1. GODS : KINGS : MEN / the Bloodlines of the Gods, and SOVEREIGNTY in Israel. (p.1)

2. KING DAVID – the life and times of the first king of ISRAEL and JUDAH. (p.19)

3. SACRED SITES – wells/stones/rivers/oaks/angels/ladders/heaven. (p.37)

4. COSMIC # CODING in the Bible – 3.1415/ 16.18/ 11.11/ 3.45, etc. (p.48)

5. St.PETER; Satans, strangers, Seraphims, and Nagas/ NARJISand the Sufis (p.56)

6. MOSES with HORNS; Michelangelo’s statue in Rome; Moses and the Anuna. (p.79).



 So, having seen how central  ‘cosmic number’ was in the foremost works of the Sumerian and Akkadian, Babylonian, and Assyrian, as well as Egypt and many other Near Eastern cultures which all underwent high amounts of interaction with each other, lets now turn to look at how active these ‘higher influences’ were in the flowering of the Hebrew religion and civilization, a religion,or culture with roots clearly in the highly conscious cultures of both Sumer (and related cultures), and Egypt…

Some writers argue that the Hebrew religion and culture gained most of it’s beliefs andlearnings from the period when the elite of Jerusalem were imprisoned in Babylon, duringwhat is called the ‘Babylonian Capture’, in the 7th century Bc.

What this overlooks is the following; that if Babylonian culture was descended from Sumer/Akkadian roots, this was as part of a long-term line of transmission of cosmic inspired consciousness. The indebtedness of Hebrew culture to the original ‘founts’ of Middle Eastern wisdom – Sumer and Egypt – is ‘encoded’ into the Bible by the experiences, and birth-places of people such as Moses (born in Egypt; adopted by wife of Pharaoh/became chief advisor to the Pharaoh);Abraham (from Sumer/ highborn wealthy family/ meetings with Pharaoh in Egypt); Isaac (his father Abraham sent him to Sumer to marry one of their relatives from there – Rebekah)Jacob (the son of Isaac, likewise sent to Sumer to marry a tribal relative – Rachel – there. Moved to Egypt in his old age when his son Joseph provided for his family in famine/father of the 12 sons and tribes of Israel);Joseph (born in Sumer – Haran -moved to Canaan when six years old/sold in slaveryto Egypt; becomesthe Vizier within Pharaoh’s court, rescuing the land during 7 years famine/he and family become trusted servants of the Pharaoh)- and so on.

So the scene of the narrative during theses 4 or 5 generations of the line of Abraham continually moves back and forth between Canaan/Israel, and Sumer (Ur of the Chaldees/Haran/N.Iraq) and Egypt, (particularly the mentioned city of On/An/Awn (Heliopolis in the Greek language) with connections stemming from Anu, the Sumerian god who was the ‘father’ of the celestial tribe).

The lineage is Shem (meaning ‘Sumer’) – Nahor –Terah – Abraham (and siblings Haran/ Nahor younger) – Isaac – Jacob – Joseph, (and the 12 tribes of Israel). Abraham’s brother Haran had family in Ur including Lot, who joined Abraham in journeying to Canaan on the word of Abraham’s father Terah.

Regarding the many (overlooked) references to Sumer and related civilizations, the lives of prophets such as Ezekiel,(in Babylon as a captive), and Daniel (adviser to King Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon) reflect the significant influence the civilizations resulting from the Anunnaki and Sumer had upon much of the Near East. These nations were at the apex of the most advanced region of the known world at that time, representing as such the lines of transmission of much of the cosmic wisdom given to mankind in it’s formative stages… the Old Testament reflects these centres of wisdom (as much as power) in its locating the main bloodlines of the Hebrew faith at many times in the two (cosmopolitan) centres of Mesopotamia and Egypt; even while asserting it’s own individuality by referring to both Egypt and Babylon as centres of worldly power to be rejected.

So the roots of Hebrew culture (like all) owe debts of gratitude to many of the positive sources within the Near East, enabling the growth (and cosmic connections) of the nation during it’s own ensuing years of statehood–restating the concept that every religion has it’s ‘parents’ – as Christianity and the early Church owes much of it’s early forms and practices to both Hebrew, and Egyptian influences.

As we have seen, in our study of the Epic of Gilgamesh, there are several texts and myths from both civilizations whichcontain references and themes that reappear in Hebrew religious ideas in more or less complete form. Ideaswhich focus specifically on these concerns…

*  in particular the higher awareness of the connections between all levels of reality – studying concepts centred around the axial routes by which energies (of life) can travel from high to low, and vice-versa. As shown by the metaphor of the four rivers of the Garden of Eden distributing the celestial/divine energies to the four points of the compass; and in the story of Jacob’s Ladder, and so on. The Tree of Life too, as seen in the central Sumerian stela featuring it, and the changing of human consciousness at some point by the deities of the Anunnaki such as Shamash. This artistic narrative of one two or three adjoined stelae was re-created through every resultant civilization from Akkadia, to Babylon, to Assyria and so on, for over 1000 years at least.

* the location of sacred sites; Navel points of the world, such as Jerusalem, Lhasa, Cuzco, Delphos, Angkor Wat, Glastonbury, and the higher dimensional forces which flow through them. Sacred architecture, (from the earliest sites and temples to the cathedrals of Europe), which is ‘tuned’ to these higher energies.

* the refinement of energies within the human body. The cosmic structure of the body, ‘in the image of God’.

* the creation of energy which is positive in nature, and the removal of that which is negative; enabling the growth of material then energetic bodies. So the universal nature of metabolism, of the inner organs andtheir functions, and the energies of the different dimensions of the cosmos which enable the human body’s continued survival and growth.

These concerns were ubiquitous in the works of antiquity believed here to have been of a ‘cosmic source’ or nature, and are central too within the Bible.


In our examination of the cultural/religious implications of the Sumerian/ABA epicGilgamesh we saw the predominance of themes  of cosmic influences and consciousness as the highest state(s) attainable by mankind in its potentials of being…ie fulfilment of the self’s (infinite) potential.

Following on from these early civilizations of the Near East, it is worth looking into the same perspectives and themes in the Hebrew civilization, and likewise it’s works of cultural reference to cosmic influences, primarily the books of the Bible,especially the Old Testament. A large part of this ‘hidden’ wisdom – the ‘consciousness of the heavens’ –  is placed within the texts in various ingenious ways, such as details of narrative,metaphor, symbols, allegory, or even numerical ‘code’… and all these  avenues offer many points of contact with the subjects of cosmic number, sacred geometry, and ‘esoteric science’ that existwithin the Bible, as within Gilgamesh a millennium earlier; so indeed it can be said these themes, of the cosmic energies of life, and the octave, are referred to on evert pagethrough abstract or oblique references.

  • to be clear at the start, while this book cites/studies the pre-eminent civilization of the Sumerians, followed by the successor-cultures of the Akkadian/Babylonian/Assyrian peoples, and then the relationship these – as well as the deep influence of the Egyptian civilization – had on the nascent Hebrew culture, it is not unaware of the many different regions and peoples which played their part then and now in the complex relationships of the Near East. So the beliefs and teachings and sciences of the immenseIndian religion/ civilization, infused into so many aspects of life there via different ways, (including possibly through close contact with the Persian peoples, a key intermediary between the East and the West in 1st millennium Bce antiquity), are but two examples of significant influences which will remain unexplored in this work. The many cultures of Asia, and the Mediterranean, andof Asia Minor around Turkey and the Caucasus (such as the Hittites), are likewise known to have been evolving in tandem with those studied during the same time-frame. So if the discussion is of the S/ABA and Hebrew line of transmission of cosmic sources of wisdom with roots in higher-dimensional influences, this is with due acknowledgement of the endless complexity of the region and of history.

 On a side-note regardingthe physical evidence of ‘higher’ intervention – the siting,and building of the foundations of the city of Jerusalem, and similar megalithic interventions which are near-impossible to explain; one example is in the foundations of the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem rests a 530-tonne dressed stone called ‘the Western Stone’.Other examples include the three stones weighing 750-900 tonnes each (!) on the third or fourth course of the western wall of the Temple of Jupiter Baal at Baalbeck in Lebanon. Even the most efficient all-terrain crane in the world today can only manage to lift 600 tonnes or so. Let alone carry these stones a kilometre from their quarry to the temple site. A stone sited at this quarry is shown below; possibly the biggest dressed stone in th world.Theories exist that the stones could have been moved on rollers from quarry to site and then moved up a slight incline similarly. Yet this is problematic; for a ramp able to bear such weights would need to consist of stone blocks itself, in all likelihood.So the ‘ramp’ explanation looks increasingly untenable when examined closely; and no demonstration has ever shown it’s validity either.

Moreover, all of the areas or sites associated with such immense feats of engineering and architecture have historical mythologies associated with the gods – from the Anunnaki onwards – from the earliest civilization circa 3000-2800 Bce when Gilgamesh was written. So both of the ‘sacred mountains’ he travels to are located within Lebanon, the first time being the ‘Mountain of the Gods’ within the Cedar Forest of Lebanon. This is argued by Sitchin to represent the ‘Landing Place of the Gods’, from where they travelled to and from their craft orbiting the earth when Niburu was in the solar system. Sitchin additionally equates Lebanon, as well as Mount Ararat, with a ‘ground-plan’ devised by the ‘celestial visitors’ for reasons of navigation from the air; it seems equally likely any such ‘geometrical’ pattern or plan was followed for reasons of consciousness – ie, concerned with hidden matters for elucidation throughout history, or equally possibly, for reasons linked to the energy-fields and pathways of the planet ‘visible from the skies’ – hence all the biblical references to angels with ‘measuring rods’. And likewise in the Book of Enoch the angels who take to the skies to measure the earth .

The ‘Great Stone’ at the quarry, 1 mile from the Temple ofBaal-Jupiter at Baalbeck, Lebanon. It measures 69 x 18 x 20 feet, and weighs an estimated 1500 tonnes!Attribution; Wikimedia, from R.W.van Shoicke, The Book and the Land, 1904. Public Domain.                                                                                                  ⇨

It seems coincidental that these areas of Lebanon accorded great sanctity and significance in this respect are also home to one of the most puzzlingexamples of ‘gigantic’ architecture in the world. Without impugning human ingenuity of any of the eras of history, this site does indeed indicate some form of extra-human involvement, even if it was only to offer a way of lifting and moving such stones unknown to mankind, proving again that energy (consciousness) can lift matter in ‘impossible’ ways. Also pointing to the importance of the Cedar trees (potentially a symbol of the ‘gigantic’?), which were indigenous only to Lebanon in antiquity, within the Biblical stories of king David, and his son king Solomon; in fact the palace of Solomon had the epithet ‘the House of the Forest of Lebanon’ providing some form of connection more likely to do with it’s associations with the heroic Gilgamesh and ‘the gods’, than for the use of alot of cedar wood in it’s building. . . as we shall see later in this section, both David and Solomon are shown in the biblical meanings of names and places to have been associated not only with ‘mighty men and warriors’ – but as such with various off-shoots of the Anunnaki such as the Nephilim which are described as ‘mighty men of old, men of renown’ in the Genesis 6 verses concerned with them. Thus the ‘giants’ of the ‘Gibborim’ (or ‘Anakim’ mentioned at Numbers 13.33) as descendants of the nephilim etc, are ‘implied’ to be some part of the lineage of David and Solomon – or at least it may be fair to say, they are implied to have some form of genetic connection to them, or possibly to the more positive lineages of ‘the gods’.  Lineages which the various King Lists of Sumer, Babylon, and Hebrew sources assert the gods created as hybrid links between themselves and mankind containing the genes of both. . .so for example the powerful mighty man Nimrod is described using the word ‘gibborim’ at 1 Chronicles 1.10. Likewise repeated at Genesis 10.8; “And Cush begat Nimrod; he began to be mighty upon the earth. He was a hunter before the Lord; wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord”.This semi-divine, or mythic status elevates Nimrod to the levels of the Anunnaki – and indeed, it is proposed in some circles that Nimrod’s character in the Bible is based upon the ‘mighty’ Sumerian deity Ninurta, one of the foremost Anuna, and the son of Enlil – who was the god responsible for the Deluge in Gilgamesh.So certainly there exist many semantic ties connected to these subjects in Sumerian, Assyrian and Hebrew artworks and texts…

(There is a fascinating and easy to overlook sub-plot of the Old Testament concerning several of these themes, in the long-term narrative of the Canaanite tribe known by the name of the Hivites.

They were a people or tribe descended from Canaan, the son of Ham the son of Noah, in Genesis 10.17. (as indeed Nimrod is the son of Cush, in the same chapter of Genesis, as just seen). The first appearance of them in an active role in Israel’s history is when Shechem (symbolic meaning; shoulder/back/spine/foundation/axis) the Hivite rapes Dinah, the daughter of Jacob and Leah. Her two brothers Simeon and Levi exact a bloody revenge, something which is punished by their losing their status as 2nd and 3rd born of Jacob – thus their descendants are condemned to be dispersed throughout Israel without any lands (Gen 49.5-7).

After this, when the Israelites escape Egypt and survive their trials in the desert at the hands of YHVH and the ‘Seraphim’, (the ‘fiery flying serpents’ and angelic order), their first task in the Promised Land is to eradicate the 7 tribes of Canaan established there (Deuteronomy 1.7) – God (YHVH) promises to completely destroy these tribes by various means, such as by the Ark of the Covenant, by military action, or by an angel (Exodus 33.2). So when the Israelites attack the tribes of the Canaanites, the groups unite into an alliance.However, one group – the Hivites – in their city of Gibeon (as we shall see later, the city of the ‘great heights’, linking to it’s pre-eminence as a site of Canaanite pagan hill-worship, plus the ‘mighty men’ /’giants’ similar in semantic terms to the nephilim. And itis a city of significance in the narratives of both David, and his son Solomon, being where Solomon interacts with YHVH the night before his coronation; most likely not a coincidence, as Solomon does follow his various ‘foreign’ wives and concubines into pagan worship of deities such as Ishtar, the Near Eastern goddess originally known as Inanna in Sumerian culture c.2800Bce!). And in keeping with the ‘coded’/ metaphoric links between Israel and the Hivites, the men of Gibeon trick the Israelites through subterfuge into sparing them and accepting them as slaves..! (Joshua 9.7/9.26-7), while the rest of the coalition is destroyed as promised by YHVH. The Hivites in this sense appear to reflect a link to the nephilim bloodline off-shoots which survive the Flood. Also it may be said they offer another example of the ‘giant’s’ bloodlines to enter into the tribes of of Israel – and simultaneously therefore on a metaphorical level introduce the theme of slavery, which in numerous instances may well refer to those born into the nephilim bloodlines, or the ‘lines of Cain’ as might be said. (And also the need for such to the Lord if redemption is to be obtained)…

In the era of the judges of Israel, the Hivites live in another significant place – near to Mounts Lebanon and Baal-hermon (Judges 3.3), with remnants of the Canaanite nations. The Israelites do indeed begin to intermarry with them at this time, prompting the wrath of YHVH… further mentions of them again bear relation to the narrative of David and Solomon, with the Hivites being co-opted by forced labour to work as builders on the Temple of Solomon. Other main builders of the Temple are likewise from what might be called ‘significant groups’, such as those under the employ of king Hiram from the Phoenician city of Tyre, the Hebrew meaning of which is ‘rock’ –  and possibly therefore source of the double-meaning created by Jesus in calling Simon Peter the ‘rock’ upon which he shall build his church. . .Peter likewise being implied in numerous ways to be of the ‘dark’ bloodlines associated with nephilim – or Anunnaki – gene streams. The cities of Tyre and Sidon (‘hunters’) are both used repeatedly in references to cities and peoples which will pay the price of their sins, as we examine later.

In another connection, 1Kings 5.6 details the requirement of Solomon to Hiram ; “Now therefore command thou that they hew me cedar trees out of Lebanon; and my servants shall be with thy servants”.

So a considerable number of sign-posts exist within the narrative of their involvement with Israel; not least of which is themeaning of their name, the Hivites, which translates in Hebrew to – serpent, according to, which states that post-biblical Hebrew commentators believed their name to stem from the Chaldean, ie Babylonian word for serpent).

This will remain in the background for the time being,as we focus on several aspects of  the books of the Bible with points of interest relating to the themes of Sumer, cosmic number, and places which occupy points of significance within the Earth’s energy-fields; ‘omphalos’, or ‘navel’ points, through which the energies of the higher-dimensions vitalize the entire world.

One of which is Jerusalem, known by the epithet ‘the navel of the world’ since early antiquity.(Jerusalem has now been archeologically proven to be representative of the original Hebrew civilization;as a find of an finding from c.1300Bce has been shown to be an almost word-for-wordartefact of the Book of Leviticus, the third of the five books of the Pentateuch,the ‘Books of Moses’ which constitute the first five books of the Old Testament).

