• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"The Heavens"

9-18-1

Active Member
Herein is an examination of the word "heavens" and the original word which subsequently was "translated" into "heavens". This examination takes place in GENESIS 1:1 with "heavens" bolded:

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ

The word is written with five letters. Working backward from the last three (read right-to-left) we have the following:

מים which is the Hebrew word for 'waters' [plural].

Next we find the letter shin ש which is the Hebrew symbol of 'fire'. To write 'fire' in Hebrew it is written אש as the alef (א) is the Hebrew symbol of 'air' and fire requires air (oxygen) to manifest.

So far we have:
ש - fire
מים - waters

The final (first) letter is ה which is the Hebrew symbol of 'window' and/or 'mirror'. When at the beginning of a Hebrew word, it is translated as "the". This window, however, is double-sided - two possible "states" depending on from which direction one is looking. It describes the same concept as with an interrogation room connected to an observation room divided by a double-sided window such that the former-to-latter yields a "window" while simultaneously the latter-to-former yields a "mirror". An interrogated subject can not "see" into the interrogation room (seeing only a mirror) while interrogators can "see" into the interrogation room looking through a "window". The letter ה is the archetype that describes this phenomena in its broadest terms not only applying to the above scenario / use of it.

We thus have the word rendered "heavens" as:
ה - window
ש - fire
מים - water

which can be read in a number of ways:
"the window into the fire in/of waters"
"the mirror of (about) fire waters"
"the firey waters; the fire in/of the waters"
"heavens"

Whereas the first three roughly describe the nature of what is being talked about, the last "heavens" made use of by English translated Bibles does not do this.

We find the Hebrew word for fire (complete with its source of air/oxygen) in the first word of Genesis 1:1

בראשית

The word השמים "heavens", when examined in the original language, is 3/5 'water', 1/5 'fire' and 1/5 'window/mirror'.

Upon the creation of the solar system, a product of which is the planet earth upon which we all are alive, the earth in her infancy (approx. 4.5 billion years ago) was essentially a ball of fire; hot, volcanic; hot pools of liquid elements. By 2.5 billion years ago, the earth had drastically cooled to a point whereby global temperatures were well below zero, rendering an ice (water) ball. As the earth developed (ultimately into what is present day earth) it underwent several cycles of heating/cooling that rendered it, at times, a global pool of water (mud-like) orbiting a ball of fire (sun). This relationship between heating (core of the earth) and cooling (surface of the earth) to produce life-sustaining equilibrium is the principle causal component of life to be generated, sustained and/or destroyed.

It is interesting to find the relationship between fire and water at the Genesis of the solar system as we find it in Genesis 1:1. The implication being that "Genesis"; or creation, first happens by means of a relationship between fire and water; that oscillate between states of heat and cool to produce an equilibrium that may sustain life to some degree.

It essentially renders all subsequent notions of "heavens" being a "place" somehow and/or somewhere else other than the physical planet itself, because the physical planet itself is the "earth" product of the "fire" "waters":

בראשית - In the beginning
ברא - created
אלהים - 'GOD'
את - (incoming) [direct object]
השמים - "the heavens"
ואת - and (incoming) [direct object]
הארץ - the earth.

Unfortunately, as is with השמים rendered "the heavens", the other six words' meanings are not in any way imparted through the English words used to translate them. It is such undertakings that has led to beings imagining there is an exterior "heaven" that one may retire to if he/she has follows some empire-based/driven theology involving idols. This is a kind of lunacy that continues to be a primary destructive force on the planet which brings me to what I wish to impart to "believers":

1. "Belief" is not a virtue. It is a kind of madness.
2. There is no "heaven" outside of the planet upon which we all live.
3. Truth itself must be the authority; not the other way around.

As such I stand in opposition to idol-based religions such as Christianity and Islam - the two most prevalent and (I argue) destructive forces on this planet in terms of God-infused ideologies (with exception to strictly secular institutions perhaps derived from them in some way).

