who defeated the armies of four kings to rescue his nephew Lot, and it is more in keeping with his fam- ily's original high station in the Chaldean city of Ur. It is also significant that with Isaac's prospect of fathering a kingly race, his wife was not selected from the women of Canaan. She was specially chosen by Abraham's emissary from his own family in Mesopotamia, and when Isaac married his cousin Rebecca of Haran, she was bedecked with jew-els and attended by her handmaids in the manner of a noble wedding.
Their twin sons were Esau and Jacob, the latter of whom was later renamed Israel. Like his father before him, Jacob also married into the Haran family of Rebecca, electing to wed his first cousin Rachel. But on their wedding night, Rachel's father Laban secreted Rachel's elder sister Leah into Jacob's bed so that she might be married first in accordance with custom. So it was that Jacob ended up with two wives (Genesis 29:28), by whom he had numerous offspring. Not content with this, Jacob also had children by his wives' handmaidens Bilhah and Zilpah. The net product was that from his wealth of sons by four different women sprang the twelve tribes of Israel.
In the Abraham section of the Qumran Genesis Apocryphon, Abraham perceives himself in a dream as a 'cedar tree', with his wife Sarah as a 'palm tree'.10 His fear was that the Pharaoh might cut down the cedar in his pursuit of the palm - which is to say that Abraham recognized a significant threat to his life for having married Sarah, who was the right-ful sister-wife of King Senusret. In the most ancient of Sumerian liturgies, and on royal seals, the fallen cedar tree was the symbol of a dead god; the goddess Ishtar was said to have 'raised up the noble cedar' when she resurrected her beloved husband Dumu-zi. Strangely, though, there were no cedars in Sumer, where the only tree of any size was the date-palm.11 Cedars grew only in the mountainous region of northern Mesopotamia.
The distinction of the royal palm tree was essentially Arabic and appears to have evolved in a line from Tubal-cain's son Ham. The great palm oasis south-east of Sinai, beyond Aqaba, was called Tehama (Teima or Tema) from the vehement heat of the region's sand, 12 and from this root derived the Hebrew name Tamar which became so important to the Messianic line. The original biblical Tamar was the daughter-in-law of Isaac's grandson Judah and there is a very strange story in Genesis / Page 167 / (38:1-30) of how she conceived of her father-in-law who did not recognize her. Some not very convincing excuses are made for Judah's action but, as a titular 'Palm Tree' of the Hamite succession, Tamar would have been an obvious choice as a founding matriarch of the kingly line promised to Isaac's descendants. Judah had therefore selected her to be the wife of his firstborn son Er, but when Er died unexpectedly (Genesis 38:7) Tamar was passed to Er's younger brother Onan, who was also prematurely slain. The writers attributed both these deaths to the will of Jehovah and then told of how Tamar was accosted by Judah, who seemingly mistook her for a harlot, pledging a kid from his flock in payment. No reason is given for Tamar's failure to announce her identity, but in due time she gave birth to Pharez and the Hebrew line towards King David was under way.
Whatever the truth of Judah's illicit liaison with his widowed daughter-in-law, it is plain that, within a culture that held kingship to be a matrilinear inheritance, this Tamar was significant to the succession, just as had been the erstwhile Tamar (Palm Tree), Abraham's wife Sarah. The facts of the matter were corrupted, however, by the later Bible writers at a time when the concept of a patrilinear dynasty was being promoted in a male-dominated Hebrew environment. Because of this, the hereditary importance of Tamar was lost. Also, by virtue of Tamar's illegal conception, the line from Judah was strictly illegitimate and it was not until a later time that a lawful marriage cemented a proper link with the Cainite royal strain.
Another Tamar turns up as the daughter of King David (2 Samuel 13) and there is a very similar tale of how she too was duped into sleeping with her brother Ammon. Then Absalom, another of David's sons, had a daughter called Tamar (2 Samuel 14:27), as did the later King Zedekiah,
and also Jesus himself. 13 The stories of individual family males finding it necessary to sleep with Tamars are each wrapped in blankets of weird explanation, but these females were of eminent station, conducive to perpetuating the true sovereignty of the line as it progressed from the time of Isaac in parallel with the main Egyptian succession.
Esau and the Dragon Queen
Page 167
Esau, the son of Isaac and Rebecca, was the elder twin brother of Jacob-Israel, who, as related in Genesis (25:30-34), purchased Esau's birthright for 'a mess of red pottage'.14 From the original word used to / Page 168 / denote 'red' (i.e. adom), Esau (who was said to have been red when born (25:25)) acquired the alternative name Edom,15 by which definition his descendant Edomites became known.
Esau was additionally said to be hairy (Genesis 27:11) - and this is reminiscent of Enkidu, the 'man of nature', in the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh.16 Some writers have suggested that the word se'ar, which was translated to 'hairy' in respect of Esau, should perhaps have been seir, a synonym for edom meaning 'red',17 but such an error by the early writers is unlikely, particularly since the 'hairy' definition was also applied in Arabian and Jewish lore to other characters, such as Ham, Lilith and the Queen of Sheba. When the Constitution of Ethiopia was drawn up in 1955, Emperor Haile Selassie was detailed as having descended from Solomon and Sheba's offspring King Menelek, who featured in the thirteenth-century Kebra Nagast - the' Book of the Glory of the Kings'.18 Menelek's queen was Makeda, who was also described as 'hairy', but in this context the translated word is better explained as 'hairy in the likeness of a bright comet - a hirsute wandering star'. The wandering stars were, of course, the biblical race of Cain and his wife Luluwa, and the 'hairy.' definition was often used to denote prominent dynasts of Luluwa's succession from the Anunnaki King Nergal and his queen, Eresh-kigal (see Chart: The Descents to Cain and Seth, pp. 240-41).
Esau's name, E-sa-um, has been found on tablets discovered in 1975 at Tel Mardikh (the ancient city of Elba) in Syria, along with references to other biblical names such as Ab-ra-rnu (Abraham), Is-ra-ilu (Israel) and Ib-num (Eber),19 thereby confirming the nominal entries in Genesis. But what Genesis does not make clear is the precise nature of the birthright granted by Esau to Jacob. As far as we are made aware, there was no sovereign or titular entitlement to consider, and since both were the sons of Isaac, the only obvious birthright would be that of senior succession to their father, from whom it had been said that a race of kings would ensue (Genesis 17: 16). The Bible relates that, in due time, King David of Israel and his dynasty sprang from the line of Judah, a son of Esau's brother Jacob, but under the original scheme of things, had the birthright not been sold, the kingly descent would rightly have been from Esau.
Before following the lines of descent from Jacob, it is worth consider-ing the legacy of Esau, whose descendants carried an immediate Dragon heritage by way of his wife Bashemath, the daughter of Abraham's son Ishmael and his wife Mahalath of Egypt}21 Mahalath was also known as / Page 169 / Nefru-sobek, a daughter of Pharaoh Amenemhet II and granddaughter of Senusret I, the half-brother of Abraham's wife Sarah (see Chart: Egypt and the Tribes of Israel, pp.254-55).
The daughter of Esau and Mahalath was Igrath, whose own daughter by Pharaoh Amenemhet III was Sobeknefru, Dragon Queen of Egypt c.1785-l782 BC. Sobeknefru (Sobekhkare) was the last ruler of Egypt's twelfth dynasty, and her name meant 'Beautiful of the god Sobek'21 Sobek was the mighty crocodile - the very spirit of the Messeh, whose great temple was erected at Kiman Faris by Queen Sobeknefru's father}2
It is generally reported that Sobeknefru had no male heir, and because of this a new thirteenth dynasty began after her death. However, since the Egyptian royal inheritance was held in the female line, new dynasties often sprang from the marriage of an heiress to a male of another family. Such appears to have been the case in this instance, and the thirteenth dynasty saw the continuing reigns of the Sobek pharaohs from Sobekhotep I to Sobekhotep Iy23 Prior to this, Queen Sobeknefru had formalized the Dragon Court of Ankhfn-khonsu (see Chapter 13), establishing a firm base for the priestly pursuits associated with the scientific teachings of Thoth which had prevailed from the second dynasty of Nimrod's grandson King Raneb.
