{Religious Circles}[15th July 1989]

[Redbook6:154-155][19890715:1035b]{Religious Circles}[15th July 1989]

19890715.1035

[continued]

Simply, the upper hemisphere [sic] is Judao-Christ-Islamic, and the lower hemisphere [sic] is pagan:

[Text extracted from ms diagram reproduced above:]

			C
			|
			Judaism
		Christianity		Islam
	G~	–	+	–	M~
			|
			eg Hinduism
			A

The degrees G~ & M~ are in both hemispheres.

I do not include in this structure religions which are systems of ethics, eg those requiring no God.

This does not mean that all religions do not recognise and incorporate elements of the other hemisphere within their structure; they do: but the emphasis is invariably on their own hemisphere.

[PostedBlogger2911for02122019]

{The Harvest Parables}[15th July 1989]

[Redbook6:154][19890715:1035]{The Harvest Parables}[15th July 1989]

19890715.1035

I have been looking for a Biblical, preferably N[ew] T[estament], endorsement of the theory that goes with C[ircles] A[nalysis &] S[ynthesis] as to why all this happens – why we are all here – ie that only in a Creation midway between the absolute freedom = absolute restriction of God the Spirit, a kind of bubble out of nothing,* can the experience be gained which gives an extra dimension to the quality (or, as we see it, qualities) of God. The Parable of the Sower,** and the greater part of its explanation, is exactly that; the whole group*** – the sower, the darnel (in M[at]t[hew] only), the seed growing by itself,**** the mustard seed, the yeast,# possibly the treasure# and the pearl,# and certainly the dragnet – describe in some detail what is happening. Even that puzzling statement about the standard begins to make sense: ‘The standard you use will be used for you – and you will receive more besides; anyone who has not, will be deprived even of what he has.’ #*

#**

*[the Creation, not the Spirit]

**As given in [the Gospel according to] M[at]t[hew] <890716>

***M[ar]k 4: 1-20

M[at]t[hew] 13: 1-52

L[u]k[e] 8:1-15

****M[ar]k only

#M[at]t[hew] only

#*M[ar]k 4:24

#**The interpretation in M[ar]k & L[u]k[e] of the Parable of the Sower – that the seed is the word [sic] – is immediately modified by the language following, eg ‘Those… are people who….’. The solution is to consider that in the beginning of Man there is only the Spirit, which is almost certainly what is referred to (eg in [the Gospel according to] John) as the Word,#*** and such simple qualities of Soul as give a new-born Man [h]is individuality; hence the ambiguity as between Seed and Plant. <890716>

#***{??Surely not? See [[Redbook6:171][19890730:1409b]{The Spirit and the Word}[30th July 1989],] 171}

[PostedBlogger2911for01122019]

{The Eschatological Discourses}[14th July 1989]

[Redbook6:153][19890714:1855]{The Eschatological Discourses}[14th July 1989]

19890714.1855

The eschatological discourses attributed to Jesus at the end of the Synoptic Gospels and in places within them, and particularly the sense of timing continued therein, have been explained in various ways.

One approach is simply to identify different strands from different sources relating to different events (eg the fall of Jerusalem, which may even have preceded some of the accounts, and the End of the Age). This is the most likely explanation of the inconsistencies, but there is no way that it can be reconciled (as the N[ew] J[erusalem] B[ible] notes seem to imply that it can) with a definite attribution to the Son-part of an omniscient Trinity God. Either on this account Jesus was not such a Son of God, or he did not utter these statements.

Another approach internalises the End of Days and the Coming of the Son of Man as an inner experience. I like the theology, but in this instance it stretches the language beyond the likely intentions of its authors.

There is one explanation, however, for the inconsistencies of time and the general conflation of experiences, which is consistent with a heightened degree of divine awareness in Jesus at this time: and it is simply that this prophetic view, being taken from outside Time,* has lost all (or nearly all) sense of time [sic], seeing, as God must, all Time in an instant.**

*per [2]

**This is not quite the same, I think, as the Theory of Prophetic Perspective (per E[ncyclopaedia] Bib[lica], Prophecy) which likens the prophetic vision to a view over an expanse of country – as I understand it: I could not read the Latin very well. <890718>

[PostedBlogger29for30112019]

{Pascal’s Church [continued]}[13th July 1989]

[Redbook6:152][19890713:1847j]{Pascal’s Church [continued]}[13th July 1989]

19890713.1847

[continued]

Note too* that the first 4 comprise pairs of brothers, ideally suited to a + pattern; and that and that they are all fishermen, to start the Inner Circle both then and after the Resurrection (Aquarius, Pisces).