And it is with the development of the Hebrew civilization between c.1800-400 BC that we find our next area concerned with the diffusion of cosmic influences/consciousness.

Aerial viewpoint of The Temple Mount complex, Jerusalem

Attribution. Godot13, CC-BY-4.0 Wikimedia.

The work(s) which contain innumerable connections to the higher dimensions/influences are, of course,the books of the Bible(especially the Old Testament with regard to the eras of Taurus and Aries from 4000Bce-0Ad; and the New Testament for those of the Piscean Age, ie. those embodied by Jesus).

The Bible – translated from Aramaic,Hebrew,Greek,Latin,Anglo-Saxon,Middle Ages English,tomodern English (among the numerous paths/translations made) is in semantic,religious, historic,allegorical, poetic, psychologicaland other terms, a massive multi-faceted work of many lives and levels; a composite work consisting of 39 or 46 books (Protestant / Catholic versions) in the Old Testament from the first millennium Bce, and27 books in the New Testament, which were written in the first three or so centuries Ad, and given final canonical form by various synods, and the publication of the Latin Vulgate version translated by St Jerome between 385-405 Ad.

Meaning that the entire corpus known as the Bible was at least a thousand years in the making, very possibly perhaps even longer. . .And this is without considering narratives such as the Flood and the Ark, or characters such as Samson, both of which have their roots in the mythologies of the Near East across many cultures dating back to the third millennium Bce.

(The numerous texts which have ‘apocryphal’ or ‘semi-canonical’ status in particular strands of these religions include such books as Maccabees I and II, Esdras, Judith, Baruch, Sirach, Solomon, Susanna, and so on.The criteria for a book’s inclusion for virtually all versions of the Bible is that the scripture is the ‘Word of God’, and as such comes from the godhead/a divine source. Whether these ‘apocrypha’ as they are termed derive from cosmic or human consciousness is a matter for personal consideration. Likewise whether they can offer any insights into the mysteries of Christianity, in their differences to ‘canonical’ scripts, indeed whether it may be part of the will of God to include additional or deeper information in these texts which was therefore ‘fated’ to be brought to mainstream attention only at a time of increased information such as the 19th and 20th centuries, etcetera).The Book of Enoch, brought to western European consciousness by the Scottish explorer and antiquarian James Bruce in 1774 from Ethiopia is one of the foremost examples of this dynamic.

But putting aside minor differences between the faiths which place the Bible at the heart of their worship, it may be said the Oldand New Testaments possess together a coherent narrative/structure – concerning the ‘will of god’ for mankind – across all the events from the first page to the last. This coherence is affirmed by the massive number of prophecies written in the Old Testament regarding the coming of the Messiah Jesus, plus many other specific predictions – likewise the New Testament includes many similar prophecies, even to the period of time known as the ‘End Times’, something which may happen in the next century or so; or may not. Many periods of history have seen mass belief that the end of civilization was imminent, such as at the turn of the first millennium, at the year 1000Ad when mass hysteria gripped many communities and nations. Overall the Bible contains over a hundred prophecies, often given as a sign of the cosmic consciousness of the prophet who states them.

The immense timescale of the Bible starts from the beginning of the universe’s creation, where the ‘waters of space’ are ‘moved’ by the Word of God and the agency of the Holy Spirit to create material reality; a sophisticated cosmogony which points to the creative dimensions of energy as modern (quantum) physics does too.The Bible then details the creation of Earth and the planets, of organic life on earth, and of mankind –all the way through the events of the history of Israel, shown in many historical details, and lists of generations of different groups of the tribes of Israel and so on. In particular the Old Testament delineates the creation of the Hebrew faith, and the nation of Israel in covenant with Yahweh (Jehovah), and the establishment of a capital city in Jerusalem.As well as YHVH’s efforts to place the nation and it’s constituent members on a sound moral and spiritual foundation, worthy of the celestial city outlined in many of the books of the Old and New Testament. And as John Michell and other writers have noted, the descriptions of the Heavenly City contain a plethora of sacred wisdom concerning geometry, proportion and esoteric number; measures to be found within the universe, the world and the individual.



This chapter being a study of some of the clearest examples of Cos# relatedthemes and narratives, we will start (somewhat arbitrarily) with the first king of Israel, King David, as an instructive example of some of the many important themes which are a part of the Bible’s sub-texts;

Firstly, David, estimated by biblical scholars to have ruled for Judah and Israel for 40 years circa 1000Bce,was one of the first full kings of a united Israel, after Saul unified Judah and Israel under his kingship; prior to this the tribes of Israel were’ruled’ by a series of priests (Moses,Aaron etc), then a series of leaders known as ‘judges’ in their role as final authority; so Samson was the 15th and last judge, just prior to the (turbulent) reign of Saul. The change,as stated by the Bible was a continuation of a need by the tribes to have a leader in war against the growing nations around them; thus kingship was  a ‘new octave’,a new way of directing the society being created by the tribes of Israel, or of uniting the larger groupings of the tribes, in what seems a fairly inevitable process. The Lord YHVH (Yahweh) was less accepting of this creation of a more political, and less religious role, perhaps pointing to the limit of the tribal community as a natural boundary of the religious leader? Or the difficulty of a  religious leader overseeing the demands of uniting and leading the numerous (twelve) tribes of Israel and Judah. In fact one of the greatest religious/ ecumenical leaders in the Old Testament given the full approval of YHVH is the priest Zadok, the ‘righteous and justified’ priest who was given responsibility in 2Samuel 15.27 as guardian of the Ark of the Covenant in the time of David. Another highly important priest is Melchizedek, mentioned in Genesis 14.18 as the high priest in the time of Abraham of the site of Salem (‘Peace’) – which eventually became Jerusalem, the ‘navel of the world’. So important is he that Jesus Christ himself is described as ‘ High priest forever in the order of Melchizedek’ in Hebrews 7.21. The fluid dynamic between religious and ‘political’ leader is shown in the text of Genesis in the description of the blessing of Abraham by Melchizedek after Abraham has won an important military victory – for the text is so written that it is not possible to state conclusively who gives tithe to whom, as the text says ‘And he gave him tithes of all’… (Gen.14.20).

 So from the time of Moses, when the political and religious leadership was retained in the person of one man few other examples exist, (and the granting of priestly authority to Moses’ brother Aaron again indicates the almost inevitable ‘fault-line’ existing between the two roles, or the natural tendency for the two roles to ‘split apart’ with growth). Something Gurdjieff states was not always the case, referring to the era of the ‘shepherd-kings’ of ancient Sumer and the Near East as a time in ‘pre-history’ when the two roles were perfectly united (linking this era to the reformations of the ‘Saintly Ashiata Shiemash’ in his narrative)… but again, the antiquity of this period points to the difficulty of uniting the two as societies and civilization grow…

Saul was the first ‘king’ of Israel, having won an important battle against a rival tribe. His ‘kingship’ is said to be divinely approved – but later in the Book of Samuel he displays a number of character traits unworthy of a sovereign ruler; and having proved his baseness, YHVH (Yahweh, the personal name of the Lord God) punishes him (with defeat and death.) One indication of the gulf between political and religious leaders is the narrative that Saul is ‘inspired’ by YHVH when he visits the prophets at Bethel, and starts prophesying; as such the Bible states at 1Samuel 10, especially verse11-12; “And it came to pass, when all that knew him beforetime saw that, behold, he prophesied among the prophets, then the people said one to another, What is this that is come unto the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets? … Therefore it became a proverb, Is Saul also among the prophets?”

As such outlining the distinction between the two types of leaders. (This occurs just prior to YHVH making Saul the king of Israel, in keeping with the wishes of the people – “And Samuel called the people together unto the Lord to Mizpeh. And said unto the children of Israel, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I brought up Israel out of Egypt, and delivered you out of the hands of the Egyptians, and out of the hands of all kingdoms, and of them that oppressed you.

And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before the Lord by your tribes, and by your thousands (1Samuel 10.18-19). Yet in a period of much war it is hard to see how it could have been otherwise…

Indeed concerning events thereafter, there are multiple kings and rulers in the Old Testament who, like Saul, having been ‘anointed’ as ruler by YHVH, are later judged as ‘falling short’, and displaced, or destroyed, by divine ‘will’. As we shall see, the Bible indicates that the seeds of these rulers downfall are in many cases the same as the seeds of their ‘greatness’; in other words, in large part, lay within the mysteries of their DNA, a theme present in antique religion and mythology from the time of the civilization of Sumer, as the details of Gilgamesh and the King Lists showed. These lists began with fully ‘divine’ members of the Anunnaki, and progressed to celestial/ human parentage, and then fully’ human’ rulers, who were still ‘of the lines of the gods’…

And the powers received in this way by the lines of kings from Sumer on were those created by the celestial DNA of the ‘gods’, the Anunnaki. And the works of art and myths of Sumer represented these powers as being solar, the predominant energy of our world, the solar system, and life.

Symbols across all the cultures of the Near East from Sumer from 3200 Bce onwards, of this double-edged power included both lions, and serpents, as representing energies which made men who possessed them in abundance stronger, more intelligent, but at risk of being subsumed by them and dominated by unbalanced force.

Assyrian king at the Palace of Sargon II, 713-706Bce, in Khorsabad/Dur-Sharrukin. From the Louvre. Wikimedia, Oliver Ga, CC-by-SA 3.0.

Thus the sub-text was expressed in many stelae of kings overcoming lions, a standard artistic theme from the representations of Gilgamesh onwards – one of the commonest themes in the artworks of antiquity, and one based more on notions of the energies of the sun than on lions per se.

Incidentally this symbolism of the lion as representative of the Sun and the energies it represents within the psyche may be recognisable to those who have studied any versions of the Tarot -where card XI (Strength) means precisely this, the need of the individual to restrain and control the life-giving, growth-enhancing, but dangerous powers of the subconscious, as represented by a lion, in their personality.Note the juxtaposition in the Assyrian relief of a serpent along with the animals. Also predominating over the deeper instinctive aspects of the self  can lead to a more unified being, under the primacy of the conscious mind.

This inner symbolism is reflected in the similarity of the two images displayed here, from over 2500 years apart…

The foremost example of this is OANNES, the God of the Annedoti said by the 3rd century Bce historian Berossus to have come from the Persian Gulf to Sumer to give humanity civilization;  Annedoti means the ‘repulsive ones’. Berossus, a historian who was accepted into the Babylonian priesthood around 300 Bce, wrote in Greek the work ‘A History of Babylonia’ using his access to inner records. This included a list of the first kings of recorded history, like so many of these lists detailing extraordinarily long periods of time; in this case 432,000 years from the first king to the tenth king Xiusouthros – who survived the Deluge. *the WB-62 Sumerian King List in the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford lists Ziusudra as the last king of Sumer prior to the Flood.

The lengthy periods in this, as in the Bible, reflect the narrative of the genetics of the heavenly rulers, who gradually gave way to the hybrid bloodlines of ‘celestial/human’  kings who thus inherited some of these aspects of longevity to a lesser degree. Berossus’ post-deluge King Lists record more normal time periods up to the kings of Babylon, in the first millennium Bce.

This hybrid nature of Oannes, like Enki, one of the most important of the deities of Sumer related cultures, was entirely representative of their ‘celestial’, solar and strongly reptilian nature…and was passed down through more than one bloodline into humankind, thus creating the hybrid lineages (primarily of ‘kings’, though not exclusively).*Note from the stela of Oannes/one of the Apkallu, the Seven Sages, (from the ‘depths’, or ‘abyss’), that he is holding the ‘cord of protection’, from early Sumerian and Egyptian artworks.

  Card XI of the Rider-Waite Tarot,1909.   Attribution;        

Wikimedia  Pamela Coleman Smith. Wikimedia/ Public Domain

In Egypt this was called the ‘Shen’ ring, meaning ‘eternal protection’, in Sumer the ‘rod and ring’ as it is called.See for example the Old Babylonian depictions of the goddess the ‘Queen of the Night’, possibly Inanna or even Lilith in Hebrew myth. This goddess was as such a deity of the underworld, possibly indicating Inanna’s descent to the ‘nether-world’ to rescue the husband of her elder sister, a mythology which found expression much later in the Greek myth of Persephone, a deity of fertility and light who was forced to live in the underworld for a part of her existence.

This ring of cord represented the protective encirclement of the kingdom by the gods of the land, as they protected the Universe likewise from the forces of Chaos. Early depictions in both cultures were of a simple cord held in a circle; whereas in other ones the symbol is slightly different, as a small handle or loop with a small container attached. This is a theory anyway, especially as there are no complete explanations of the strange small containers at present. . . indeed in this Babylonian image of Oannes it is midway between a cord and a container. (Note also the skill with which the ‘horns’ of the Anunnaki are incorporated into the design of the fish head-wear as gills!)

(left)Oannes, at Nineveh, Assyria. From Austen H.Layard. Attribution;Wikimedi, Public Domain

These ‘symbolic’ tales and artworks were a part of every (cosmic consciousness) inspired culture from Sumer, to Akkadia, Babylon, the Assyrian empire, then the Hebrew and Greek cultures later. See for example, the similarity in meaning of the myth of the sun figure Samson to that of Icarus and Daedalus; the elder of whom benefits from the powers of the Sun by controlling them, and the son of whom, Icarus, suffers the consequences of not doing so– he is ‘burnt’ by his own (excess) powers, in other words, a central lesson found within antiquity.

A study of Samson’s extensive story in Judges chapters 13-17, (four full chapters) reveals many aspects of this inner reality.

The name Samson actually means ‘little Sun’, and is related to the Sumerian/ABAAnunnaki god Shamash, the ‘deity of the Sun’ present in the religious myths of Sumer, the epic of Gilgamesh and so on. Samson also bears strong resemblance to the character of Enkidu in the epic, the wild-man friend of Gilgamesh. Indeed some rabbinical commentators have questioned whether Samson actually existed, so fantastic is the detail in the story of his life, and so widely known a mythos in the Near East of antiquity…

Noteworthy too is the fact that although the Judge of Israel for twenty years (mentioned twice in his story), not one example is given of his being consulted by the people of Israel as such. The only time a delegation approaches him is to plead for him to stop provoking the Philistines with acts of violence.

Apkallu equivalent of Oannes, with ‘pine-cone’ and ‘container’

Nimrud, Assyria 900Bc. Attribution; OSM Amin, 2009.Wikimedia, CC-BY-4.0. Note the serpent arm-bands also, on manyexamples of this image, as well as the fine artwork and craftsmanship, and conscious meanings of the symbolism – reproduced quite consistently for at least 1200 years, from c.1800-600 Bce.

Confirmation of this Sun/serpent metaphor-related basis for the life of Samson, (as well as Gilgamesh, and others) comes in metaphorical form; the presence in his story of a lion; bees; honey; foxes; burning wheat/corn fields; him breaking his bonds like ‘flaxburnt with fire’ (Judges 15.14/16.9, etc); threats of burning with fire (14.15); the flame of the angel ascending to heaven (13.20), and so on.

(There is also a considerable amount of number symbolism ‘encoded’ within the story of Samson, much of it based around the value of three; 30 sheets and 30 change of garments (14.12); 3 days without solving the riddle (14.14); Samson slays 30 men (14.19); catches 300 hundred foxes! (15.4); 3000 men of Judah visit Samson at the top of the rock of Elam; and 3000 Philistines are killed by his last act standing between the pillars when blind and captive. . . what this numerical symbolism actually means is completely open to debate. One possible conclusion is that taken in conjunction with the sun-related symbolism, as well as the unlikely/ miraculous/ impossible events of his narrative – such as the pillars –  the writer(s) of the tale of Samson wished to convey themessage that the ‘facts’ and wisdom of the Bible may be interpreted metaphorically as well as literally, something which can be a difficult step to take in a person’s widening of their understanding of the meanings of the Bible; indeed may have been written purposefully as allegories to expose the understandable tendency of the religious to accept the literal truth of every word of sacred texts. In other words, reflecting the devout reader’s ‘suspension of disbelief’/ literalness back to them. So it can be asserted with no impugnment that a simple belief in the literal veracity of everything written in the Bible is not necessary, or even desirable in sifting the inner meanings of the collected texts’ authors;for in writing of things which exist ‘outside of’ this world, and the temporal dimensions it exists within, there can be no other way of communicating such matters – and by writers who in many cases give every indication of having been the recipients of cosmic consciousness. . .whatever the sources of such awareness.

(Indeed some narratives of the Bible, when examined closely seem to be written precisely to show the attentive reader that the events of some sections virtually cannot actually have happened, ie hold allegorical significance primarily (such as the deeds of Samson); despite the usual answer being in biblical circles of debate ‘God can do anything’, which is true and yet a limiting belief also).