As the thirteenth pharaonic dynasty drew to a close, other parallel dynasties began to rule alongside the main kingly succession. These coextensive kings ruled in the eastern delta, beginning with the short- lived fourteenth dynasty, followed by the simultaneous fifteenth and sixteenth dynasties called the Hyksos delta kings. They governed from about 1663 BC alongside the seventeenth Theban dynasty of the main succession, until finally deposed by the eighteenth-dynasty founder, Pharaoh Ahmose I, in about 1550 BC. Centred mainly in Avaris, the Hyksos rulers were so named from their distinction as Hikau-khoswet, which is said to mean Desert Princes. They are often .referred to as the Shepherd Kings, although this is said by many to be a misnomer. In reality, they were indeed 'shepherds' in accordance with the ancient Mesopotamian kingly style (see Chapter 9) which had been transported into the Hyksos realm of Syro-Phoenicia, from where flourished a regular caravan trade with the Mesopotamian kingdom of Mari 24 When documenting the Hyksos dynasts, Manetho referred to them not only as 'shepherds', but also as 'brothers', and this was precisely the term used to define the equal status of the prevailing individual kings of Mesopotamian regions such as Mari, Babylon and Larsa 25
The Hyksos kings were Amorite26 descendants of Ham and as such / Page 170 / would have been of a strain related to the early second dynasty - perhaps even to the twelfth dynasty of Queen Sobeknefru. One way or another, they challenged the seventeenth dynasty of Thebes, and in matters of warfare they introduced the horse, the chariot and the compound bow, none of which had formerly been used in Egypt. These things were, however, previously apparent in Troy, from where the Sea Kings (those of Aa-Mu) and their followers spread into the Mediterranean seaboard lands after Troy V was devastated by fall-out from the Mount Santorini eruption in 1624 BC. It is likely, therefore, that the Hyksos (who were also called the 'Foreign Rulers') were of Trojan origin.
Although reference books make much of the fact that Ahmose I succeeded in overthrowing the Hyksos rulers, it is evident that there were marital alliances between the competing houses of Avaris and Thebes. It is generally reckoned that the Hyksos Pharaoh Apepi II (Apophis) was the last hereditary Dragon King in Egypt, but it would appear that the heritage was perpetuated through a female line into the new dynasty. Even the grave of Ahmose's son Amenhotep I contained a preserved vase cartouche of the daughter of Apophis,27 which signifies the enmity was not so great between the houses as is traditionally sup- posed. The Sobek tradition of Apophis (the designated Beloved of Sobek) was continued by the eighteenth-dynasty pharaohs, and it was Tuthmosis III who established the famous alchemical mystery school of the White Brotherhood of the Therapeutate (see Chapter 13), from which an eventual branch established the Essene community at Qumran. This original school was operated by the priests of Ptah, the god of metallurgists, architects and masons. Ptah was regarded as the great Vulcan of Egypt,28 and the High Priest of Ptah was the designated 'Great Master Artificer'.
Notwithstanding the intervention of the Hyksos kings, Egypt had from the outset of its first dynasty (c.3050 BC) been a unified nation comprising the separate Upper (southern) and Lower (northern) kingdoms.29 Each kingdom had its own regalia - a white crown (hedjet) for Upper Egypt and a red crown (deshret) for Lower Egypt, while the double-crown (shmty) incorporated both. Additionally, the lotus and the vulture were symbolic of the white kingdom, while the papyrus plant and the cobra symbolized the red kingdom. More important to our quest, though, is that each of the kingdoms had its own principal stone pillar- a spiritual umbilical cord between the priests and the gods.3O "
THE
MAGIKALALPHABET
14 1+4
And you, said the scribe.
AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZ
The good brother continued thus.
GENESIS OF THE GRAIL KINGS
Laurence Gardner 1998
Page 170
"In the city of Heliopolis (Lower Egypt) was the ancient Pillar of Annu, whose name is reminiscent of the great Sumerian god Anu, father / Page 171 / of Enki and Enlil. Its counterpart at Thebes (Upper Egypt) was called Iwnu Shema, which means, quite simply, Southern Pillar. These two eastward-facing pillars, which existed at the time of unification, were revered by the Tuthmosis Therapeutate and were the prototypes for the two eastern-porch pillars of Solomon's Temple of Jerusalem some 2000 years after the unification of Egypt. The Jerusalem pillars still feature in modern Freemasonry as Jachin (to establish) and Boaz (in strength) (1 Kings 7:21). In Egypt the pillars were symbols of unity and of a concept known as Ma 'at, which defined a level and just foundation.31 This ideal of righteous judgement was synonymous with divine kingship and with the Hebrew Malkhut, and not surprisingly Ma' at, the goddess of truth and law, was said to be the sister of Thoth. Her weighing of truth in the balance was conducted with a feather,32 and truth was identified with gold, the most noble of metals (see Chapter 13).
When the souls of the early pharaohs passed into the Otherworld (the Afterlife) they were tested by the funerary god Anubis against the judicial feather of Ma'at and, as shown in reliefs of the era, Anubis was directly associated with the conical bread of the white powder - the highward fire-stone of the temple priests. Today's metaphysical studies now maintain that, by way of a superconductive process, the bodies of some Old Kingdom pharaohs could well have been physically trans- ported into another dimension of space-time, where they remain in a suspended state precisely as the ancient texts suggest. There is as yet no final proof of this, but there is proof of the ability to perform such a feat and it would certainly explain the mystery of the undiscovered Gizeh pyramid kings, Khufu, Khafre and Menkaure."
Here Alizzed had the scribe write Bread, b'read.
And so the scribe writ thirty and then the number 3
Page 171
"It was a particular tradition of Egyptian kingship that the funerary rites which consecrated the dead as everlasting gods were identical to those which gave the pharaohs a divine status during their lifetimes.33 Among the many royal insignia were the shepherd's crook and the sceptre, just as in ancient Sumer - and although legitimate gods were revered in both countries, the earliest form of ritualistic religion was an enthusiastic belief in the divinity of the kings.34 Prevailing above all, though, was an overriding principle of sovereignty which insisted that 'A man may not become a king without a queen, and a queen must be of the royal blood'.35
Irrespective of the Bible's dismissal of the Egyptian descent from Esau through Queen Sobeknefru, the Old Testament writers did acknowledge the Lilithian heritage of the line to his wife Bashemath
(see Chart: Egypt and the Tribes of Israel, pp.254-55). It is explained / Page 172 / that Esau's heirs by Bashemath and his other wives became the Dukes of Edom; they are cited in Genesis (36:31) as 'The kings that reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel'.