This is one of many reasons which render the institutions of Christianity and Islam both idol-based imaginations of things unreal (mark of insanity). Imagining a Savior Man will rule for a thousand years and/or one will receive virgins in heaven for carrying out the "will" of...?

As such "believers" are free to post their imagined conceptions of "heaven" in accordance to whatever theology they ascribe to and we can talk about how ridiculous they are given what "heavens" actually means as it is was originally written.
 
Last edited:

Tumah

Veteran Member
Can you prove that ש is the symbol for fire? Can you explain why you think that א, the first letter of the Aramaic (not Hebrew and I'm pretty sure it comes from the Greek ἄηρ) word for 'air' should have been understood to be the Hebrew symbol for air when Genesis was written?

Maybe א, the first letter of fire, is the symbol for fire, and ר, the first letter of 'wind' is the symbol for air and ש is actually the Hebrew symbol for the word wealth (which also has a ש as it's second letter)?
Perhaps שמים is really just a portmanteau of the words שם מים (water is there), and it was given that name because it looks like the rain is coming from ... there.

If you can also include in your response a reason why you've included the ה (the definite article part of the word) in your breakdown of the word שמים...that would be nice.

I think it might be important to consider the significance between a claim and the underlying basis of a claim that makes it reliable. For example, in this post, you've called what you're doing here an "examination" when it actually appears to be a "manipulation" due to that missing basis.

P.S. The word את isn't a direct object. The direct object is השמים. The word את says that a following word (usually the following word, but it can also be the word after the following) will be a direct object.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
Can you prove that ש is the symbol for fire? Can you explain why you think that א, the first letter of the Aramaic (not Hebrew and I'm pretty sure it comes from the Greek ἄηρ) word for 'air' should have been understood to be the Hebrew symbol for air when Genesis was written?

Your emphasis on the word prove is noted. Unfortunately in such nuance the word prove becomes subjective. In this light I will however still attempt to advance the argument.

From a significantly more nuanced perspective, the letter ש itself is not technically wholly 'fire' (as it requires air) but carries the general meaning(s): expression; shine; "tooth" and is associated with the tetrahedron. In light of human expression, all expression is derived from the three principle centers: head (psychological), heart (emotional) and sex (behavioral). The three vavs which comprise ש denotes the relationship between these joined by an unstable base.

In terms of Hebrew Kabbalah these three vavs refer to the monad denoted by Abraham (psychology) Isaac (emotion) and Jacob (sex). It is as such Jacob is the one who "rests his head" ר on the stone of scone and sees angels and demons traversing upward and downward. The polarity of ascension/descension is determined by the activity in the sex in accordance with the Biblical narrative of Adam and Eve engaging with the "fruits" of the tree of knowledge. One can go up, one can go down. It depends on "choice".

When adding aleph א we derive the word which literally means "fire"; and it is as such "fire" cannot "express" without air (oxygen). This is true in both the construction of the Hebrew system and the living system within which we live.

Maybe א, the first letter of fire, is the symbol for fire, and ר, the first letter of 'wind' is the symbol for air and ש is actually the Hebrew symbol for the word wealth (which also has a ש as it's second letter)?
Perhaps שמים is really just a portmanteau of the words שם מים (water is there), and it was given that name because it looks like the rain is coming from ... there.

The Hebrew letter ר is more fundamental than "wind". It is the general expression of "rushing out" as if to "radiate" outward. This is why ר is associated with the head: that which projects itself outward from a central point in all directions. As in רוח the final letter chet is the joining of vav and zayin (as in Nuach (Noah); nun-chet). This "rushing out" is connected to the joining of vav and zayin through another vav which is precisely the conduit through which אלהים operates: a radiation through chet in the form of the relationship between a separated man (masculine-vav) and woman (feminine-zayin).

