1. THE MYTH THE BIBLE IS JUST MYTH 

2. THE EVOLUTION OF EVOLUTION

3. ASTRONOMY IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

4. IGNORANT GOAT-HERDERS OR STUPID COWBOYS?

5. UNDERSTANDING SPINOZA AND EINSTEIN

6. THE END OF ATHEISM - Real Atheism No Longer Exists

7. THE GOD THAT IS - A Reformed Karaim explanation of G-d that is admitted to be even by Richard Dawkins, NOT a Delusion.

8. THE ORIGIN OF THE SYNAGOUGE - The Synagogue Is Not Actually Jewish

9. ARMILUS -  The Historically Jewish Perspective Of The National Identity Of The AntichrisT

10. THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT

11. HAVE YOU "ACCEPTED CHRIST"?  (Most Christian's do not)

12. THE QARAIM - Existence of Qaraim is documented in the New Testament half a millenia before Ananites borrow the term

            (1) It is asserted that all ancient historical literature is "myth",
            but modern "psycho-analysis" is "science" [though it's basis is
            Greek mythology elucidated by Freud, as displayed in the names of
            it's various major "complexes", "syndromes" and mental "illnesses"]
            "Opedius Complex", the "Ego", the "Id", the "Psyche", etc., etc.

            (2) It is asserted that the Bible is "myth" though all of the
            necessary elements to constitute a "myth" from a "history" are
            absent.

            (3) It is asserted that Jesus is a "myth", though ancient
            "mythological material" was always written as such, and the New
            Testament opens with a two volume "historical treatise" [Luke 1:1-3
            & Acts 1:1] submitted to a government offical, possibly gathered and
            written for a Roman insurrection trial. [Titus 3:13, Act 28:16]

            (4) It is asserted that the Old Testament's creation account is
            "myth", yet it differs in no substantial way from our "own"
            explanation of origins [if read from original language]. Including
            our "big bang" and "theory of evolution" first proposed by Jewish
            rabbis and Islamic scholars from the middle ages [including the ape
            as origin].

            (5) It is asserted that Babel was a "myth", though the archeological
            site has been uncovered, including it's ziggeraut.

            (6) It is asserted that Noah's flood was a "myth", though the CIA
            have released photos of a large wooden boat sitting on top of Mount
            Ararat. [which was kept secret for decades while "myth-makers" were
            writing their stories]

            (7) It is asserted that Adam and Eve are "myth", though the female
            chromosome looks identical to a "rib", and the Heb. word means
            "plank".

            (8) It is asserted that Daniel was a "myth" and written after all
            it's prophecies, though the greatest prophecy of the book is the 483
            years "to date" of the coming of the messiah to Israel in 32 AD.

            (9) It is asserted that God is a "myth", though there has never been
            found an indigenous tribe of people on earth by modern sociologists,
            who did not have a concept of such.

            (10) It is asserted that hell is a "myth", though atheists describe
            in detail their "out of body experiences" in NDEs and their post NDE
            experience of "a hellish like experience", which ironically has
            never been observed to occur with children.

            (11) It is asserted that "heaven" is a "myth", though people have
            accurately described events occuring post-consciousness NDE,
            followed by their experiences of "heaven-like experiences".

HISTORICAL FACTS ON EVOLUTION:

            (1) Originally developed by Jewish and Islamic Biblical scholars

            (2) Originally proposed by Western Theists.

            (3) Adopted and developed by a Unitarian

            (4) Proclaimed as "science" by Atheists.

            (5) From there adapted by Atheist States with a communist economic
            model.

            (6) Used to justify everything from racism to mass killings in the
            range of a hundred million deaths.

HUNDREDS OF YEARS BEFORE DARWIN

             * Talmud Chaggiga 13b-14a states that there were 974 generations
            before God created Adam.

            * The midrashim state that the "first week" of Creation lasted for
            extremely long periods of time. See Anafim on Rabbenu Bachya's Sefer
            Ikkarim 2:18; Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 9.

            *974 generations

            1 generation [in the post-diluvian era was 72 years/pre-diluvian 200?]

            974 x 200 = 194,800 years before Adam

            Adam was not considered the "first person" as is taught today. Adam
            was considered the first "master", a concept foriegn to modern
            westerners but is well understood by eastern traditions. Adam was
            proposed as the founder of the 'eastern tradition' of serpentine
            enlightenement which he later "repented of" and gave the first
            prophesy of the coming "redeemer/messiah".

            "Cain" carried this "way" to the land of Nod [where he took a wife]
            and became a founder of one of it's first cities. From there the
            sepentine tradition is advanced. It is referred to as the "way of
            Cain".

            ----------------------------------------------
            The observation of the language in these texts in what the rabbis
            based their veiws on:

            Gen 1:2 And the earth was [HEBREW="BECAME"] without form, and void;
            and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God
            moved upon the face of the waters.

            This is about something else entierly which occurs "AFTER" creation.

            [a re-creation of earth(?)]

            Ecc 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh:
            but the earth abideth for ever.

            Ecc 1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and
            that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new
            thing under the sun.
            Ecc 1:10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is
            new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
            Ecc 1:11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall
            there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that
            shall come after.
            -----------------------------------------------

The Babylonian Theory of the Planets
by N. M. Swerdlow
Reviewed by Stacy G. Langton

 One of the great discoveries of the nineteenth century was a discovery about the past ---the existence of a highly sophisticated mathematical astronomy among the ancient Babylonians. Otto Neugebauer tells the story in The Exact Sciences in Antiquity, pp. 103--105 (full references are given below). The discoverers were three Jesuit priests. The first, Johann Nepomuk Strassmaier, an Assyriologist, worked in the British Museum for nearly twenty years, patiently and tirelessly copying into his notebooks the contents of unpublished clay tablets from Babylon. Among these were many with astronomical contents, which Strassmaier was unable to comprehend. He invoked the help of Joseph Epping, a professor of mathematics and astronomy, then at Quito, Ecuador. Epping's first results were published in 1881, in an obscure Catholic theological periodical. He had been able to decipher the names of the planets and zodiacal signs and had uncovered the main aspects of the Babylonian lunar theory. After Epping's death, his work was continued by Franz Xaver Kugler.

The Babylonian astronomers who created these tablets ---the "Chaldeans" of the Book of Daniel: "The king [Belshazzar] cried aloud to bring in the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers," (Daniel 5:7)--- are referred to by Noel Swerdlow, in the book under review, as the "Scribes of Enuma Anu Enlil". The "Enuma Anu Enlil" is a vast series of seventy tablets containing thousands of omens, originally from the second millenium B.C., referring to the appearances of the sun, moon and planets, as well as meteorological phenomena. ("Enuma Anu Enlil" just means "when Anu and Enlil"; these are the opening words of the first tablet. Anu and Enlil were Sumerian gods.) For example, "If Jupiter [rises] in the path of the [Enlil] stars: the king of Akkad will become strong and [overthrow] his enemies in all lands in battle" (BTP, p. 94).

Because of the importance of celestial phenomena for the understanding of events in Babylonian society, the Scribes, by the neo-Babylonian period (7th century B.C.), had begun to keep records of systematic observations of the sky. These are now known as the "Astronomical Diaries". "Indeed, the Diaries, originally extending from the eighth or seventh to the first century, are by far the longest continuous scientific record, or should we say, the record of the longest continuous scientific research, of any kind in all of history, for modern science itself has existed for only half as long. And of course it is the Diaries, or the records from which the Diaries were compiled, that provided the observations that were later used as the empirical foundation of the mathematical astronomy of the ephemerides, in which the same phenomena of the moon and planets recorded in the omen texts were reduced to calculation" (BTP, p. 17).

The final, mathematical, phase of Babylonian astronomy dates mainly from the third to the first centuries B.C. From this period we have ephemerides, tablets containing tables of the computed positions of the sun, moon, or planets, day by day, or over longer periods, such as month by month. (Strictly speaking, an ephemeris, from the Greek hemera, "day", should mean a daily record; but Neugebauer has applied the term in the more general sense.) There are also tablets called procedure texts, which give schematically the rules for computing ephemerides, much like a modern computer program.

The object of the book under review, Noel Swerdlow's The Babylonian Theory of the Planets (here abbreviated BTP), is to explain how the Scribes could have determined the parameters of their planetary theories. (The lunar theory is not dealt with at all.) What does this mean? The Scribes were mainly interested in planetary phenomena corresponding to those in the omens, particularly heliacal risings and settings. Take, for example, the planet Jupiter. It drifts eastward (most of the time) through the Zodiac, as does the sun (always). But the sun's motion is faster than Jupiter's. Thus the sun will eventually pass Jupiter. After it does, Jupiter will be westward of the sun, and will therefore rise earlier. When the angular distance between Jupiter and the sun is great enough so that the sky is still dark when Jupiter rises, its rising will be visible. Its rising on the first day of visibility is called its "heliacal rising".

Babylonian ephemerides of Jupiter give the dates and positions in the Zodiac of its heliacal risings, which occur, on average, roughly every 399 days; this is called Jupiter's "mean synodic period". Now suppose, for example, that in some year Jupiter's heliacal rising occurs when Jupiter (and also the sun, which must be only a few degrees ---in fact, possibly as much as 17°--- away) is in the constellation Leo. Then the next heliacal rising will occur in the constellation Virgo. On average, each successive heliacal rising will occur about 33° further along the Zodiac, just over one zodiacal sign; this interval is called the "mean synodic arc" of the phenomenon.

Now the Scribes were able to recognize (using the extensive observational records in the Astronomical Diaries) that, after many synodic periods, both the sun and planet would return to essentially the same positions in the Zodiac. For Jupiter this happens, for example, after 427 years (the so-called "ACT period"), during which time there have been 391 heliacal risings, and the position of the heliacal rising has itself gone through the Zodiac 36 times. Since the earth, sun, and Jupiter are now again in the same relative positions as at the beginning of the cycle, the speeds of the sun and Jupiter through the Zodiac will be the same as before, and the whole cycle will essentially repeat.