Scholars of Hebrew literature make the specific point that in listing the legitimate Dukes of Edom (Idumaea), the Genesis compilers defined twelve individual dukedoms, equivalent in number to the twelve tribes of Israel.36 Also, there were twelve 'princes of nations' given as the sons of Abraham's son Ishmael (Genesis 25:13-16). Although the tribes of Israel are generally well known, these other influential groups of twelve have been strategically ignored, albeit the families of Ishmael and Esau were defined as high-bred dukes and princes. The Ishmaelites emerge as the twelve tribes of Syro-Arabia, while the Muslim tradition reveres Ishmael and Abraham as the joint founders of the Holy House at Mecca.37 Esau's Edomites were destined, in turn, to inherit the kingdom of Idumaea as the Dragons (kings) and Owls (queens) of eternity, in accordance with the book of Isaiah (34: 13-17): 'They shall possess it for ever; from generation to generation shall they dwell therein. The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them, and the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose
THE COAT OF MANY COLOURS
Page173
"The base structure for today's knowledge of the Egyptian pharaohs comes from the pen of Manetho, a Greco-Egyptian priest of Heliopolis. He was born at Sebennytos in the Egyptian delta and rose to become an adviser to Pharaoh Ptolemy I (c.305-282 BC). In his chronicles, Manetho listed aspects of Egyptian history by way of a series of ruling dynasties, giving a skeleton of chronology from about 3100 BC (when Lower and Upper Egypt were united as one kingdom) to the death of Pharaoh Nectanebo II in 343 BC.l
Unfortunately, no complete version of Manetho's text exists and his work is mainly known to us through the writings of later chroniclers such as Flavius Josephus (first century AD), Julius Africanus (third century AD) and Eusebius of Caesarea (fourth century AD). An additional dilemma is caused because although Manetho clearly had access to the Heliopolis Temple records, he did not have access to specific dates for his pharaonic listing.
Even though inscriptions from before the time of Manetho were dis-covered in later times, these were in the form of ancient hieroglyphs (picture-symbols) and it was not until 1822 that the hieroglyphic code was broken by the French Egyptologist Jean Francois Champollion. This decipherment was achieved by way of the now famous Rosetta Stone,2 found near Alexandria in 1799 by Lieutenant Bouchard of the Napoleonic expedition into Egypt. The black basalt stone from about 196 BC carries the same content in three different scripts: Egyptian / Page 175 / hieroglyphs, Egyptian demotic (everyday cursive writing) and scribal Greek. Through comparative analysis of these scripts (with the Greek language being readily familiar), the hieroglyphic code was revealed; it was then cross-referenced with pharaonic cartouches (ornamental oval- shaped inscriptions denoting royal names)3 of the Egyptian kings.
Once the hieroglyphs were understood, the content of other ancient records could be decoded. Among them are some which give kingly lists to compare with the records of Manetho. They include the Palermo Stone,4 a black diorite slab which details the last pre-dynastic kings before 3100 BC, followed by the pharaohs through to the fifth-dynasty Neferirkare in about 2490 BC.5 Also now translated are the Royal List of Karnak (Thebes),6 the Royal List of Abydos,7 the Abydos King List,8 the Royal List of Saqqara9 and the Royal Canon of Turin, a papyrus from about 1200 BC.
With all these to hand, it is still difficult to fix absolute years for an Egyptian chronology because the lists bear no dates as such. At best there are given lengths of individual kingly reigns and certain astro-nomical references, along with some information pertaining to Mediterranean countries other than Egypt. But, in the context of these records, there is much debate about whether particular pharaohs, or even whole dynasties, ruled consecutively or simultaneously. As a result, alternative chronologies are currently available, wherein dynastic and regnal dates vary between fifty and two hundred years.
Ultimately, we have a conjectural form of 'standard mean chronology' which is generally used in textbooks today - but this is largely based upon the seventeenth-century biblical dating structure compiled by Archbishop Ussher of Armagh (see Chapter 2). Since the majority of Ussher's reckoning is inaccurate, it follows that the Egyptian dates calculated from his framework are similarly incorrect.
Only from 897 BC through to 586 BC can Palestinian dates be ascertained with any precision, for it was during this period that the northern Mesopotamian records corresponded with the royal succession in Palestine. These records, known as the Assyrian Eponym Canon, were discovered at Nineveh by Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson in 1862. They detail the appointments of the Assyrian eponyms (officers equivalent to Roman consuls), along with the accessions of the succeeding kings.10 The first thoroughly accurate date which ties an Assyrian king to an Israelite king is 853 BC, when Shalmaneser III of Assyria recorded King Ahab of Israel at the Battle of Karkar.
Based on a recalculation from the Assyrian records, David is now said / Page 175 / to have been king of Israel from 1001 BC (against the Ussher reckoning of 1048 BC) and his son Solomon to have reigned from 968 BC (against1015 BC) - a forty-seven-year difference in each case. Archbishop Ussher had no access to any such original texts in 1650; even if he had had, he was certainly not experienced in translating ancient Assyrian writing. So, having commenced with Ussher's inaccurate dates for the Israelite kings, incorrect dates have consequently been assumed for the parallel Egyptian succession. This has caused a good deal of historical misunderstanding. In recent years, the Egyptologist David M. Rohl has made an in-depth study of this very haphazard form of pharaonic dating 11 and his findings show precisely how certain in- accuracies came about. Champol1ion, who deciphered the ancient hieroglyphs in 1822, identified Pharaoh Sheshonq I with the biblical Shishak who plundered the Temple of Jerusalem in the reign of Solomon's son King Rehoboam of Judah (2 Kings 14:25-26; 1 Chronicles 12:2-9).12 Since Ussher had dated Rehoboam's reign as being 975-957 BC, Sheshonq I of Egypt (founder of the twenty-second dynasty) was accordingly dated to correspond with this, there being no known date for him beforehand. Other pharaohs were then plotted from this base using the recorded lengths of their reigns as a guide. Subsequently, in 1882, Britain's Egypt Exploration Fund was founded with the express purpose of confirming Old Testament information by way of archaeological discoveries in Egypt,13 but what followed was more of the same chronological manipulation to bring Egypt into line with the Bible stories through the arbitrary application of pharaonic dates.
The essential problem with the SheshonqiShishak chronology was that Ussher's date for Rehoboam differed by more than fifty years from that deduced from the Mesopotamian records. So, in recent times, Rehoboam has been re-dated so that the Jerusalem siege is said to have been in 925 BC; and Sheshonq I has also been re-dated to 945-924 BC in order to conform. Even so, there is absolutely nothing outside Champollion's original speculation to prove that Sheshonq and Shishak were actually one and the same person.
A more reliable pharaonic dating relates to the year 664 BC, when it was recorded that King Ashur-banipal of Assyria took his army into Egypt and sacked the city of Thebes. This invasion is confirmed in the Egyptian archives and can be directly attributed to the final year of the twenty-firth-dynasty Pharaoh Taharqa, whose dates are now given in most lists as 690-664 BC. In this book, however, we are not concerned"
So Even
SEVENS
AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZ
GENESIS OF THE GRAIL KINGS
Laurence Gardner 1998
THE COAT OF MANY COLOURS
Page176
"According to the book of Genesis (46-47), Abraham's grandson Jacob-Israel took his extended family (seventy members in all) from Canaan into Egypt, where they settled in the region of Goshen by the Nile delta. There, escaping an initial famine in Canaan, they remained and multi- plied (Exodus 1 :7) through a number of generations until they were eventually led out of Egypt by Moses. The standard chronology of Ussher maintains that Jacob's original move into Egypt from Canaan was in 1706 BC, with the Mosaic exodus occurring 215 years later in 1491 BC.14
In apparent confirmation of the Israelites' sojourn in Egypt, the annals of Pharaoh Ramesses II (the Great) make reference to Semitic people who were settled in the delta region of Goshen, but this does not really help because they are not specified as Israelites. The Semites of the region (then as today) were not simply the Israelites, but included the Arab races of Syria, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia and the Fertile Crescent in general15 (see Chart: The Descents from Lamech and Noah, pp.244-45). Apart from mentioning Semitic people in Goshen, the records of Ramesses II (along with those of his predecessor Seti I) also refer to the town of Asher in Canaan.16 But, Asher (Joshua 17:7) was named after one of the tribes of Israel who returned with the Mosaic exodus (Numbers 1:41), thereby indicating that the exodus must have taken place before the reign ofSeti (c. 1333-1304 BC).