Regarding שם מים this can indeed be rendered "the name/place of the waters". I don't dispute this: it is one possible way to read it. However, it is not the only way as when one amalgamates all possible readings into a single 'form' each possible reading yields further insight. I do not however hold that the א is a symbol for "fire" - it is essentially a firmament (vav) in the midst of a higher yud and a lower yud generally denoting "all there is" which can not be limited to fire alone.

If you can also include in your response a reason why you've included the ה (the definite article part of the word) in your breakdown of the word שמים...that would be nice.

The reason is because the letter ה has a practical basis upon which it itself *exists*. This principle is as I already described: it is a window-mirror depending on from which direction one is looking giving rise to two possible functions: reflecting what is shown to it or passing through to reveal what is on the other side. This principle is related to ב in that it is one of a First Distinction: reflect vs. pass through.

This is precisely why YHVH requires two uses of ה despite it being 'one' letter: on the one side of the vav it is reflecting, on the other side it is passing through.

This ה is also present in the word for 'GOD' אלהים rendering the possible reading:

אל - "toward"; "god" [masc.]
ה - window-mirror; "the"
ים - expanse "sea" [fem.]

Which can be read as "Elo - ha - yim" rendering "god in/of the expanse/sea". What is interesting about this is rendering the reading:

אלה - goddess [fem]
ים - plurality [masc]

Which all relates to why a failure to understand that אלהים is intrinsically masculine/feminine (as one 'unit') giving rise to the primordial Adam which is/was both masculine [image] and feminine [likeness] is in grave error. It is on these grounds I denounce Christianity and Islam as essentially being half-atheist to use loose language.

I think it might be important to consider the significance between a claim and the underlying basis of a claim that makes it reliable. For example, in this post, you've called what you're doing here an "examination" when it actually appears to be a "manipulation" due to that missing basis.

The basis is found in the letters themselves which serve as archetypal relationships; especially the first nine:

namelink.gif

3x9-inlevls.gif

________________________________________________________________
www.meru.org

As such the "basis" must begin with the letters themselves and what they indicate at their most "basic" level before attaching any other significance to them.

P.S. The word את isn't a direct object. The direct object is השמים. The word את says that a following word (usually the following word, but it can also be the word after the following) will be a direct object.

This is correct - I didn't mean to suggest את is the direct object itself but rather is pointing toward an incoming direct object which is השמים. However, I would argue that one possible understanding of את is "you". In other words reading Genesis 1:1 as "In the beginning created GOD [you/your] the heavens and [you/your] the earth." is not "wrong" and is perfectly valid.
 
Last edited:

9-18-1

Active Member
I'm pretty sure the Qur'an is not pro-idol worship.

On the surface no, it is not.

However the deception is deeper: the entire institution by virtue of its design is (like Christianity) of idolatrous construct.

Islam utilizes a central figure (Muhammad) as a basis or "mold" of a model man to imitate. In the case of the Qur'an, Muslims are instructed to imitate/emulate Muhammad's pattern of conduct no less than approx. 85 times. As such the Muhammadan fundamental structure: on the micro- level (single Muslim) to the macro-level (to the entire House of Islam) the framework is singular and common: the pattern of conduct of Muhammad.

Like Christianity, Muslims thus carve a graven image in their minds (Moses referred to the mind as the heavens) and create profound emotional attachment(s) to these images (Moses referred to the heart as the earth) of Muhammad prompting them to adopt a predefined behavioral subset. This is in complete violation of the commandment issued by Moses (ie. the Muslims' own "god"):

Exodus 20:4
לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה אשר בשמים ממעל ואשר בארץ מתחת ואשר במים מתחת לארץ
"You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth."

This is precisely what both the religions of Christianity and Islam do: they form images of men (Jesus/Muhammad) to be etched into the object(ive) idol-worshiping minds (heavens) which demands worship (on/in earth) via. attachment; emotional relationship; "shaytan": the expression of "being 'bound' on and ongoing" that results in the collapse into a programmed and/or predefined pattern of behavior(s) which may become a destructive force in creation "evil". This "evil" manifests through the abuse of women by the hands of men.