And this is not a strictly modern interpretation; in his book ‘The Secret Power of Music’ David Tame relates on p.208 the perspective of some of the early Church fathers in this respect;

“Only from the fifth century Ad did the Creation stories of Genesis begin to be taken as literal historical records; this occurring as knowledge of the ancient wisdom within the Christian movement deteriorated or was forced underground. Before this, we find Gregory of Nyssa (c.Ad 390) describing the Genesis Creation as ‘ideas in the form of a story’. The other prominent churchmen of the time also accepted the Creation stories as allegorical”.

(Tame then goes on to place the origins of the Genesis creation stories within the context of the Middle and Near East, particularly the awareness of several religions that the Creation ‘was linked with a form of utterance or sound of God’. Myths of The Flood were also widely incorporated in civilizations throughout the Near East and Asia).

The connected symbolism of sun, serpent and lion, and their power, is shown elsewhere in the Old Testament in a more oblique form. This is that Samson and his parents were of the Tribe of Dan, so that rabbinical texts have linked Samson to the character named ‘Bedan’ (mentioned in 1Samuel12.11) . Further to this is the blessing of Jacob before his death to his 12 sons, the founding fathers of the Twelve Tribes of Israel; in referring to Dan he said (Genesis 49.16-17);

“Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel. Dan shall be a serpent, by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horseman’s heels, so that his rider shall fall backwards” (our italics).

Samson was of the tribe of Dan; he was also the fifteenth and last of Israel’s line of ruling judges. He aligns in this way too with the concept of the judge as ‘shaitan’, or critic/’obstacle in the path of ’/ ’divine prosecutor’ of the accused person or peoples. Much as the symbology concerning Simon Peter links him effectively with Satan in this role, as a ‘stranger’, a ‘divinely appointed’ opponent, or ‘testing angel’. . . as we shall see in section iv.

Note too Simon Peter’s words in the first book of Peter, 1Peter5.8;

“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion walketh about, seeking whom he may devour”.

Reflecting the lion and serpent metaphors of antiquity connecting to the powers of the Sun, (within both the world and genetics of various bloodlines); the number of the sun’s energies in the number-symbolism of antiquity was 666, according to John Michell in City of Revelation, and elsewhere. Symbolism confirmed by itsusage in the bible being connected with Solomon, gold, and the building of the Temple (at 1Kings 10.14).

– thenarrative of the tribe of Dan links the myth of Samson to ‘heroic’ figures such as Gilgamesh and Enkidu present in the cultures of antiquity from effectively the beginnings of civilization across the numerous peoples of the Near East; Gilgamesh in one of the oldest (composite) texts of human history was also depicted as defeating and controlling one or more lions from within the middle era of the first Sumerian civilization, circa 3000-2700Bc; as well as being protected by the sun-deity Shamash. And whatever doubts about the historicity of the life of Samson exist, the metaphorical meanings contained within his story areextensive. . .

So how did Sumer, and it’s ensuing (Eastern Semitic) civilizations of Akkadia, Babylon and Assyria in Mesopotamia come to be the source of such longstanding narratives? The cultural records of Sumer and the following cultures statethis was the period when the ‘gods’ of the Anunnaki established civilization; ie. created working systems of land reclamation from marshes, systems of irrigation and agriculture, designed and built cities and sacred temples, taught skills of metallurgy and craftsmanship, instituted the many aspects of civilization such as law courts, education and temples, and in total brought the gifts of civilization ‘from the heavens to earth’.  And not only brought civilization to mankind but oversaw the establishment of the first true civilization at first hand; Sumerian deities were responsible for each of the cities and areas of Sumer, and had their personalspaces in the innerareas of the ziggurat temples of their city-state.

This involvement lasted for many centuries, from 3000Bce onwards, until by the era of c.600 Bce their presence and guidance of events had become far less frequent or direct.By then such relationships as existed were used moreto confer authority on the king – for example, around the time of the last king of the Babylonian empire, Nabonidus in 556Bc in Babylon, (mentioned in the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament as Baltasar, or Belshazzar), who stated his ancestry was of the moon god Sin, (one of the younger generations) of the Anunnaki. This was ultimatelyin a failed attempt to restore the fortunes of the failing empire, as Babylon was defeated by Cyrus the Great of the first Persian Empire,  in 539Bc.

Another noticeable point is that this era was one of increasingly prevalent wars, between all the vying nation-states andpeoples of the region, in contrast to the more personal and meaningful stelae of a millennium earlier such as the Tree of Life, with accompanying depictions of the Anunnaki enlightening or guiding mankind…

Stelae depicting sieges, battles, the numbers of prisoners of war, (and their torture), and the riches of the king became far more standard fare by the 6th century Bce.

(right) Assyrians torturing captives; from Nineveh / Nimrud.

Sir Austen H.Layard,1882.Attribution; Wikimedia/ Public Domain

So the stories of Shamash, and Gilgamesh etc had been extant and extensive in the Near East in various forms for at least 1500 years by the time of 1200Bce when Samson is said to have lived. The writing of  the narrative of Samson may date from shortly after,  or from sometime around the period of the Babylonian Capture, when the religious and political elite of Jerusalem and Israel were taken to Babylon for 70 years or so (from when Nebuchadnezzar II defeated Jerusalem in 603/598Bc until 538Bc when Cyrus released them, a year after defeating and taking Babylon).

It is conjectured that it was at this time in 7th century Bce Babylonthat Hebrew compilers/writers/editors of existing religious texts, were introduced to the extant conscious stream of Sumerian wisdom – the first civilization of the Anunnaki, and as such stemming from a source of conscious cosmic origin, however much later than the events taking place in Sumer. (ie noting the less direct influence of the Anuna on Babylonian culture, )

(Again it may be helpful to note, to state the Babylonian and wider Near East-influences upon the Hebrew religion is not to denigrate the Old Testament in any way; whether, for example, Samson per se existed or was an archetypal figure, is moot – for these nations will have had many ‘heroic’ men, warriors judges and kings, whose lives bore witness to the truth of his story; or Samson may have existed, and had the Sun-symbolism and mythic/symbolic acts of his story added by the writers of the Bible to make the story more universal and ‘complete’. Also noticeable is the innovative high standard of the biblical language and narrative, in comparison to other texts of that period from around 600 Bce, which has stood the test of time extremely well with it’ssophisticated metaphors, sub-texts, encodings, language and spiritual and psychological insights; making it much like Gilgamesh, quite clearly a product of higher – or cosmic – consciousness).

All of which leads us to the central subject of this first section, which centres upon the narrative created by the civilization of Sumer; the literal link between gods and men; what Anunnaki texts called the ‘granting of ‘kingship’ to men’  – and the life-time story of David, one which encapsulates the inner tensions of the narrative of antiquity that can be encapsulated as GODS:KINGS:MEN.

As already seen, the Anunnakiintroduced kingship (in the extensive period before the Deluge according to the Sumerian King Lists),as a way of creating a (genetic) link between themselves, and ‘mankind’, a link which would enable the correct transmission ofcosmic guidance by bridging the gap between the two. Also making rulership of mankindmore sympathetic, and reducing friction, as kings could clarify the people’swishes to the ‘gods’, and the ‘gods’ wishes to the people, the rulers having effectively a foot in both camps.

 So,the institute of ‘kingship’,was designed consciously as potentially the best way to guide the development of human society in a harmonious and firm manner –  the absence of(political) leadership and stability being likely to result in societal conflict and destruction.

 Moreover this class was to fulfil its function when the ‘gods’/’celestial beings’ had finished their initial agenda of creating homo sapiens, and civilization, and accordingly (at some inevitable point) stepped away from day to day direction of the affairs of mankind – as indeed they did during the 1stmillennium Bce, so that the Babylonians, Assyrians, and Hebrews all lamented the loss of guidance in person from their Lord. Something reflected in the Psalms of the Old Testament in many examples linking the absence of YHVH to the defeats and humiliations of the six or so centuries before Christ.

But this general withdrawal was one direction only; especially once the process of building societies of urban ‘sanctuaries’/ strongholds/communities ie. citieswas established on a solid footing –utilizing and developing various technologiesand agricultural systems, thus enabling the division of labour; united by strong societal,cultural and religious ties based upon cosmic principles.

 For these reasons the institute of kingship was created as the best long-term intermediary for cosmic influence and way of  passing sovereignty to mankind itself. The long-term strengths were also the long-term problems of kingship,though – and the genetic drawbacks of the kings’ ‘heroic’ genetic stream, were part of the reality, and thus a part of the experience of life…

 So, (lines of) kings and queens were made ‘more godlike’ than ‘ordinary humans containing a higher  proportion of ‘celestial’ genetics, in order to enable there to be a separate, connecting level between the two.

 In the earliest society of Sumer, Gilgamesh was the first mythical ‘king’ of the city ofErech,  fulfilling this intermediary role; although his father Lugalbanda, was one of the  line of Shepherd/priest-kings, stated to have lived for 1200 years in the Sumerian King List (written on tablets circa 2100 Bce in the Ur-III dynasty of Sumer – which arose confusingly sometime after the fall of the Akkadian dynasty which arose from the earliest Sumerian ones! – and also the lists from the Early Babylonian period also from around 2100 Bce).

As Tally Ornan writes in the introduction to the article Godlike Kings in Mesopotamian Art, published in ‘Critical Approaches to Ancient Near East Art’, (ed. Brown and Feldman, 2013);

“Standing at the head of the social hierarchy, the Mesopotamian king had a close relationship with the gods, and was considered a mediator between the earthly and divine spheres. The interaction betweenkings and gods had a supreme role in ensuring social welfareand a vital function in the empowerment of the ruler.

The paramount indicator of divine royal status was the addition of the cuneiform sign dingir, denoting god in Sumerian, as a classifier preceding the name of a king. This process began in the reign of Naram-Sin, king of Akkad 2254 – 2218Bce…

Indirect means of deification are expressed in a variety of literary genres such as royal inscriptions, myths and epics, or titular formulas. They can be traced in notions such as the divine pedigree of a king, the resemblance of the king to divine images, godlike stature and superhuman traits, quasi-divine royal accomplishments, or the intimate relationship of the king with the divine as manifested by sexual and parent-and-child metaphors…”

And in studying the links between sovereign figures within Sumerian culture and that described in the Bible, it is clear that not only kings and queens but individuals at the centre of events in the Bible had links to figures depicted in Sumerian works of art and literature. Or in other words, reflected the narratives of human:gods interactions found within works such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, among many otherMesopotamian stories and myths;

Wise-women in the Bible such as Rahab, and figures from Sumerian & Babylonian mythology/ society.

There are some female characters in the Old Testament who are called ‘harlots’, such as the woman Rahab living in Jericho (Joshua 2.1- 6.25) who gave the Israelites information as they sought to view and then conquer the land of Canaan promised by the Lord.

Yet the role of the woman Rahab, who co-operates because she has heard of the Lord’s helping of the Israelites with miracles to escape Egypt, as well as defeat Canaanite tribes, indicates she is a ‘powerful’ and connected woman; wise-women play an important role in many of the events in the Old Testament, as in Gilgamesh. As such the term ‘harlot’ may have been an application taken from the Sumerian role of the ‘temple Hierodule’, as featured in the Epic of Gilgamesh – the ‘sacred prostitute’ who served as such for the temple in the city, and may have been involved with the ‘divine’ roles of providing help to others at crucial times; and possibly performing some sort of informal ‘initiation’ of young men through their passage-of-rites into sexual adulthood. The hierodule named Shamhat in the early chapters humanizes Enkidu the ‘wild-man’ through sex and one-to-one intimacy, and teaches him how to eat, dress, and relate with people. The female innkeeper Siduri helps Gilgamesh recuperate after his exhaustive travails, and then introduces him to the boatman Urshanabi, who can aid him in his quest to meet Utnapishtim, (the ‘Noah-figure’ of the epic).

This role of women is reflected in the fact that some commentators in the past termed Rahab as an innkeeper, rather than say she was a ‘prostitute’, while in Gilgamesh the innkeeper Siduri is referred to by the epithet of ‘The Replenisher’, a clear association with celestial processes of life and fertility, etcetera. So the character Rahab who is portrayed as being of some significance in the early stages of Israel’s foundation may well be a subtle reference to the ‘sacred’ roles of such influential women in the Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Near Eastern and Hebrew societies of the era.

There is though some deeper issue here, in that the prophet Isaiah called the sea-monster/ cosmic being (in Isaiah 51.9-10) Rahab, using this word rather than Tanniym, Leviathan or Tiamat (all meaning ‘sea-serpent’) as others did;

“Was it not you (the ‘Lord’) who cut Rahab to pieces, who pierced that monster through? Was it not you who dried up the sea, the waters of the great deep, who made a road in the depths of the sea so that the redeemed might cross over?”

Job also uses the name in this way; “God will not withdraw his anger; The helpers of Rahab do stoop under him” (Job9.13). Likewise “He stirreth up the sea with his power, And by his understanding he smiteth through Rahab” (Job26.12). Psalm 87.4 links Rahab with Babylon, Philistia, Tyre and Ethiopia, saying; ‘this man was born there’. As this section shows, these places are associated closely with the negative bloodlines of the (Sumerian) nephilim.

Both Isaiah and Job providing in this way several semantic connections to the (serpent/ waters-related deity) Enki, Lord of the Ap-su, the subterranean depths of water comparable to the subterranean underworld/aquifers, the depths of the seas, the subconscious/instinctive centres of the body*, and of the ‘abyss’/space.

(*hence the proverb of Solomon, in Ecclesiastes 10.8, noted elsewhere in this section; ‘He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it; and whoso breaketh an hedge, a serpent (nahash) shall bite him’, indicating the divisions existing between different parts of the human mind ; and as we see in the Etymology section, the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root for serpent was ‘s-nego’, from which came the word ‘nagas’. This stem was the source for words in many languages connected with ‘snake’, ‘neuron’, ‘nerve’ and ‘sinew’ – as well as ‘dark’; ‘negra’ ?).

In the meaning Rahab contains in Hebrew of ‘arrogance’ or ‘blusterer’/’storm’, it is said to symbolize both Egypt in it’s treatment of the Israelites, as well as Babylon similarly later. Zecharia Sitchin relates Rahab the sea-monster to the Babylonian myth of Marduk and Tiamat, whereby the planet Marduk smashed a planet which had ‘invaded’ the solar system, a planet as such ‘without a destiny’ (ie, ordered path around the sun); Tiamat/ Rahab.In this telling the collision created the asteroid belt as we know it, and possibly at the same time created the planet-wide ‘dent’ which is now the Pacific region of our planet, according to some theorists. In Psalm 89.10 is apparent support for this celestial or planetary meaning; “Though hast broken Rahab in pieces, as one that is slain; thou hast scattered thine enemies with thy strong arm”. So in this interpretation the words of Isaiah etcetera relate not to the seas of Earth, but to the ‘waters’ of the solar system, and of space; a metaphorical duality which was in use from the Sumerian myths/ Epic of Gilgamesh onwards).

Of course, the use of Rahab by Isaiah may be in reference to the aspect of female (non-creative) energies of chaos – as Lilith, the deity of the night in many cultures of the Near East in antiquity similarly represented. In this sense Isaiahmay have been linking excessive or unrestrained female sexuality within societies to the negative energies of chaos existing within the ‘deeps’. Aview which may be at the heart of the injunctions of Hebrew law-makers such as Moses to consider women at the time of their monthly menstruation to be ‘unclean’, (Leviticus 12.2, 15.9, 15.20, 15.24, 15.25, 15.33, Ezekiel 22.10, 36.17 etc) and thus avoid intimacy with, as having a degree of negative/‘chaotic’ energies within themselves at that time. (Likewise the society of men descended into unbridled sexual activities, such as that of Sodom and Gomorrah which was subject to divine punishment and destruction, due maybe to the possibly non-human ‘nephilim’ origins of such practices, or equally likely, because of the impossibility of positive growth in such an unbalanced society). So guidance of human societies towards sexual restraint, or discernment may be said to be part of the early celestial ‘stewardship’ of mankind in the civilizations of Sumer, etc, and in Hebrew society. Certainly both male and female energies may be both positive or negative in character, tending towards the negative when in a state of excess, or imbalance. Moses, like Isaiah and Job, was not noticeably ‘sexist’ or derogatory to women in any way, indeed was in a loving marriage – so his decrees, like the prophets’ use of the word ‘Rahab’ may be allowed some leeway, in his outdated patriarchal views that would probably not be granted forgiveness today…

(For more detail on the Babylonian myths of the battle between Marduk and Tiamat, see The Twelfth Planet, by Zechariah Sitchin).

This semi-divine/ human aspect of his being is at the centre of the epic poem of Gilgamesh, and informs all his behaviours – and likewise in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, where the line of Cain is equated with the line of kings, and as such given protection through a mark of authority; writers such as Laurence Gardner have proposed that Cain was not the son of Adam, but rather marks the split in genetics whereby the ‘lines of kings’ were formed; so theorizes that Cain ‘wasthe son of the LORD’, (a biblical title for Enki/Ea, with YHVH being his brother Enlil).

