What Has Been Hidden

We now begin Chapter 9, “What Has Been Hidden.” One will recall Jesus’ saying, “Nothing has been hidden except to be revealed,” as the inspiration for this title. We begin the chapter with Preston Harold exploring Jesus’ understanding of entropy.

This study finds it most significant that Jesus gave evidence of understanding the relationship between entropy and communication – between “bits” of information, “fowl of the air,” and nature’s supreme law…

The word, entropy, from the Greek, trope, means: a turning, change, after energy. Jesus’ name for this changing arrangement of energy as energy runs its course is “realm of heaven” – He says it is:

…like a grain of mustard-seed, which a man takes and sows in his field….it becomes a tree, so large that wild birds come and roost in the branches of it…Jesus said all this…to fulfill what had been said by the prophet,

I will open my mouth in parables

I will speak out what has been hidden

since the foundation of the world.

To have more appreciation for Jesus’ statement above it will help us to explore the work of the scientists Warren Weaver and Claude E. Shannon, who through their studies found that communication was bound up with the phenomenon of entropy and published their findings in The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Quick spoiler: Anyone who has ever played the phone game knows how quickly entropy kicks in when trying to relay a simple message around a tight circle of humans. Nevertheless, Weaver says:

“That information be measured by entropy is, after all, natural when we remember that information, in communication theory, is associated with the amount of freedom of choice we have in constructing messages….One has the vague feeling that information and meaning may prove to be something like a pair of canonically conjugate variables in quantum theory, they being subject to some joint restriction that condemns a person to the sacrifice of the one as he insists on having much of the other. Or perhaps meaning may be shown to be analogous to one of the quantities on which the entropy of a thermodynamic ensemble depends.”

Preston Harold goes on to interpret Weaver in light of this study:

The Christ was to “tell us of all things…” Communication was the heart of His problem. If Jesus grasped the significance of entropy in communication, He saw that He could use the Scriptures as His “source” of information on the Christ, and that the number of the descriptions of this One in the Scriptures would allow Him wide freedom of choice in selecting among them those required to construct His message in such a way that the ideal in redundancy might be achieved, enabling Him to convey the maximum of meaning within the limits of possibility.

In the redundancy lies the secret.

We’ll explore this secret in our next installment. Until then, peace.

 

Advertisements

Happy New Year!: Looking Ahead and a Quick Review

Apologies for going AWOL these past 7 months. As the saying goes, “life happens,” and I’ve been quite busy with taking care of other more pressing issues. All is well and I am looking forward to getting back on track a bit for 2018. For now, before we begin Chapter 9, I thought it would be a good idea to do a quick review of the thesis for “The Shining Stranger” according to Gerald Heard in his introduction to the book:

1. Jesus recognized the Messianic hope to be valid and universal, but misdirected when man looked beyond his individual being to find the Christ (Logos, God-Son) which Jesus saw to be incarnate in every person, revealed through humankind’s unique power of speech and expression of the Word, God, One, I.

2. Jesus realized that until the ancient Messianic doctrines were superseded by a valid, ethical concept of the Christ, of God, and of man, the individual and society would suffer the ravages of Messianic pretension, as well as the curse of Messianic delusion which Jesus suffered but from which he recovered before beginning his ministry, recognizing himself to be no more, no less, than any other human being.

3. Jesus was convinced that until man ceased to look for a Messiah to come and solve all problems, the development of human consciousness would be arrested because man would not seek his “inner kingdom” to find the Christ of himself, the Authority that governs his life and inevitably leads him to become responsible to and for himself as well as a responsible member of society in which truth alone actually governs and reigns, in time destroying whatever is false, spurious, and incompatible with man’s true nature and need.

4. Therefore, Jesus’ purpose was to complete and destroy the Judaic Messianic tradition together with any Messianic concept akin to it through a withering of this idea as the Messianic idea he espoused, the idea of the Christ in everyone, took root and flowered to overshadow prevailing Messianic expectation. He knew exactly what he was doing and was in no sense victimized.

5. Jesus’ mission was to destroy Messianic tradition creatively by making “Israel” and its history a symbol of human personality or consciousness, while making himself a symbol of the Christ in every person which insures his eternal life and the evolution of his consciousness through dealing with his own forces of good and evil which Jesus saw to be equally essential to life and satisfaction in it, but he saw also that each force was in process of regeneration; Jesus made himself a symbol of the Logos in humankind to establish the pattern of the operation of the Christ in Homo sapiens’ evolution from child to man free of destructive impulses by virtue of being fully conscious and completely empathetic, with dominion over himself, his flesh, and his life.

6. The Bible, one body of words encompassing the limits of human consciousness, truth bearer that can dwell always with men and which Jesus knew must be brought into being as a result of his works and his command to his disciples, is itself historical Judaic Messiah.

Now that we’ve had a quick review, we’re ready to move on to Chapter 9. I’m looking forward to you joining me there. Until then, peace.