The book of Genesis (47: I1) states that, in Egypt, the Israelites were settled in the land of Ramesses, while Exodus (I: II) claims that they actually built the city of Ramesses (Pi-Ramesses). But Ramesses I did not reign until c.1335 BC, and Ramesses II not until c.1304 BCI7 - practically two centuries after the Israelites had supposedly vacated his country according to Ussher. In fact, it was impossible for Jacob and his family to have settled in the land of Ramesses because they arrived in Egypt many centuries before the reign of Ramesses I.
It is almost as though we have awakened into the daylight of history from a long and troubled sleep, and yet continue to be disturbed by the faint but haunting echoes of our dreams."
Alizzed engineers, the sense of did you view
Hearing this, the Zed AlizZed exteriorized an idee fixe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
1+6 |
2+5 |
1+8 |
1+3 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1+3 |
|
|
|
|||
|
1+6 |
|
1+5 |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
THAT
Pharaoh sows a fair straight row writ the scribe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
2+7 |
|
|
THAT
Pharaoh sows a fair far row said the scribe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1+3 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
153 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
8+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
One hundred and fifty three said Zed Aliz smelt as in fish. The scribe misspelt smelt, azin fish .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
2+7 |
|
|
The scribes writ Pi' ra' mid and then in subtl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
The scribes writ Pi' ra' mid and then in subtle aside writ Pi Ramesses
Five the midway point between four and nine writ the scribe
The wah good brother continues the straight line path of the turning circle.
Did the scribe misaspell Ptah, said the scribe
Thus writ that far yonder scribe.
SORCERY
Wade Haskins 1974
Foreword
" Signs, symbols, archetypes, correspondences-between the visible and the invisible, the microcosm and the macrocosm -testify to the persistence in the deepest oceans of the mind of an age-old longing to achieve through magic a goal still beyond the reach of science. That goal is a coherent view of man and his universe. Drawn together from many different sources and presented in this book in simple, down-to-earth terms are thousands of fascinating items relating to the art of manipulating the forces that control the universe.
All the entries are arranged alphabetically and cross-in-dexed to provide ready access to the wide variety of mate-rials associated with sorcery. Frequently further references are supplied at the end of an entry. In most instances the reader can find additional information on a subject by referring to the names or expressions mentioned in a par-ticular entry.
Sorcery, as used in this book, embraces the world of the supernatural and the precepts or practices through which men through the ages have sought to dominate their uni-verse. Universal and timeless, sorcery appealed to primitive minds, to the earliest literate thinkers, and to occult philoso- phers from Hellenistic times through the Middle Ages and into the modern era...."
Page 188
Egyptian Incantations .
Magic tablets of ancient Egypt contain charms and incanta-tions for various purposes. An incantation against dangerous animals reads:
Drive far from me the lions- coming from the earth, the / Page 189
crocodiles issuing from the river, the mouth of all biting
reptiles coming out of their holes!
Stop, crocodile Mako, son of Set!
Do not wave thy tail:
Do not work thy two arms: Do not open thy mouth.
May water become as a burning fire before thee!
The spear of the seventy-seven gods is on thine eyes:
The arm of the seventy-seven gods is on thine eyes:
Thou who wast fastened with metal claws to the bark of
Ra, .
Stop, crocodile Mako, son of Set!
Another contains a series of names referring to magically transfigured names of the gods Osiris and Seth:
0 Oualbpaga!
0 Kammara!
0 Kamalo!
0 Karhenmon!
0 Amagaaa!
MAGIKALALPHABET
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
2+0 |
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE NEW ELIZABETHAN REFERENCE DICTIONARY
Page729
I (I), i, the ninth letter and the third vowel in the English alphabet (pl. Is, I's), has two principal sounds: long, as in bind, find; short, as in fin, bin, win, etc.; and three minor sounds: (I) as in dirk (derk), (2) as in intrigue (in treg'), apd (3) the con-sonantal sound of y, as in behaviour (be hi' vyer), onion (Un' yon).
I (2) (i) [A.-S. ic (cp. Dut. ik, Icel. ek, G. ich, L. ego, Gr. ego)J, nom. sing. 1st pers. pron. (obj. me, poss. my; pl. nom. we, obj. us, poss. our) In speaking or writing denotes oneself. n. (Metaph.) The self-conscious subject; the ego.
*I (3) [AYE (I)].
Page 729 . . . 7 +2 + 9 = 18 . . . 1+8 = 9
Page 730
iambus (i am' bus) [L., from Gr. iambos, an iambic verse, a lampoon, from iaptein, to assail], n. (pl. -buses) (Pros.) A poetic foot of one short and one long, or one unaccented and one accented syllable. iamb (i' amb), n. An iambus. iambic (i am' bik), a. Of or pertaining to the iambus; composed of iambics; n. An iambic foot; an iambic verse. *iamblcally, adv. iambist, n. iamblze, v.t. iambo- grapher (-bog' ra fer), n. A writer of iambics.
The Complete Book Of
FORTUNE
1988
Page 269
" WE know that all things in the universe are subjected to rule. The movements of the planets, the sequence of .the seasons, and the structure of physical bodies are not deter-mined by chance or by coincidence but by mathematical laws. A knowledge of these enables the scientist to foretell certain occurrences, Thus the astronomer can predict when a comet will be seen, when the sun will be eclipsed, or when the full moon will shine.
In effect, it may be said that the whole universe is governed by numbers, and, since this is so, we may naturally conclude that human beings are no exception to Nature's laws. It is the science of numerology which applies the laws of mathematics to mankind, and teaches the art of interpreting those numbers by which the character of an individual is influenced.
The ancient Egyptians attached great importance to the significance of numbers and employed them as a means of fore-telling the future; but it is chiefly to the Greeks and the Hebrews that we owe the foundation of modern numerology. Pythagoras, the Greek mathematician and philosopher, stated that "Numbers are the first things of all of Nature," and believed that all natural phenomena could be reduced to terms of geometry and arithmetic. He founded a school of philosophy on this doctrine, his followers being known as the Pythagoreans. The Hebrews, from a set of beliefs called the "Cabbala "-those tenets "received by tradition" -associated certain numbers with letters of their alphabet, and thus formed the basis of the interpretation of names.
In numerology, the art of which can be very quickly mastered, we are concerned with the reduction of everything under considera- tion to the form of an arithmetical figure. The figure can then be interpreted by reference to the traditional meanings of numbers. These interpretations are older than history; they date back to the time when the dawning intelligence of primitive man first visualized the meaning of number and associated it with a spiritual significance.
Page 270 The revelations of character which can be obtained by means of numerology are not infallible, for what science can claim to account for all the wonders and vagaries of Nature? Yet general indications can nearly always be obtained from the interpretation of numbers, which will give us a clear indication of the part we play in the harmonious arrangement of the wonderful universe.
Before we proceed farther with this study, it should be under-stood that figures themselves are merely signs which represent an idea of number. Numerology is not concerned with the outward appearance of these signs, but with the meanings of the numbers which they represent.
An Egyptian sage, an Ancient Hebrew, a philosopher of classic Greece, each made a different sign when he wanted to convey the idea of the number 3. But each one thought of the same number. Because of this we have been able to apply various interpretations from ancient writings in the Egyptian, Hebrew and Greek to our own numbers, which are Arabic in origin. Numbers are, in fact, a universal language, for they are understood by all rational persons of every race on earth.
