Dear Gentlesl:
Let's try this for
communicating in Symbol, the Language.
I remind myself that we
are communicating about the 153 fish.
JBJ has written that 153
is something, I think it was called a triangle, of 17. 17 is a number that is
all through the Psalms. One at the base, then 2, then 3, etc. is building a
triangle. When we get to 17, the total,
1 +2 + 3, etc. up to 17 is 153.
But we will be doing
something different. We will be building a mountain of words, of
transitions.
Numbers, Words,
Names--ERH says the the waters under are 'number,' the earth beneath 'words,'
and the heavens above, 'names'.
Mountain.
Back to Sinai.
One mountain is the
tabernacle. It has bronze, silver, and gold levels.
Another mountain is the
elders over 10s, 50, 100s, 1000s.
Can we make a mountain
of transitions? That would be associated with names, for a vocative is
half an imperative, and we, in the image of God, speak and hand to 'dress' the Garden of Creation .
So I'm saying that we
are in some way naming, not numbering, we we able to make another mountain of
transitions.
Can we do that?
I think so, if we look
multiperspectivally. One perspective on the Ten Words is that all can be
seen in terms of any one. 'Don't steal,' for instance, applies to 'No
other gods,' 'no idols,' etc.
That’s one perspective.
Another is this: Can we build a mountain of transitions? For instance, what is the transition from ‘No
other gods,’ to ‘No idols’? Let’s think
of it as a minor premise. The major
premise would be ‘No other gods,’ the minor premise is what we are looking for,
and the conclusion is ‘no idols’.
[It’s easier with the
prologue and the First Word. Major
premise:I am the Lord your God, who brought you our of …. bondage.’ ‘Your
rescuer is your exclusive god’ would be the minor premise. ‘Have no other gods
before Me’ would be the conclusion. But
we aren’t using the prologue at this time]
Back to the minor
premise/transition between the First Word and the Second Word—what would it be.
Could it be ‘Idols are (false’) gods’?
Let’s say so. ‘Have no other
gods’. ‘Idols are false gods’. ‘Have no idols.
Let’s do 2 and 2. ‘No idols.’ And ‘Don’t carry the Lord’s name
emptily’. Minor premise? ‘If you carry
the Lord’s name emptily, you are worshiping through idols.’
I am unable to devote
the time in this attempt, this essay, to make all the transition names, but you
can see that I would have to make a layer of 9 transitions for the Ten
words. Then, the next layer would be 8
transition for the 9 first layer transitions.
Then it would be 7 second layer transitions for the 8 first layers,
etc. What would be the One Transition? That would be good to know.
It would be equivalent,
this One Transition, to the peaks of the other two mountains: Moses, at the top of the mountain of judges,
and the Holy of Holies at the top of the mountain of the building, the
Tabernacle. Moses gives the word of judgment, thus words in earth beneath. If
there are 365 (pillars?) in the tabernacle, or other significant numbers, the
tabernacle would be numbers, the waters under. (It’s more, but this is an
exploration—the Tabernacle represents the world, Israel , Christ, etc…)
What is the 2nd
layer transition between the two transitions we have so far? Between the First Word and the Second Word we
have, per above: ‘Your rescuer is your
exclusive God,’ call that ‘A’. And from
2 to 3, or ‘B,’ we have ‘If you carry the Lord’s name emptily, you are
worshiping through idols.’
How do we get from A to
B? That’s for another time. And to do this 9 +8 +7 +6 +5 +4 + 3+ 2 times
to get to the One Transition, as Moses transitions us through the Wilderness,
and the Holy of Holies is a transition (once a year, through the High
Priest?...), that would be a piece of work.
I don’t see how 45 is of
significance, though!
But this does show that
it’s not all numbers, that the Language, Symbol is much more. I thought here above in ‘mountain’.
Love in King Jesus,
Chuck ‘Charlie
TwelvePages’ Hartman
PS: In Joran Lanier’s
‘You Are Not A Gadget,’ he discusses language, a new language, using the
example of cuttlefish, who can play pictures on their skins to
communicate. It is valuable, this
discussion, though he divides the world up differently, saying that all our
languages now are symbols. In another of
his works, ‘Who Owns The Future?,’ he opens the discussion of preventing Big
Data from being (my terms) like the railroads, as in ‘railroaded without a
trial’.
No comments:
Post a Comment