Muhammad is the global 'idol' of lust for power; lust for women; lust for power over women; lust for power over all things; lust for conquest etc. Islam is the warped 'garment' that attempts to conceal its true nature: precisely how the idol worshiping Muslims conceal (stifle; attack; kill over) criticisms of Muhammad. The very fact that Muslims take "offense" to criticisms of Muhammad is the embodiment of their worship of the man. If Muslims were not idol worshipers, they would not revere a central figure in this way such as Muhammad.

Yet Muslims do not extend the same "reverence" to so-called prophets as Moses (Musa) whose commandments Muhammad violated exceedingly ad absurdum. As such Muslims have developed a defense mechanism that manifests in the form of psychological projection: to project ones own iniquities outward, imbuing others as having them and condemning them for it, which is about as anti-Christ; anti-teachings-of-Jesus (whom Muslims call "Isa") as one can possibly get. This is precisely the illness Muhammad had which drove him into endless warfare and conflict against so-called "unbelievers". He was projecting his own illness outward and labeling those who disagreed with him as "unbelievers" despite those who disagree do so correctly: the man was insane.

People didn't, don't, and refuse to "believe" Muhammad and his self-proclaimed call to prophecy because people "know" he was, is, and always will be insane. He is the cosmic archetype of what happens to people that allow the lust for women; sex; conquest etc. to control all three faculties of the body: head, heart, sex. He is the manifestation of the true death of man: the final causal result of eating the forbidden fruits of the tree of knowledge: death of the soul; insanity; endless regress into seeking personal (sexual) gratification(s). This leads to coveting of women (Islam is institutionalized "blame women for everything" just as Adam tried to blame Eve for his own errors); degradation of women; dehumanization of women (despite "god" being both masculine and feminine) and sexual degeneration(s). That is the mark of a sick people(s).

Christianity is of the same construction: idol based and its "politics" certainly resembled Islam's current politics: politics of endless expansion and conquest via "believers" vs. "unbelievers".

Dear Muslims: "belief" is not a virtue. It is a satanic vice. The word your beloved prophet Moses (Musa) used to denote Satan is the following word:

שטן

The ש shin is the archetype of 'expression': through head/heart/sex.
The ט 'tav' is the archetype of being 'bound'.
The ן 'nun final' is the archetype of 'ongoing'.

What your religion is telling you is "Shaytan" is actually this: "the expression(s) of/by being bound in an ongoing state".

This is precisely what "belief" is: the expression (worship) by being bound (to an idol(s)) in an ongoing state (by virtue of "belief" in it). As such, any/all belief-based systems are inherently idolatrous.

Islam (and Christianity) is absolutely 100% pure Satanic idol worship: and it holds as so according to the original law(s) of Moses whom Christians/Muslims hypocritically call a "prophet".
 

Jedster

Well-Known Member
Y
.....

However, I would argue that one possible understanding of את is "you". In other words reading Genesis 1:1 as "In the beginning created GOD [you/your] the heavens and [you/your] the earth." is not "wrong" and is perfectly valid.


את meaning 'you' is second person singular, addressing a(i.e. one) female.
I cannot see how your interpretation makes sense.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
את meaning 'you' is second person singular, addressing a(i.e. one) female.
I cannot see how your interpretation makes sense.

Malkuth (matter) is feminine and ends in tav; aleph is of ein soph and is associated with Kether (as one of three mother letters). Here 'you' is not (only) an object/person but encompasses beginning-to-end as it pertains to 'being' in the context of the all-there-is: in/of 'the heavens' and 'the earth' which are more accurately 'the fire in/of the waters' and 'the [light] running'.

'The [light] running' is interesting given the teachings associated to Jesus indicating that each being *is* that running light; the body a vessel (lamp). This is true - the body houses the light that is "running" both within and within (same energy).