Many systems of numerology are in existence, but the one which is considered here, and which springs from the most ancient and reliable source, is based chiefly on the nine primary numbers. These are represented by the figures 1 to 9 inclusive. The cipher, or 0, such as is contained in the number 10, has no tangible significance and, therefore, is not considered. The figure 10 is a form of 1, with certain modifications of which we shall learn later.
All numbers which are greater than 9 can be reduced to one of the primary numbers. Consider the number 26; to reduce it to a primary number we must add together the digits of which it is composed. thus 2+6 = 8. We see, therefore, that 26 reduces to
the primary number 8. In the same way 44 = 4 + 4 = 8; 21 = 2+1 = 8; 63 = 6+3 = 9; 98 = 9+8 = 17 = 1+7 = 8; and 789 = 7+8+9 = 24 = 2+4 = 6. This is the method we must use throughout for reducing large numbers to primary ones."
9
I AM THAT I AM
I THAT NINE AM THAT NINE I AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Zed AlizZed, shadows and far yonder scribe make humble obeisance
FORTUNE
1988
Page 280
9 The Nonagon, the number 9, or the Ennead was known to many of the ancients as Perfection and Concord, and as being unbounded.The latter quality was attributed to it from certain peculiarities manifested by the figure 9 when treated mathematically If 9 is multiplied by itself, or any single figure, the two figures in the product when added together always equal 9. For example:
9 x 3 = 27 = 2+7 = 9; 9 x9 = 81 = 8+1 = 9; 9 x5 = 45 = 4+5 = 9; and so on. Similarly, if the numbers from 1 to 9 inclusive are added together, totalling 45, the result of adding 4 to 5 = 9; if 9, 18, 27, 36, 45, 54, 63, 72, 81 are added the sum is 405 or 4 +0 + 5 = 9.
Again, if any row of figures is taken, their order reversed, and the smaller number subtracted from the larger, the sum of the numerals in the answer will always be 9. For example:-
51286347
23081868
and 2+3+0+8+1+8+6+8 = 36 = 8+6 = 9.
There are numerous other examples portraying this peculiar property of 9, but those given above will be sufficient to demonstrate why the ancients considered the Ennead to be unbounded. It is called Concord because it unites into one all the other primary numbers, and Perfection because nine months is the pre-natal life of a child.
In ancient Rome the market days were called novendinae, for they were held every ninth day; we remember that Lars Porsena "By the nine gods he swore"; the Hydra, a monster of mythology, had nine heads; the Styx was supposed to encircle the infernal regions nine times; the fallen angels in "Paradise Lost" fell for nine days; the Jews held the belief that Jehovah came down to the earth nine times; initiation into many secret societies of the East consisted of nine degrees; and magicians of former times would draw a magic circle nine feet in diameter and therein raise departed spirits."
Although something of a deliberately debilitated scribe, the scribe after serious deliberating , writ, Ramesses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
18 |
|
|||
|
1+8 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
REDUCE |
||||||||||||
|
1+0 |
|
|
REDUCE |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEDUCE |
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
18 |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
18 |
||||
|
1+8 |
|
|
|
1+ 9 |
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
1+0 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|||||
|
1+6 |
1+8 |
|
|
|
1+ 9 |
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
1+0 |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GENESIS OF THE GRAIL KINGS
Laurence Gardner 1998
Page176
"The book of Genesis (47: I1) states that, in Egypt, the Israelites were settled in the land of Ramesses, while Exodus (1: 11) claims that they actually built the city of Ramesses (Pi-Ramesses)..."
" These incongruous biblical statements have puzzled historians since Victorian times and it has long been recognized that the comments relating to Ramesses were anachronisms. They arose because the Old / Page 177 / Testament compilers referred to the Egyptian delta settlement by the name known to them in the sixth century BC - and that part of the Nile delta was called the 'land of Ramesses' until the fourth century AD.18 Though perhaps anachronistic, the Bible references are not necessarily altogether incorrect, for the exodus appears to have happened in pro-tracted waves from the time of Moses and it seems that many Israelites remained in Egypt following the departure of the main body.19
Regardless of this, some scholars have lately redefined the period of Israelite settlement in Egypt so that its last days coincide with the reign ofRamesses II, giving the revised date of 1300 BC for the Mosaic exodus of the Bible.2O There is an amount of logic in this, because it is clear that Ussher's 1491 BC date was far too early for the historical Moses - but it is, none the less, guesswork.
A rather more accurate guide to the timing of the Israelite departure from Egypt was established only in 1997 when cereals from the archaeological layer at Jericho before its fall were carbon-dated to be about 3311 years 01d.21 This dates them to around 1315 BC, which means that Joshua's Israelite army which destroyed the city had still not arrived at that time. This means that by 1360 BC the Israelites were still in Egypt and had not yet removed to Sinai with Moses.
Additionally, the science journal Nature22 has identified the volcanic ash from the eruption of Mount Santorini in the Mediterranean with the biblical 'plague of darkness' in Egypt (Exodus 10:22-23), thereby wholly dissociating the event from the Exodus time-frame. The effect in Egypt of this volcanic disaster and its accompanying earthquake (geologically dated to 1624 BC) is related in the Ipuwer Papyrus acquired by the Museum of Leiden in 1828. This multi-page nineteenth- dynasty document, copied from an earlier source, tells of a series of devastating events in Egypt, in keeping with the plagues of Exodus, and it states that the fire and ash which consumed the land 'fell from the skies'23 some 300 years before the time of Moses.
Moving back to the time of Abraham, we know from the book of Jubilees24 that Abraham's great-great-grandfather, Reu (Raguel), was married to Ora, the daughter of the Sumerian king Ur-nammu of Or. It was he who built the last great ziggurat of Ur and founded the third Chaldean dynasty, reigning c.2l13-2096 BC.25 The subsequent fall of Ur took place in 1960 BC, at which time Abraham moved northwards from Ur to Haran, along with his father, Terah, and family. Then, following the death of Terah, Abraham migrated into Canaan with his wife Sarai (Sarah) and his nephew Lot (Genesis 11 :32, 12:5)..."
TERAH
EARTH
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
2+5 |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5+2 |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
1+8 |
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At which point the narritive ran on
GENESIS OF THE GRAIL KINGS
Laurence Gardner 1998
Page 180 "Within this sequence we find a very good example of the Old Testament's inherent confusion over dates and personal ages. Genesis (11 :26) explains that Terah was aged seventy when his son Abraham was born; a few verses later (Genesis 11 :32) it is related that Terah lived on to the age of 205. This would make Abraham 135 at his father's death. But then, after another four verses (Genesis 12:4), we are informed that Abraham was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran after the death of Terah!
Plainly, in matters of chronology, the contemporary records are far more reliable than -the Bible, and from these it can be deduced that the biblical accounts of the early Hebrews in Haran, Canaan and Egypt j (from the time of Abraham to the time of Moses) are set within the 600 years from 1960 BC to 1360 BC, with the exodus to Sinai coming soon after the latter date.
Abraham's grandson Jacob was renamed 'Israel' at the Beth-el covenant (Genesis 32:28, 35: 10), and his descendants became known as 'Israelites' or 'Children of Israel'. Then, in the adulthood of his sons, Jacob-Israel took his complete family (by his two wives, Rachel and Leah, and by their handmaidens, Bilhah and Zilpah), including all his grandchildren, into Egypt in about 1760 BC. By that time, it is related that his son Joseph (who had previously been sold into Egypt by his jealous brothers) had become vizier (viceroy) to the pharaoh.