It follows that the synodic arc from one heliacal rising to the next ---the actual synodic arc, as opposed to the mean synodic arc mentioned above--- will be (as we would say) a function of the location of the phenomenon in the Zodiac. Now the mathematical astronomy of the Scribes was quite different from that of the Greek astronomers, such as Hipparchus and Ptolemy, which was based on a geometric model, representing namely the sky as a sphere, with the earth at the center. The Scribes used no geometric model at all. Rather, they used numerical schemes for computing the function giving the synodic arc of the phenomenon in terms of its location in the Zodiac.

In one of these schemes for Jupiter (known as "System A"), the rule is simple. The Zodiac is divided into two zones, the first running from 25° of Gemini to 0° of Sagittarius, the second from 0° of Sagittarius back to 25° of Gemini. In the first zone, the synodic arc from one heliacal rising to the next is taken to be 30°; in the second, it is taken to be 36°. (There are auxiliary rules for the cases in which the synodic arc overlaps both zones.) For this system, then, the parameters are the lengths and locations in the Zodiac of the zones, and the corresponding synodic arcs.

The question, then, is how the Scribes fell upon these particular values for the parameters. Of course, they must have used their recorded observations, but how? Swerdlow has compiled tables of relevant observational records from the Astronomical Diaries, and has also computed the synodic arcs and times from modern theory. (It is interesting that in some cases ---for example, for Saturn--- the computational procedures of the Scribes give results which fit the modern computed values much better than their own observations do.)

The problem is that the observational records, though extensive, are crude. The date of the heliacal rising can be observed (provided the weather is favorable), but the Scribes had neither the instruments for observing its position precisely nor a coordinate system for recording it. The Diaries give merely the sign: "in Leo", say; sometimes they remark whether it was near the beginning or the end of the sign.

Swerdlow argues, then, that there must have been a way to determine the parameters from the synodic times alone, independent of the synodic arcs. And in fact this is possible. For there is a fundamental relation between mean synodic arc and time: the mean synodic arc can be found from the mean synodic time just by subtracting a certain constant value, characteristic of the given planet.

(It may strike the reader, as it did me, that this relation is rather odd. Though Swerdlow gives a formal derivation, pp. 66--68, he does not give an intuitive explanation of why it should be so. Actually there are two factors involved. First, the synodic time is the time for the sun to go once around the Zodiac and more, until it catches up with Jupiter again; the synodic arc is just the comparatively short arc from one occurrence of the phenomenon to the next. Second, there is the conversion from units of angle to units of time. The angular units are degrees ---a unit which we have inherited from the Babylonians! The units of time are "mean lunar days", nowadays called by the Sanskrit term "tithi". There are precisely 30 tithis in a mean lunation, or synodic month. Now the sun travels roughly one degree per day. More precisely, the conversion factor is 1 plus 0.03 tithis per degree. Since the conversion factor is so close to 1, it is convenient, instead of multiplying by the conversion factor, to add the extra amount corresponding to the increment 0.03.)

The Babylonian Theory of the Planets has been reproduced photographically by Princeton University Press from copy supplied by the author. Consequently, the type-face is rather ugly, and the appearance of the printed page is unpleasant. On the other hand, the copy-text has clearly been prepared with great care. I noticed only a few typographical errors in this very complex book. (There are trivial errors on p. 119, line -3 and p. 154, line 20. On p. 158, line 16, "Table 2.4" should be "Table 3.4". On p. 172, line 9, "principle" should be "principal". Also, on p. 5 there is a reference to a 1990 article of Brown which is not listed in the bibliography.)

The Introduction reviews the three stages of Babylonian astronomy: the omens of the Enuma Anu Enlil and similar texts, the observations of the Astronomical Diaries, and the mathematical astronomy of the ephemerides and procedure texts. Swerdlow obviously considers these stages as arising naturally one out of the other. (It is amusing to contrast this point of view with Neugebauer's remark: "Nor does the interest in celestial omens---as one class of omens among many---lead to astronomy," Astronomy and History, p. 160.) Part 1 of BTP explains the basic period relations for planetary phenomena and works out the relation between synodic arc and time. Part 2, the heart of the book, discusses the various systems which the Scribes used for each of the planets (except Venus), and shows in detail how the Scribes could plausibly have arrived at the parameters they adopted, on the basis of synodic times extracted from the Diaries.

In fact, the Scribes did not explain (at least in any tablets that we have) how they arrived at their parameters; thus, any reconstruction such as Swerdlow's can only be speculative. The important thing (I think) is that he has given a believable account of how it could have been done. Perhaps one could improve on the details, but it seems likely that the Scribes must have done something like this. (Swerdlow himself discusses a couple of alternate approaches in an Appendix.)

(The Babylonian theory of Venus is different from that of the other planets, because Venus has a very short period of 8 synodic periods in 5 years less just 4 tithis. The Scribes, for whatever reason, preferred to use this short near-period, letting successive cycles drift slowly backward through the Zodiac, rather than the long periods which they used for the other planets.)

Part 3 of BTP considers the method of fitting the arithmetical schemes to actual positions in the Zodiac, and the relations between different synodic phenomena: for example, the arc between an heliacal setting and the following heliacal rising.

In principle, Swerdlow's treatment does not assume any previous acquaintance with Babylonian astronomy. He admits, however, that the reader would do well to look first at the relevant chapter in Neugebauer's Exact Sciences in Antiquity. I found BTP to be pretty tough going, nevertheless. Swerdlow's exposition is not always clear. For example, I found his discussion of the basic period relations on pp. 57--59 to be both confusing and incomplete. Here the reader will find a more perspicuous account in Neugebauer's History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy, pp. 388--390. Of course, the Scribes did all their numerical calculations in sexagesimal (base 60) notation, and Swerdlow naturally follows their lead. (I found it convenient to program my little pocket calculator to operate in sexagesimal ---but I have not checked all the calculations.)

Perhaps few readers of MAA Online will find themselves able to take time from teaching calculus and doing research on Banach spaces (or whatever) to work through this difficult and complex book. I think, however, that they will be rewarded if they do. As Swerdlow insists, Babylonian astronomy is (apart from arithmetic and geometry) the first of the natural sciences. The Scribes were the first to see the possibility and usefulness of applying mathematics to describe and understand the complex phenomena in the natural world. Much of our heritage as mathematicians starts with them.

What was it in fact that led the Scribes to develop a mathematical theory? Swerdlow has a remarkable answer: bad weather! "All those nights of rain and clouds and poor visibility reported in the Diaries turned out to be good for something after all. When it is clear, observe; when it is cloudy, compute (...) [T]he principle first understood by the Scribes of [E]numa Anu Enlil in order to take account of adverse weather has remained, with ever increasing sophistication, the foundation of observational and experimental science, whether in measuring distances of galaxies or masses of subatomic particles. Here above all, science was born in Babylon. From bad weather was born good science. And the reduction of periodic natural phenomena, however great their irregularities, to a precise mathematical description that may be applied to both prospective and retrospective calculation, that is, to mathematical science, was also the achievement of the Babylonians" (BTP, p. 56).

"They have left no record of their theoretical analyses and discussions, but to judge from the works they have left us, the Diaries and ephemerides, the goal-year texts and almanacs, the discussions of two Scribes of Enuma Anu Enlil contained more rigorous science than the speculations of twenty philosophers speaking Greek, not even Aristotle excepted. I say this seriously, not as provocation, and further, I believe it is due precisely to the scientific and technical character of Babylonian astronomy that most historians and philosophers remain without comprehension of it, still preferring to dote upon childish fables and Delphic fragments of Pre-Socratics, requiring no knowledge of mathematics and less taxing to the intellect. (...) The origin of rigorous, technical science was not Greek but Babylonian, not Indo-European but Semitic, something I believe no one who has read Kugler and Neugebauer with understanding can doubt, and, my God, those Scribes were smart" (BTP, pp. 181--182).

Publication Data: The Babylonian Theory of the Planets, by N. M. Swerdlow. Princeton University Press, 1998. Hardcover, xv+246 pages, $39.50. ISBN: 0-691-01196-6.

...................................................................................................

‘Astrology in Ancient Judaism’, ‘Astronomy in Ancient Judaism’, J. Neusner, A. Avery-Peck and W. S. Green (eds.),  The Encyclopaedia of Judaism, V, Supplement Two, Leiden - Boston: Brill, 2004, pp. 2031-2044.

Astronomy and Astrology Among the Jews in Antiquity

Meir Bar-Ilan

The prophets and the sages were aware of at least seven different stars and constellations (Jer. 44:17-19; Amos 5:8, 5:26; Job 9:9; 38:32).

The way the luminaries are said to have been created (Genesis 1:14) shows awareness of the role of both luminaries in the calendar. The story of the Flood (Gen. 7-8) reveals calendrical thinking, as of an awareness of 11 days gap between a lunar and a solar year (according to the Massoretic text). The five “stops” in the Flood narrative shows awareness of (a solar) calendar.

Theophrastos (372-288/7 BCE), a disciple of Aristotle, wrote that the Jews watch the stars at night and pray to God. Since Theophrastos wrote in the context of sacrifices, it is evident that he was writing about priests in the Temple where the exact date had significance for the ritual, sacrifices and festivals (=calendar). Though there is no other evidence that priests were engaged in Astronomy (Psa. 8:4 is not sufficient), it goes well with the Mesopotamian tradition where there was a connection between astronomers and priests. Moreover, before the destruction of the Temple (in 70 CE) there was a priestly court in Jerusalem where testimonies of the sighting new moon were analyzed (m. Rosh Hashana 1:7), so there is no reason to doubt Theophrastos’ evidence

in 1 Henoch, a Priestly Aramaic book that was edited out of (at least) 5 books, there is an astronomical work (ch. 72-82), from the 3rd century BCE. The Astronomy book is based on Mesopotamian astronomy as seen by its measuring the movements the Sun’s rising point at the along the horizon as well as from other aspects. The book shows a unique combination of Astronomy and religious mystical cognition, based on a 364 day solar year, beginning on Nissan 1.