Empty space is not "empty" - in such a vacuum virtual particles pop in and out of existence faster than they can be detected but their effects can be measured. When ים is understood as the sea/expanse within which this "activity" can happen (as scientists now advance as a plausible explanation for the 'big bang') we derive one possible basis for השמים that explains the causal activity that collapses all matter into existence. However this is speculative and I could not argue to prove this.

However ארץ is the archetype 'all' radiating outward producing upright tree(s) (matter) and/or simply 'the [light] running' which is translated as "earth". "Earth" is actually not entirely accurate: all present matter/energy is ארץ that is a product of השמים which are both connected by the vav. As such the את is in a context that can not possibly exclude any/all beings because it is being used in a context of the entire visible (and invisible) universe "all-there-is".

In other words anyone who reads Genesis 1:1 the את applies to "them" just as it would apply to anyone/everyone else reading it but is not a particular object/person - it is all-encompassing and not exclusive.
 

JJ50

Well-Known Member
I don't believe a place called heaven exists. I don't think any god created the universe. The Biblical god appears to be a very human creation. I am hopeful that science will one day discover how it all came about.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Your emphasis on the word prove is noted. Unfortunately in such nuance the word prove becomes subjective. In this light I will however still attempt to advance the argument.

From a significantly more nuanced perspective, the letter ש itself is not technically wholly 'fire' (as it requires air) but carries the general meaning(s): expression; shine; "tooth" and is associated with the tetrahedron. In light of human expression, all expression is derived from the three principle centers: head (psychological), heart (emotional) and sex (behavioral). The three vavs which comprise ש denotes the relationship between these joined by an unstable base.

In terms of Hebrew Kabbalah these three vavs refer to the monad denoted by Abraham (psychology) Isaac (emotion) and Jacob (sex). It is as such Jacob is the one who "rests his head" ר on the stone of scone and sees angels and demons traversing upward and downward. The polarity of ascension/descension is determined by the activity in the sex in accordance with the Biblical narrative of Adam and Eve engaging with the "fruits" of the tree of knowledge. One can go up, one can go down. It depends on "choice".

When adding aleph א we derive the word which literally means "fire"; and it is as such "fire" cannot "express" without air (oxygen). This is true in both the construction of the Hebrew system and the living system within which we live.



The Hebrew letter ר is more fundamental than "wind". It is the general expression of "rushing out" as if to "radiate" outward. This is why ר is associated with the head: that which projects itself outward from a central point in all directions. As in רוח the final letter chet is the joining of vav and zayin (as in Nuach (Noah); nun-chet). This "rushing out" is connected to the joining of vav and zayin through another vav which is precisely the conduit through which אלהים operates: a radiation through chet in the form of the relationship between a separated man (masculine-vav) and woman (feminine-zayin).

Regarding שם מים this can indeed be rendered "the name/place of the waters". I don't dispute this: it is one possible way to read it. However, it is not the only way as when one amalgamates all possible readings into a single 'form' each possible reading yields further insight. I do not however hold that the א is a symbol for "fire" - it is essentially a firmament (vav) in the midst of a higher yud and a lower yud generally denoting "all there is" which can not be limited to fire alone.



The reason is because the letter ה has a practical basis upon which it itself *exists*. This principle is as I already described: it is a window-mirror depending on from which direction one is looking giving rise to two possible functions: reflecting what is shown to it or passing through to reveal what is on the other side. This principle is related to ב in that it is one of a First Distinction: reflect vs. pass through.

This is precisely why YHVH requires two uses of ה despite it being 'one' letter: on the one side of the vav it is reflecting, on the other side it is passing through.

This ה is also present in the word for 'GOD' אלהים rendering the possible reading:

אל - "toward"; "god" [masc.]
ה - window-mirror; "the"
ים - expanse "sea" [fem.]