This is based on the clue that of his birth Eve says (Gen4.1)‘I have gotten a man from the LORD’, as well as apocryphal versions of Eden in Jewish rabbinical texts, which state the same narrative; in other words that whereas Abel was the son of Adam and Eve, Cain was the offspring of the Lord and Eve – a hybrid of the genetics of  Eve, and the (‘Anunnaki’) serpent.  Thus the serpent is an image or metaphor of Enki/Oannes, who created humanity originally (in the ‘birthing room’, or laboratory), and then also the hybrid ‘line of kings’ – thus Cain was genetically different to Abel, in the Old Testament, as this particular hidden narrative of Genesis was sourced from the Sumerian creation myths, such as the Enuma Elish, and the pre-Deluge King Lists.

As Laurence Gardner notes, the Bible states not that Cain was ‘a tiller of the ground’, but instead that he had ‘dominion over the earth’, a subtle difference in meaning indicating the authority of kings…one distinction is that Enki created mankind with Ninhursag, the ‘great mother of Earth’ using ‘scientific’ techniques, whereas the Nephilim created lineages through sexual intercourse – one reason why the offspring of the Nephilim were far from perfectly balanced.

This narrative is not the product of one or two writers in recent years either; it is clearly suggested as the true course of events in the work of ‘apocrypha’ the ‘Book of the Secrets of Enoch’ translated and published in 1896 by William Morfill, and 1924 by Rutherford H.Platt. This work is a variation of the standard Book of Enoch as published by the Rev. R.H.Charles in 1893, which was based on the Ethiopic versions brought to England in 1774 by the explorer James Bruce.

The Secrets of Enoch versions were based on Bulgarian, Serbian, Russian, and Slavonic versions which had been extant in those regions since the first centuries of the 1st millennium. And this version said of Adam and Eve;

“(The devil) …understood his condemnation and the sin which he had sinned before, therefore he conceived some thought against Adam, in such form he entered and seduced Eve, but did not touch Adam”. (Ch 31.6)

This does not specify the difference in parenthood between Cain and Seth as the Bible indicates/ specifies to exist for some reason. But the possibility that the line of Cain was that of the Nephilim, the sons of the Anunnaki who mated with human women, is one of the Old Testament’s most significant hidden narratives.

 While the primary genetic  stream of kings were from the earliest of times viewed as ‘heroes’, and ‘men of  renown’, on the downside, if they were not of faultless morality they had the tendency to be unsympathetic, greedy, violent beings ; as the Book of Enoch  states of the character of the Nephilim who began the bloodlines,

And the spirits of the giants afflict, oppress, destroy, attack, do battle and work destruction on the earth, and cause trouble; they take no food, but nonetheless hunger and thirst, and cause offences”. (Rev. R.H.Charles version, 15.10).

This conflicting nature of the line(s) of kings is one of the unspoken themes of the Old Testament; for some are seen as ‘the descendants of the gods’  – notions of the ‘divine right of kings’ largely stemmed from this paradigm, of innate highest qualities – and the Bible does take pains to locate Jesus within the bloodline of Jesse, David, and Solomon, stemming ultimately from Adam and Eve, and thus in the  image of the godly Creator as he created them;

Genesis 5.1   In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him.

Yet the lineage of Seth from which Noah and thereafter the Hebrew tribes were traced, is so nearly identical with the lineage of Cain that the two may be conflated easily, possibly with this intention by the writer of Genesis. In Genesis 6.4 the story is related;

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

(which led directly on to the Flood, to ‘eradicate’ the predominance of the corrupted lines of the Nephilim, according to the book of Genesis…but it does not state that they were completely separated from humanity – on the contrary, the great-grandson of Noah is Nimrud, the ‘mighty hunter’ who builds the Tower of Babel, and is unmistakably of the hybrid Sumerian lineages). Indeed, additionally, texts such as the Qumran scrolls revealed the ‘celestial’ genetics of Noah himself, so other-worldly was his appearance when he was born, linking him in the text directly with the ‘sons of the gods’, the Watchers – (The Book of Enoch, ch.106);

“And after some days my son Methuselah took a wife for his son Lamech, and she became pregnant by him and bore a son. And his body was white as snow, and red as the blooming of a rose, and the hair of his head and his long locks were white as wool, and his eyes beautiful. And when he opened his eyes, he lighted up the whole house like the sun, and the whole house was very bright. . .And he arose in the hands of the midwife, and opened his mouth and blessed the Lord of heaven.

And the Bible,like the Sumerians, does not always indicate clearly which lineage is which – or whether the two are intermixed. There is some confusing overlap between the line of Cain, and the line of Sethwhich Eve gives birth to once Abel has been murdered… A quick check reveals the names of the two lines are more than similar – they are effectively the same;

Cain; Enoch – Irad – Mehujael – Methusael – Lamech.

Seth; Enos – Cainan – Mahalaleel – Jared – Enoch – Methuselah – Lamech – Noah*.

*Noah is implied to be theoffspring of the ‘Watchers’ in the Book of Noah. There is also some interesting synchronous detail in the lineage lists; in Cain’s list Lamech has three sons, and in Seth’s Noah has three sons, who people the world after surviving the Deluge, so that they are called the ‘fathers of the nations’. Cains sons are the representatives individually of; Jabal, ‘the father of those such as dwell in tents and of such as who have cattle. Jubal, ‘was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ’ – and Tubal-Cain ‘an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron’ (Gen4.22). Noah’s sons were each assigned as follows; Japhet peopled Europe, Ham peopled Africa, and Shem peopled Asia, between them creating the ‘toledot; the’70 nations of the world’…

And it may be possible to compare or conjoin the two lineages, of Cain, and Seth; so Europe became the continent where the nations (of Tubal-Cain) were skilled in the craftsmanship of brass and iron ie, metal-work, technology, war. Africa became peopled by those such as dwell in tents and have cattle; predominantly rural in nature –  and Asia became where those who handle such as ‘the harp and the organ’ were located.

This last description requires a bit of clarification; in the Vesica section we see how the Bible describeswhen the Ark ofthe Covenant was brought into the Temple of Jerusalem/Solomon; the number ofmusicians and singers symbolically represents the cosmic# values of 120 and 288. The number 288 is saidto be a value of the ‘pulse-beat’ of the Earth by several writers, such as Ernest Maclain, in his work ‘The Myth of Invariance’, from 1976.

When the Ark, symbol of divine power is placed within the (cubic proportioned) Holy-of-Holies, the room then fills with a cloud, the ‘Glory of God’.  The number of Levites ‘skilled in singing to the Lord’ (as the Seraphim do in heaven) were 288. (1Chron25.7), while in 2Chron 5.12 there are 120 priests who were trumpeters.(- see the destruction of the Walls of Jericho, by use of the Law of Seven, and accompanying sound, of the voice, drums and trumpets) Both numbers are cosmic# related, in the geometric harmonics related to 288, 144, and 72 as well as to 432 and 360, relating to the frequencies of the universe as the ‘rachaph’ (the spirit of the Lord)  ‘hovers (vibrates) over the waters’ (of space-time). In other words it is a harmonic of the primordial pulse-beat of the universe. In biblical termsthis is the ‘Word of God’ – the Logos – ‘creating material reality’ in this way.

So frequencies andharmonics are at the heart of music – and the universe, at the level of theatom –reflected by the philosophy/religion of Pythagoras and his school in the 6th century Bce, in the concept of the ‘music of the spheres’… Strachan relates the values of 72,144 and 288 to octave intervals within the proportions of the Temple of Solomon, built to be a place on earth whose proportions in the three sections (courtyard, main temple, and Holy-of-Holies) reflect those of the universe, numerically having ratios of the unison fourth – and fifthintervalswithin the octave. The cubic ratio (1:1:1) of the Holy-of Holies at 20 x 20 x 20 cubits reflects the note of the full length (open) string of an instrument which is called the fundamental; the 1:1 note of the octave which happens to contain all the vibrations of the other musical intervals of the octave within it’s overtones, and as such contains ‘all the consonances of the universe’.Hence the unison, fourth and fifths are called perfect consonances, because they are invariable notes which cannot be changed into major or minor key. Moreover the Holy-of-Holies, itself with a geometric centre-point from which the voice of the Lord was heard, and the chamber filled with a dense smoke at the temple’s inauguration ceremony (2Chronicles5.12-14), was located directly over the place on the Temple Mount said to be the ‘centre of the world’,and as such a ‘higher dimensional gateway’ point; making the entire narrative one of cosmic consciousness and part of a long-term tradition older than any religion or civilization .

The science writer Brian Green writes in his book ‘Elegant Universe’;

“String theory proclaims, for instance, that the observed particle properties are a reflection of the various ways in which a string can vibrate. Just as the strings on a violin or a piano have resonant frequencies at which they prefer to vibrate… the same holds true for the loops of string theory. But we will see that rather than producing musical notes, each of the preferred patterns of vibration of a string in string theory appears as a particle whose mass and force charges are determined by the string’s oscillatory pattern. The electron is a string vibrating one way, the up-quark is a string vibrating another way, and so on. Far from being a collection of chaotic experimental facts, particle properties in string theory are the manifestation of one and the same physical feature; the resonant patterns of vibration – the music, so to speak – of fundamental loops of string” (within the smallest sub-units of the atom, such as the quark) … (p.15-16) Again, he writes;

“(Similarly) strings on a violin, for example… can undergo an infinite number of different vibrational patterns known as resonances. These are wave patterns whose peaks and troughs are evenly spaced and fit perfectly between the the string’s two fixed end points. Our ears sense these different resonantvibrational patterns as different musical notes. The strings in string theory have similar properties. There are resonant vibrational patterns that the string can support by virtue of their evenly spaced peaks and troughs (ie their wavelength, or number of vibrations per second) exactly fitting along it’s special extent. According to string theory, the properties of an ‘elementary particle’ – its mass and various force changes – are determined by the precise resonant pattern of vibration that it’s string executes”.

This shows the essential link between cosmic # and sacred architecture, which is based upon the harmonic ratios of notes found within the octave, whereby various divisions of the octave, such as fifths, thirds, etc produce series of notes based upon concordant frequencies found within a string over an octave’s range. As highlighted by Pythagoras; a vibrating string will give different notes/ frequencies/ overtones/ harmonics at mathematical divisions of the open string, a characteristic which is to be found at the heart of the Chinese stringed instrument the gu-qin.

The harmonics and timbre of the playing styles taught since at least the 5th century Bce make the gu-qin one of the most ethereal and sophisticated musical instruments known to mankind, a fact reflected in the music made by it being included on thegolden recordscarried by the two NASA spacecraft Voyager One and Two in 1977. Among other information (such as the sound of the sea, wind and storms, as well as fifty or so spoken languages) this record contains the highest expressions of music and art as representative of humanity’s achievements throughout history, as it travels further from the solar system than any man-made object ever has before. At present, having passed the limits of the solar system in 2013 at around 10 billion miles distance, the probe is estimated to be 15 or so billion miles (154 AU or Earth:Sun distance) from Earth. It still has enough power to transmit periodic messages of scientific data taken weekly twice a year back to earth, which take over 20 hours travel at the speed of light to reach us, The probe is expected to have enough power left to do so for another two or three years yet… and travelling at 60,000 mph with no atmospheric impedance, is expected to continue travelling outwards for thousands of years further.

So the ‘physics’ of the stringed instruments considered point in this way to the foundations of reality upon a harmonious basis of vibrational rates or frequencies. As Gurdjieff taught, energy becomes halved in vibrational rate over one octave, and correspondingly more ‘material’, on what is a continuum effectively from the realms of pure energy down to the densest matter within the universe– thus making the octave a central way of studying energy-matter interactions. With awareness of the concordances of reality within it’s deepest levels,subjects such as the classical architecture and music of various epochs likewise arose as some of the best ways of communicating such understanding.For example,the Gothic cathedrals, and European music from 1300-1800 were likewise based upon the underlying tenets of this ‘creative harmony’ of the cosmos and reality.

The universal basic ‘note’ of the atoms within material realitymay be related to the hydrogen atom, according to the works of Ouspensky and Gurdjieff (please post any corrections to this!), as a ‘building block’ of reality at the level of the atom, which has a standard  (universe-wide) frequency of vibration.

And in relation to the human being, the ear and it’s ability to process information from reality means that the organ of perception, and hearing in particular, are tuned to the energies of the cosmos and their vibrational patterns or frequencies. This includes light as well as sound; we are tuned through millions of years of evolution to the informational networks pervading all levels of the universe.As we examine in the Great Pyramid section, it is possible therefore that the Pi-related values of 5.5, 11, 14, 22, 28, 44 and so on are reflected in the human ear’s mathematical sensitivities; for within the inner ear the sound vibrations we receive from external sources enter a spiral channel for sorting and processing before being encoded by hairs within a ‘water’ filled space into electrical signals fired along the nervous system to the brain; as most animals (particularly mammals) similarly have. The number of turns of the spiral determines what frequencies the ear is able to perceive, meaning different animals have different number of turns, and sensitivities to higher or lower frequencies. Within humans the number of turns of the spiral is exactly 2.75, in keeping with the progression of values from 22 to 11 to 5.5 to 2.75 as mentioned. If biological life evolved to be as sensitive as possible to the material energies of life and the world, as both modern science and Gurdjieff maintain to be the case, then we are naturally in tune with the energies of reality as they resonate with Pi and the sphere of the planet (as the energy fields of the planet circle it)- most particularly with hearing, the ear having three times as many nerves as the eye; indeed the true extent of the capabilities of the human ear is certainly nowhere near fully known in this respect, particularly as the deeper levels of information derived from sound may be experienced only subconsciously and instinctively. Likewise music shows the links existing between sound and not only the intellectual centres of the mind, but the emotional areas too, tending very often towards the subconscious as these centres do…a feature supported by the harmonic aspect of music, (be that in humans, or animals, particularly mammals).

Coincidentally (or possibly not) the Standard Tuning Reference note on the piano for the last century has been the A⁴ above Middle C, of the frequency of 440 Hz. The progression of A notes from the lowest octave on the keyboard upwards is 27.5, 55, 110, 220, 440, 880, 1760 and 3520 Hz from A° to A⁷, in a curious synchronicity which puts much of the music in the world in theoretical and actual harmonic relationship with these cosmic proportions of the ear and reality.

It may therefore be with theseassociations that the continent which is peopled by ‘those skilled in the harp and the organ’– ie. stringed instruments capable of studying the law of seven via the octave  – represents in theorythe region where the(conscious) study of such subjects has always been followed; the East, and Asia in general, the continentwhere all five or six of the major religions on earth began, namely the Hebrew, Christian, Islam, Hindu, Sikh, Jain, and Buddhist faiths. The engraving below by Gustav Dore is an example of the celestial nature of consonance in terms of musical notes, indicating that virtually every reference to music within the Bible is concerned with the higher spheres.

Although that said, it is a curious fact that studies have shown people to perceive notes of higher or lower pitch, or frequency, as coming from corresponding points that are higher or lower in spatial terms. . !

(Caroll C.Pratt, The Spatial character of high and low tones, 1930, Harvard). As she writes, ‘A high tone does not mean a tone which is high in space. The phrase is merely figurative, and must be accounted for in terms of secondary criteria such as, e.g., the apparent localization of high vocal tones in the head, and low vocal ones in the chest’ (and stomach).

But whatever the linguistic and psychological factors, this is almost so deeply a part of human consciousness as to be unchangeable, and indeed, to be almost therefore un-noticeable!But to conclude, the metaphorical meanings attached to the harp, and stringed instruments within the Bible are almost without exception to the ‘higher spheres’ (or ‘circles’, or ‘spirals’ as the linguistic root of sphere refers to, affirming the significance of these powerful and mysterious forms within music, nature and reality).That the Bible describes the choirs of the seraphim besides God in the highest heaven may thus be seen to be pointing to the significance of music in relation to reality.

(left)The Psalmist king David, by Gustav Dore.Attribution – Wikimedia, Public Domain.

So as can be seen, the two lines – of Cain and Noah’s three sons  – are juxtaposed to a considerable extent, an unstated fact but one which is potentiallyhighlysignificant. The earliest example of the concept of dividing the regions of the world into three came, unsurprisingly, from Sumer, in the division of the skies/ land/ seas to Anu, Enlil and Enki respectively.