The people in Qumran had (or: tried to have) the “Jubilees” calendar of a solar year, made of 364 days, as in the Temple Scroll, but it is most likely that they used other calendars (though not simultaneously). The day began probably at sunrise as in Lev. 7:15 and Rabbinic Priestly traditions as in t. Zebahim 6:18. Some 20 texts found in Qumran show a deep consciousness of calendrical issues that, although they do not support a new calendar, they do exemplify the importance of the role of the calendar in Qumran. 2 Enoch (that was not found in Qumran) comes from another priestly milieu, most probably: from Jerusalem, where Enoch was a hero. The author writes of a more complex calendar than that in 1 Enoch, of 365 ¼ days a year, with 7 years of intercalation in a cycle of 19 years, and a great cycle of (19*28=) 532 years (2 Enoch 6:21-26). The author gives the order of the planets in a non-Hellenistic system: Saturn, Venus, Mars, Sun, Jupiter, Mercury, Moon. It is quite obvious that this calendar shows a better knowledge of astronomy (and more ‘modern’) than the one in 1 Enoch, reflecting Hellenistic, combined with Mesopotamian, influence.

...the Rabbis described the world as a ball (p. Aboda Zara 3:1, 42c). Rava (3rd-4th centuries in Babylon) said that the whole world is 6,000 parsah (b. Pesahim 94a), which is about 24,872 miles, close to modern estimates.

Those who saw the new moon appeared before a court, first of priests and then of Rabbis, who checked the witnesses and evaluated their testimonies (m. Rosh Hashana 1:7). The different courts had different rules and it is highly probable that they had different calendars at the same period. R. Yohanan b. Zakkai (1st century), one of the founders of the Rabbinic tradition, was said to know all the Torah, Tequfuth (seasons, the moments of equinoxes and solstices) and Geometry included (b. Sukkah 28a), that is calendrical calculations and astronomy.

 While he stated the opinions of the sages of Israel as against the sages of the nations, we are told that the sages of Israel contend that the sphere is fixed while the zodiac signs are cycling, but the sages of the nations say the opposite. R. Judah the Prince, as the last referee, added an argument to prove the Jewish opinion (b. Pesahim 94b). However, in another dispute, stated at the same place, concerning the path of the sun at night, R. Judah the Prince said that the opinion of the sages of the nations seems to be superior. According to Maimonides (Guide 2:8), the Rabbis held the Pythagorean opinion, while the opposing sages were Aristotelians, and they were victorious.

Shemuel said: “the paths of the sky are known to me like the paths of Nehardea, except for a comet whose nature I do not know” (b. Berakhot 58b). After Shemuel’s statement the Talmud continued: “we have learnt that it (a comet) never passes through Kesil, and if it does – the world will be destroyed” (Kesil is mentioned in Amos 5:8; Job 38:31 and identified by ibn Ezra as “the heart of the Crab”). Shemuel was asked: “(Is it true), we see that it passes?! And he answered: “This is impossible, either the comet goes above it or beneath it. (p. Berakhot 9:2, 13c). The Rabbis said that there is a star that rises once in 70 years and deceives sailors (b. Horayot 10a). It is assumed they meant the comet later named after Halley, a comet that appeared around 140 CE (and 70 is taken as a round number for a cycle of around 78 years).

In a sermon that R. Afes (3rd century) gave in Antioch (Genesis Raba 10:1) there appear data concerning the times of the planets’ circling the earth in a very scientific way (compare to Vitruvius, On Architecture, 9:1). This sermon was given on the occasion of reading the beginning of Genesis, and the whole sermon has a flavor of combining Torah and science (as in modern times).

Bar Kappara (Land of Israel, 2-3 centuries CE) said: “one who knows how to calculate the seasons and zodiacal signs (in calendrical issues), but he doesn’t do so – of him Scripture says: ‘But they regard not the work of the Lord, Neither have they considered the work of His hands’ (Isa. 5:12)”. R. Johanan said that there is a religious commandment to calculate the seasons and the zodiac signs (=months), (b. Shabbat 75a). These opinions are a continuation of a long tradition that sees the study of astronomy as a religious practice.

Shemuel is the first Rabbi to give the duration of the solar year more precisely than the Tannaim. Shemuel said: “in between every tequfa (season) there are 91 days and 7 ½ hours” (B. Erubin 56a), that is an average that yields a solar year of 365 ¼ days, in accordance with the Julian year. He showed his astronomical knowledge by sending to the Land of Israel a calendar with intercalations for 60 years in advance, a calculation that was not enough however to impress R. Yohanan (b. Hulin 95b). Shemuel was also sure he could make calculations of the calendar (without the need for witnesses) for the whole Diaspora (Babylonia), but he was shown that he wasn’t aware of some of the rules of the calendar (b. Rosh Hashana 20b), or else this rule had no Babylonian origin.

In the lost Midrash of 49 Middot, from the Land of Israel, probably from the 4th-5th centuries, there is a sermon that has fortunately been preserved (Yalkut Shimoni, Shemot 418). The Rabbi found a correspondence between the zodiacal signs in the heavens and the way the tribes of Israel dwelled in the desert. He stated: “Tribe of Judah in the East, Isachar and Zebulun with him. Against them in heavens are Aries, Taurus and Gemini. With the Sun, together they serve five parts out of eight”. Probably he meant that out of the 1800 in the Eastern horizon, the Sun on the longest day, rises at azimuth of 67.50. However his words are understood, it is evident that the Rabbi (and his audience) knew something about Astronomy, which played a role in the synagogue.

Baraita deMazalot is a unique astronomical and astrological tractate. It gives astronomical data in unprecedently scientific ways. The author describes two different systems, an Egyptian and a Babylonian one, regarding the position of the stars in the zodiacal signs at the moment of creation. The author gives the exact distances from the Earth to the Moon, from the Moon to Mercury and so forth in a manner resembling the Mesopotamian beru ina same, x heavenly units equal to y earthly units. The author quotes not only Rabbinic sources but states the opinions of “the sages of the Gentiles”, “the sages of Egypt, Chaldeans and the Babylonians”. There is no doubt that the writer drew some of his data from Ptolemy (not necessarily directly), but his other sources remain to be analyzed. The author used Greek terminology, such as trigon (triangle), Stirigamos (standing) and diametron (diameter). The writer was probably a Rabbi who lived in the Land of Israel in 5th-6th centuries, and one of his sermons shows his competence very well.

R. Elazar Ha-Qalir, in the 6-7 centuries, was a master of the Hebrew language, a sage who knew all Rabbinic traditions and a prolific poet who wrote hundreds, if not more, Piyyutim, many of them still in use until this very day. In a famous Piyyut of his (“az raita ve-Safarta”, to parashat Sheqalim), his abilities as a mathematician and geographer are clear. However, in a Piyyut, only recently discovered (“or Hama u-Lebana”), it becomes apparent that he was an astronomer as well. In his Piyyut Ha-Qalir gives data of astronomical value: a solar year is 365 ¼ days (like Shemuel), and a lunar year is 354 1/3 days (without explicit precedent). His intercalation cycle was of 19 years (“Ehad beEhad Gashu”), but he had another solar cycle of 28 years (similar to b. Berakhot 59b), and more data in his Piyyutim has not yet been evaluated (e.g. his Piyyut: “abi kol Hoze”). It is assumed he was the head of the Yeshiva, the Jewish academy, in Tiberias and played a role in the process of intercalations.

Pirqe de Rabbi Eliezer is a midrash from the Land of Israel, from the 7th or the beginning of the 8th century (though it claims to be older with pseudepigraphic beginning and other statements). Chapters 5-7 discuss the calendar in prosaic Hebrew in a way similar to Ha-Qalir’s poetics. The author’s solar year is 365 ¼ days and his lunar month is 29:12:793 (assumed to be a Talmudic tradition). The author continues by stating that the length of a lunar year (as precisely multiplied by 12) is 354:8:876, exactly like in Midrash Agada, Buber ed., Genesis 1:14, Midrash Sod Ha-‘Ibur, and in our “modern” data (though very slightly bigger than the ‘real’ time).

The author gives his calculations in regard to ecliptical limits: A solar eclipse will occur if the moon’s latitude at conjunction is at most 60 “ma’alot” (units), and a lunar eclipse at most 40 “ma‘alot” (units). The moon’s great cycle is of 21 years while the sun cycles every 28 years and this leads to a great cycle of 84 years (21*4=28*3), that is (approximately) one hour of God (based on Psa. 90:4), though this cycle is not easy to explain. However, his system of intercalation is based on a 19 year-cycle, like the “modern” Jewish calendar, while adding one lunar month in the years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, 19. From the way the author portrays Biblical heroes as having secret knowledge of intercalation, and from his own description of the process of making decisions on this issue, it is evident that the author played an active role in calendar decisions. That is to say the author, Rabbi and astronomer, was one of the heads of the Yeshiva in Tiberias where they met at least once in 2-3 years to consider whether to intercalate the year or not. The author’s data, together with Talmudic halakhah, reveal that the author’s calendar could have been as exact as ours.

Baraita deShmuel is an Astronomical and Astrological tractate, based on Biblical knowledge combined with Greek science, as is clear from its inclusion of a few Greek words, such as ametron (without measure). The author uses some of his own terminology. Some of his Hebrew words are mere translations. A degree is called “hail”, that is an army-corps (following b. Berakhot 32b). The author uses “large hour” as does Pirqe de Rabbi Eliezer. The author shows his ability to use a “reed”, Qane (a precursor of the theodolite, already known in Egyptian Astronomy), which makes him the first Jewish author to do so. The author gives the values of the noon-shadow during the year (Cancer 0; Leo and Gemini 2; Virgo and Taurus 4… Capricorn 12). The author gives the oblique ascension of the zodiac signs such as “Aries 200, Libra (the cane of Libra) 400, from Aries to the cane (of Libra) one should add 40 for each sign” (=Taurus 240; Gemini 280; Cancer 320; Leo 360; Virgo 400; Libra 400; Scorpio 360; etc.). This is precisely a scheme of the Babylonian System A. Some Biblical verses are quoted in a midrashic manner. However, the text is full of astronomical data such as the time it takes each of the planets to circle the Earth, and the apogee and nadir of the zodiac signs. There is a special treatment of the Teli, that is Draco (mentioned no less than 17 times), and other stars are mentioned as well. The author mentions the year 4536 Anno Mundi (= 776 CE), and this is used to conclude that the text was composed that year, though there are doubts concerning the authenticity of that text. The author gives the limit of 120 21’ for both solar and lunar eclipses. The tractate was attributed to Shemuel the Babylonian (sharing a solar year of 365 ¼ days), though its dependence on Baraita deMazalot is very clear. This derivation leads to the probability that the text was composed in the Land of Israel with dependence on Babylonian-type arithmetical methods in Hellenistic culture.