	? CAS	[?CAS]
In Mk 3:13-19 brothers James & John ‘The Sons of Thunder’ are paired between		← →
brothers Simon (Peter), the rock, and & Andrew (Greek name).		↨
Mark’s order for the new 8 is: (The ‘&’s are from Matthew)
________
Philip (Greek name)	R~	\
&
**Bartholemew (=?Nathanael??? – ‘without guile’ ‘no deception’	S~	/
Matthew*** (Levi – the tax collector, already chosen)	U~	\
&
Thomas (the doubter)***	J~	/
________
James son of Alpheus	?C	↑
&
**Thaddeus**** (L[u]k[e]: Judas brother/son of James)	G~	<- -
Simon the Zealot****	M~	→
&
Judas Iscariot	A~	↓

[The / & \ represent sloping arrows in the ms: the top 2 slope up, & the lower 2 slope down]

(These are only wild speculations↑)

*[See last previous entry]

** Legend: of the 70 (E[ncyclopaedia] B[iblica]

***(Some[?] M[at]t[hew] ↨ [ie reverses[?]]

****L[u]k[e] ↨ [ie reverses[?]]

(These 3 groups of 4 are found in all 3 Synoptic Gospels, as an effect of the variations within the groups)

[PostedBlogger29112019]

{Pascal’s Church}[13th July 1989]

[Redbook6:152][19890713:1847i]{Pascal’s Church}[13th July 1989]

19890713.1847

[continued]

*

													Line count	Cumu-lative	**
						0									The Spirit
						1							1	1	The Creator
					1		1						2	3	In orthodox terms, I suppose, the Trinity:***
				1		2		1					4	7	1st 4 disciples****
			1		3		3		1				8	15	Next 8 Disciples****
		1		4		6		4		1			16	31
	1		5		10		10		5		1		32	63	#
1		6		15		20		15		6		1	64	127
													128	255

#*

*(See earlier vol [V])

ref [[Redbook6:147][19890710:1722]{Cumulative Doubling Instability}[10th July 1989],]147:

**(– Each cumulative total tending to jump to the next by adding the next line (= square), as noted on

[[Redbook6:147][19890710:1722]{Cumulative Doubling Instability}[10th July 1989],] p147

***in my view, The Trinity + the Adversary, ie adding Son & Adversary.

[<↓>]

In the Creation, the Trinity + the Adversary → Creation (including Evil)

In Jesus’ mission, the Trinity → the Church (excluding Evil)

CREATION								THE CHURCH
The Spirit				0				The Spirit
The Creator Father				1				The Father
The Son – The Adv[ersary]			1		1			The Spirit – The Son
4 Cardinal Archetypes		1				1		1st 4 disciples
8 Degrees	1		3		3		1	Next 8 Disciples

(The Spirit, having the number 0, & being everywhere and nowhere, can do this)

<19890717>

****This is exactly how M[ar]k and M[at]hew record their selection (Luke omits Andrew).

#(This may the mistaken basis of Luke’s 72, ie 63 – 3 (Trinity / F[ather], Son & A[dversary] = 60, +12 = 72[;] or eg 60, +12 = 72 – but ‘72 others’ (L[u]k[e] 10.1) ‘in pairs’. (or 70)

Luke’s Gospel is more of a work of art than Mark’s or Matthew’s… or maybe this was just a selection from those who had by now joined, chosen as a multiple of 12 for the 12 Tribes [of Israel]….

#*{per [[Redbook6:147][19890710:1722]{Cumulative Doubling Instability}[10th July 1989],] 147,

V. [[Redbook5:222-223][19880724:1443g]{The Sphere [continued (7)]}[24th July 1988]ff] 223, &c.}

See [[Redbook6:166][19890726:1118]{Historical Circles (1) [continued (3)]}[26th July 1989],] 166 <901110>

[continues]

[PostedBlogger26for28112019]