Jesus’ Robe of Light

To finish up Chapter 8, Preston Harold discusses one of the often overlooked but strangely appealing aspects of the Gospel: Jesus’ robe. He takes us on a journey to understanding the deep meaning of this single-pieced garment, for which four Roman soldiers cast lots at His feet during the crucifixion.

battle18

Jesus appears to have seen that…within (the cross) is held the quintessence of being, light, one-point defined; thus through cross-action one is triumphant. It should come as no surprise, but it does, to see that Jesus created the symbol to indicate that as men began to “handle” light and to try to elucidate its secret, they would come upon an indivisible whole, one, which would so elude them as they labored within the confines of a “four-dimensional” concept that they would resort to a “game of chance” to try to possess its secret. This symbol of wholeness and this drama may be observed at the foot of the cross, where soldiers cast lots for his robe.

…Scientists play their game of chance because when numbers are large, “chance is the best warrant for certainty.” It is when number is small, specifically when they confront one, h, that the number, four, is seen to be inadequate to deal with the quantum, a unity that appears to be “outside the oyster of Space and Time.” This indivisible piece bespeaks another dimension that somehow transcends the four-dimensional concept – bespeaks another dimension which, like TAO:

…”covers the ten thousand things like a garment” but does not claim to be master over them…

This, the “fifth-dimension,” may be likened to the all-encompassing, seamless unity of a single reality covering life like a garment woven in one piece, as was Jesus’ robe, the robe of Light.

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. –John 19:23-24

jesus-is-crucified

And how did the soldiers decide who would keep the robe, the fifth garment? Like our modern-day scientists they played a game of chance; they cast lots. Which soldier received the robe is not important, the point is that the robe could not be divided. When dealing with the undividable fifth dimension, wholeness and chance are inevitable.

Observant readers of the Gospels will also recognize the higher, fifth-dimension significance of Jesus’ robe in the story of the healing of the woman with the issue of blood who need only touch Jesus’ robe for the cure, and when Jesus’ robe became as white as the light at his transfiguration on Mt. Tabor.

We’ll begin Chapter 9 in the next post. Until then, peace.

Space: The Final Frontier

The concept presented in our last installment, five “intervals” needed to completely secure or “house” one of them, and three “intervals” moving against two “intervals” as two “intervals” react against three “intervals” to accomplish this, is presented in Jesus’ equation of One. He says:

…five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

Preston Harold says:

To insure that these words be recognized as a mathematical formula, Jesus gives an explicit division of the household. He states it as: father against son, mother versus daughter, mother-in-law versus daughter-in-law. Only if the mother plays a dual role—that is, mother is also mother-in-law – can these six “factors” be reduced to five forces, the number of forces “at issue” in one’s household as given in the equation. And only if every family were four in number with one son married, and one daughter unmarried, could the words apply to life. Jesus spoke symbolically or poetically, but He spoke as a mathematician…

images

Jesus states the field formula so explicitly that His words bespeak a still “finer division” underlying the matrix. That is, he describes the forces at issue as: father versus son, and son versus father; mother versus daughter, and daughter versus mother; mother-in-law versus daughter-in-law, and daughter-in-law versus mother-in-law. His words give rise to twelve signs, eight negative, four positive, thereby “elaborating” the ratio of negative to positive force, presenting the concept that a still finer division of forces underlies the “field” – a force that involves “doubly stated double negatives” giving rise to a negative effect which is of positive value in life, an effect that sustains the division of the manifestly positive factors and/or measurable dimensions of one thing.

Harold goes on to explain how both negative and positive polarities are necessary for the manifestation of life:

This negative effect that is of value in life, but can be expressed by “nothing positive,” may be described only as Lao-tzu describes Tao:

We put thirty spokes together and call it a wheel;

But it is on the space where there is nothing that the utility of the wheel depends…

Therefore just as we take advantage of what is, we should recognize the utility of what is not.

lao

This, Tao—Holy Ghost, zero, nothing explicable—has endless descriptions which yet cannot describe the nature of it:

There is something formless yet complete

That existed before heaven and earth.

How still! How empty!

Dependent on nothing, unchanging,

All pervading, unfailing.

7024573-space-stars-road

Is it not space? Only by paradoxical exclamation points can the fullness of it in the universe be implied, so that “Tao never does; Yet through it all things are done.” Space may be seen as pre-existent unity and multiplicity at once, as continuous creation of positive value by means of the eternal presence of “nothing manifest” in which one and all have their being.

Until next time, peace.

The ONE Point

If Jesus realized that a point may be seen as a “beginning” or as an “interval,” but not as a defined whole, line or interval, then the question became: how many “beginnings” or “intervals,” which may be symbolized as (o), are necessary to define a point or to give it “actual being”? – that is, not to define the operative positive force itself, which may be said to correspond to the vertical line bisecting the horizontal diameter of a circle, but to define one point in the circle that the cross enfolds? Or, the equation may be put, simply: how many “intervals” (o) are required to draw the configuration of the positive sign (+), which appears as answer to the problem of the product of zero divided, and also defines a point?