...................................................................................................
Astronomy in Israel:
From Og's Circle to the Wise Observatory

Yuval Ne'eman#+
Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel

Several of the Mishnaic scholars ** were versed in Astronomy, such as the "Tannaim" Yehoshua ben Zakkai [7], the Patriarch Gamliel II and in particular Yehoshua (=Joshua) ben Hananiah [8]. In the tractate Horayoth, dealing with errors of Justice, the following anecdote is related [9]:

      "Rabbi Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua went together on a voyage at sea. Rabbi Gamliel carried a supply of bread, Rabbi Yehoshua carried a similar amount of bread and in addition a reserve of flour. At sea, they used up the entire supply of bread and had to utilize Rabbi Yehoshua's flour reserve. Rabbi Gamliel then asked Rabbi Yehoshua - "Did you know that this trip would last longer than usual, when you decided to carry this flour reserve?" Rabbi Yehoshua answered - "There is a star that appears every 70 years and induces navigational errors. I thought it might appear and cause us to go astray." Rabbi Gamliel then exclaimed "You are so knowledgeable and you nevertheless have to travel to make a living?"

This observation is generally interpreted as relating to Halley's Comet  [10] , with a period aproximating 76 years. Observing a comet's periodicity, with such a long period, requires records covering many centuries; it is possible that the Mishnaic scholars did inherit such records from the Great Knesset scholars (before 300 BC) who received them during the Babylonian exile (586-537 BC) from the "Chaldeans" (i.e. from Sumer, Akad etc. going back to the IIIrd Millenium BC).

Omar Khayyam, whose Rubayat was just a hobby, his professional creativity having yielded methods for solving factorizable cubic equations etc.) and spread all over the new Mohammedon Empire. The Jews were active participants, and the first Arabic-languate treatise on the Astrolabe was written by the Jew Joel, known as Masha-Allah of Basra (Iraq) around the year 800. This is the treatise that was translated into English by Geoffrey Chaucer ("The Treatise on the Astrolabe") around 1380, from a prior Latin translation.

Sind ben Ali, a heretic Jew, was the main contributor (~830) to the astronomical tables of the Caliph Maimum. The scene now shifts to Spain, where Abraham bar Hiyya Hanasi ("The Prince") of Barcelona (d. 1336) improved on these tables, using calculations performed by the Arab astronomer Al-Battani (d. 929). Abraham bar Hiyya was a prominent mathematician and astronomer, and wrote famous textboks in both fields. He introduced Europe to (Arab) trigonometry in his "Treatise on Mensuration and Calculations". The Hebrew was translated by Plast of Tivoli into Latin in 1145 and his book served as main source material for that later work of Leonardo Fibonacci of Pisa. In Astronomy, his book "The Shape of the Earth" is based upon the Ptolemaic system, contains a roughly correct estimate of the distance to the Moon

His student, Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1164), poet, philosopher, Biblical commentator and Astronomer, spent the last part of this life travelling in Italy and France, ending up in Eretz-Israel. He continued the publication of tables, mostly on the movement of the planets. The "Toledo Tables" were compiled by 12 Jewish astronomers led by the Cordovan Arab astronomer Ibn Arzarkali ("Azarchel"). The Latin version (translated by John of Brescia and Jacob Ibn Tibbon) was further improved in 1272 by a group of astronomers led by Isaac Ibn Said, and is known as the "Alphonsine Tables".

Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon's (=Maimonides) main contribution to Astronomy in his complete rejection of Astrology (1194). He is is unique, throughout the Centuries, in making this clear-cut. Remember that Kepler was still drawing horoscopes! Perhaps this should justify a visit to Maimonides' tomb in Tiberias.......

Rabbi Levi ben Gershom ( = Gersonides, also Maestre Leo de Bagnols, Maestre Leo Hebraeus; 1288-1344), was one of the greatest of Medieval astronomers. He lived in Provence, mostly at Orange. As a mathematician, he rediscovered the law of sines and published a sine table, correct to the 5th decimal. As an astronomer (he wrote 136 "chapters"!), he is the first to have relied on his own observations (in his studies of eclipses) rather than on Ptolemy's. He invented "Jacob's staff", a navigational instrument which was widely used for 3 centuries, and was the first person kown to have used a Camera Obscura for his observations.

Rabbi Levi is also the first scientist to derive more realistice estimates of the distance to the fixed stars. Ptolemy's estimate was of the order of 10-5 light years ( a million times smaller than the distance to the nearest star), whereas Rabbi Levi reached a figure of about 105 light years, 10 times our present estimate for the distance to an average star in the Galaxy. Gersonides was also one of the greatest Medieval philosophers and published Commentaries to the Bible.

The Zohar, a compilation of Jewish mystic writings drawn in Spain in the XIIIth Century anticipates Copernicus by stating that "the whole earth spins in a circle like a ball; the one part is up when the other part is down; the one part is light when the other is dark; it is day in the one part and night in the other".

Jewish astronomers played a key role in the theoretical preparation of the great voyages of discovery in the XVth Century. Judah Cresques, forced to adopt Christianity in the massacres of 1391, later became the Director of the Prince Henry of Portugal's ("The Navigator") Nautical Academy of Sagres. Abraham Zacuto ("Zacut", 1452-1515) worked first at Salamanca but moved to Portugal after the expulsion from Spain. As Court Astronomer to Kings John II and Manuel I, he prepared the voyage of Vasco da Gama (1496) and supplied instumentation (include his newly perfected copper astrolabe), improved tables, charts, intruction and briefs. He developed the first copper astrolabe. His very precise predictions of eclipses were used by Columbus to threaten the natives at a dangerous moment. Like all Jews, Zacut had to flee Portugal in 1497 and went to Tunis. He died in Eretz-Israel

The XVI-XVIIth Centuries were centuries of Jewish sufferings, and contributions to Astronomy are less prominent, except perhaps for the Herschel family, of Jewish origin. It was only when Alexander von Humboldt became President of the Prussian Academy of Sciences, that he abolished the requirement of a Christian Oath by a Professor at his ordination. Karl-Gustav Jacobi was the first Jew who did not have to abjure his faith to become a Professor. The oath was re-establised by von Humbold successor, but it was no more in existence when Einstein, Minkowski and Schwarzschild were ordinated.

.....................................................................................................
ESSAYS FROM ARCHAEOASTRONOMY & ETHNOASTRONOMY NEWS, THE QUARTERLY BULLETIN OF THE CENTER FOR ARCHAEOASTRONOMY

Number 24 September Equinox 1996

The State of Archaeo/ethnoastronomy and the Land of the Bible
by Sara L. Gardner, Univ of Arizona

The use of astronomy by the inhabitants of Palestine has interested scholars as early as the turn of this century, when their examination of biblical texts led them to make comparisons with Greek and Mesopotamian astronomy and mythology. About twenty years later mythological tablets (13th century BCE) were found at Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit) on the coast of Syria in 1929. The language and syntax of the Ugaritic tablets are similar to the Bible, and mythological motifs of the Ugaritic texts reflect motifs of biblical and extra-biblical texts. For example, they recorded how the gods influenced the changing seasons, and how the god of the Hebrews created the seasons in Genesis. Extra- biblical texts are used to study the development of Jewish astronomy and its calendar in the second half of the 1st millennium BCE. The list is lengthy, but the Astronomical Books of Enoch should be mentioned. They were written in the 2nd century BCE, and described the heavens as they were perceived by the ancient Jews. The ancient Hebrew literature as well as archaeological artifacts are rich in astral imaging.

Astral images began in the Chalcolithic period (4500-3300 BCE) at Teleilat Ghassul in Jordan near the Jordan River. The Ghassul Star, the image of a luminary rising above the mountains, and a faint image of a rayed sun or star behind a worshiper testify to an understanding of astronomy in this early period. Astral images continued throughout the history of ancient Palestine at many sites such as Hazor where instruments that marked the path of the sun, moon or star were depicted; for example, an altar showed a star image rising above two columns, and a stele showed the moon rising above two arms and hands that were postured as columns. The data collection of astral images from literature and artifacts is extensive, but nonetheless, this information has not been collected into a study on the practice of astronomy and/or its role in society. Nonetheless, these studies are prolific when compared to studies on the relationship between architecture and the movement of the sun, moon, and stars. Research to date has established one site, Rujim el-Hiri (Golan Heights in northern Israel), was built for the primary purpose of marking the June solstice from approximately 3000-2000 BCE, but its potential as an astronomical observatory has not been fully developed (Mizrachi 1993: 112-18).

The primary interest of biblical scholars is to establish a precise orientation of the entrances of temples to the eastern horizon, or to establish that there is not an orientation. Excavators are cavalier in their interpretations, and casually remark that the entrance of cult building or its cult object caught the rays of the rising sun--without any substantiating studies. Unfortunately, excavation records do not consistently record precise directions, either True or magnetic north (see Taylor 1993). While numerous scholars insist that orientation of temples should be studied, these calls have not mentioned what the premise for orientation should be-- beyond an assumption that the cardinal directions are somehow important.