The duration of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt is confirmed in the, Masoretic Hebrew Old Testament which states (Exodus 12:40): 'The: time that the Israelites spent in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years'. In the King James Authorized Bible, the book of Exodus (12:40) simi- larly states: 'Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years'}6 If this calculation is roughly 1 correct, then the departure of the Israelites with Moses would have occurred around 430 years after 1760 BC, which places the exodus at about 1330 BC.
The main genealogical problems presented by the Old Testament's seem- ingly comprehensive family lists appear from the outset of the Egyptian sojourn. Prior to the time of Abraham, the descent of the noble patriar-chal family was recorded through the ages in Mesopotamia and these records were available to the Genesis compilers in Babylon. But, from / Page 179 / the moment of Abraham's migration to Canaan and the nomadic existence of his offspring, there is very little evidence of the generations until the time of King David and his successors.
The various Bible listings from Abraham to David (which are amal-gamated in the book of 1 Chronicles) identify thirteen generations with an above-average generation standard of about seventy-two years. With the exception of the story of Joseph, the Bible is remarkably silent regarding the 430-year period which embraced the Israelites' sojourn in Egypt. The book of Genesis concludes with the death of Joseph and his embalming and burial in Egypt, whereupon the book of Exodus begins with a short account of procreational disputes between the Egyptians and Israelites, and then leaps forward through the centuries to the birth of Moses. This becomes quite disconcerting when it is realized that the Joseph and Moses stories are portrayed as if they are linked together with hardly any time between (Exodus 1). And it is positively disturbing to read in the chapters of the book of Numbers that when Moses led the Israelites across the Red Sea to Sinai, the said seventy family members of Joseph's father Jacob-Israel (Genesis 46:27) had somehow multiplied to about 2 million people, including an army of 603,550 male warriors aged over twenty27"
6 + 3 + 5 + 5 = 19 . . . 1 + 9 = 10 . . .
6 x 3 = 18 x 5 = 90 x 5 = 450 . . . 4 + 5 = 9
"It is explained in Genesis (41:39-46) that, at the age of thirty, Joseph became the 'ruler over all the land of Egypt' and was dubbed Zaphnath- paaneah. This is said by the Israeli Bible scholar Moshe Weinfeld to mean something akin to 'God speaks - he lives',28 but in ancient Egypt such a title would not, of course, have referred to the God or the Hebrews. A closer translation comes from the German linguist Georg Steindorff who relates that the name means 'The god speaks - may he live'.
Were it not for the separate Egyptian records of Joseph the vizier, and of his genealogical link with Moses in the fourteenth century BC, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish him from Joseph the son of Jacob-Israel in the eighteenth century BC. The Bible (through a strategic switch of time-frames, from Genesis to Exodus) implies that these two Josephs were one and the same - and this is managed by dispensing, between books, with 400 years ofhistory, 29 just as is the case between the Old and New Testaments.
What further emerges is the possibility that the whole story of young Joseph's dispute with his brothers, and the legendary coat of many colours, was contrived by biblical scribes in order to link one chrono- logical period with the other. Historically, Joseph the vizier was an / Page 180 / Egyptian governor shortly before the days of Moses - but despite all popular tradition, he was not one and the same with Joseph the son of Jacob, who lived four centuries earlier.
The books of Exodus (13:19) and Joshua (24:32) each relate to the 'bones' of Joseph, claiming that the Israelites took them out of Egypt for burial at Shechem. But this is inconsistent with Genesis (50:26), which states that the body of Joseph the vizier was embalmed (that is to say, mummified) in Egypt. This form of physical preservation was specifically reserved for those of the highest orders, and there would have been no resultant bones to transport. If any bones were removed by the Israelites, these might have been the bones of the original Joseph, but they could not possibly have been those of Joseph the vizier, whose body has now been unearthed in Egypt.
So what do we know about Jacob's son, the original Joseph? We are told that Joseph was born late in Jacob's life and that he was disliked by his many brothers because he was his father's favourite and had been given a coat of many colours (Genesis 37:3). Actually, this is a corrupted English translation from the Hebrew which denoted simply an 'ornamented tunic',3O and made no reference whatever to colours. An ornamented tunic (the ketonet pasim) is later referred to in the book of 2 Samuel (13: 18) and is again wrongly stated to be 'of divers colours' in English translations. In the original text, it was strictly 'a robe with sleeves'.3) On this later occasion, the robe is worn by Tamar, the daughter of King David, and the text explains that the ketonet pasim (apparently a unisex garment) was indicative of both princely station and virginity. 32
In the Anchor Bible, it is explained that the story of Joseph's being sold into Egypt by his brothers (Genesis 37) is, by way of linguistic analysis, the composite work of two separate authors.33 Sometimes Joseph's father is referred to as Jacob, and on other occasions as Israel. Within the context of the overlaid stories, we first have Reuben suggesting to Judah and the others that Joseph should not be slain, and then Judah makes the same plea to Reuben and the others. Whenever the paternal name 'Jacob' is used, Reuben is portrayed as Joseph's protector; whenever their father is called 'Israel', Judah is the protective brother.
There are, in consideration, numerous anomalies which make the story of young Joseph quite chaotic. Initially, the brothers throw Joseph into a pit with intent to kill him (Genesis 37:24). But then, through a change of heart, they sell him to a passing caravan of Ishmaelites (37:27). Afterwards, some Midianite traders arrive on the scene,
/ Page 181 / whereupon the brothers pull Joseph, once again, from the pit and sell him to the Midianites who take him to Egypt (37:28). Then, after Joseph appears to have been sold twice, Reuben looks into the pit (37:29-30) and is surprised to find him gone!
Although unsatisfactorily constructed, the purpose of this narrative was to ensure that Joseph made his way to Egypt independently of his father and the rest of the family, who were said to have followed some while after. By this means, Joseph was removed from the family scene in order to become strategically identified with the later Joseph who became Governor of Egypt.
Once in Egypt, at the age of seventeen, Joseph was apparently sold to a high chamberlain (sar hatabahim) named Potiphar (Genesis 39:1), who is not mentioned by name thereafter. However, the introduction of the man's name at that early stage was conveniently suited to identifying this Joseph with his later namesake, who, at the age of thirty-three, married Asenath, the daughter of Poti-pherah,34 a priest of Ra (Genesis 41:45). Although the names Potiphar and Poti-pherah appear mutually supportive, the characters were distinct, one being a courtier and the other a priest.35
Finally, and to support the point concerning the contrived account of the early Joseph, we have the added story of his attempted seduction by Potiphar's wife (Genesis 39:7-18). When Joseph refused to submit, the woman ripped his garment from him and presented it to her husband, claiming that she had narrowly escaped being assaulted by Joseph. Until a few decades ago, there appeared nothing untoward about this discrete little tale - but then Egyptologists translated a hieroglyphic document called the Orbiney Papyrus from nineteenth-dynasty Egypt (c .1250 BC). In this document they discovered the story's original prototype within the romantic lore of old Egypt36 - and it had nothing whatever to do with Joseph."