Which can be read as "Elo - ha - yim" rendering "god in/of the expanse/sea". What is interesting about this is rendering the reading:

אלה - goddess [fem]
ים - plurality [masc]

Which all relates to why a failure to understand that אלהים is intrinsically masculine/feminine (as one 'unit') giving rise to the primordial Adam which is/was both masculine [image] and feminine [likeness] is in grave error. It is on these grounds I denounce Christianity and Islam as essentially being half-atheist to use loose language.



The basis is found in the letters themselves which serve as archetypal relationships; especially the first nine:

namelink.gif

3x9-inlevls.gif

________________________________________________________________
www.meru.org

As such the "basis" must begin with the letters themselves and what they indicate at their most "basic" level before attaching any other significance to them.
What you did here was continue to serenade us with more of the same...things.
What you didn't do here, was anything that could even slightly be described as proving your claims.

Essentially, you're expecting people to take your manipulations as valid on the basis of your say-so. If it wasn't previously clear to you, allow me to explain that "your say-so" is not a valid basis for which you should expect claims to be accepted.


This is correct - I didn't mean to suggest את is the direct object itself but rather is pointing toward an incoming direct object which is השמים. However, I would argue that one possible understanding of את is "you". In other words reading Genesis 1:1 as "In the beginning created GOD [you/your] the heavens and [you/your] the earth." is not "wrong" and is perfectly valid.

That would be an interesting argument, because you'd essentially be ignoring Biblical grammar. Once you relax the rules, the party becomes free-for-all and everything means anything.
... but I think we've already seen that in your posts.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
I don't believe a place called heaven exists. I don't think any god created the universe. The Biblical god appears to be a very human creation. I am hopeful that science will one day discover how it all came about.

They are rather close - the 'Big Bang' model is mostly accurate with exception to how it relates with time as 'time' and 'space' are the same 'thing'.

What you did here was continue to serenade us with more of the same...things.
What you didn't do here, was anything that could even slightly be described as proving your claims.

Essentially, you're expecting people to take your manipulations as valid on the basis of your say-so. If it wasn't previously clear to you, allow me to explain that "your say-so" is not a valid basis for which you should expect claims to be accepted.

I'm not here to "prove" anything and neither do I "expect" people to do anything. If you don't like what I am saying, you are free to disagree. However you are not free to speak on behalf of me: I don't "expect" people to do anything as you claim.

That would be an interesting argument, because you'd essentially be ignoring Biblical grammar. Once you relax the rules, the party becomes free-for-all and everything means anything.
... but I think we've already seen that in your posts.

The original Torah had no spacing; no marking. It was a string of symbols. These symbols refer to specific archetypal 'forms' that exist. For example beit is the archetypal form of 'first distinction' and is required for any 'thing' to exist. The language aspect to it had developed over time and has underwent "manipulations" as the language/usage itself evolved. This is where the "grammar" comes from - it is a subset of rules imposed by the application of language that could otherwise be read strictly numerically and/or as equations which is precisely what Genesis 1:1 is (if read as such).

In case you are not aware: the 22 letters are derived from non-vocal gestures. This is before language even enters the picture.

That's not to say one can "ignore" the grammar aspect exclusively (as even I don't as you claim) but it should be considered to the extent of its application and no more - numerical considerations don't rely on grammar. For example:

Shushon640.jpg

______________________________________________________________________________
www.meru.org

penetrates the text on a level deeper than the "grammar" and generates the basic form: seed-in-itself which is the matrix of "continuous creation":

AlphaSentence.gif


The 22 Hebrew "symbols" are indeed building blocks that describe creation and the auto-correlation of Genesis 1:1 describes "continuous creation" as denoted by the form above (as above) Adam Kadmon (so below) in the above graphic.

So I don't "expect" anything of anyone just as I don't "expect" hostility people have for me to subside - it comes with the territory and this is something either one (can) accept(s) or does not.
 