Problems for scholarship exist beyond the collection of data and its interpretation for the land of the Bible, because it conflicts with current religious beliefs. The primary sources for data come from sacred Hebrew and Christian writings--the Torah and the Bible--and from sites mentioned in these texts. Research has in the past--and continues now--to be an exercise in proving that the modern interpretation of the Torah and the Bible is literal and written in stone, so to speak, while a few scholars approach the subject from an academic perspective and not religious. If research in archaeoastronomy in Palestine is to be initiated, it must be from a secular perspective such as Syro-Palestinian archaeology led by William G. Dever (1990). Through the combination of biblical and extra-biblical texts, astral images found on artifacts, archaeology, and astronomy the potential exists to open a new rich field of study for archaeo/ethnoastronomy as well as add another chapter in the history of astronomy.

References

Dever, W. G., Recent Archaeological Discoveries and Biblical Research, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1990.

Mizrachi, Y., Rujim el-Hiri: Toward an understanding of a Bronze Age megalithic monument in the Levant. diss. Harvard University. Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services, 1993.

Taylor, J. G., Yahweh and the Sun: Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sun Worship in Ancient Israel. Sheffield: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1993.

The Bible is scoffed mercilessly with the claims by certain Atheists that it was written by "goat-herders", therefore it's contents are without any merit and the people were "ignorant".  The argument against this misconception could fill a book of course.  Moses was trained in Pharaoh's court, Daniel was an advisor to a world empire as well, Paul had been trained by one of the greatest rabbinical minds in history.  The Bible is a cultural literature of a people that contain poetry, songs, philosphy, history, court chronicles, legal deposition, even some slightly sexually explicit romance literature.  It never claims to be a singluar "book" nor does it claim to be the substitute for the "Word of God" (which is always what God speaks to a person, not what someone writes down that he said),  But having said that, the claim that because there were some shepherds in the Book who occasionally wrote some of it's texts, therefore it should be viewed as repulsively ignorant, is simply about the level of ignorance that is being charged.  NASA Astronauts inspired a movie called "Space Cowboys". Are we to then relagate all NASA science to the ignorant musings of a bunch of "Stupid cow-boys"?

Let's examine one of the most defamed "ignorant musings" of the highly educated goat-herder Moses.  The ignorant "myth" of creation.

 THE BIBLICAL "MYTH" OF THE CREATION WEEK

            (1) "Luminance" is described. 1:3
            (2) Leads to evaporation and precipitation cycle 1:6,7
            (3) Reducing water levels 1:9
            (4) Exposes land and 1:10
            (5) First life forms emerge 1:11
            (5) Seasonal cycles begin 1:14
            (6) Complex life forms emerge, 1:21,25
            (7) Culminating in man. 1:26

            This is how they described the origin of the universe:

            Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

            This is how modern science describes the origin of the Universe
            [since 1965]

            http://universe.nasa.gov/images/science/...
            [NOTE THE "GRAVITATIONAL WAVE FORMS"]

            This is how they described the earliest formative stages of the
            earth:

            Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was
            upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face
            of the waters.

            This is how modern science describes it thousands of years later:

            QUOTE: As the collisions tapered off the earth began to cool,
            forming a thin crust on its surface. As the cooling continued, water

            vapor began to escape and condense in the earth's early atmosphere.
            Clouds formed and storms raged, raining more and more water down on
            the primitive earth, cooling the surface further until it was
            flooded with water, forming the seas.

            It was a "Revelation". And it took us until 1965 to figure out there
            was even a big bang.

            There were "seven YOM" of formation to our present earth. Often
            mis-interpetated as 24 hour days from English. YOM is a unspecified
            cycle of time with a beginning and an end, Ancient Rabbis interpeted
            it to mean "ages", recognizing this fact.

            Here are the SEVEN "YOM" According to modern science:

            http://universe.sonoma.edu/activities/bi...

            This is how modern science with the precision of NASA space-age
            technology writes the "week" of creation:

            .....AS WRITTEN BY THE PEN OF MODERN SCIECNE

            Big Bang................Saturday midnight
            First Atoms form........Saturday 12:01:00a.m.
            Stars and Galaxies form.Saturday 3:20:00a.m.
            Our Sun is born.........Wednesday 4:00:00p.m.
            Earth born..............Wednesday 8:30:00p.m.
            Moon formed.............Wednesday 9:40:00p.m.
            Earliest life on Earth..Thursday 5:30:00a.m.
            Multi-cellular life.....Friday 4:10:00p.m.
            Dinosaurs appear........Friday 9:50:00p.m.
            Dinosaurs die...........Friday 11:20:00p.m.
            Humans arise............Friday 11:59:35p.m.

Yet with all this, written in an age where the leading "cosmologies" declared the world came from an aligator in the Nile or Marduk was chopped in half and his corpse is the earth and sky, when people without this "revelation" were burning their children to idols and eating each other, this is all "reduced" to "myth" written by "ignorant goat herders"?

Lets return the idea with a parallel to all those rocket scientists at Houston's Johnson Space-Flight Center, who are really nothing more than "stupid cow-boys" ?

Who think in their ignorance that all life came from ....? [nothing?]

Because of  ....[nothing?]

How stupid is that?

            Stupid Cowboys.

THEY HEAR AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND

Modern Academia consistently interpet the words of both of these men out of context, perhaps on purpose, perhaps not.  But as with any writer or thinker context helps to define what is meant and without it, not much will reflect the intent of any singular comment or discussion.  The context especially for Baruch Spinoza and to a lesser but still significant by way of Spinoza for Einstien is a cognitive paradigm we call Tehudah Reformed Karaite Judaism, without which much of what is represented about them is nothing more than mindless babel.

Einstein went through a continuing pilgrimage throughout his life so comments from oone phase can be found to be at odds with another but in his own mind all of these thoughts were progressions of logic like planks of a bridge which when put together lead one to the other side.

Comments toward the end of Einstein's life were not the same as the comments at the height of his career, yet they were not altogether disconnected either.  And without understanding the basic Judaic concept of Baruch Spinoza there is not much sense you will make of what Einstein said along his way.

Spinoza, far from attempting to create some godless rationalistic world of deterministic pantheism as is often presented by people of such said persuasions themselves, ...was actually attempting to grasp the true meaning of the Biblical texts with a eye toward translating them into the modern intellectual vernacular of western Europe in the 17th century.

            SPINOZA-

            QUOTE: In a letter to Henry Oldenburg, the secretary of the Royal
            Society, Spinoza declared, "I do not think it necessary for
            salvation to know Christ according to the flesh: but with the
            Eternal Son of God, that is the Eternal Wisdom of God, which had
            manifested itself in all things, and especially in the human mind,
            and above all in Christ Jesus, the case is far otherwise." 27 He
            himself, he claimed, "paid homage to the Books of the Bible, rather
            than to the Word of God." 28 Spinoza read the New Testament
            Scriptures as well as the Old Testament Scriptures, e.g. St John's
            Gospel and the Epistle to the Hebrews, in a Hebraic way. He
            complained to Henry Oldenburg: "You think that the texts in John's
            Gospel and in Hebrews are inconsistent with what I advance, because
            you measure oriental phrases by the standards of European speech;
            though John wrote his Gospel in Greek, he wrote it as a Hebrew." 29

            NOTE - THE UNITY BEWEEN "NATURAL AND SUPERNATURAL"

            QUOTE: As a Jew himself Einstein naturally resonated with Spinoza,
            the greatest of all modern Jewish philosophers, for they shared in
            the traditional unitary concept of man as body of his soul and soul
            of his body. Although there was much in Spinoza's philosophy which
            Einstein could not accept, what did appeal to him was Spinoza's
            rejection of Cartesian and other forms of dualism, and his unitary
            conception of the universe with its inherent rational harmony. That
            was both a help and a problem for Einstein. It fuelled his great
            drive toward unified field-theory, and his rejection of a dualism
            between time and space, wave and particle, relativity theory and
            quantum theory, but Spinoza's logico-mathematical and hard causalist
            uniformity gave rise to an absolute rigid determinism which
            conflicted with Einstein's realist and dynamic understanding of the
            openness of the universe, in his rejection of the closed Euclidean
            system of the world. - www.ctinquiry.org

            QUOTE: What did Einstein mean, then, when he referred to God as
            "cosmic intelligence", "the grandeur of reason incarnate in
            existence", to which he not infrequently referred in a Talmudic
            expression as "the Old One"? He was not always consistent so that it
            is not easy to grasp precisely what he meant. But it seems clear
            that he conceived of God as the ultimate spiritual ground of all
            rational order which transcends what the scientist works with as
            natural laws–a point to which we shall return later–but unlike the
            Jewish-Christian religion he did not think of that in what he called
            a "personal" or "anthropomorphic" way, that is, as a God conceived
            in man's image, but in a "superpersonal" (ausserpersönlichen) way
            freed from the fetters of the "only personal" (Nur-Persönlichen), or
            people's selfish desires.

            QUOTE: Einstein was often asked, "Do you believe in God?", to which
            he sometimes replied "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals
            himself in the harmony of all being". 24 "By God", Spinoza wrote at
            the very beginning of his Ethica, "I mean a being absolutely
            infinite-that is, a substance consisting in infinite attributes, of
            which each expresses eternal and infinite essentiality". Proposition
            XV of the Ethica stated: "Whatever is, is in God, and without God
            nothing can be, or be conceived." 25

            QUOTE: I can't answer with a simple yes or no. I'm not an atheist
            and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the
            position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books
            in many different languages. The child knows someone must have
            written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects
            a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know
            what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most
            intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvellously
            arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these
            laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves
            the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but
            admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is
            the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not
            two separate things. 26

            QUOTE: ...neither the rule of human nor the rule of divine will
            exist as an independent cause of natural events.

            PANTHEISM.

            QUOTE: The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is
            the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of
            religion as well as all serious endeavour in art and science. He who
            never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least
            blind. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there
            is something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and
            sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection,
            this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious. To me it
            suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly to grasp
            with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that is
            there. 5

            The Saturday Evening Post, 1929:

            "To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?"
            "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the
            Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of
            the Nazarene."

            "Have you read Emil Ludwig's book on Jesus?"

            "Emil Ludwig's Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen
            of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity
            with a bon mot."

            "You accept the historical Jesus?"