Page 181
Eighty miles (c. I 29km) south of modem Cairo is the town of Medinet- el-Faiyilin, where a 200-mile (322km) canal from the Nile has long transformed the desert waste into a lush garden paradise of fruit groves. To the local residents (the fellahin) and throughout Egypt, the ancient waterway is known as Bahr Yusuf (Joseph's Canal), and it is said to be named after Joseph the grand vizier.37
/ Page 182 / (diagram Map omitted) Genesis (41:39-43) tells how this Joseph was made Governor of Egypt:
And Pharaoh said unto Joseph. . . . Thou shalt be over my house and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou. . . and he made him ruler over all the land of Egypt;
A later Genesis entry, which is rarely quoted, has Joseph saying, 'God hath made me a father to Pharaoh' (Genesis 45:8). This is a particularly impressive statement and could not possibly have related to Joseph, son of Jacob, who was sold into slavery. But was there perhaps a grand vizier who fathered a pharaoh - a prestigious governor after whom a canal / Page183 / might have been named and who would have ridden in the king's second chariot, as related in Genesis (4l:43)? Indeed there was: a vizier who, contrary to normal custom, was embalmed like a pharaoh (precisely as described in the last verse of Genesis) and entombed in a fine sarcophagus in no less a place than the royal burial ground - the Valley of Kings at western Thebes (modem Luxor)."
The scribe writ of Thebes, the bes best, beast.
Egyptian tomb inscriptions usually relate, in one way or another, to the godhead under which the occupant was placed in life, using such deiform names as Ra, Amen and Ptah. In this case, the unusual tomb inscriptions of the grand vizier do not relate to any known god of Egypt; they reveal instead such names as Ya-ya and Yu-ya - phonetically, Iouiya, which is akin to Yaouai, a variant of Yahweh or Jehovah.38 From these inscriptions, the vizier has become personally known as Yuya, and this is of particular interest because his grandson, Pharaoh Akhenaten, later developed the 'One God' concept in Egypt.
Yuya (Yusut) was the principal minister for the eighteenth-dynasty Pharaoh Tut~osis IV (c.14l3-l405 BC) and for his son Amenhotep III (c.1405-l367 BC).39 His tomb was discovered in 1905, along with that of his wife Tuya (the Asenath), and the mummies ofYuya and Tuya are among the very best preserved in the Cairo Museum.40 It came as a great surprise to Egyptologists that anyone outside the immediate royal family should have been mummified and buried in the Valley of Kings. Clearly, this couple were of tremendous importance in their day; this becomes obvious from Yuya's funerary papyrus, which refers to him as 'The Holy Father of the Lord of the Two Lands' (it ntr n nb tawi), as does his royal funerary statuette.41 The style 'Lord of the Two Lands' was a pharaonic title relating to the kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt,42 and so it is plain that Yuya was not only the viceroy and primary state official, but was also the father of a pharaoh, just as related in Genesis (45:8). He even held some personal kingly status, as determined by his pharaonic designation, 'One trusted by the good god in the entire land'.43
Yuya's family was very influential, holding inherited land in the Egyptian delta, and he was a powerful military leader.44 Anen, the elder son of Yuya and Tuya, also rose to high office under Amenhotep III as Chancellor of Lower Egypt, High Priest of Heliopolis and Divine Father of the nation. But it was their younger son, Aye, who held the special distinction 'Father of the God'45 and became pharaoh in 1352 BC - as did other descendants of Yusuf- Yuya, including the now famous Tutankhamun (see Chart: The Egyptian Connection, pp.256-57).
Not only was Yuya of individual royal significance, but so too was his / Page 184 / wife Tuya. Genesis (41:45) tells us that Tuya (Touiou) held the dis- tinction of 'Asenath' (iw s-n-t) - a style which derives from an eighteenth-dynasty Egyptian dialect and means 'She belongs to the goddess Neith'.46 Tuya was the daughter of a priest of Heliopolis and, according to the Corpus of Hieroglyphic Inscriptions at the Brooklyn Museum, she was the designated 'King's Ornament' (kheret nesw). By way of her mother, she is reckoned to have perhaps been a grand- daughter ofTuthmosis III,47 founder of the Great White Brotherhood of the Therapeutate, while through her father she was descended from Igrath (daughter of Esau and Mahalath), the mother of Queen Sobeknefru who established the Dragon Court as a royal institution in Egypt.
We are, therefore, into the realm of the original covenant of kingship made with Isaac. His son Esau may have sold his birthright to his younger twin brother Jacob-Israel (whose descendants became kings of Judah), but now we discover that, through Tuya and Yuya, descendants of Esau did indeed become pharaohs of Egypt. These particular pharaohs have become known as the' Amarna Kings' : they were Akhenaten, Smenkhkare, Tutankhamun and Aye, who ruled consecu- tively c.1367-1348 BC.
From the eighteenth-dynasty campaigns of Akhenaten's great-great- grandfather, Tuthmosis III (c.1490-1436 BC), Palestine was under Egyptian rule and it remained so into the era of the Amarna Kings. The American Egyptologist James Henry Breasted referred to Tuthmosis III as the 'Napoleon of Egypt',48 and the empire (from Syria to Western Asia) established by him and his son Amenhotep II was certainly in-dicative of the kingly domain promised to the descendants of Isaac: 'from the river of Egypt, unto the river Euphrates' (Genesis 15:18). If the covenant were to be taken literally, it would appear that the selling of the birthright by Esau to Jacob had no effect whatever; it was not until after the Amarna period that the lines from Esau and Jacob were united through marriage, subsequently descending to the Davidic kings of Judah.
Laurence Gardner 1998
Page 46
" The Old Testament's best-known giant is, of course, Goliath of Gath, the Philistine warrior who challenged the shepherd-boy David. We are told that Goliath's height was 'six cubits and a span' (1 Samuel 17:4)- that is six forearms (of 20 inches/50cm) and a spread hand (of 9 inches/22.5cm). So Goliath was 10 feet 9 inches (3.27m) tall. By any standard of reckoning, this is immense. Even allowing for a 25 per cent exaggeration in order to enhance David's predicament, we are still left with an 8-foot man. However, there are such warriors in our modern age: the post-war German wrestler Kurt Zehe, for example, was 8 feet 4 inches tall, while the Rotterdam colossus of the ring, Rhinehardt, stood at 9 feet 6 inches.12 Many of today's American basketball players might be regarded as giants, but they are plainly not hideous ogres in accordance with the image conjured by the word 'giant' in mythology and romantic literature.
In spite of Goliath's physique, and the enormity of his sword, young David slew him, prior to any legitimate combat, with a well-aimed sling-shot to the forehead. But in later times, when threatened by Goliath's equally large family members, 'David waxed faint', leaving their destruction to his servants (2 Samuel 21:15-22). Elhanan of Bethlehem managed to slay the brother of Goliath, 'whose spear-staff was like a weaver's beam'. David's nephew Jonathan then slew a son of Goliath who had' on every hand six fingers, and on every foot six toes'. Othe] sons of Goliath, namely Ishi-benob and Saph, were also killed by David's men Abishai and Sibbechai, but in no event are we told how the victories were won.
Page 174
"Even though inscriptions from before the time of Manetho were dis-covered in later times, these were in the form of ancient hieroglyphs (picture-symbols) and it was not until 1822 that the hieroglyphic code was broken by the French Egyptologist Jean Francois Champollion. This decipherment was achieved by way of the now famous Rosetta Stone,2 found near Alexandria in 1799 by Lieutenant Bouchard of the Napoleonic expedition into Egypt. The black basalt stone from about 196 BC carries the same content in three different scripts: Egyptian / Page 175 / hieroglyphs, Egyptian demotic (everyday cursive writing) and scribal Greek. Through comparative analysis of these scripts (with the Greek language being readily familiar), the hieroglyphic code was revealed; it was then cross-referenced with pharaonic cartouches (ornamental oval- shaped inscriptions denoting royal names)3 of the Egyptian kings.
Once the hieroglyphs were understood, the content of other ancient records could be decoded. Among them are some which give kingly lists to compare with the records of Manetho. They include the Palermo Stone,4 a black diorite slab which details the last pre-dynastic kings before 3100 BC, followed by the pharaohs through to the fifth-dynasty Neferirkare in about 2490 BC.5 Also now translated are the Royal List of Karnak (Thebes),6 the Royal List of Abydos,7 the Abydos King List,S the Royal List of Saqqara9 and the Royal Canon of Turin, a papyrus from about 1200 BC."