Ancient Soul

The Spiritual Universe
Herein is an examination of the word "heavens" and the original word which subsequently was "translated" into "heavens". This examination takes place in GENESIS 1:1 with "heavens" bolded:

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ

The word is written with five letters. Working backward from the last three (read right-to-left) we have the following:

מים which is the Hebrew word for 'waters' [plural].

Next we find the letter shin ש which is the Hebrew symbol of 'fire'. To write 'fire' in Hebrew it is written אש as the alef (א) is the Hebrew symbol of 'air' and fire requires air (oxygen) to manifest.

So far we have:
ש - fire
מים - waters

The final (first) letter is ה which is the Hebrew symbol of 'window' and/or 'mirror'. When at the beginning of a Hebrew word, it is translated as "the". This window, however, is double-sided - two possible "states" depending on from which direction one is looking. It describes the same concept as with an interrogation room connected to an observation room divided by a double-sided window such that the former-to-latter yields a "window" while simultaneously the latter-to-former yields a "mirror". An interrogated subject can not "see" into the interrogation room (seeing only a mirror) while interrogators can "see" into the interrogation room looking through a "window". The letter ה is the archetype that describes this phenomena in its broadest terms not only applying to the above scenario / use of it.

We thus have the word rendered "heavens" as:
ה - window
ש - fire
מים - water

which can be read in a number of ways:
"the window into the fire in/of waters"
"the mirror of (about) fire waters"
"the firey waters; the fire in/of the waters"
"heavens"

Whereas the first three roughly describe the nature of what is being talked about, the last "heavens" made use of by English translated Bibles does not do this.

We find the Hebrew word for fire (complete with its source of air/oxygen) in the first word of Genesis 1:1

בראשית

The word השמים "heavens", when examined in the original language, is 3/5 'water', 1/5 'fire' and 1/5 'window/mirror'.

Upon the creation of the solar system, a product of which is the planet earth upon which we all are alive, the earth in her infancy (approx. 4.5 billion years ago) was essentially a ball of fire; hot, volcanic; hot pools of liquid elements. By 2.5 billion years ago, the earth had drastically cooled to a point whereby global temperatures were well below zero, rendering an ice (water) ball. As the earth developed (ultimately into what is present day earth) it underwent several cycles of heating/cooling that rendered it, at times, a global pool of water (mud-like) orbiting a ball of fire (sun). This relationship between heating (core of the earth) and cooling (surface of the earth) to produce life-sustaining equilibrium is the principle causal component of life to be generated, sustained and/or destroyed.

It is interesting to find the relationship between fire and water at the Genesis of the solar system as we find it in Genesis 1:1. The implication being that "Genesis"; or creation, first happens by means of a relationship between fire and water; that oscillate between states of heat and cool to produce an equilibrium that may sustain life to some degree.

It essentially renders all subsequent notions of "heavens" being a "place" somehow and/or somewhere else other than the physical planet itself, because the physical planet itself is the "earth" product of the "fire" "waters":

בראשית - In the beginning
ברא - created
אלהים - 'GOD'
את - (incoming) [direct object]
השמים - "the heavens"
ואת - and (incoming) [direct object]
הארץ - the earth.

Unfortunately, as is with השמים rendered "the heavens", the other six words' meanings are not in any way imparted through the English words used to translate them. It is such undertakings that has led to beings imagining there is an exterior "heaven" that one may retire to if he/she has follows some empire-based/driven theology involving idols. This is a kind of lunacy that continues to be a primary destructive force on the planet which brings me to what I wish to impart to "believers":

1. "Belief" is not a virtue. It is a kind of madness.
2. There is no "heaven" outside of the planet upon which we all live.
3. Truth itself must be the authority; not the other way around.

As such I stand in opposition to idol-based religions such as Christianity and Islam - the two most prevalent and (I argue) destructive forces on this planet in terms of God-infused ideologies (with exception to strictly secular institutions perhaps derived from them in some way).