            "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the
            actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No
            myth is filled with such life." 7

            QUOTE: Science can only be created by those who are thoroughly
            imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This
            source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To
            this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the
            regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is,
            comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist
            without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an
            image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is
            blind. 17

            QUOTE: Count Kessler once said to him, "Professor! I hear that you
            are deeply religious." Calmly and with great dignity, Einstein
            replied, "Yes, you can call it that. Try and penetrate with our
            limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind
            all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle,
            intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond
            anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am,
            in point of fact, religious." 18

            QUOTE: My religion consists of a humble admiration of the
            illimitable superior Spirit who reveals himself in the slight
            details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. The
            deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning
            Power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my
            idea of God. 20

            QUOTE: You will hardly find one among the profounder sort of
            scientific minds without a peculiar religious feeling of his own . .
            . .His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at
            the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such
            superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and
            acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection. 21

A GOD THAT DOES NOT REWARD AND PUNISH 

While at the same time he did embrace the Buddhistic concept of karma, which is not really that much different than what Spinoza was saying about the real nature of what the prophets described as the "Judgement of God".  The point being that rather than catastrophic events being a personal response from a god who sits on a throne in the sky and decides he is personally mad about something, and then hurls a lightening bolt, much of what happens comes from a spiritual equilibriatium in the universe itself.  People bring about their own consequences for what they do, sometimes fortunate, sometimes unfortunate, in much the same way they relate to the laws of nature itself.  Atheists eager to enlist Einstein in their cause miss the operative opening two words of the statement ..."A GOD".  There is a "mystery" subtely recorded in the Tanak that Adama was the "image" of G-d.  The "reflection".  When you look into heaven with an angry face and shake your fist, that is what you see looking back.  Is this a "personal decision"? Or a law of the "nature of G-d"?  Spinoza and Einstein said it was the latter. Unkown to many religiously minded, the previous traditional explanations are much less scriptural and much more based on the classic Greco-Roman caracitures of Zeus !!!

EINSTEIN DID NOT BELIEVE IN A PERSONAL GOD

Neither did Moshe. Numbers 23:19 - G-d is not a man.  Meaning not a "person".  Something much greater than a "person" that we relate to as a "person" in a child-like primitive faith to appropriate and experience, but even in the writngs of the Tehudah, it is written that G-d is not to thought of in like manner as human nature, for he "rains on the just and the unjust alike" and is "no respector of persons".  He is not PERSONAL.  And when the laws of the universe bring about a "consequence" for a certain action or behavior, G-d is not really personally punishing you, you are punishing yourself!  G-d's nature is unchanged and unmoved by your behavior.  You simply do not understand how the mirror works.

EINSTEIN CALLED THE BIBLE CHILDISH AND IMMATURE

This is probably one of the most quoted citations on the internet you will find about Einstein, despite the volumes of other things he also said that put his comment in perspective.  He is right of course, the Bible is childish and immature.  So are people. So it would make sense to give them what they can understand.

As far as this being the definitive clarifier of all that Einstein thought, it should also be remembered that he said the SAME THING ABOUT SCIENCE!  He obviously still studied and taught it.

What Einstein was attempting to communicate zooms right past the gadflies, and if I venture to tell them here, I'm sure they would still not understand. But for those who can understand, it was all about the gift of intuition to hummaity and how much more is possible, compared to what actually is. The reason we do not progress is because we have belief systems that make it a sin or a heresy or an offense against scientific orthodoxy to do so.

 AN EXAMPLE OF THE CHILDISH AND IMMATURE MISSING THE POINT

"If one purges the Judaism of the Prophets and Christianity as Jesus Christ taught it, of all subsequent additions, especially those of the priests, one is left with a teaching which is capable of curing all the social ills of humanity."

TEHUDAH REFORMED KARAITE JUDAISM

REAL ATHEISM NO LONGER EXISTS

That comes as a surprise ot many Atheists of course, but it is actually historically true.  Truth is often stranger than fiction and many of the labels that have begun as one thing have morphed themselves into things which were originally their exact opposite.  This has occured in world religion more times than can be counted, and it should come as no surprise the same has occured in certain branches of philsophy and even politics.

Originally, Atheism was the belief that only that which existed as percieved by the natural senses was real.  Everything else was simply ignorance, superstition and primitive thinking.  The word "Supernatural" is a favorite pinata to bash in these debates. You cannot "prove" the Supernatural.  There is no scientific evidence for the Supernatural, therefor it does not exist.  God is supernatural therefore God does not exist.  A beautiflly simple logical syllogism that reanders most processed and packaged theists making excuses, in a state of denial and taking stabbs at discrediting the entire body of modern science.  No wonder it is such a popular parlor trick!  Unfortunately, that is primarily all that it is,  In fact, far from being defensive about the Supernatural, it is the Atheist that has the greatest contradiction with reality, especially modern scientific reality.

The reason the Atheist is able to play this game and always win, is simply because he has moved the goal post to his side.  And one of the reasons he goes on the attack over this term, is because it is precisely this term that ends the entire concept of Atheism, permenantly, in the modern mind if he does not.  The problem? The Atheist always gets to arbitrarily define the term, and it is always defined inn the way that makes sure he comes out the winner,,, rather than use a dictionary.

Why does the dictionary spell defeat for an Atheist using this term?  Because when you look up the definition of the term and it's etymology, you will discover an amazing fact that the Atheist always fails to mention.

su·per·nat·u·ral 

ATHEISM AND A REFORMED KARAIM EXPLANATION OF G-D

The subject of G-d's existence is one that modern hummanity often makes a personal pilgrimage through shifting from one nuanced position to another throughout life until one finds a personal explanation that seems consistent with one's general observations, or inevitable religious indoctrination, if religious.

But the Scriptures have a much simpler definition of G-d than ever fearlessly admitted by rabbis, theologians, clerics and religious philosphers.  It can be reduced in the following axioms:

The G-d Of The Scriptures

(1) G-d makes it rain

(2) G-d goes in and through all things

(3) G-d created the world

That is so simple it is child-like.  Very easy to understand.  These three explanations which occur repeatedly through all monotheistic texts and are in virtual agreement.  But if one looks at these truths with open modern eyes, rather relgiously indoctrinated ones, one will see something rather amazing:

(1) God makes it rain  = Gravity

(2) G-d goes in an through all things = Electro-magnetism

(3) G-d created the world = Force (both weak and strong)

Now, we have the proven existence of G-d. 

These are fully known now as the fundemental forces of the universe,  They are fully scientifically proven realites, that govern everything in the Universe and as such by definition, God.  We also know theoretically that when  the final phase of physics is completed in a Unified Field theory ot Theory of Everything, it will also be ONE.

Of course, not the one of classical Latin theology or Rabbinical Orhtodoxy, but that is part of the problem.  That one, doesn't exist. This one does.  This was Spinoza's explanation of G-d, but unlike the modern teachers of Spinoza tell you in the University, it did not come from some edge of the hummanistic intellectual universe, it simply came from the scriptures, minus a few midrashes.

Oh. Almost forgot. Yes, there is is this issue of conscousness,  Atheists do like to point that out.  Well it's really not as big a deal as you might think. Carl Jung met with Einstein and introduced the concept of the "Collective Unconscious Mind", which has become the experimental basis for all paranormal psychology, from OOBEs to NDEs (which do in fact occur)

Then of course comes this moralizing about G-d. How could G-d kill people in a flood? He's a feindish monster if he did that! Really? Well what if nature did it? Does that make nature a feindish monster? The answer is always a rqtional: "Of course not".  And there's the crack in the argument. We know there are going to be volcanos, there are going to be floods, there are going to earthquakes, etc.  In fact, if the earth did not do some of these things it would malfunction as a planet.  Now, the prophet percieved future events and translated that information thorugh personfication lingustics.  In other words, a prophet would not simply say, I had a vision and saw a flood, He would say "G-d" gave me a vision of a terrible judgement coming, and he said all the rightoeous need to evacuate and head for the hills.  This is literally no any different than if you yell at somone in the road to get out of the way or they will get hit by a car.  Oh, the terrible car! How could a car do such a thing!  The car must be very evil to want to go around running over little children and hitting people!  Really ? You would blame the car?  And not the driver or the person in the road who had a choice to make?  The baisc underlying assumption that G-d (if he would nice) could spend his day re-arranging the reality of the universe for a lazy selfish person so full of hate they refuse to even listen to their own survival instincts like a common monkey with a bannana, or a bird,

If you are really the evolutionist you claim, you would see why nature would need to eliminate such a defective species without apologies, not even faithful enough to it's own survival, much loess anyone elses,  to obey it's own common instinct?

You see? This is a cultural misunderstanding of personfication lingustics, Perhaps an intentional one,  But that is what it is. Nothing more. If you fail to condemn and demonize nature for the same exact thing, then your argument is invalid, becuase you assume that whatever excuses nature from moral responsiblity for what it does, does not also excuse G-d, when in fact it is the "nature of G-d" we are discussing. Pun intended.  It is "G-d's nature" to have a functioning earth complete with volcanos and floods.  This is simply the "nature of G-d".  It is also THE SPEAKING OF GOD (i.e., intuition) that can tell you to GET OUT OF THE WAY.  And it is the lack of faith in what G-d says to you (intuition), that causes you to remain and get punished.  Now if G-d is speaking. but you are not "listening", whose fault is that?  And if G-d is telling you to get out of the way, and you prefer to ignore the instruction and suffer the consequence? Whose fault is that? G-d's?  ///Because you refuse to get off your own fat lazy behind and learn to pray and hear his voice? (metaphorically speaking concerning personfication lingustics in the process of intuition)

The main complaint from Athiests is that this makes you no different than an Atheist.  No.. actually I say it makes the Atheist no different than a theist. Which in fact, is what it really does.  And then of coure comes the screams about "pan-theism".  Well, the writers of the Bible never heard of the term. It was invented long after that were dead and gone.  It's not their fault some philosopher in the 17th century decided to label this idea as "Pan-theism" when they probably should have been labeling collooqeual Theism "Neo-Platonism" instead!