The scribe states in all honesty the number of letters in the following alphabets
Jewish 22 Greek 24 English 26"
BLESSED BE THE NAME
OF
THAT
22 + 24 + 26
72
7 + 2
IZ
NINE
THE HOLY BIBLE
Scofield References
St Mark A.D. 33 Chapter 14
Page 1068
33
34
My God My God why hast thou forsaken me?"
Page 608
"MY God my God why hast thou forsaken me why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring ?"
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THAT
IRI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
1+9 |
1+ 8 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1+9 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
1+9 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE HOLY BIBLE
Scofield Reference
Chapter 1
Conception and birth of Jesus
(Lk. 1.26-35; 2. 1-7; John 1. I, 2, 14). } 1
18
"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:
When as his mother
Mary
was espoused to
Joseph,
before they came togethershe was found with child of the
HOLY GHOST"
19. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example was minded to put her away privily
20. But while he thought on these things, behold, dthe angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph; thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall 'save his peo-ple from their lsins.
22. Now an this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23. Behold, ha virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Em-manuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
24. Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25. And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name
JESUS.
|
|
|
|
|
E |
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
1+5 |
1+9 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THAT
JOSEPH 6 FETTERED WORD
JESUS 5 FETTERED WORD
MARY 5 FETTERED WORD
THEZEDALIZZEDTRANSLATESMUTELETTEREDESSENCEOFNUMBER
JOSEPH = ONE 1
JESUS = 2
MARY = 3
6 SIX= JOSEPH = ONE 1
5 = FIVE JESUS = TWO 2
4 MARY = THREE 3
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 = 21
1 x 2 x 3 x 4 x 5 x 6 x 7 = 720
6 SIX= JOSEPH = ONE 1
5 = FIVE JESUS = TWO 2
4 MARY = THREE 3
6 + 1 = 7
5 + 2 = 7
4 + 3 = 7
SIX 6 SIX 6
6 + 6 = 12 1 + 2 = 3
ZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZA
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF
THAT
WORD
9
THE
WHITE RABBITZ
HAD TAUGHT ZED ALIZ ZED
TO C THINGS THROUGH A CLASS SPARKLY
AZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZAZ
THINK
WORDS
THINK
THAT
WORD
CRUCIFICTION
THAT FAR YONDER SCRIBE AT THE INSTIGATION OF THE POWERS
THAT
2 + 5
WRIT THESE WONDERFILLED WORDS
OSIRISISISHORUS
NINE
THE HOLY BIBLE
Scofield Reference
Page 129 A.D. 32Chapter 10.
VERILY, verily. I say unto yon, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climb-eth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
2. But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
3. To him the porter openeth; and the sheep "hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth hbefore them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strang-ers.
6. This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they misunderstood not what things they were which he spake unto them. .
7. Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8. All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.
9. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy I am come that they might have1ife, and that they might have it a more abundantly.
11. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the; sheep are not, seeth the wolf com-ing, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
13. The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14. I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
15.
16.
and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
17.
18.
This com- mandment have I received of my Father.
19. There was a division there-fore again among the Jews for these sayings.
20. And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?
21. Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?
(Cf. John 14. 9; 20. 28, 29.)
22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.
23 And Jesus walked in the tem- ple in Solomon's porch.
24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the; works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and "1. know them, and they ffollow me:
28 And I give unto them eter- nal life; and they shall never per- / Page 1130 / ish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 .My Father , which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."
30
CASSELL'S ENGLISH DICTIONARY
1974 Edition
Page 541
Hebraic (he bra' ik) [late L. Hebraicus, Gr. Hebraikos], a. Pertaimng to the Hebrews, their mode of thought, or language. Hebraically, adv. Hebraism (he' bra izm), n. The thought or religion of the Hebrews; a Hebrew characteristic; a Hebrew idiom or expression. Hebraist, n. One learned in the Hebrew language and literature; one who conforms or adheres to Jewish ideas or religious observances. Hebraistic, -al (he bra is' tik, -al), a. Hebraistically, adv. hebraize, v.t. To convert into a Hebrew idiom; to give a Hebrew character to. v.i. To become Hebrew; to act according to Hebrew manners or fashions.
Hebrew (he' broo) [F. hebreu, L. Hebraeus, Gr. Hebraios, Aram. ebrai, Heb. 'ibri, prob. one from the other side, an immigrant], n. A Jew, an Israelite; the language of the ancient Jews and of the State of Israel; (colloq.) unintelligible talk, gibberish. a. Pertaining to the Jews. Hebrew- wise, adv. In an Opposite sense (from the fact that Hebrew is read from right to left).
Hebridean (he brid' e in) [Hebrides, erron. for L. Hebudes (Pliny), Hebudae., Gr. Heboudai, a. 0f or pertaining to the Hebrides, islands off the west coast of Scotland.
Hecate (hek' a te) [Gr. Hekate], n. (Gr. Myth. mysterious goddess holding sway in earth, heaven, and the under-world, and represented as triforn hag, a witch. Hecataean (hek a te' in), a."
"...hectometre (hek to me ter) n A French measure of length containing 100 metres or 109.3633 yds."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
1+8 |
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
1+8 |
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3+4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE MAGIC MOUNTAIN
THOM
AS
MANN
1875 -1955
FOREWARD
"THE STORY of Hans Castorp, which we would here set forth, not on his own account, for in him the reader will make acquaintance with a simple-minded though pleasing young man, but for the sake of the story itself, which seems to us highly worth telling- though it must needs be borne in mind, in Hans Castorp's behalf, that it is his story, and not every story happens to everybody- this story, we say, belongs to the long ago; is already, so to speak, covered with historic mould, and unquestionably to be presented in the tense best suited to a narrative out of the depth of the past.
That should be no drawback to a story, but rather the reverse. Since histories must be in the past, then the more past the better, it would seem, for them in their character as histories, and for him, the teller of them, rounding wizard of times gone by. With this story, moreover, it stands as it does to-day with human beings, not least among them writers of tales: it is far older than its years; its age may not be measured by length of days, nor the weight of time on its head reckoned by the rising or setting of suns. In a word, the degree of its antiquity has noways to do with the pas- sage of time - in which statement the author intentionally touches upon the strange and questionable double nature of that riddling element.
But we would not wilfully obscure a plain matter. The exag-gerated pastness of our narrative is due to its taking place before the epoch when a certain crisis shattered its way through life and consciousness and left a deep chasm behind. It takes place - or. rather, deliberately to avoid the present tense. it took place, and had taken place - in the long ago, in the old days, the days of the world before the Great War, in the beginning of which so much began that has scarcely yet left off beginning. Yes, it took place before that; yet not so long before. Is not the pastness of the past the profounder, the completer, the more legendary, the more Immediately before the present it falls? More than that, our story has, of its own nature, something of the legend about it now and again
Page xii
We shall tell it at length, thoroughly, in detail-for when did a narrative seem too long or too short by reason of the actual time or space it took up? We do not fear being called meticulous, in-clinng as we do to the view that only the exhaustive can be truly . interesting.
Not all in a minute, then, will the narrator be finished with the story of our Hans. The seven days of a week will not suffice, no, nor seven months either. Best not too soon make too plain how much mortal time must pass over his head while he sits spun round in his spell. Heaven forbid it should be seven years!"
And now we begin.
THE MAGIC MOUNTAIN
Page 10
| |
|
|