The narrative of the Flood is of interest in that it posits the existence of the bloodlines of ‘the gods’ –  the creation of mankind deriving from Sumerian myths such as ‘Enki and Ninhursag’, where the gods mixed their own celestial ‘substance’ with the ‘clay of earth’, ie proto-human DNA. As such in the myth the biblical representation of Enki is the role of the serpent which completes the process of making human beings as they are today, creating fully conscious ‘homo sapiens’ with the ‘wisdom of the gods’. This theme is shown in one of antiquity’s most well-known images, that of the Tree of Life, with ‘guardian deities’ standing behind humans who flank the Tree. Most significantly the deity inserts a ‘pine-cone’ symbol towards the back of the human’s head; the‘Occipital gate’ in eastern philosophy, and towards the ‘pineal gland’ the ‘seat of the soul’ as Descartes described it. So in Tree of Life stela, as in the bible version,with the fruit of the Tree, the process of the creation of fully complete man and woman, the mixture of celestial and material ‘in the likeness of God made he him. Male and female created he them . . .’ (Genesis 5.1-2), is the result of ‘physical’ intervention to the physiology of the human being. This is the message of the sacred texts of antiquity, with the broader processes of evolution acting upon these significant alterations made at individual moments in the history of the last 75,000 years or so; whether this is true, or provable, is a question for consideration also.

So this is almost certainly a separate process to that of the creation of the hybrid ‘celestial’/human bloodlines as described in Genesis 6.1-4, that of the ‘Nephilim’, which occurs at a later stage. This process described in Genesis is concerned solely with the actions of the younger Anunnaki as happened in Sumer; and this is evidenced by many details within the Old Testament, such as the references to the ‘sons of Anak’, or the ‘Anakim’.

But a contradiction of sorts arises; the Nephilim bloodlines are placed in the era preceding the Deluge, indeed this is the reason given in various texts for YHVH’s actions in allowing the Flood, due to their offsprings (the giants for example) negative influences and effects upon the world in their oppressive rule of mankind. So it appearsthat with the Deluge, the problem is ‘solved’ – and yet it isn’t, because not only is the lineage of Enoch and Noah ‘compromised’with celestial genes (the ‘Watchers’) of indeterminate nature, but the descendants of Noah, in the persons of Nimrod, Abraham, Nahor and Lot etcetera, are linked directly with the bloodlines of Sumer and of Babylon, (of which Nimrod was the ruler at the time the Tower was built). Nimrod is one of the closest links to the ‘mighty men of old’, the Nephilim, in the post Flood era in fact, but not solely.This apparent anomaly of pre- and post-Flood lineages is certainly worthy ofexamination. Another point to bear in mind is the fact that the stories and narratives of the Bible are in cases such as this allegorical; mankind was never reduced to just a handful of people, or however many the story of Noah posits – meaning the ‘truth’ held within is less easy to obtain. But if the myth indicates a bottle-neck within mankind’s genetic history, this may offer a clearer picture of the spread of celestial genes within various peoples throughout the (Asiatic) world from c.8000 Bce.

The clearest references to the Nephilim bloodlines are when the Old Testament refers to the Rephaim, such as at 1Chronicles 20.4-8 which details the Israelites battles against the Philistine giants of Gath, who were ‘of the born-ones of the rapah’. This narrative is repeated at 2Samuel 21.15-22 again stating the giants of Gath were of the rapah/ rephaim. (Again, how these clear bloodlines of the nephilim existing circa 1080 Bce survived the Flood is not explained or referred to). And in Judges 1.20 the text links these rephaim with the ‘sons of the Anak’; the ‘sons of the gods’ mentioned in Genesis 6.1-4, ie. the ‘sons of the Anunnaki’. And many allegorical details link key characters within the Israelite narrative to these bloodlines ‘of the mighty men of old’.

This complexity is reflected in the meaning of Nehashim in Hebrew as the ‘knower of  secrets’ – this relatesto the aspect of Enki asa deity of wisdom, technology and so on. Regarding the multi-‘dimensional’ aspect of the epithets of some of the Anunnaki deities, some critics have asked how thecharacteristics of ‘wisdom’ ascribed to him can possibly be related to his epithet as the ‘god of mining’, as if the two are contradictory; the truth is they are essentially linked. Bothmetaphorically, and physically; firstly in the sense of the deepest levels of instinctive wisdom, ie the subconscious deepest levels of the mind.And in outer terms, how could the pyramids, temples, and societies and cities of the early civilization have been built without metal tools? (or nations and empires without weapons? The history of mining and (metallurgy), and of building and civilization, is the history of mankind’s progress, to paraphrase Zecharia Sitchin (The Gods of the Golden Tears chapter, The  Lost Realms).* (Though the Bible states at one early point in the Old Testament; “there were no smiths in the land of Israel during those days”, (1Samuel 13.19) this actually lends supportto the point – for the rest of the verse says; “for the Philistines had said, Lest the Hebrews make swords or spears”… as at this point in time the Philistines had temporary control over the Hebrew tribes, and thus controlled this key aspect of society. Accordingly theymade the Israelites ‘go down to the Philistines to sharpen their plowshares, mattocks, axes and sickles’ 13.20.)

Similar happened during the Babylonian Capture, as related in 2Kings 24:14 –

And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men  of valour, ten thousand captives and all the craftsmen and smiths…

And the next verse affirms this use of number symbolism to convey metaphorical themes; in this instance that of the octave raised repeatedly by reference to 7 and 8, as in Ecclesiastes, and 1:7 ratios of warriors to craftsmen here;

(2Kings 24.16)

And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and craftsmen and smiths a thousand, all that were strong and apt for war, even them the king brought captive to Babylon.

There is much similarity between the Nahash, or Nehushtan, the ‘seraphim’, the‘darting’ or ‘flying’  fiery serpents, and characters in the Bible called Nahash, as well as from Eastern mythology the class of otherworldly serpents called the Nagas. In fact the connections are so extensive, and meaningful that it can be argued to be intentional, relating the biblical ‘angelic order’ with the celestial beings the Nagas of Buddhist and Hindu mythology.

Nagas itself in India means snake, or cobra; ‘naja naja’ is the genus even today for the Indian royal cobra.In fact etymologists consider the Proto-Indo-European language of India between 4500 and 2500Bce to have been the source of the word ‘s-nego’, from which came words such as ; snake; sinew; nerve/ neuron; naga. But it is the original mythological meanings which are significant here; the Nagas, like the seraphim, were higher dimensional serpents of great intelligence and power, who resided beneath the waters of sacred lakes across the East  -much like the ‘serpentine’/hybrid deities Enki/Oannes etc were associated in essence with waters. The Nagas took an interest in helping mankind most often, again like the Near Eastern deities and seraphim, but could sometimes be indifferent to human-kind’s wishes; much like the seraphim tormented the Israelites in the desert with their ‘fiery bites’ …(Isaiah 14.29, and Numbers 21.6, itself a cosmic# value as 108 x 2, 432/2, etc, and the diameter of the Moon at 2160 miles).

Side-bar; Angkor Wat, Cambodia,  the temple of the Nagas;

One of the most significant, and incredible Eastern temples dedicated and built with the Nagas in mind, is the temple system of Cambodia centred around Angkor Wat. Indeed the name Angkor stems from the Sanskrit ‘nokor’, or ‘naga’ ie royal or celestial


Angkor Wat temple complex, Cambodia.Attribution; Wikimedia, Public Domain.

Built between 1113 and 1150Ad in estimate, as part of the wider temple complex of Cambodia (forming a coherent site of many temples) the temple at Angkor Wat is an immense structure; it is formed of approximately 7-10 million sandstone blocks weighing a maximum of 1.5 tons each. These were quarried 25 miles away from the site. The design and cosmology of the original temple were Hindu, and it was dedicated to Vishnu rather than Shiva as had been the custom. The design of the complex is geometric in many essential details. The central temple is in the midpoint of a quincunx, in the middle of a cross or square of 4 outer structures. This is representative of the omphalos nature of mount Meru in Hindu cosmology, the sacred mountain ‘at the centre of the world’. The temple was gradually given to Buddhist orders over the next century or so, where it has remained to this day.

Much of the symbolic number and artwork of the temple structure is astronomically oriented, and symbolic in number. On the equinoxes the sun rises directly over the centre tower of the temple. The number of Nagas sculptures on the Western Causeway entrance bridge to both Angkor Wat and nearby Angkor Thom number 54 or 72, both cosmic # significant. As the photographshows, the Nagas carvings on the bridge are of a high quality of craftsmanship;

Seven-headed Nagas deity on the causeway bridge at Angkor Wat. Wikimedia, Public Domain.

Inside one of the main stelae, or reliefs within the Kurushetra Wars relief, (also known as the Mahabharata, or Ramayana Wars), is of the ‘churning of the sea of milk’  by 180 asuras and devas, cosmic beings (similar to ‘angels’ and ‘devils’). The concept is the source for the name of the book studying the stellar associations of the tales and legends of antiquity, ‘Hamlet’s Mill’, by von Dechend and Santillana. The myth of the churning is that the opposing classes of celestial beings pull on the ‘serpent of the cosmos’ creating the ‘milk of ambrosia’, or ‘life creating energy’ by their actions. This may be connected to the gravitational forces which are at the heart of the solar system, and the galaxies of the universe, and the rotational energies created by the planets as they rotate each ‘day’, the orbits of planets around the sun, as well as of billions of stars around the centre of the galaxy… and is thus linked to the Sun’s 25,920 years cycle of Precession by writers such as von Dechend and Santillana, by which cycle the sun completes one orbit around the earth against the backdrop of stars, thus delineating the 12 houses of the zodiac, each taking 2160 years.The site of Angkor Wat, and the wider site is located at a point around the globe which is argued by some to be in ‘geometric’  proportion to other sites around the world such as Giza, and Nazca in Peru, (where immense lines and markings in the desert earth have been made, which are only visible from the air). Such relationships, if true, unexplained except as coincidental, indicate the builders and designers of these sites may have been guided by, or inspired by the cosmic consciousness’ of such higher dimensional beings as the Nagas; and provide a link to the higher-beings or angels who were ‘given cords that they might go to measure the earth’ or the temple in the ‘city of heaven’, to paraphrase both the Book of Enoch(61.1-5) and the Book of Revelations(11.1), as well as many other texts.

Angkor Wat bas-relief of the Churning of the Sea of Milk

by 180 asuras and devas. Attribution; Wikimedia, CC-by-SA 3.0, MarkAlexander


  And considering the relationship between serpents, the Nahash, and the seraphim in the Old Testament, as well as with Sumerian and related civilizations mythologies concerning the ‘gods’ who created their societies, the concept of the Nagas is without doubt of immense significance and meaning, related between such distant civilizations as they have been throughout much of history.

That the bloodlines which are ‘Anunnaki’ or ‘Nephilim’-related, (as shown in their lineages in Sumerian cultural texts such as the King Lists of before the Deluge, and Gilgamesh)are the same as those depicted in the Old Testament begins to look extremely likely.

The curious reality throughout history may be that to some degree the positive  and negative aspects of Nagas/ Watchers/Nephilim bloodlines may appear to be entwined within each other,possibly intentionally. While the serpent in the Garden of Eden is portrayed universally as the cause of all evil, and mankind’s fall from grace, there are still several aspects of the positive serpent gene-stream,following on from Sumerian myths of the wisdom/positive guidance,and mercy/benevolence, of Enki, the  serpent-deity of the Anunnaki. This may be hard to understand,so rarely is this theme encountered in western culture, though it is something that has always been easily accepted within eastern religions and philosophy …

(left) Enki with waves/fish coming from his shoulders, indicating an inherent part of him is represented; from the Adda Seal, an Akkadian cylinder seal from c.2300Bce, which is full of allegorical symbolism).

As we see elsewhere, the hybrid nature of Oannes is likewise indicated by the fish/man imagery; the fish symbolism (strange when considered) indicates the reptilian genetics of Enki/the Anunnaki (perhaps in varying degrees, and varying between the separate programmes of ‘the bloodlines’ creation)… these differences are very difficult to separate; history has tended to focus on the negative aspects of the least positive lineages, such as the Nephilim/ lines of Cain, Nimrud and so on.

 Yetin the Epic of Gilgamesh, one of mankind’s oldest and most widely disseminated works of artistic and mythic literature, it was Enki who alone of the ‘gods’ refused to accept Enlil’s decree that mankind be destroyed, and warned his righteous servant Utnapishtim of the forthcoming Flood; and provided Noah/ Utnapishtim (‘one born of the place/people of the fish’, ie. ‘piscim’ from PIE ‘peysk’) the blueprint to build the Ark;additionally, the vessel ascribed to Enki was given the dimensions of a cube, rather than a boat…indicating it’s possible metaphorical/ intellectual/ cosmic number meanings, from 2,800Bce onwards.

So connections exist between the Nagas (the celestial serpent-beings), and the Hebrew Nahash, the ‘brazen serpent’, and link to the ‘fiery seraphim’, the ‘darting’ or ‘flying’ serpents (who also attend upon YHVH himself in the highest heavens), and some of the bloodlines and characters of the Old Testament; so for example the king Nahash is related in some way to the bloodline of David, and displays all the (confusing) characteristics of the Nagas and the Seraphim. The juxtaposition or inter-changeability of the names of the bloodlines emanating from Seth and Cain, as well as evidence from Talmudic and other texts such as the Books of Enoch, and Noah indicate likewise the possibility that the lineage of Noah was of a hybrid nature.

Many of the most significant characters of the Bible have connections to these bloodlines of varying positivity or potential; Moses, Enoch, Lamech, Noah, King David and his son Solomon, Simon Peter, and so on, to name some of the foremost all have semantic or ‘historical’ links with the Nagas/Seraphim/Watchers celestial bloodlines, as we examine shortly.

Likewise the relationship of not just biblical characters such as King David, or Simon Peter to the Nahash/Seraphim, but of other religious figures; such as in the Shi’a branch of Islam, Narjis, the Roman princess who was born of the bloodline of St Peter, who became through her pious efforts the wife of the 11th Imam, (Hasan Al-Askari) and mother of the 12th, the ‘divine messenger’ the Mahdi. In a link involving cosmic number encoding,  the king Nahash who is possibly representative of the Nagas, features at  1Samuel 11.1 –in some symmetry, the 11th generationoffspring of Narjis and the 11th Imam in their lineage was the creator of the Naq’shbandi (symbol-makers!) Sufi brotherhood; Baha’uddin Naq’shband.

 The Seraphim in the Bible are closely involved in many matters relating to the Sun, indeed their name stems from ‘dry’, or ‘parched’. This includes both outer events, such as the destruction of the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah, and inner characteristics/lineages connected to the solar energies of the heavens.

Yet these ‘negative’ aspects of their being, or characteristics, have tended to be equated with the cursed serpent of the Garden of Eden, condemned for eternity to have ‘dust in it’s mouth’. In other words, the serpent- lines or beings within the umbrella-term of the Nagas have as a result of this been associated with ‘the old serpent Satan’, as St John terms it in his New Testament book.

And yet,  this subject in the Bible is less clear-cut than first impressions would suggest;as well as the links to earlier civilizations deities, and to the bloodlines of characters in the Bible,there are several references in the Bible to ‘servants’ or ‘angels of the Lord’who are considered to be ‘satans’; there are many examples.

There are 9 references to ‘satan’ in theHebrew bible, 5 times to people and 4 times to ‘divine beings’. In the Old Testament /Genesis, there was not an actual concept of ‘the Devil’. So upon a close reading, the serpent in Eden is not called Satan, or ‘a satan’, or devil…it is left to the reader’s inferral; or assumption. Additionally, the ‘fall’ of man is linked to the gaining of ‘higher consciousness within humanity, for some unexplained reason.

In the Book of Job, (the) satan can potentially be viewed as ‘a servant of God’s heavenly council’, whose job (no pun intended)as part of that is to be an ‘accuser’, something that was a legal position/duty in ancient Israel(and Mesopotamia according to Shawna Dolansky*) – although the name Job does mean in Hebrew ‘adversary’…thus making the role of satan here central to the book’s themes. (And of all the books of the Old Testament, and their mystical visions and poetic prophecies (Isaiah among many being this in particular) Job contains more encoded references to the many archetypes and narratives of other, older religions of the Near and Middle East than any other book; which makes questions of where and when this work was written very interesting, as indeed, by who?)

In Zechariah Ch.3 likewise, the prophet is stood in front of a heavenly council – before him stand a heavenly messenger and a satan, whose task is to accuse him(as a servant of YHVH, not as an independent force of evil).This accusation is to symbolize earthly political opposition to Zechariah’s elevation to authority – and once the prophet has passed the test, the satan is ‘rebuked’, and Zechariah is given spotless new white robes; much how (the) satan and Job are treated at the end of that book.

In 2Samuel 24.1 the text states, ‘the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go number Israel and Judah’. In other words YHVH seeks a reason to punish Israel; makes David take a census; and then punishes them for this. He gives David a choice of long or quick punishments, so he chooses a pestilence, as the quickest option to choose.2Samuel 24.15-16 says ‘…and there died of the people … seventy thousand men./ And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord repented him of the evil, and said to the angel, It is enough, stay though now thine hand.” So this is a confusing text in some senses, and does indicate the role of the angel, or ‘satan’ in this passage. In another version of the same events, 1Chronicles 21.1 it states that “Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel”. . . this narrative is chosen by many as proof that the ‘devil’ persuaded David to number Israel thus causing the ‘sin’; but this seems to ignore the first verse of 2Samuel 24.1 which is diametrically opposite,in it’s outline of the events. An impartial viewpoint might be that as in other parts of the Old Testament, the ‘satan’ does the bidding of the Lord, rather than acts independently ‘against’ the Lord’s will.

