Chili

I always thought that Christ was born in the mind of man on the darkest day of his life which is best represented with midnight, midwinter, midlife for which the number 666 is symbolic. So now the mark of the rational animal man in who's mind the faculty of reason is temporary inactive (= beyond theology) is the gateway to heaven and this analogy is confirmed with an appropriate explication of Rev. 13 by the description of the first and second beast while yet the man's number is 666.

That Christ was born at Christmas follows as a direct result of the daily masses culminating in the Christ-mass in the same way as the [daily] forms culminate in Plato's Ultimate Form and as Aristotle's [daily] ousia's culminate in the Parousia. Further away from home it is where the daily rounds of Samasara culminate in the final round of Samsara in the mind of the stream entrant who also will have some 'house-work' to do before his 'Easter' comes about.

In John there is no nativity but Christ (Nathanael) just falls out of the fig tree and Mark announces Christ as John the baptist who later is the son in "mother there is your son."

Perhaps it is wrong to insist that there was a baby born unless we had ours massacred by Herod (cf. Luke's Temptation in the desert parable and John's Cana event).

I certainly hold that Christmass is for Catholics only and never for Christians for whom he has already been in the sense that he comes only once in a life time. It would be fair enough to say that santa comes each year but that would be for children on Dec. 6 to serve as a foreshadow of Epiphany on January 6 later inlife.

In short, there is no room for baby Jesus anywhere to be found.

ApostateAbe

Born in the mind of man on the darkest day of his life which is best represented with midnight, midwinter, midlife for which the number 666 is symbolic? Do you think of all of these things yourself? Can you please explain why you believe the thought of Jesus was born on the darkest day of his life? Don't do it if you have to write a Bible. I would just like to get a rough idea of the way you think.

Chili

Oh, I look at the metaphysics only. I am not a mythicist or MJ proponent but just somebody with a mind of his own. In other words, I belong to no camp but am happy to find agreement with others, and for what it's worth, I learn a lot here.

Because the light of common day is an illusion which is made known in Gen.1 where evening followed each day except on the 7th day = where Sunday gained assent in Gen 2:1 for that reason. Note that Gen.2 is where Gen 1 is made manifest. As an aside in Catholic Europe Sunday is the seventh day of the week.

I believe I wrote that Christ was born and will now add that he was born in the mind of Joseph who later was called Jesus, or at least, his life as Jesuit- by-Nature in Galilea is described in the Gospels on account of his rebirth(Nazarite by nature in Judaism). Galilea then is also a state of mind but so is Israel and Rome.

Christmas is celebrated for 2 days because dayligth never came the first day as if the sun stopped and thus darkness prevailed. This is to be juxtaposed with Easter that is also celebrated for 2 days but always on a Sunday as if evening never came = following the creation parable of Gen.1 where, if only by inference, evening did not follow on the seventh day.

There is also the incident when Magdalene was at the tomb in the dark because daylight never came and never will come to Magdalene alone (you need my character identity for Magdalene to understand this).

ApostateAbe

Haha, I can tell that the mods love you, Chili. Toto gives you your own threads. At first I thought that maybe your bizarre comments were just imagined arbitrarily, but you do seem to have some sort of structured paradigm with logical reasoning built into it, though it remains alien to me. How do you work the connection to 666?

Chili

Hi, yes I feel very special here but that is only because I am 'untouchable'

I actually have a meaning for every number on our clock (don't laugh), with 0 belonging to Eve who is well balanced [as temple tramp] but with no mind of her own. The number 3 is for Adam who thinks he has one but is divided in his mind and not full circle in either one (as opposed to 8). The number 6 is for Mary as the second Eve and the number 9 is for Christ as the second Adam.

At the number 6 is a paradigm shift from our involutionary yang period to the evolutionary yin period and that is where the woman (we call her Mary) is the narrow gate of Purgatory (Galilee there now under Herod instead of Pilate to show that we also recognize this shift in our mythology). I suppose that some would call it born again etc. but a change (metanoia) must be evident to say the least.

I then look at midnigth, midwinter mass when our days are the shortest and our nights are the longest and add midlife as the 3rd six to make 666 the most welcome sign in our life as it represents the 'darkest night' on which Christ is born unto us. I later call it the onset of meno pauze in association with the word MENO wherein we "remain" as eternal beings from there on.

Then there is also Rev.13:18 where it is called the "number of man" as distinguished from the number of that "certain man" for which some ingenuity is needed to calculate it . . . and therefore is not 666.

I actually have a story to tell about each number on our clock which according to me gives a detailed description of what I would call Catholic salvation and lean on Zamjatin's use of these numbers in WE to justify it.

ApostateAbe

OK, it seems sort of numerological. Is there a reason by behind those numerical designations? A tradition maybe?

Chili

Yes I think so but not tradition except that we look at it often. More than anything is it "we look but do not see" until knowledge is ours prior to nature in a very Platonic way. Call it mystery if you like but it is based on gnosis for sure and that includes all of Gen 1, 2 and 3 (I never really got any further), and yes, Zamjatin was a Catholic but I am not sure if that has much to do with the shape of these numbers. It is just that I find agreement with his use of these numbers in presenting the role play of his characters.

ApostateAbe

Would you identify with the Pythagorean way of thinking? The Pythagoreans (and perhaps the Platonists) are criticized by modernists for valuing pure thought and reason without much regard to observation. At least that is what I gathered from watching Carl Sagan's Cosmos.

Chili

Not sure how to answer that because I do now know much about Pytogoean thougth and I know not much about Plato and even less about Aristotle but enought say that I like Plato. I like Spinoza, the Russian classics and the arts in general but with a definite slant towards the Romantics. And yes, I like allegory and metaphors.

ApostateAbe

The episode of Cosmos that I referred to was Episode 7: Backbone of Night. In it, Sagan creates in his viewers a strong contempt for Plato and especially for the Pythagorean "mystery cult" (founded by Pythagorus, traditionally credited for the theorem of a right triangle, a²+b²=c²). He claims that the Pythagoreans and Plato intellectually legitimized social prejudices, minimized the relevance of empirical observation to gain knowledge, and encouraged the monopolization of knowledge for the elite. The presentation is strongly slanted and unfair, but it may reflect the prejudices that many people in this forum may have against your way of thinking (we are all fans of Sagan). The Pythagoreans were numerological, and they and the Platonists built elaborate systems of belief from only logic and a few premises. Here is that episode:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...1445702433281#