Thank you for taking the time to actually look. Chapter II is very important actually because he shows how he interprets things. It is very methodical, he walks through a bunch of examples. Visions he attributes to nations because the Book of Daniel tells him to. It tells the reader that the first empire is the Babylonian Empire, by telling the king that he is the head of gold (Daniel 2:38). It also tells us about Persia and Greece (Daniel 8:20-21). Newton recognizes that all the visions are referring to the same sequence of empires. I don't think, after reading his work, it is arguable that he is wrong about the interpretations. The real argument comes with the date the Book of Daniel was written. I can understand if it is outside the realm of possibility to accept it may have been written prior to events. However, this is why I find more recent Biblical prophecy completion to be very interesting. If you just open-mindedly read into recent events, such as in 1948 Jews return to Israel, their plan to rebuild the Temple, the way of the world, many many examples of very legitimate explanations for how prophecy is being literally fulfilled, it is very interesting. Some other interesting facts: The Bible says the last empire will have a thousand thousands serve him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stand attending him (Daniel 7:10). There are approximately 1.2 billion Roman Catholics in the world, and approximately one million workers for the Roman Catholic Church. Daniel 7:23-27 talks about the fourth beast, and how it is replaced by another that is different from the former ones, and shall subdue three kings. Pope Stephen II did precisely this by being the first pope to crown a civil ruler in 754AD and then subsequently getting King Desiderius of the Lombards to submit to him as well as Emperor Constantine. Newton was trying to date the beginning of the Pope's supremacy. What is quite interesting to me is my theory of everything (see alternative theories forum, "Theory of everything", post #1, 78, 79), which is based in observational evidence, explains how all levels of the universe operate the same, simply at different rates due to orbital rate of revolution. My theory is based on Newton's work (gravity, laws of motion) entirely; mass is infinitely divisible (why would there be an elementary particle philosophically? I have evidence of this in my paper--specifically Firstenberg et al., Attractive Photons in a Quantum Non-linear Medium, Nature 502, 71-75 (2013) who show that photons HAVE MASS by causing it to interact with highly reactive particles in a near vacuum, which allows for the observation of photon mass, is one example of evidence), such that the universe is infinitely large AND infinitely small. The Milky Way I show in the other thread to orbit a center of mass (the Great Attractor), and this produces the all distant redshifted galaxies by gravitational lensing (light is trapped in a Figure-8 which represents precisely the magnetic field of the Great Attractor). This made me recognize the true genius of Newton because he was so, so RIGHT about the universe. At this point, my model was infinitely divisible mass+infinite volume+gravity=universe. Knowing this, gravity is shown to MANIPULATE the material world such that the universe is CREATED. Without gravity, nothing exists. Therefore, I felt this was proof positive of a "creator", not by any means an interactive God. But because I felt this way, I ventured into Newton's prophetic works with an open-mind. Newton was interested in the Philosopher's Stone. This is a result of alchemy, which I have come to believe is solely an attempt to manipulate the material world mentally, which is described very much in detail in the Kybalion, a hermetic teaching that was released (in all of their secrecy) in 1912. Notice the year, which was when we still were not sure what galaxies WERE. So, let me quote the Kybalion to you: "Then all particles of Matter are in circular movement, from corpuscle to suns. The planets revolve around suns, and many of them turn on their axes. The suns move around greater central points, and these are believed to move around still greater, and so on, ad infinitum. " In other words, my theory of the universe precisely is described in a hermetic teaching of 1912. In fact, galaxies are talked about with great confidence. This isn't to be taken lightly, we didn't know for certain that galaxies WERE galaxies in 1912, if they were wrong the entire text would have been discredited. However, they were oh so right. Only now are we discovering they were right about the "ad infinitum" part. "Suns spring into being, and then their height of power being reached, the process of retrogression begins, and after æons they become dead masses of matter, awaiting another impulse which starts again their inner energies into activity and a new solar life cycle is begun. And thus it is with all the worlds; they are born, grow and die; only to be reborn. " Again, precisely how an eternal universe that is constantly fluxing and creating anew operates. "As above, so below." The most important four words ever uttered. Let me give you a scientific example. All levels MUST CORRESPOND if I am correct. So, do they? Lets look at solar systems. Are they GALAXIES???? Well, what do we observe about galaxies? They comprise: 1) center of mass, 2) orbiting masses, 3) arm structures, and 4) galactic halo. Let's look at our solar system. 1) Center of mass: Sun. Easy enough... 2) Orbiting masses: planets, asteroid belt, Kuiper belt. Sounds like a disc structure to me... 3) Arm structures: Heliospheric current sheet. Google it, you will see how this immediately provides evidence for arm structures in the galactic shape. 4) Galactic halo: Oort cloud (at least in part). How about planets? 1) Center of mass: Earth. 