Five “intervals,” (o), are the fewest that will satisfy this situation:

img_5851

The number five, itself a spherical number, completely “houses” the one point defined. If five is the “measure” of one, defined, one cannot measure the same in every direction: in the figure above, both the vertical and the horizontal line “count” three intervals, but if they are “taken apart” one line will “inventory” more intervals than the other.

…The two smallest segments of a line that can exhibit one degree of difference and move to completely secure and reinforce one “corpuscle of light” must measure three intervals (o) in one segment, two “intervals” (o) in the other. As the three-interval segment moves perpendicular to the two-interval segment, the two-interval segment may divide and close against the three-interval segment as it passes through, thus securing and reinforcing its center point. This action may be symbolized:

img_5853

Both segments perfectly share and equally sustain the one-interval that becomes a “corpuscle of light.”

Until next time, peace.

What’s the Point?

Preston Harold gives us a mathematical lesson on the concept of a “point.” In this installment we will quote him at length as we prepare to discuss how Jesus understood the concept, which we will explore in the next post. Now, for your pleasure, Preston Harold:

Zero must be seen as the whole, beyond examination, and therefore its measure, unapparent, is expressible only in negative terms, so that zero’s division must correspond to: (-/- = +). But this simple division is equivalent only to taking the diameter of a circle; to define the center point in its being, the product of this division must be divided by itself, so that the whole equation of zero-divided must correspond to: (-/- = +/+ = +). Again, the positive sign (+) is presented as answer, just a s the configuration of the cross appears when one determines the center point of a circle by bisecting its diameter. The center point defined by the cross cannot be seen as a correspondence to negative-one or positive-one; it is neutral in its position and must correspond to one-neutral for one-whole. The point itself cannot be defined, except as it is defined by the cross (+), that is, in the definition of the cross itself.

download

Nicomachus said that a point is “the beginning of a line, or an interval, but is not itself line or interval.” The point enfolded in the cross is not the beginning of either line, but is an interval in both lines, and is the one point so arranged and sustained by the opposing horizontal and vertical lines or “forces.” One might say that this point is defined in negative, positive, and specific terms, so that it is the only point in actual being.

Until next time, peace.

The Cross as Mathematical Solution

bpuzaqgccaanrxx

When all of Jesus’ statements are applied mathematically, and when one considers the full import of His presenting the cross (+), the positive sign, as His symbol and all-embracing answer it would appear that His mathematical concepts moved beyond those of His day, and that He attempted to describe the reality of the operation of the energy that mathematics attempts to describe…this study poses His words against the concepts of Nicomachus of Gerasa…both He and Nicomachus use “father and son,” and “teacher and pupil,” to symbolize “greater and the lesser,” or the concept of opposites, unequal; but in Jesus’ concept these opposites meet and are reconciled in the unity of one, or sameness.

Here Preston Harold describes the similarities between the teachings of Jesus and Nicomachus, striking as they are. But whereas Nicomachus writes that “when a point is added to a point, it makes no increase, for when a non-dimensional thing is added to another non-dimensional thing, it will thereby not have dimension…,” Jesus took another point of view.

This is to say, when the cross (+) as symbol and all-embracing answer is applied to the problem of “sum of nothing added to nothing,” it would say that Jesus did not overlook the word added – the symbol (+) introduces the problem of organization, or, as Eddington put it, of “and.” The cross as answer indicates that there cannot be a “non-dimensional thing,” –or, one might say, until a point has dimension or until it is defined, a point is not a point: the cross has dimension and it also defines a point, or gives a point dimension. The cross (+) as answer and symbol calls forth the concept of negative (-) and positive (+) numbers.

Harold now goes onto describe how one becomes itself the unit of measure when seen in contrast with zero. It shifts in its capacity from a mere digit to an active function, from a noun to a verb.

algy-binary-1

In the view of this study, Jesus realized that the correspondence between one and the whole, zero, and between one and each other ensuing digit, differing only by one, makes of one, measure itself. This is to say, one is not merely a unique digit: it is, rather, a principle, or action involving opposites, “minus-one” and “plus-one,” upon which the whole operates. Thus, Jesus saw that in the definition of one as an operative principle, the definition of the underlying principle upon which one and all operate could be grasped. And as Jesus examined His own mind the “sum of nothing added to nothing,” which must perforce involve the division of “nothing,” or the whole or zero, the positive (+), the cross, arose as the only possible answer to the problem of “naught divided by naught.” This, because the problem itself is posed in terms  that may be seen only as a negative divided by a negative which produces a positive answer. Or, one might say, that if through use of zero-0-an infinite increase in number may be drawn, then unlike the number one, when zero multiplies itself it produces more than itself: it must forever reproduce itself plus.

Until next time, peace.