If one wishes to claim the monotheistic G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob does not exist , then you are required to use the Bible's definition to prove it, not some Neo-Platonic defintion of G-d invented by Thomas Aquinas which defines him outside the realm of existence to start with. (In other words as "non-existent")  OF COURSE that G-d would not exist, it's been defined outside the sphere of existence to begin with, so existence is not an atrribute it actually has,  But if you accpet the childish scriptural defintion, then you will realize how stupid this debate is. Of course gravity exists! What fool would say in their heart their is no gravity?  And maybe that was originally what was understood.

Richard Dawkins says this is the only God that is not a delusion.  Not that it matters, but then he claims this is "A"Theism, meaning "no God". That statement, of course, contradicts itself and is logically impossible.  If this is a God which is not a delusion, then Atheism is no more, no matter how you define it.  God is a title.  A title which can be extended to anything in a debate about the existence of any God of any sort.  That obviously includes the theoretically unified fundemental forces of the universe + collectice unconscous mind. Case closed. Class dismissed.  And if that bothers you and you are an Atheist, don't worry, You can keep right on believing in Atheism anyway, religious people do it all the time.

WHO IS 666?

 In our tradition, people are surprised to hear that we believe 666 was 666.  Unfortunately most people have never heard of the man who was actually named 666.  Not much is required to "interpet" 666 as 666, you simply count it 1,2,3, as instructed, when you do not mind accepting the man whose name was actually 666 but for many Christian denominations, this is an historical requirement that is simply too costly to ecclesastical tradition and speculative futuruism, so it is rejected, if even known at all.

However there are many reasons from an historical Jewish perspective these sources will not suffice, let alone the minor detail of it's literal fuflillment in history.  To understand why 666 is rejected as 666, will require a bit of historical background.  First, let's examine the Jewish concept in Antiquity.

One must assume that a name that would be so specific to actually be listed in the Ha Galah (Revelation) by name verbatim would recieve quite a bit of attention from prophecy gurus in the Christian community.  But as you will see for yourself if you do an internet search on the topic, such will not be the case.  And this is one of the reasons that many Christians have been becoming increasingly interested in reformed karaite faith.  666 is a politically charged topic obviously because if you believe it is a future person, this will most often fall on the head of Judaism or a Secular European King or President or some variety of Muslim leader.

In Jewish tradition, Armilus was always identified from the beginning as a Roman.  This concept is reflected even in the New Testament (or Tehudah) because the people who wrote the New Testament writings were Jewish.  Their concept of the anti-christ is found echoed in these early 1st century writings long before the Christian Church had come into being.

ARMILUS THE REAL ANTICHRIST

JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

Antichrist was also called Armilus, a Jewish rendering of Romulus; thus, in Pseudo-Methodius, "Romulus qui est Armilus" (compare W. Bousset, "Antichrist," pp. 33, 67).

Owing to the identification of Rome's angel with Samael [Prince Of Satan], chief of the evil spirits, Armilus in the course of time was identified with ROMULUS {Founder Of Rome} (see Bousset's "Antichrist," pp. 66, 67). The name given to Armainyush in other Jewish eschatologies was Belial (Beliar, II Cor. vi. 14; Sibylline Books, ii. 6, 15, iii. 63; Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Dan. v.), the same as "spirit of hell" (see Ps. xviii. 5 and Bäthgen's Comm.), hence the "son of perdition" (II Thess. ii. 3) and the "man of sin," that is, rasha', "the Wicked" (Isa. xi. 4). Thus the Serpent is spoken of as Harasha', "the Wicked One," in Gen. R. xx., Bek. 8a (compare Targ. Yer. Gen. iii. 13); and Rome as the wicked kingdom, Malkut ha-resha'ah (Gen. R. lxxvi.).

By : Erik Stave Kaufmann Kohler

"Satan" in the Bible.

...in the Jewish view, great tribula?ions were to precede the Messiah's coming. The Jews would seem to have expected an evil Messiah, an Anti-christ; consequently, the teaching of THE NEW TESTAMENT in this direction DOES NOT IMPLY ANYTHING NEW. This Antichrist is, moreover, to be, on the hypotheses of several writers, nothing else than AN INCARNATION OF THE DEVIL himself. In consequence of the hatred of the Jews toward Rome, even after it had accepted Christianity, this Antichrist was also called ARMILUS, A JEWISH RENDERING OF ROMULUS; thus, in Pseudo-Methodius, "Romulus qui est Armilus" (compare W. Bousset, "Antichrist," pp. 33, 67).

Bibliography: E. Stave, Einfluss d. Parsismus auf das Judentum, 1898;
W. Bousset, Der Antichrist, 1895;
Sieffert, Antichrist, in A. Hauck's Realencyklopädic für Protest-antische Theologie u. Kirche;
J. Darmesteter, Ormuzd et Ahriman, Paris, 1877;
Jackson, Dualism, in Geiger and Kuhne, Grundriss der Iranischen Philologie, ii. 626-631.E. S.

—In Rabbinical Literature:

According to Targ. Yer. Deut. xxxiv. 3, Moses was before his end shown the history of Israel's tribulations, ending with the punishment of Armalgus the Wicked (), the war of Gog and Magog, and the appearance of Michael as his triumphant combatant. Compare with this the battle of Gabriel with the Leviathan at the end of days (B.B. 74b), AND THE ANTICHRIST stories in Jellinek, "B. H." v. 127; "Assumptio Mosis," 10. Thus the Messianic prophecy (in the Targum to Isa. xi. 4), "With the breath of his lips [mouth] will he slay the wicked," refers to Armalgus—as the manuscripts have it, or as our printed edition has it, Armilus, which is the same as Armalyus = Armainyus. Bacher ("Targum zu den Propheten," in "Z. D. M. G." 1873, p. 31, note) has shown that all the manuscripts to Isa. xi. 4 have the ?, either or or . He has also called especial attention to the tyrant Armalinus, the mythical builder of Memphis in Arabian folk-lore, who, according ...

RABBINICAL LITERATURE

Rabbinical literature is actually the source of much of the Chiliast concept of the end of the world Antichrist that physically fights against  the messiah.  What Chiliast leaders rarely explain to their following is that most of these concepts belong not to the New Testament, but to the Talmud!!!  The New Testament literature proposes a very different view of what the Antichrist would be.  While they do agree it will be a Roman, the similiarities end there.  Thus why so much of the speculative images from Chiliasm so popular in American media, are actually specifically absent in the Tehudah (New Testament).  They were never the actrual source for these images and concepts to begin with.  Roman Catholic theology, examiining ways to defend the Papacy from charges of being the Antichrist pulled much of this material from the Jewish Talmud and Jewish traditionalism to create an interpetation of antichrist which would insultate the Papacy from suspicion.  Protestants who either adopted these teachings or brought them into the Protestant movement from Catholicism were never accepted as being scripturally grounded until the 1900s among American evangelicals. 

The claim that Israel being restored proved the Chiliast interpetation is not actually true as a number of historical Protestant theologies had also predicted a restoration of the nation of Israel and one of the most well known examples of this is Isaac Newton.  Isaac Newton, and ardent student of Biblical prophecy corrected predicted this eventual future event, and also recognized that Israel was actually the "elect", Jewish monotheism was never abrogated by New Testament theology and that ...yes... the Pope was in fact the Antichrist.

All of which are true.  Yet it has only been his identification of the restoration of the nation of Israel that has garnered any attention from Chiliasts, conveniently leaving out the other points which made this realization only logical.

The ecumenical movement sponsored by the marriage of religion and conservtive politics, has made the public declarations that the Pope is the antichrist, almost a form of public obscenity, or at least the equation is usually attempted.  However, there are still a number of Protestant movements, that while do prefer conservative politics, are not so happy with the idea that one cannot even publically utter the core tenent of historic faith that most of their movements were actually founded upon, as "Protest-ants".

The most recent public offering from Rome has been typically politically engineered to offend the least amount of people possible, preferring to deflect the title not to a future possible Jew, but to an ancient bad guy everyone hated anyway... Nero.  But as pleasant as this teaching might be to the ears of the public masses, it has virtually no real basis in scripture, Tanak or Tehudah, alike.

 NERONIAN ARGUMENTS ARE NOT VALID

(1) Rev 4:1 After these things I saw, and lo, a door opened in the heaven, and the first voice that I heard is as of a trumpet speaking with me, saying, `Come up hither, and I will shew thee what it behoveth to COME TO PASS AFTER THESE THINGS;' [Even Rev. 1-3 contained prophetic information] Some of which would not "occur" for centuries. - Definitely not contemporaneous to the time of writing.

(2) Rev 5:11, Rev 7:9- clearly place the time frame for these events when there would be millions & millions [myriads of myriads] of people in the future who would both know about and embrace the faith of this then relatively small relgious cult out of Israel.[when many of these events would occur] - Definitely not contemporaneous to the time of writing.

(3) Rev 7:14 - A great persecution would be "completed" before the beginning of the following events in the next chapters. (hoi erchomenoi ek tēs thlipseōs tēs megalēs). Present middle participle with the idea of continued repetition. - Persecution was underway, but not completed, for centuries.

(4) Rev 6:1 - 6:6 - 4 HORSES of the Apocalypse must occur prior to the "Revlation of the man of sin". The prophetic template given in Rev 4:2, is astronomical, in keeping with Jewish usage,(Gen 1:14,Dan 6:27,Luk 21:11,Act 2:19). The 4 Horses are located at "the four corners of heaven". (Saturn in Saggitarius [the bowman], Mars in Centaur [the swordsmen], Eclipse in Libra [the scales], Neptune/Pluto in Pegasus [Pale]). These indicate clearly "atronomical ages" were intended to be understood.

The MENORAH (referenced in Rev 1:12,13,20) make it rather unmistakable to a knowledgable Jew. The MENORAH was always associated with the 7 planets.