2) Orbiting masses: Inner and outer Van Allen belts. Now, the other two are tougher to detect as we observe smaller and smaller. So, instead, I will compare Earth to the sun for further evidence. The sun observably has sunspots and flares etc that exist at the edge of the sun's photosphere. Does Earth have such structures? The airglow of the ionosphere represents the photosphere. Sprites and ELVES represent solar flares and sunspots! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_(lightning)#mediaviewer/File:Upperatmoslight1.jpg The ELVES form at the edge of the airglow of the ionosphere. The only difference is time dilation and relative sizes. Hermeticism is the means by which the Philosopher's Stone is obtained. Because they knew the structure of the universe so specifically in 1912, I am certain they were right across all facets of how the universe operates both physically and mentally. Why? Because it explains so much. By understanding the mental operation of the universe, we can obtain the Philosopher's Stone. By obtaining the Philosopher's Stone, we can perform deeds such as those in the Bible that are deemed impossible. For example, the simple act of living to the ages the Bible cites. This is due to a hermetic understanding of God. The Bible loves to talk about the worship of gold, silver, etc. and condemn it. This is because it is a worship of the MATERIAL world, which is the OPPOSITE direction necessary for understanding God because God is mental, infinitely large vibrations and material worship is of the infinitely small vibrations. All things come back to the seven principles of the Kybalion. I know I sound insane, but I do hope you take the time to think on this. Remember Occam's Razor; the Big Bang is illogical because it ADDS to science--expansion of space, dark energy, a finite lifespan of the universe. This CANNOT BE philosophically. The universe must be SIMPLE and ELEGANT. My theory shows it is precisely that: infinitely divisible mass being manipulated by gravity. This is why I find Newton's work so interesting; 1260 years ago just so happened to be the first known crowning of a civil ruler by a pope. That could have happened any other year, but it happened 1260 years ago--the period that Newton shows to be disclosed in the Bible between the rise to power of the Catholic Church and the year when the world knows it as the Antichrist, which there is evidence to support at this point.
Not true. (http://www.enlighteningscience.suss...e_and_religion/newton_on_science_and_religion) No need to discuss if Sir Isaac was right or wrong about God here. My point is the Aqueous Id is intellectually dishonest, or just doesn't remember what he claims to have read many times terribly well. That's his biased, selective memory at work again.
I'll leave it to others to refute your scientific theories, if they care to. Please explain to me what The Book of Daniel and Newton's interpretation of it has to do with your segue into physics. Have I missed something? Do you mean Newton is responsible for the Kybalion? Your phrase, 'a hermetic teaching that was released (in all of their secrecy) in 1912' makes no sense to me. Was it released or was it secret? Where did it come from, and how could they know what they claimed to know? Does it have something to do with Daniel? Also you write: 'The Bible loves to talk about the worship of gold, silver, etc. and condemn it.' That's primarily Jesus that does that, and I don't think The Bible generally approves of great, or excessive wealth, but I wouldn't go so far as to say what you have said. I think you're going to have a time defending your theories here. I can't say that I wholly accept them myself. Not my field of expertise. It's like they say in Cockney Star Trek, I've submitted above though. Around here we've got a lot of proper naughty moody geezers! And they'll want to mug you off in a real tear up!
Hermeticism is an extremely old philosophy that has been shrouded in secrecy, passed down from person to person, for many years. However, in 1912 the Kybalion was published which very specifically discusses their understanding of the universe. This goes against their policy of secrecy, is what I meant. It has to do with the Bible because the philosophical understandings of nature taught by Hermeticism leads us to understand how the literal interpretation of the Bible can be recognized; such as ages of those in the Bible, etc. The idea of the Philosopher's Stone is that someone with it can manipulate the material world mentally. The Philosopher's Stone is fundamentally the understanding of the universe that allows one to understand mental manipulation of the physical world. This relates to the Bible because Jesus, for example, was a HUMAN who UNDERSTOOD sufficiently that he was able to MANIPULATE the physical world through MENTAL manipulation. Water to wine, for example. I honestly am still reading through the Bible with what I know in mind, and if it is Jesus that says these things its because he understands hermeticism. Don't mind me, I've never been one for semantics. Jesus or the Bible, whoever teaches it specifically...it is in the Bible Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! This is why I was so horrible at biology, so much to memorize..... It's all about baby steps. Let me walk you through it. First and foremost, do you believe the Big Bang? PHILOSOPHICALLY speaking. First, ignore all scientific evidence which is shrouded in ASSUMPTIONS (specifically, the ASSUMPTION that cosmological redshift is the result of MOTION opposed to GRAVITY). Honestly, I just submitted my Theory of Everything to Science last night. It is just a matter of time before someone reads it and appreciates it as the true reality of the universe. The evidence is so overwhelming (to the philosophically sound mind).