This is one of many reasons which render the institutions of Christianity and Islam both idol-based imaginations of things unreal (mark of insanity). Imagining a Savior Man will rule for a thousand years and/or one will receive virgins in heaven for carrying out the "will" of...?

As such "believers" are free to post their imagined conceptions of "heaven" in accordance to whatever theology they ascribe to and we can talk about how ridiculous they are given what "heavens" actually means as it is was originally written.

In your general concept I agree with you.

However, Christianity and Islam are entirely man made religions that really have nothing to do with any real God or any true spiritual matters. They are just made up mythologies to fool the masses with. So it's like using a comic book to disprove the existence of "Heaven" or God, which flaws your entire case.
 

Ancient Soul

The Spiritual Universe
Why did u leave out Judiasm as a man made religion?

The post I was replying to only referenced "Christianity and Islam", so I stuck with that. It's called focusing and staying on track.

But to keep "you" happy, yes, Judiasm is another bogus man made religion that also has nothing to do with any real God or any true spiritual matters.
 

tayla

My dog's name is Tayla
Unfortunately, as is with השמים rendered "the heavens", the other six words' meanings are not in any way imparted through the English words used to translate them. It is such undertakings that has led to beings imagining there is an exterior "heaven" that one may retire to
We should consider what the early Israelites and the Jews before the time of Jesus believed about the topics in question. They didn't speak English, so, issues of translation into English are irrelevant.
 
Humans need to start taking sound more into consideration when trying to figure it out. Harmonic resonance, amplification... "the beginning", atu-waa... zep-tepi.

Everyones so close!

This is me interacting with yall watching it.

 

9-18-1

Active Member
We should consider what the early Israelites and the Jews before the time of Jesus believed about the topics in question. They didn't speak English, so, issues of translation into English are irrelevant.

We neither can nor need to: it is hard-coded into the language.

If you want to understand how a people(s) perceives; thinks; "believes" etc. one only need observe the fundamental 'structure' of the language(s) they used.

With regards to the Hebrews' use of language, the words are constructed according to what something *is*. For example the words for 'light' and 'skin' are identical save the first letter (former: aleph [vav-resh] latter: ain [vav-resh]. Therefor 'light', when reflecting off a body (of skin) produces the same 'light' but as [a] skin. This is precisely how 'light' interacts with the skin: it reflects off of it. In other words, only that which 'stops' light is said to be 'physical' - there is an entire 'realm' that is not 'physical' and this is the Hebrew word for 'the heavens': השמים. Contained in this word is the 'equation' for such a non-physical 'state' in which nothing (everything) in it does not 'interact' with 'light' at all. It is described as firey waters (last 3 letters: mayim is the word for waters) but the 'fire' has no fuel; which is hard to conceive of in the 'physical' sense because this is not physical 'fire' yet. However it lies in potential to become fire if fueled by air to manifest in the physical which is הארץ in:

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ

There are over 900 different ways to "read" the first word. It means many, many things that are all inter-related. "In the beginning..." is a general 'consensus' term used to describe them all at once. But the word itself contains many indications of what this 'beginning' is.

It is like a sudden 'bang' that grows over time via a process of 'creation' that utilizes a six-fold form. This form is comprised of three upper and three lower regions: the former "the heavens" and the latter "the earth" and each region is divided into four slices. This produces twelve slices in a full circle.

This is what produces the (Great) yearly cycles presently kept by calendar "months". The fundamental 'structure' upon which this is based in hard-coded into 'creation' itself (not the traditions built upon them).

Humans need to start taking sound more into consideration when trying to figure it out. Harmonic resonance, amplification... "the beginning", atu-waa... zep-tepi.

Everyones so close!

This is me interacting with yall watching it.


World Peace is my prize - whatever brings us there. I know the solution involves balancing the gender imbalance institutionalized by idolatrous religions that use strictly male figures as "role models" that people adopt as their own nature. There will never be world peace so long as such Idol Worship exists.
 
Top