(5) Rev 4:4 - 24 Hours, Rev 4:6 - The 4 Quads, Rev 4:7 - the 4 Corners of the Zodiac, clearly indicated by the description of the "creatures" [Leo, Taurus, Aquarius, Scorpio*] *Scorpio was originally an Eagle in the Jewish system. Rev 4:8 - The 12 "wings" of the covenant, & later, referenced as the 12 tribes. Rev 4:10 - Indicating the end of the time awaited, wrongly translated by Gentiles as "end of time".

(6) Rev 5:1 - Bible prophesied. Written "within" and on the "Backside" (ὄπισθεν) indicating reverse scripting. Left to right & right ot left. [Greek & Hebrew] - Definitely not contemporary.

(7) Rev 5:1-2, "..sealed with seven seals." Known as the 7 seals of Destiny in Judaism, referred to occasionally at Rosh Hashanah [The Jewish New Year], L'shanah tovah tikatev v'taihatem" (or to women, "L'shanah tovah tikatevi v'taihatemi"), which means "May you be inscribed and sealed for a good year." - Clearly placing the following explanations in the Jewish context of the beginning of a NEW "AGE".

"Age" is a long time.

IDENTITY CONFIRMED BY ASTRONOMY

 There are literally hundreds of things in Revelation that make it's interpetation rather unmistakable in a knowledgable open karaite believing Jewish mind.  The indication of Sixtus III is verified by the template given, the coronation of Sixtus III which occured in July 432 AD. and should be accompanied by THE RISING of the BEAST IN THE SEA.

Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

On July 31, 432 AD, the precise date of Sixth III's Papal coronation, CETUS, (The Sea Beast) was directly on the Eastern Horizon, as was predicted.

THREE UNKOSHER FROG SPIRITS GO OUT TO THE KINGS OF THE EARTH

["UNKOSHER" means "unclean", but also indicate the NON-JEWISH nature/origin of this "doctrine"]Rev 16:13 And I saw three UNKOSHER spirits like FROGS [Egypt] come out of the mouth of the dragon {the Emperor}, and out of the mouth of the beast [Roman papacy] , and out of the mouth of the false prophet {Abba Pachomius} [Egypt]

(1) A non-Jewish doctrine of 3 spirits, originating from Egypt associated with Frogs

a. The Trinity is Non-Jewish as it violates the Shema

b. It is composed of 3 "spirits"

c. The doctrine originated in the GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTIANS [read as "scripture" by Rome's formative theological architects]

d. OGDOADS are "forces" of "creation"

e. They are sumbolized in Egypt as FROGS.

THE GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTAINS

[Found Among The Nag Hammadi Texts At Saint Pachomius Monastary] The Gospel of the Egyptians is no longer extant but was mentioned by Hippolytus and Epiphanius. Most of our citations come from Clement of Alexandria, and there is also a reference in the Excerpts of Theodotus. The gospel was apparently used in Egypt in the second and third centuries.

“Despite the paucity of the extant fragments, the theology of the Gospel of the Egyptians is clear: each fragment endorses sexual asceticism as the means of breaking the lethal cycle of birth and of overcoming the alleged sinful differences between male and female, enabling all persons to return to what was understood to be their primordial and androgynous state.” – Ron Cameron, Introduction, The Other Gospels

FROM THE "GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTIANS"

THREE POWERS came forth from him: they are the Father, the Mother and the Son,from the living silence, what came forth from the incorruptable Father. These came forth from the silence of the UNKOWN FATHER. From that place the three powers came forth, THE THREE OGDOADS that the Father brings forth, in silence with his providence, from his bosom, i.e., the Father, the Mother, and the Son. - p. 209,

THE NAG HAMMADI LIBRARY

SIXTUS III - In the THEODOSIUS II CODEX made the doctrine of the TRINITY Roman Law, enforcable by the State. [Beginning the persecution of Jewish believers]

THE EIGHTH KING

Sixtus III was the 8TH Pope after the FIRST formal OFFICAL AUTHORITATIVE establishment of THE ROMAN PAPACY-

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA-
Ursinus, who had been a rival to Damasus (366), was alive and still maintained his claims. However, the EMPEROR VALENTINIAN III, in a letter to Pinian (February 23, 385), GAVE HIS CONSENT to the election that had been held and praised the piety of the newly-elected bishop;

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
Pope Siricius - ...SIRICUIS answered this letter on FEBRUARY 10, 385, and gave the decisions as to the matters in question, exercising with FULL CONSCIOUSNESS OF HIS SUPREME POWER OF AUTHORITY in the Church (Coustant, "Epist. Rom. Pont.", 625 sq.). This letter of Siricius is of SPECIAL IMPORTANCE because it is THE OLDEST COMPLETELY PRESERVED PAPAL DECRETAL (edict for the authoritative decision of questions of discipline and canon law).

FULL PAPAL AUTHORITY BEGAN WITH POPE SIRICIUS 385 AD

1. Siricius (384-99)
2. Anastasius I (399-401)
3. Innocent I (401-17)
4. Zozimus (417-18)
5. Boniface I (418-22)
6. Eulalius ((418-19)
7. Celestine I (422-32)
----------------------------
8. Sixtus III (432-40) <=== 8TH 

PROPHECY: He will be preceded by seven kings. He will be the eighth. Revelation 17:10-11.

1. Siricius (384-99)
2. Anastasius I (399-401)
3. Innocent I (401-17)
4. Zozimus (417-18)
5. Boniface I (418-22)
6. Eulalius ((418-19)
7. Celestine I (422-32)
----------------------------
8. Sixtus III (432-40) <=== 8TH

THREE AND A HALF YEARS CONFIRMING THE COVENANT 

It is commonly claimed in Chiliast escatology schemes that three and one-half years after the confirming of the covenant, the Antichrist will sit in the rebuilt Jewish temple claiming to be God. Daniel 9:27, 11:31, 12:11, Matthew 24:15-21, II Thessalonians 2:3-4.

However, there is nothing in the text about a JEWISH temple in the prophecy concerning Antichrist (2 Ths 2)

There is no parallel to "ex cathedra" in a JEWISH TEMPLE.  So barring a completely radical redefinition of Judaism as a religion, this would not be "fulfilled" in or a through any kind of "Jewish Temple", and if it actually ever were, such a Temple would not actually be "Jewish" by definition.  The Jewish Temple was sacerdotal only and permitted no one into the Holy of Holies but the high priest of the nation.

However, the odd fact is that after approximately 3 & 1/2 years (435 AD) , an agreement to honor the respective traditions of Judaism among people now identified historically as "heretics" or "Judaizers" (the Jewish community responsible for writing the New Testament documents, which inlcuded blood relatives of Christ) was abrogated in the compilation of the Theodosian II Codex.  A punitive oppressive legal code that criminalized the observance of any religion other than state-sponsored Roman Catholicism in the empire, and only under certain restrictive conditions, RABBINICAL JUDAISM, as a crime against the state.  Thus Jewish communities with traditons outside the Papal approved version of Rabbinical Judiasm were targeted for extermination.

At this same approximate time-frame Sixth III presided over the first official "Christmas" in Rome held at the shrine of the wolf.  It was attended with the innovation of Idols made in the likeness of Jesus, Joseph and Mary, which of course are strictly forbidden under Jewish law.  The Jesus Icon created by Sixth III was conspiciously absent any hint of Jewish flesh, much less Jewish religion.  It was literally a re-make of the statuary honoring the sun-god of the Romans, Apollo (a/k/a Sol Invictus), the unconquered Sun. Jewish family members of Christ, keeping the New Testament tradition of reformed karaism, were subsequently exterminated (at least as far as Rome was concerned).

Approximately, 3 & 1/2 years later, Sixtus (Sixth) III, was "struck-down" by a sudden and unexpected death with no appearant cause.  This "mystery death" has been "doctored" by Roman historians, but occassionally you will find an undoctored reference to his "unexpected" and "inexplicable" demise.  This is precisely the pattern chiliasts claim will occur with their own version of antichrist eschatology! (despite the fact no such pattern is actually required strictly from the texts!)

THE TEN KINGDOMS

He will arise among a union of ten kings. Daniel 7:24, Revelation 17:12-13

1. Alamannis [Now Germany]
2. Visigotha [Now Spain]
3. Franks [Now France]
4. Suevea [Now Portugal]
5. Burgundia [Now Switzerland]
6. Saxony [Now England]
7. Lombardia [Now Italy]
8. Ostrogoth
9. Vandal
10. Herulis

His ten nation union would merge into a world government which he would dominate. Daniel 7:1-8, Revelation 13:1-3.

It was under the Pontificate of Pope Sixtus (Sixth) III that the confession that Rome was literally the head of all "Churches" in the world became official doctrine as it was inscribed into the stones of his cathedral building and written into Roman legal code in the Theodosian Codex.

WOULD EXALT HIMSELF OVER EVERYTHING CALLED GOD

2Th 2:3-4 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except ...that man of sin be revealed, ...who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped…  

The Bull Unam Sanctam... Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII reads as follows: "The Roman Pontiff JUDGES ALL MEN, but is JUDGED BY NO ONE. We declare, assert, define and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every human creature necessary for salvation that which was spoken of Christ 'thou has subdued all things under his feet' may well seem verified in me... I have the authority of the King of Kings. I AM ALL IN ALL and ABOVE ALL, so that GOD HIMSELF and I, the VICAR OF GOD, have but one consistory, and I am able to do ALL THAT GOD CAN DO."

"The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: 'I am the door of the sheep.' Into this fold of Jesus Christ, NO MAN MAY ENTER UNLESS he be LED BY THE SOVERIEGN PONTIFF; and only if they be UNITED TO HIM [The Pope] can men be saved, for THE ROMAN PONTIFF is the VICAR [Substitute] OF CHRIST and His personal representative on earth." (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

And GOD HIMSELF IS OBLIGED to abide by the judgment of his priest and either NOT TO PARDON OR TO PARDON, according AS THEY REFUSE to give absolution, provided the penitent is capable of it." -Liguori, «Duties and Dignities of the Priest», p.27

"the vicegerent upon earth, NOT A MERE MAN, but of a VERY GOD;" , the vicegerent of Christ, who is "VERY GOD AND VERY MAN." Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Devretales, col. 205

"Lord God the Pope" - Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4,