You can walk all us through it, if you want. I'm just amazed that you composed such a lengthy answer to my last post so quickly. BB, invented by a bishop, who it appealed to for it's theologicalness, as far as I know is a theory, but one so widely accepted and evidenced that it is practically a given now, although it is always best that nothing is ever fully accepted. The Zen Buddhist say, with great faith must come Great Doubt (incidentally explaining Mother Theresa's 'dark nights of the soul') I do hope your not going to get into Newton being a Mason and all that. He was one wasn't he? Aqueous, can masons be gay?
As far as Newton's sexuality, Hermeticism teaches that to obtain rebirth one must remove the "torments" from their life. This includes sexual desire. I believe Newton was just so devout that he truly practiced this, period. He saw the parallel between Hermeticism and the "superhuman" powers of those in the Bible. I don't know what Masons believe with regard to hermeticism to answer that question, I prefer to just keep it to the minimum things I need to know to explain his views. But, I guess if Masons believed in hermeticism at their core, then he could be associated with that philosophy. As far as the Big Bang, it relies on assumptions. The EVIDENCE of the Big Bang is the observation of all distant redshifted galaxies. This, because it is in all directions, led us to say it is the result of Doppler shift i.e. motion away from us. This, then, led us to say the universe therefore began from a single point. This is WHY the Big Bang exists; because of the ASSUMPTION of Doppler shift causing cosmological redshift instead of gravity. Why was gravity dismissed, then? Simple. Gravity would logically produce an observation of half redshift and half blueshift. However, this assumes that light travels in straight lines. If you read through my evidence I present in posts #78 and 79 I mentioned in my last post, you will see there is PROOF POSITIVE of gravity causing our observed redshifts. How this results in all distant redshifted galaxies is because the photons from those galaxies operate exactly the same as the particles flowing through the sun that I talk about in post #1 with respect to electromagneticism. They flow through the Great Attractor in a Figure-8 pattern. How does this result in all distant redshifted galaxies? With each INWARD and OUTWARD motion, overall blueshift/redshift is approximately zero. However, with each ORBITAL motion (in the Figure-8 pattern), REDSHIFT IS PRODUCED that is not canceled by a blueshift motion. This means that redshift is a function of distance precisely as described by Hubble's Law (albeit vs. redshift opposed to recessional velocity which includes the assumption of redshift being caused by motion), using gravity alone to explain how this is so. Dark Energy is because as the particle is redshifted, it is literally slowed down (as gravity does), simply we cannot OBSERVE the velocity difference because we are FALLIBLE OBSERVERS. With each revolution through the Figure-8 pattern, it therefore cannot go radially as far as the previous revolution. Therefore, the rate of redshift increases with distance (because gravity is an inverse of r^2), resulting in the observation of the increasing rate of redshift per distance which led to the introduction of Dark Energy. Again, we only need gravity to understand this observation.
Your Ignorance is showing again. The redshift we observe from distant galaxies is classified and contains all three in most situations...Doppler, Gravitational, and Cosmological. The first two only play a small part though, but are discernable. The rest of your post is just your own personal manufactured take on the situation, and in part a jumble of scientific words and personal assumptions. If it was anything else, or if you had any support or evidence to support your nonsense, you wouldn't be here. As an evangelistic God botherer, you would be getting your ground breaking stuff peer reviewed to gain fame and fortune and the favor of whatever mythical deity it is you favor.