Dolansky makes the point thatit wasn’t until many centuries later, after the last book of the canon was written, that of Daniel circa 162Bce, that the Hebrew canon was closed. It was at some time after that the Hebrew culture saw the development of an opposing force to God, ie evil – and Satan likewise, as an individual representative of that. The book of Genesis was revised in light of this development in thinking in Israel, and Satan associated with the Serpent, this ‘alteration’ taking place around the 1st and 2nd centuries of CE… (so it may be seen that the Eden serpent may possibly have been written originally as a characterization of the being, and role/actions of Enki/Ea/Oannes, the genetic source/creator/ ‘enlightener’ of ‘homo sapiens’ – and source of ‘The Fall’ as humans ‘lost the innocence of unconsciousness’.

Hence the sexual subtext of the imagery in Genesis subtly points to the Serpent/Enki, with all the gene-splicing creation myths of Sumer and related cultures incorporated into the sub-text. This notion of the hybrid ‘nephilim’ nature of the lie of Cain is not a modern one, for it is a part of Jewish rabbinical literature since at least the Middle Ages, relating to the spread of Qabbalism). So the growth of the concept of what might be called a Manichean satan, opposite to the Lord grew when ‘beliefs in angels, demons and a final apocalyptic battle arose in a divided and turbulent Jewish community” according to Dolansky.

While Dolansky notes* that nowhere in the Bible, even in the New Testament is Satan linked directly to the Eden serpent, it seems somehow inevitable this evolution of the concept of ‘satan’ occurred; and it is clear that modern interpretations of the Bible can see little of the original Hebrew (and perhaps earlier) religious beliefs in this regard. Perhaps because even by the second century Ad Satan had evolved into an opponent of God’s will who posed a threat to mankind as a ‘deciever’.

So Satan is seen as leader of forces of darkness/ the enemy of Christ in this sense, rather than as a (willing?) servant of the ‘hosts of heaven’ and the Lord -as the Satan who tempts Jesus on the mountain, may be potentially represented upon close reading.

But the conception of an independent Satan, not actually indicated in the Bible, grew with nascent Christianity in the first centuries Ad through the works of – Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Augustine – etc until by 17th century Milton was portraying Satan as being the serpent in the Garden of Eden…

*Shawna Dolansky -Biblical Archaeology Society; How the Serpent became Satan. (April 18th,2021)

Yet even Jesus refers to the positive; ‘be wise as serpents’; and refers to the similarity of his fate to that of the healing serpent on the cross of Moses, the Nahash/Nehushtan, at John 3.14/15..

But if references to the positive or negative aspects of the serpent in the Bible in the history of Western literature are compared, or counted, there are virtually zero positive references or perspectives and interpretations equable to eastern symbols of the serpent.

And the confusing ‘interwoven’ stream/ duality of the positive and the negative ‘gods’  bloodlines, is one of the themes the Bible ‘encodes’, or includes in it’s narratives without referring to overtly apart from four brief verses in Genesis 6.

Enki/Ea,in his role as a serpent-god in Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian religions, is cast as the Devilas such in the Bible, at least under first impressions.Seethe books of Moses, Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Job, the synoptic gospels, St John, Revelations, for references to serpents/ sea-monsters such as Rahab, (the ‘primeval serpent’/ pride, arrogance) Tannin, (‘sea-dragon’), Leviathan- both mentioned in Isaiah (27.1)–and in Job (41.10) etc and so on… and yet Leviathan’s meaning inHebrew is ‘to join or connect things’, hence the tribe of Levi were the priest ‘caste’ of Israel with no specific area or homeland. As states, it is a ‘verb of building, and a verb that lies at the heart of intelligence and cognition’. Again connecting the serpent of the Garden of Eden to the ‘fall’/increased consciousness that came with eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowing. And as the Sumerian deities particularly Enki/Ea, the water/ serpent ‘god’, created mankind/the first ‘Adam and Eve’ by infusing celestial genetics of the Anunnaki into early humans – thus creating ‘homo sapiens’, or ‘man that knows’ ; so this is a puzzling narrative.

Perhaps a lesson in humility, in that however much wisdom mankind has attained by eating of the Tree of Knowing, it has not been given of the Tree of Immortality- (the key aim of Gilgamesh’s quest, the Plant of Life, and one which he obtains by diving deep into the Apsu – the abyss – and then loses, it being promptlystolen by the ‘lion of the ground’, the snake…)

See the Gilgamesh section for more on this.

This subject, labyrinthine and profound,  is at the heart of the numerous meanings and references to the ‘serpent’, and the ‘devil’, and the ‘nehash’/’nehushtan’ (brazen, copper serpent affixed to a pole)the serpent of healing* made by Moses . It is a clear theme of the Bible that positive aspects of the ‘serpent’, especially in it’s complex symbolism, are entwined with more obviouslynegative  references and characteristics, to confuse and even mis-direct the unquestioning reader…

*the Nahash created specifically for healing serpent-bites of the Seraphim- if so, this may be Moses indicating the value of the Nehash to those with higher levels of the reptilian lineage within their blood! In effect the existence of a path,or remedy, for healing the ‘sins’ and imbalances of such bloodline(s) !

And in keeping with the theme of metaphorical meanings relating to higher dimensions, the Nehushtan can be seen to resemble a sine-wave upon an x and y axis turned vertically; and additionally, has many connotations relating (coincidentally?) to medicine and healing, something which probably originated withinSumerian and Egyptian culture and from there to the Hebrew, Greek, and on to modernity;

a. Sine-wave upon an x- and y- axis

b. Religious picture of Moses and the Nehushtan, the Brazen (brass) Serpent.

c. The Caduceus, a Greek and then Roman inspired symbol, of commerce, nationhood etcetera.

d. The Rod of Asclepius, also Greco-Roman, used nowadays to signify medical matters.

Allpictures from Wikimedia, Public Domain.

(The winged caduceus is a Greek symbol of Mercury also from antiquity, and is separate but similar to the Rod of Asclepius, which has medical connotations; but their usage in modern medicine symbology is largely the same, as the fourth symbol shows the Rod of Asclepius as depicted widely on ambulances in modern life).

The poet William Blakepainted Jacob’s Ladder, in 1804, in which the ladder to heaven bears some resemblance with a logarithmic spiral, something which was first drawn in 1525 by the incredible artist Albrecht Durer; it is a ‘self-similar’ spiral incorporating in it’s geometric progression the harmonic ratios of phi as it grows, and was called by Durer an ‘eternal line’. (Durer also painted the famous work ‘Melencolia’ in1514, featuring an angel, ladder to heaven, and various mathematics and geometer’s tools, showing his ability to combine understanding with artistic talent. Indeed, Durer wrote Four Books on Measurement, and Four Books on Human Proportion examining such questions).The painting by Blake of a helical spiral shows he toomay well have had some awareness of the importance of the (sacred) geometries within nature and reality, such as the shape of DNA in it’s double-helix, in many forms of life such as plants, sea-shells etc, even in the shape of galaxies – particularly as Jacob’s Ladder is a central concept of the Bible in depicting the places on earth which are ‘gateways’ for higher-dimensional energies. Something we examine in part II of this Bible section, Sacred Sites.

a. William Blake; Jacobs Ladder, 1804.Attribution; Wikimedia, Public Domain.

b. Albrecht Durer; Melancholia, 1514.

c. Albrecht Durer; study of the symmetries and proportions of the body, 1557; and d. his sketch of the geometries of sine-waves, 1525 – which closely resembles the squared circle as studied in the Geometry section.

The metaphorical meanings related to the serpent from so many related cultures of the Near East in antiquity may offer some explanation for why Michelangelo depicted Moses in his famous sculpture (in the Church of St Peter-in-Chains, in Rome), with horns upon his head,  in contrast to explanations proposing that the convention of the middle ages in this regard stemmed from a linguistic mis-interpretation of the biblical words used in the passage when Moses came down from Mt Sinai…from the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible it was read as ‘his face was horned with light from conversation with the Lord’, from which the convention stemmed.

The word in question (‘qaran’) concerns Moses’ face ‘shining like the Sun’ when he came down Mt Sinai from seeing the Lord; and yet some perspective can be found in studying the Dead Sea Scrolls found  in 11 caves at Qumran from 1947 – 56. Among the 984 texts found of biblical scriptures etcetera were copies in several caves of the deuterocanonical Book of  Jubilees, the Book of Noah, the Book of Giants,  which is parallel in part to 1Enoch, showing the question of the celestial/hybrid lineages was not unconsidered in Hebrew religious groups. A full copy of 1Enoch did not surface in the ‘West’ until 1778 when James Bruce brought 3 copies back to England and France from Ethiopia, after nearly a decade of exploration. In this text Noah was born ‘a strange son, diverse from and unlike man, and resembling the sons of the god of heaven‘with skin, and hair ‘as white as wool and as red as a rose’, and a ‘face which shone like the Sun’ and eyes that ‘lit up the whole house’ (ch.106) prompting his father Lamech (!) to ask whether he was in fact not his, but the ‘child of a Watcher’. The answer of Enoch is a masterpiece of misdirection… So the fact of Moses’ shining face being an explanation for the horns is actually only confirmation of the same narrative contained within the historical texts…  a question we examine in more depth in part 5 of this section.      

Additionally, the 20th century and the archeological discoveries in Sumer, Akkadia, and the related civilizations of Iraq/Mesopotamia brought the antique depictions of the Anunnaki (as divine beings who created mankind, and the ensuing civilizations); the clearest identifying feature of this tribe, across thousands of years of portrayals, was their head-dresses depicted with the ‘horns of cattle’, as described by custom; thus linking Moses with the divine tribe, ie as one of the offspring of the ‘sons of the gods’; likewise through the preponderance of unusual serpent-imagery in the life-story of Moses, and his brother Aaron, withEnki/Ea and thereafter the Nagas also. But it is in fact possibly fair to consider that the ‘horned’ head-dresses of the Anunnaki may actually be – snakes ! See for example firstly, the Tree of Life stelae, where one of the Seven Sages (possibly Shamash the solar ‘god’) wears the divine head-dress; plus armbands which are representations of serpents in many versions. Likewise the stela of Shamash and the four-rivers star or planetary symbol from Sippar circa 900 Bce, when it was a Babylonian city.

(left) Shamash from Assyrian stela of the Tree of Lifeat the British Museum. Attribution; cos# contributor.

Notice also the serpent arm and wrist bracelets worn by Shamash in the Assyrian stela. The photographs of representations of Oannes from Babylon, and a winged deity from the Assyrian civilization, both on page 8 likewise show the use of the forms of headwear for indicating the celestial nature of such beings. This custom spread throughout the Near East in antiquity, across thousands of years, despite various alterations and achange of understanding of their inner meaning with time, perhaps.

(below) The Tablet of Shamash, fromSippar 900Bce.  Wikimedia, G.Todd.

And in related manner, there is the depiction of the gods of Egypt, likewise the creators of mankind, and civilization, with head-wear that is surmounted by a serpent. This was called the Uraeus, a word stemming (like Orion/Ur-anna) from ‘Ur-‘ or ‘Or‘, the original word in Sumer meaning the ‘light of the heavens’, or ‘the light of the Sun’; later passed on to the Hebrew language, for example the word used by Isaiah for ‘light’ is ‘Or’, connecting to later words centred upon meanings linked with gold, light, and order. (See the Notes and Numbers section for more on this).

 One reason perhaps why it was a common artistic custom in Egypt to show the rays of the sun as serpents is this link, or metaphor, between solar energies and serpents, also present within the Sumerian civilizations.

(below left) Seti I offering to the Goddess of Truth, Temple of Abydos,

from John Ward, 1902. Attribution; Wikimedia, IABi.

So Michelangelo’s sculpture contained some of the meaning from antiquity of the ‘horns’ of the divine as represented by the Anunnaki, and the Egyptian gods, while being guided by the Latin wording of St Jerome to represent Moses with ‘horns’ as written.

And one logical conclusion which may be drawn from this analysis is that the gods of Sumer, and of Egypt were signified artistically by head-dresses which represented the light of the heavens, rather than the horns of cattle… this may be related to the pathways the sun’s energy takes through the earth as ‘dragon-lines’ or serpent-lines, as well as the wider set of symbolism linking the serpent and the sun…

In the Old Testament, the negative aspects of kingship are often left unstated, or not directly referred to (as in the epic of Gilgamesh) –and yet this is an essential  part of the narrative of the first full King of Israel, David, considered as such to be the founding father of the nation of Israel – as we shall now see.


DAVID, introduced in 1 Kings16.18 as a callow youth with many inherent virtues, is the youngest of eight brothers on what is a homestead and farm, rather than a  wealthy residence in the capital of the nation of the Hebrews. So this (easily overlooked) youth, born circa 1050Bce according to time-lines derived from the Bible,is chosen by God as the ruler of the Hebrew nation, and becomes as such the first shepherd-king of the nation of Israel.

As such, he had to be both ‘everyman’,representative of all, and yet unique; – one of the people, and ‘one in a million’… as represented, incidentally, by the fact he is the only ‘David’ in the entire Bible..!

And it is this conflict, representative of the demands placed upon, (and the dualnature of), the ‘bloodlines of Kings’,  which the life of David symbolizes more than any other character in the entire OldTestament.

David held the kingship of Israel from circa 1035- 970 Bce, according to the estimates of biblical scholars and archaeologists.

In the extensive sectionsof the Old Testament concerning David’s life, one packed with drama, incident and  historic events, he  rules as a popular and revered king; after Saul’s short and incomplete reign, David is the first true king of Israel and Judah after the era of the judges. It is David who establishes the base of the nation of Israel, securing the land against hostile tribes/ nations,forming diplomatic alliances with others, doing the ‘will of the Lord’ as directed by YHVH and the chief priests Samuel, and Zadok, and establishing the capital city in Jerusalem, commencing many building works, customsand reforms during his reign, (traces of which are believed by archaeologists to have been discovered in the strata of Jerusalem uncovered in the last century or so).

The narrative of King David is equally significant in that it contains in essence the history of all kings – and queens; and the growth of the nation,or the kingdom (for good or bad) from early tribes,races and regionsetc. The institution of kingship in other words.

As we have seen, the Hebrew civilization in Israel initially had leaders who were community or tribal leaderswho were also divinely ‘ordained’ messengers; people such as Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Enoch, Elijah, Joshua and so on.

After some period, Judges assumed the authority of rulership. They were chosen from the various 12 tribes of Israel at random, coming to the fore in times of emergency in particular to unify the tribes militarily. As such they occupied the position of ‘final authority’ across the tribes, thus providing leadership, and justice. This period lies between the first conquering of the land of Canaan by Joshua, c.1350Bc, to the formation of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel c.1025Bc. There were 17 or so different judges, ruling for on average about 20 or so years. These are described in the Book of Judges, the First Book of Samuel, and 1 & 2Chronicles. The first judge wascalled Othniel, (although Moses was described as a ‘shofet’ or ‘judge’ over Israel…delegating cases of justice in accordance with the advice of his father-in-law Jethro(Exodus 13.18-26)The last judge was Samson, who ruled as a judge, despite his isolated and unruly or chaoticlifestyle, for twenty years .

It was after the judges that Israel inaugurated the reign of  Kings – Saul was the ‘first’ king of Israel, chosen by the Lord, but after acting dishonestly and violently against his servant David, was judged by the divinity as unworthy to be king; he was thus ‘judged’ and died in battle against the Philistines soon after – and the young shepherd-boy turned courtier and soldier, David,  was ‘chosen by the Lord’,  and became the first full king of Judah and Israel, c.1015Bc.

He reigned for 40 years, 7 in Judah, then 33 in Israel, in Jerusalem, then was followed by his (chosen) son,Solomon…establishing the concept of inherited sovereignty.

But the institute of kingship was asked for by the people of Israel after the judges period; and YHVH (through the head-priest Samuel) warns the people of Israel ofthe dangers of kingship;

     1Samuel 8.11-18;

And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reignover you; he will take your sons, and appoint them for himself,

forhis chariots, and to be his horsemen…

And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks and to be bakers.And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, eventhe best of them, and give them to his servants.

He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye

shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day…

And so on – but possibly the demands made of the people of establishing the nascent state led to their asking YHVH for a king; from fleeing the captivity of Egypt,and the military forces of the Pharaoh,to crossing the wilderness for 40 years ; to the wresting of the land of Israel through battle from various occupying tribes and peoples; and then building the nation. (And likewise were punished comprehensively for allowing their faith in YHVH to be affected by reverence for other peoples’ ‘gods’). Perhaps they were envious of thegains of war achieved by other Near Eastern ‘nations’ led by kings. So they chose to be ruled and led by a king. 1Samuel8.20 ‘That we also may be like the other nations; and our king judge us,and go out before us, and fight our battles’.