Do you understand what cosmological redshift IS? We associate it with DOPPLER SHIFT because of motion away from us due to expansion of space. Mind you, at this instant we have now introduced a previously UNRECOGNIZABLE element into the model. Expansion of space, which did not exist previously, now exists JUST so we can continue to assume Doppler Shift. Rigggght. I see your arguments. They are very persuasive, since you have rebutted every point I have made with ignorant hand-waving. Good job.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Ignorant hand waving???? Why does images of a pot, kettle and the colour black flash before my eyes. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Wouldn't it be nice if we could just have a civil discussion - disagree without name calling. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well, when all is said and done, I truly believe there will be peace and brotherhood among all mankind. It's just a matter of time before people see the truth. It is a struggle to keep my eye on that, when so constantly disregarded without thought. I am not perfect, else I would just turn my cheek. Alas... I hope you do take the time to look at the evidence! I can tell you are open to whatever the evidence shows, and here it shows everything.
Agreed: We have come along way since the dark ages and the Inquisition and continue to progress towards a time when religion/God has been made completely redundant, simply through scientific discoveries and revelations. Still a while to go yet, but it will happen. No, just your own burdened laden, warped view of that evidence.
Disagree about what, exactly? If you compare sccully's opening posts and claims (" I said I was agnostic, I did not explicitly state my beliefs beyond that Newton is very convincing to me. ") with his last couple of forays into fundamentalist Christian evangelism of the standard juvenile kind we see so often in these forums ("This relates to the Bible because Jesus, for example, was a HUMAN who UNDERSTOOD sufficiently that he was able to MANIPULATE the physical world through MENTAL manipulation. Water to wine, for example."), you will see that your disagreement with AI about sccully's apparent agenda here has been decided against you - he's obviously uninterested in actually discussing Newton's writings (their context, content, origins and issues, role and meaning in Newton's life, etc), and far more concerned with Bible thumping ("Jesus or the Bible, whoever teaches it specifically...it is in the Bible") using Newton's unpublished and personal writings as a tipper. Which is disrespectful enough to Newton to anger anyone who cared about the man's memory, btw. What is it with these fundies that they see nothing wrong with treating the dead in this careless and inconsiderate way, thieving reputation and the aura of real achievement to wrap their nonsense in?
That is your opinion. I prescribe to following knowledge, just as Newton did. Don't try to claim I am disrespecting Newton, I understand him far better than any human alive because I have walked his shoes. You THINK you know, but you certainly didn't bother to look at any of my evidence with any openness. I never claimed to not currently believe (GASP HOW DARE I SWITCH SIDES I MUST BE CRAZY), I just began the post with mention of my previous agnosticism and absent my specific beliefs. Simply because I then proceed to discuss evidence in a logical manner doesn't make my word of any less value. Thanks for your time.
Wow! I was referring to post #87 and 88. I see that you are another not interested in having a civil discussion - disagreeing without name calling. I get tired of asking this: why can't you people that have misunderstood the topic and mistaken it for your pet bugaboo -religion- just leave it be? If you could see past your prejudice, you might see that you were mistaken - or if you had just read sscully's post more carefully without seeing them as an opportunity to take a hit at religion. There are no Christian Fundamentalists here except in your imagination. Moderators: Can I ask that the word 'fundy' be treated as belligerent and derogatory just as other terms used to denigrate a person's race, nationality or sexual orientation are? There are no Fundamentalist here, and I grow weary of seeing it used by small-minded bigots any time someone dare to use the JC-word. Really, some of the members here haven't the slightest idea what scientific objectivity or even good manners are. Being a Christian isn't exactly like being born into something like one's nationality, but it is something different from being a Fundamentalists. I know of none here, and yet we Christians have to constantly bear accusations of ignorance, scientific illiteracy and outright stupidity because we have a view different from the scientific pretenders here who fancy themselves enlightened and rational, thus deluding themselves, but no one much else.
Well put again. <3 It's ok, no atheist will listen to me until my paper is published, I know that I will face delusional ignorance that looks down on me, but truth does not hide. Once my paper is published, then the world will have no choice but to realize the truth when I lay the evidence before them as someone of scientific respect.
For the record, I have no idea if your ToE is any good or not. I just hate bigots shouting 'Bible-thumper! Fundy! Hidden agenda!' Whenever someone mentions The Bible or Christianity. Keep your prejudices to yourself, why don't you - is my message to them.
That basically concludes this thread of inquiry into the nature of Newton's religious writings, since sscully was Newton's twin brother in another life and already has figured him out. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! On Planet Bizarro, where imagination and intellect are swapped. :bagpuss: Not to worry, there are no fundies here. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Yes, I know--I just appreciate that you don't discredit what I am saying instantly, ha. I do hope that you look into it all though, I don't know what your background in cosmology is--it sounds like you aren't that into it from a few of your past posts?