At the time of his first appearance, (ie. apart from the priest Samuel visiting his families farm to bless ‘the future king of Israel’) David is the most normal of youths, a shepherd-boy most often found up in the hills looking after his charges… and yet YHVH tells Samuel, the highest priest in the land, that this boy will play a central role in God’s plans for the nation. At Saul’s court in 1Samuel16.14-15it states,

But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Sauland an evil spirit from theLORD troubled him.

His servants noting this,decide to seek out ‘a man who is a cunning player on a harp, so that when Saul is troubled , the music shall make him well…’

And the answer to their inquiries isthe youth David, the unobtrusive sheep-herd and youngest of the 8 sons of Jesse.

After this follows his life’s story in becoming king of Israel, and his (unspoken) gradual journey from everyman and nation-builder, to autocrat… no character in the Bible (across the two books each of Samuel,and  Chronicles, and Kings) receives as much attention as David – other than Moses in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New Testament.

It is fair, in following the closely detailed twists and turns of fate and circumstance which characterize the entire life of David as an allegory of the institution of Kingship through the Bible, and in wider terms, through history.

He progresses as a loyal servant/soldier for the worldly and divinely chosen (at that time) ‘king’, Saul –  in the process going  through tests of strength and valourand worthiness, and accumulating a group of his own fellow soldiers and kinsmen as loyal supporters; as Saul becomes increasingly irrational  and insecure, he acts  maliciouslyand violently towards David.

But gradually becomingindependent of Saul, even while emotionally attached/ loyal to him, after surviving more than one unfair assassination attempts by his sovereign,he and his men wage ‘guerrilla war’ on Saul’s forces.When the Philistines kill Saul (and his son) in battle, as foretold by Samuel to Saul as divine punishment, David is immediately crowned king, on a triumphant day in Jerusalem.

 His kingship is born in great positivity, of establishing the ‘divinely approved’ nation,  to create  the ‘righteous kingdom’ of Heaven on Earth – his hope is of being a representative of all the people,before the LORD.    

But a scene from his coronation day perfectly encapsulates the conflicting pressures history has exerted upon virtually all kings and queens. This is when the people of Jerusalem welcome their new king into (the public space of) the centre of Jerusalem;

 2SAMUEL 6.15-23;

So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the trumpet.

And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David,MichalSaul’s daughter

(David’s wife) looked through a window,andsaw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and shedespised him in her heart. . .

And he dealt among all the people, even among the whole multitude of Israel, as well to the women as men, to every one a cake ofbread, and a good piece of flesh, and a flagon of wine. So allthe people departed every one to his house.Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughterof Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king ofIsrael today, who uncovered himself today in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants,as one of the vain fellows shamelesslyuncovereth himself!

And David said unto Michal, It was before the LORD, which chose mebefore thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the LORD,over Israel; therefore will I play beforethe LORD.

Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

This establishes the early sense of his decency and openness, in contrast to later years, when the King is secure, and complacent in his power… in fact though, almost from the first the reality is less than perfect.

The Bible narrates small acts of avarice,malice, machiavellian practices (sending the husband of a married woman (Bathsheba) he desires off to be killed in war) and in broad terms, becoming compromised by circumstances -perhaps the politics of the ‘world’;

Towards the end he is largely completely distanced from the concerns and hearts of the ordinary people who constitute his kingdoms’ people, so that his final years include divine judgement; infirmity; depending on other’s energies; acts of vengeance (breaking  promises of forgiveness); and establishment of inherited, rather than earned or deserved kingship.

– so the story of David becomes one of the dangers of ‘worldly power’, in it’s gradual divergence from the moral ‘north’ of the priests and ‘shepherd-kings’ of early eras…even with the best of intentions, due to the constant demands of needing to achieve security/fight wars/promote unity/ assimilate or stifle elite conflicts/ resist any of the temptations of power and wealth; and so on.

And Israel learnt the inherent problems and contradictions of the political dynamics of ruling a ‘nation-state’ which few foretold when asking YHVH for a king to lead and protect them. 

The story of David certainly highlights these dynamics; and is also possibly an allegory concerning either; the ‘corrupting nature of power’ – or the ‘corrupting nature of powerful genes’…) – which reminds of the constant references by Lamech and others, to ‘guilt’, or a ‘burden’ which means that “If Cain  shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold’ (Gen4.24).

And Jesusrefers to this quite directly, in sayingto Peter ‘not 7 but 70 times should you forgive your brother if he sins against you’, he is referring to Cain in particular, and the long-term (inevitable, and  predictable) effect of ‘negative’ genes upon the self, and the need to continually work to avoid being subsumed by them).


 Later books from the end of Solomon’s life detail the arc of the state of Israel, a fluctuating series of rulers /dynasties etcetera from 940Bce onwards – the splits between the twelve tribes immediately after Solomon’s death into 10 northern and 2 southern states, of Israel and Judah, until 738Bce and the Assyrian defeat and exile of the tribes of Israel to the cities of Mesopotamia. Likewise their return and rebuilding of society,plus the longstanding period of captivity from 603 – 539 Bce in Babylon, the return again, and the lengthy period of instability and upheaval between then and the coming of the predicted Messiah Jesus.

Much of the religious writing of the Old Testament,etc from this period is distressed in nature, such as Lamentations, or visionary/ prophecy/ concerned with YHVH ‘s punishment of the people of Israel for their shortcomings/breaches of the Divine Covenant. The prophets of the later ages of Hebrew civilization Ezekiel/ Isaiah/Daniel/etc from circa 900 – 200BC. foretell the political and military upheavals to be faced by the nation in the centuries preceding the coming of the messiah, the putative saviour of Israel.

From this  then begins  the new Testament and the ‘arrival of Christ’ – at a time when the Roman empire has replaced the various invading empires (or self-rule).While traditionally political and religious power were kept separate in Israel, for obvious reasons, in the time of the Roman occupation the religious leaders assumed greater power because of their authority; a situation which

exacerbated the conflict between Jesus and the Sanhedrin.

Whatever the intricacies, it is in these circumstances that the beginnings  of Christianity are based, with the birth of the infant Jesus, in a time and place characterized by a sense of dislocation and uncertainty, through the demands of politics and empire….

 To return to the encoding of Cos# themes within the imagery of the life stories being considered – the Bible doesn’t ever straightforwardly say that David was partially of the ‘gods’ bloodline. The only mention of the ‘sons of the gods’ matin with human women is Genesis 6.1-4 and other references to ‘giants’; and yet as we shall see, the Deluge only cleared away the most visible of the excesses of the nephilim; let alone what other ‘celestial’ bloodlines existed within the region, and then within the tribes of Israel also.

David was an unknown and lowly shepherd of an ordinaryfamily of the tribe of when first discovered; indeed so completely normal and unnoticeable was he, being the youngest son of 8, that his father didn’t even think to put him forward when Samuel asked him to present his sons, the Lord having told him the next King of Israel would be found among them…(1Samuel 7.11)

1Samuel 16.10-11;

Again, Jesse made 7 of his sons to pass before Samuel. AndSamuel said unto Jesse, The LORD hath not chosen these.

And Samuel said…Are here all thy children? And Jesse saidThere remaineth yet the youngest,and,behold,he keepeth thesheep. And Samuel said, Send and fetch for him, for we will not sit down till he come hither.

When David is presented to Elijah the prophet anoints his head with oil, in recognitionof his worthiness as future king – after which David has the ‘spirit of the Lord with him’ from that day.(16.13) The next verse 16.14 states;

But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.

His servants look for ways to assuage his emotional ‘state’, and devise the idea of using pleasant music to sooth him. Upon which one of the servants says,


Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters,and a comely person,and the LORD is with him.

There are several things to note from this section of the book of Samuel,indeed the narrative described may be seen to encapsulate several of the most important themes in Cosmic#. And fittingly, David’s character, which is blessed in the sense of being harmonious, is described here fullyfor the first time at Samuel 16.18, the value of the ‘golden section’, phi! (ie. 1.618, etc)

And the content of the verse, the use of music to change human moods,(and consciousness) is correspondingly a cosmic# subject; especially as music so neatly personifies the importance of the Octave, the use of string lengths to calculate vibration rates (and vice-versa, as in ancient China), harmonic ratios within reality and so on… so (sacred) architecture has been termed as being ‘music set in stone’.Note here the fraction 7/ 8 as related to the notes of the Octave, and thus the creation of newforms ofenergies.Related perhaps, in Ecclesiastes (the wisdom of David’s son,Solomon,according to tradition),the attention is brought to the significance of the proportion of 7 and 8, possibly meaning the 7 notes of the octave,and the 8th, the same as the first but of a new octave;


Cast thy bread upon the waters; for thou shalt

find it after many days.

Give a portion to seven, and also to eight; for thou

knowest not what evil shall be upon the earth.

(ie, what consequences actions will initiate – or how events will unfold in the long-term).Related to this, in Cos# the following significant numbers – 864 and 432 (numbers central to the material reality of the  Sun, sunlight, the Sun and Moonand the Earth,and the Square and Circle);and 123.456789 (as 10²/9² = 1.23456,  the square root of 1.23456 therefore equals 1.111, as 10/9 = 1.111) and 987.654321;all significant values which appear in many subjects within cos#. So –

  864/ 7 = 123.456

”  x 8 = 987.654

And considering the theory that the source of much of the content of Sumerian, Babylonian and Hebrew cultures was based on ‘cosmic#’ in content, it is of relevance that there are hidden references to the keynote numbers – Pi,Phi,345.6,864and 111, 2.22, 1.23etc within significant verses within the Bible. . .

– and indeed, there are many further examples of hidden ‘encoded’  cosmic numbers in terms of metaphors – such as 7, 77 and 777 within narratives, and chapter/verse placings, and  as we shall examine shortly. Something that hasn’t received muchawareness in study of the Bible before, due perhaps to the low profile of the significance of such stated cosmic# values.

The blessing of sovereigns/bloodlines by ‘the Lord’ is likewise raised in this story ofSaul and David’s personalities at the cross-over point of their ‘destinies’, which are dependent upon their behaviours deriving from their essential selves. . .  as Saul is unable to rise above his base instincts David replaces him as the leader of the Israelites, according to YHVH’s judgement. Also a feature is the use by the Lord of ‘an evil spirit’ – a ‘satan’, or ‘adversary’ – to test the worthiness of a person’s character, such as Saul…the significant point being it is ‘a spirit sent by the Lord’, as stated in 1Samuel16.14. Something which does not necessarily indicate what God’s ‘judgement’ is in such cases as this and others.

    There is more clear encoding of cosmic# wisdom in David’s life;  the name of David’s wife Bethsheba means Beth; house of – Sheba; seven.As seen also in Beer-sheba,the Well of Seven,in Kings 16.12 etc.) Both names are unexplained by conventional commentators in terms of relating to the Law of Seven and the octave, more in terms of ‘oath’, as in ‘by seven seals’, etc -yet if the Bible uses allegory, in addition to historical narratives, this may be something theuse of Sheba/’Seven’ connects to in terms of purely abstract processes as noted concerning the octave.

And immediately after David’s reign comes that of his son, Solomon; who most famously meets with his paramour- the Queen of Sheba.

So, amazingly, she too is named ‘Seven’, just like his father David’s wife Bethsheba. The queen of Sheba (1Kings 10) is stated to be an Ethiopian queen according to academics, and the Kebra Nagast,(an Ethiopian religious text dating from the 12th century Ad approximately).Kebra Nagast, (reminiscent of the Indian name for the royal cobra, ‘nagas nagas’), means ‘the glory of kings’.

She is also referred to as the ‘Queen of the South’ by Jesus when he talks of the ‘queen of the south who came from the ends of the earth to hear Solomon’s wisdom’, (Matt.12.42, Luke11.31). In his words Jesus shows his understanding of the metaphoric meanings contained within the Solomon/ Sheba narrative; for the land she came from, Ethiopia is not particularly ‘the ends of the earth’; but in the sense of South referred to from Sumerian times onwards, it refers to the  symbolism  of the ‘Ap-su’ –as the Sumerian deity Enki was ‘lord of the Ap-su’- the abyss which is the subterranean reservoir of waters from which all life comes. In metaphoric terms it is the ‘deeper’ (lunar, feminine, subconscious) areas of the instinctive, stomach centre, in contrast to the other two, the emotional, and intellectual centres, as Enki was in contrast to Anu (skies/heavens/mind), and Enlil (lands/heart/chest/emotions) in their three-fold division of the world. The Etymology section looks at that of South /Sudin Ab-zu / Ap-su, as in Ziusudra, in these terms; the stories of Utnapishtim, Ziusudra, Atra-hasis, Noah etc are all filled with the symbolism of the instinctive centre – the subconscious, ‘subterranean’ centre – which directs survivalof the self, and the instinctive sensing of reality. Thus including within Enki/Ea’s epithet ‘lord of the South’ all the symbolic aspects to the ‘ap-su’, the subterranean founts of all water, and fertility within the land. As we have seen, the Epic of Gilgamesh located the Plant of Life, or Immortality within the depths of the Ab-zu.

Likewise the Temple of Solomon was situated at the navel-point of the earth where the waters of the abyss drained at the end of the Deluge, and from there brought vitality to the visible world – a clear continuation of the Sumerian myths of the Ap-su. (Additionally, as with so many Sumerian and biblical figures, such as Rahab and Tiamat etcetera, the multi-level and symbolic meanings contained within the (cosmic consciousness of) epithets such as Enki ‘s ‘Lord of the Ap-su’ may relate the ‘depths’ to other contexts, be that of the consciousness, or space itself. . . a narrative at the centre of the mythologies of the Anunnaki, and their creation of humankind and civilization).

So biblical concepts of sea-monsters ‘of the depths’, such as Rahab, Tiamat and Leviathan are all related to the serpent; and potentially to aspects of the self such as the ‘reptilian centre’ of the stomach level of physiology – a parallel which points to the coherence of the Sumerian and biblical narratives. So this is a highly complex epithet ‘Queen of the South’, casually inserted into the narrative by Jesus in it’s manings and associations.

Related to these concepts of the ap-su, the word tebah (Ark, or box) is used only twice in the entire bible; once to refer to the Ark of Noah, and once to the box Moses is floated on the Nile in as a baby, pointing to the nature of the Ark as being able to withstand the pressures of ‘the waters’ when in flood, on a personal level also; and both characters are indeed indicated to be connected to the celestial Sumerian bloodlines, a point which is of some relevance.

And incidentally, the only character named Tebah in the bible is the (Sumerian) son of Nahor, the brother of Abraham, as mentioned in Genesis 22.22 ! As we shall see, Abraham and his relatives provide many links with Sumer, and the bloodlines of the Anunnaki, which are subtly indicated within the details of their – and other’s – lives.

And this is at the heart in one respect of the taleof Solomon and Sheba, with the metaphoric layers of meaning contained within it.The non-personal aspects of the mythic story indicate it’s links with abstract knowledge – and thus potentially with ‘esoteric’ consciousness found within themystery schools of Hebrew and Near East societies. SoShebavisits – exchanges gifts with–and then bonds with/ ’marries’King Solomon– thus forming a narrative of the conjoining of cosmic male and female energies – solar and lunar –perhaps the clearest in the Bible..! (2Chronicles 9/ 1Kings 10.1)This repeats the (Nagas) theme of male/female lovers (or ‘energies’) often depicted as positive/negative energy lines or serpentswhich intertwine.

Illustrations; DNA intertwining double-helix; FuHsi and NuKua from China,Tang dynasty 651Ad; Hindu stela of male and female Nagas deities at Belur. Attribution; Wikimedia, Public Domain.

And it is at this point in the Bible, in listing the gifts that the queen gave to king Solomon that the first mention in the Bible of the number 666 is made (the number of solar energy, as stated by John Michell in his work‘City of Revelation’) – and this is of talents (a weight) of gold, which has been the metal representative of the sun throughout history; Sheba gifts him 120 talents of gold at 1Kings 10.10; and mention is made four verses later at 1Kings 10.14 of the amount brought in a year from ‘Ophir’, namely 666 talents of gold. The number 120 has cosmic# significance too, being 1/3 of 360, as well as being the product of 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 x 5; in this way it can indicate the presence of one of the thirds of +/-/= in the Law of Three. (It may also be viewed asholding cos# meanings related to the number five – linking at as such to nature, growth, and Phi; indeed, in esoteric numerology five is the number of ‘man’ – and a pentagon holds ratios of Phi within it’s internal measures, as does every human. The number of phi proportions within the human body (and why they exist there) is too extensive to list now; perhaps it will better studied in a full article later in the year.

So here it mayindicates Sheba brings female energy (-) to the marriage, and Solomon male energy (+). This value of 120 was extant in the (cos#) works of art of antiquity from c.3000Bce onwards; when the Epic of Gilgamesh used it as a metaphor (in the number of poles Gilgamesh had to cut to propel the ship to the ‘far away’ (ie, space) where the figure granted eternal life by Enlil after the Flood, Utnapishtim (Noah) was to be found – showing in this way it’s relation to cosmic matters. This punting (muscle power) was unfortunately made necessary because Gilgamesh had ‘broken the stone things’ and ‘picked all the urnu snakes’ in the forest prior to travel. These mysterious items are metaphors for higher energies, (referring perhaps to things such as minerals, crystals, energy-lines and so on) as we examine in more detail in the Gilgamesh section).

. . .

Ethiopia was also where copies of the Book of Enoch thought to date back to the 1st or 2nd century Bcewere discovered by the Scottish explorer Sir James Bruce in 1773. In fact it was Bruce who brought to the West and the modern world therefore not one classic and significant text (the Kebra Nagast) but the Book of Enoch too..!(see image left of a page of the Book of Enoch).

While the book dates most certainly to the 2nd or 3rd century Bce, (as portions of the Dead Sea Scrolls showed it’s existence from then at least) and the Kebra Nagast to the 13/14th century, it must be presumed the books Bruce was given were indeed more recent copies)…

(left) Page of the Book of Enoch, from the Ethiopicmanuscript, donated by James Bruce in 1778 to the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Attribution; Wikimedia Public Domain

The narrative of 1Enoch is very much concerned with the Watchers, the ‘sons of the gods’ mating with human women to create the Nephilim, hybrid bloodlines (like Cain’s) of strong negativity. Also with the granting of wisdom to the righteous Enoch to ‘help mankind rebuild after theDeluge’ is allowed to occur, to break the destructive influence of the Nephilim. And yet the line of Enoch, and Lamech and Noah is seen to be possibly of the ‘celestial’ bloodlines too – though whether negative, positive or intermediate is not clear. So the Book of Noah, and of Jubilees (and the Book of Enoch, thought to have been the source for the Bible’s references to the Watchers) describe the other-worldly appearance of the infant Noah when he is born, as we have already noted.

There are numerous semantic signposts to the influence of these sorts of genetics within the life of David and his relatives and sons. David’s lust for Bathsheba when she is still married to another man, and the ensuing murder of her husband leads to a child being born – who dies after living for just seven days, this showing the result of David’s breaking ofspiritual or moral laws… The next child conceived and born to them is Solomon (Peace/God,also meaning Sun in the Egyptian names of On, and Amun, as well as the name ‘Sol’ which may have links to the sun in pre-Latin languages). When David’s son Absalomattempts a coup from the Jerusalem palace while David is out of the city, he is eventually killed; in rabbinic commentaries David’s counsellor Hushai comforts him that the circumstances of the boy’s conception, as his mother was a captive, meant he was always bound for a troubled life and end. We will look at this period of David’s life now in much more detail nowto see whether these concerns were .


The argument that Anunnaki/ Enki/ serpent-based wisdom is present in the Bible,in continuation of Sumer/ABA and Egyptian cultures’ mythologies, is to some degree supported  by the presence of Nagas and Cos# references embedded deeply within the story of King David, as well as his wifeBathsheba, his son Solomon, his paramour the Queen of Sheba (as we have seen) – and further to this, much support is to be seen in many facetsof family, tribe, places and name… all of which can convey some meaning of inner essence by the structure of the word(s) used in the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. For example Jesus himself names Simon ‘Peter’, or ‘cephas’ (in Greek) as he will be the ‘rock upon which the church is built’ as the texts say. The name of Jerusalem likewise  means ‘foundation of peace’, or ‘completeness’ / wholeness’…and so on; indeed, as we shall see, place and character names contain an immense amount of information relating to their most significant characteristics.

The Nachashisthe brazen serpent which Moses makes (among a great dealof serpent imagery and metaphor in the life-story of Moses and his brother Aaron) to provide a form of healing for the people of Israel during their travails in the deserts after fleeing Egypt. Quite how this action, constructing a serpent which is attached to a pole in the ground, in the mountain camp of the Israelites provides healing to them, is unexplained. But it is clear that there are a slew of metaphorical meanings and references attached to such a construction at that time, leading all the way back to the serpent-god Enki, from the founding civilization of Sumer.

 So the Nahash is a thread which runs beyond the limits of the Israelites, and is a symbol of that enduring line-of-transmission which the Hebrew civilization continued as it found it’s own identity.

 As we have seen, the imperative for David to be ‘one of the people’,as well as the ‘highest representative’ of them, or one in a million is a sign-post to the midpoint between god(s) and men he was expected to inhabit.

It can almost be said to be the key to the story of David, and his son Solomon– ie the ensuing ‘bloodline of kings’, (which culminates in Jesus, although he did not seek political power in any way particularly). So, if we posit the connection between the Nagas,and the Nahash,and between the kings of Sumer etc and the Hebrew kings,as being representatives of the influence of the Nagas, the ‘cosmic messengers’ involved in creating mankind,and thus guiding mankind and creating intermediary bloodlines – it is of interest that the two references to people called Nehash in the Old Testament both serve in their symbolism to link King David to the bloodlines of the Nagas (in what appear to be both intentional, as well asindirect references). 

Nahash – the parent of Abigailwho was sister to David, and Zeruiah,at 2Samuel 17.25. (Some rabbis maintain Nahash is another name for David’s father, Jesse; others that it is the name of a prior wife to Jesse, before David’s mother…although strangely the mother of David is never named in any of the many chapters devoted to David’s life.

But either waywe are forced to confront the connection between Nahash and David in close genetic terms. Further emphasis is brought to bear in several passages where David reprimands excessive violence/bloodthirstiness in his captains (and three cousins, Joab, Abishai,and Asahel)by calling them ‘ye sons of Zeruiah’ (ie children of Nahash? as her mother is never named, while her father is Jesse)in what becomes a short-hand epithet for ‘men of violence’;

2Samuel 3.39;

And I am this day weak,though anointed king. And

these men the sons of Zeruiah be too hard for me;

The Lord shall reward the doer of evil according

to his wickedness.

In one of the most interesting passages of the life of David (among many), the following events occur; when King David is threatened with being ‘usurped’ by a faction led by his own son,Absalom,indeed appears defeated, he and his men/band of soldiers pass through a valley, out in the  hills and mountains, in a place of little shelter or comfort; a man they pass by (Shimei – he ‘who hears’) recognises them as the men who ‘killed’ (replaced as king) his blood-relative,Saul.

2Samuel 16.5-13;

And when David came to Bahurim,behold,thence came out

a man of  the  house of Saul,whose name was Shimei…; he came forth, and cursed still as he came.

And he cast stones at David and at all the servants of King David; and all the mighty men were on his right hand and on his left.

And thus said Shimei when he cursed, Come out,come out, thou bloody man, and thou man of Belial. (Satan)

The LORD hath returned upon thee all the blood of the house of Saul,  in whose stead thou hast reigned; and the LORD hath delivered thekingdom into the hand of Absalom thy son; and behold, thou art takenin thy mischief,because thou art a bloody man,

Then said Abishai the son of Zeruiah unto the king, Why should this  dead dog curse my lord the king? let me go over,I pray thee,and take off his head.

And the king said, What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah? So let him curse, because the LORD hath said unto him,Curse David. Who shall then say,Wherefore hast thou done so? …let him alone,and let him curse; for the LORD hath bidden him.

It may be that the LORD will look on mine affliction, and that the LORDwill requite me good for his cursing this day.

And as David and his men went by the way, Shimei went along on the hill’s side over against him,and cursed as he went,and cast stones at him,and cast dust.


What a strange passage !And one which raises two immediate points; as well as the number of semantic clues relating David to aspects of the negative lines – the use of the name Belial (Satan), the casting of stones, dust, curses, etc – what precisely is the affliction David refers to? the situation of being challenged by his son Absalom; or in his day of humiliation, forced out of Jerusalem to the middle of nowhere, where he is insultedby a small, ‘powerless’ man,in front of his men – or the affliction of the ‘curse’ of his kingly bloodline, rather like the emotion of Lamech,of despair at the imbalances of the bloodlines of the Nephilim/Cain etc..? (Hence Lamech’s comment regarding the culpability of his bloodline  ‘for if Cain shall be avenged (punished) sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold’ (Gen4.24) – possibly also meaning forgiveness will take a longer time too). And it is the same with Moses, with his wife sayingto himthe same thing,“thou art a bloody man”; a defining characteristic of the ‘dark’ bloodlines equable to Cain. (Exodus4.25)

From this question, we find that the Hebrew stem of David – dawa – means to be ill!  Specifically to do with the ‘having the flows’ ie of inner ‘fluids’; but also possibly indicating the ‘lineage’ (or ‘stream’) of the ‘seed’ of the ‘gods’, in this way providing signposts of the inner nature of David’s bloodline. (as the Sumerian Creation myth of Enki and Ninhursag; the Creation of Dilmun states; “upon Ninhursag he caused to flow the ‘water of the heart’, She received the ‘water of the heart’, the water of Enki”. The name Moses meaning ‘from the waters he was drawn’(actually stated as such by the biblical text, at Exodus 2.10) resonates in this way to the epithets applied to Enki/Ea in Sumer and following civilizations, the ‘Lord of the Waters’ /Ab-zu or ‘Deeps’).

This ‘affliction’ may thus be whyNoahis so named, meaning ‘respite’ –arguedby some to be from the oppressions of the nephilim and their offspring – or possibly from the punishments of YHVH on mankind – or potentiallyperhaps meaning ‘respite’from the weight of the affliction of being in the bloodline of the ‘(sons of) gods’, ie. as a recipient of God’s mercy as well as ‘punishment’. . . hence the whole narrative of the events surrounding the birth of Noah depicted in the Book of Noah, Jubilees, Enoch and so on, greatly significant texts in the non-canonical scriptures of antiquity. Namely in their providing support to the ‘conundrum’ that Noah is a ‘son of the Watchers’ ie a celestial/human hybrid, as evidenced by the nature of his skin, eyes, hair, chest, and so forth, who is one of the few humans allowed to survive the Flood – a cataclysm created because of the growth of the aberrant Nephilim’s control over mankind…. We will look at this in a little while, as well as in the Moses section later.

 So, indeed the night the two heavenly beings come to take Enoch(the great-grandfather of Noah, in the line Enoch – Methuselah – Lamech – Noah) up through the heavens to receive God’s blessings, he describes in the first-person account the events preceding the celestial visit. (The Book of the Secrets of Enoch, translated from Slavonic versions of Enoch by Rutherford H.Platt, 1928);

I was alone in the house. I was in great trouble, weeping with my eyes, and was resting, and fell asleep on my couch. And there appeared to me two men, exceedingly tall, such as I have never seen on Earth. Their faces shone like the Sun, their eyes were like a burning light, and fire was coming out of their mouths…their arms were like golden wings.They stood at the head of my couch, and called me by my name.”

No reason is given for his emotional state, this being left to the reader’s discernment. And secondly, the description of the celestial beings closely matches the known characteristics of the Seraphim, as described in the various books of the Bible and apocrypha such as Noah, Jubilees, and so on – not just ‘beings of light’, but of ‘fire’ too, who are concerned with punishing the guilty, such as the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. This entire narrative, which runs deeply contradictory to instinctive beliefs, may well prove to be a fertile area of research within the Bible and related subjects; and may be a clue that the Bible – representing ‘cosmic consciousness’ – is more complex than common-sense dictates.

To examine these themes more closely in a significant period of David’s reign, it is worthgiving a quick glossary of the Name meanings of the people and places in 2Samuel,as we take a detailed look at the insurrection of David’s sovereignty by his eldest son Absalom -as well as the highly significant events taking place at the end ofKing David’s life, and the succession of his favoured son Solomon, connected as they are in the narrative, and to the themes of this section.

Mahanaim– meaning –  settle down/select camp (the competing bloodlines of the Houses of Saul/ David?)

Abishai-‘my father Yah exists’ – perhaps enphasizing ‘heroic’/ celestial aspect of the ‘sons of Zeruiah’.

Absalom – the father is peace (not my-father is peace – abishalom)

Ahithophel – ah;brother of- tapal; tasteless;foolish.  See also-from Greek; Ophites/ Ophelites; a serpent-worshipping group(which relates to his position/advice/fate.)

Joab    – the father is lord (abb.of Yahweh + ab;father) – “obedient servant”?

Shobi   -to turn/transition point /captive !

Ephraim – to be fruitful, or wealthy;to be depleted…

Rabbah  – city of Ammon/Nehash;connected somehow with the giant Og and the Rephaim – possibly inbattling/ defeating them.Also to become many,or great/multitude;root of ‘rabbi’. Thisties in with Ammon/Nahash bloodline(s)… also; to shoot  (arrows).

Maacah – oppression, pressure.

Barzillai-associate of the son of Nahash. Means ‘iron bar’ (of the Lord) in keeping with king Nahash’sseverity/’cruelty’…

Zeruiahneck – bind – adversary – rock!!

Abiathar– (priest line of Eli) – remnant/what remains/ a cord which ties.

Bahurim – choice,youth,chosen one.

Zadok   – justice, righteousness.

Ahimaaz – son of Zadok,helps warn David,possibly a deputy of Solomon later. The  root of ‘ma’az’ not used in Hebrew, but related arabic; ‘to console’- also to hurry,hasten, to be light-footed.

Archite – a Canaanite tribe said to be near to Anathoth,Bethel and Luz – all relevant to the themes of this section. There is the sense contained within the word of  ‘long’,high/’arch’ etc.

Anathoth – 1Kings2.26 Related to Anunnakiand/or Thoth? Abiathar comes from/ islinked in meaning to;time cycles / answer to prayers /correspondences/fulfilling a task /to afflict, oppress,or humble. All of which can be linked to the original activities and purposes of  the deities from Nibiruperiodically within the solar system 50 years per 3600,(hence ‘Jubilee’) who are said to have createdmankindand civilization; for example, in the Sumerian creation myths humans were created for thepurpose of mining gold for the (younger) gods, who were tired after many years of mining’s ‘demeaninglabour’ – this obviously not being the full story!  Interestingly considering the (inevitable) decline of reverencefor the Anunnaki in all of the Near East’s cultures, and in Egypt  of the god Thoth, as they distanced themselves from human affairs, it is said that Anathoth’s ‘glory dwindled, and it’s reputation slumped’ (; so that Isaiah prophesied the dire fate of ‘wretched Anathoth’, in Isaiah 10.30… in this way reflecting throughmetaphor the ‘fate’ of the ‘gods’ as they moved away from directinteraction with humanity in the era after 1000Bce.

Several ‘mighty-men’ and warriors hailed from Anathoth,linking to the ‘powerful’ bloodline(s) of thegods/human hybrid lines; Abiezer (1Chronicles 11.28) and Jehu (1Chronicles12.3).

Nahash  – close link to Nahash the brazen serpent of Moses(symbol of; metallurgy,societal/religious tools and implements,’technology’,knowing, secrets,alloys,alchemy,wisdom,healing,DNA;the Nagas, hybridbeings/bloodlines)… Additionally representsas such – ‘knower of secrets’/oracles/instinctivereptiliancentres of  stomach/brain. The Bronze Age (c.3000Bc-1000Bc), was replaced by the technological refinements of the Iron Age c1200Bce.

Nahash is the king of Ammon who lays siege to the people of Jabesh-Gilead, in Gibeah (1Samuel 11.1-11!). As shown, Gibbeah (‘mighty’ or ‘high place’), relates to‘mighty men of old’/ ‘giants in the earth’/ pagan hill-top sites which Gibeon was, and linked as such to king Solomon…so the connections are extensive here, especially as Nahash behaves in what appears to be a ‘Nephilim’ manner, perhaps to peoples who are of the same blood-lines. . .

Later Nahash appears to be held in high regard by Davidpossiblyas representative of his (David’s) bloodline, or for some unspecified aid or act of mercy.See below for discussion. Also a certain Nahash (which particular one is unspecified) is stated to be the fatheror parent of  Zeruiah and Abigail(2Samuel17.25) – the daughters of Jesse, David’s father (ie.David’ssister’s parent therefore..) Maybe through different mothers; or a mother with two different husbands in time.

Possibly this anomalyis a sign-post to a deeper reality, meaning essentially Zeruiah,Davidetc are’of theline’ of the Nehushtan/Nagas/ king Nahash – hence the epithet David coins,’yesons of Zeruiah’meaning mighty,harsh,cruel, and who are described as ‘adversaries’, (satans), by David at 2Samuel19.22. . . and the word used for ‘mighty’, ‘gibborim’ is also used for the ‘mighty men of old’ –  ‘the giants’ borne of the Watchers and women in Genesis 6.1-4.

Ammon  – the place ruled by king Nahash, ie. the tribe of the Ammonites (traced from the highly concentrated ‘Watchers’-connected line of Lot and his daughter (who got himdrunk to impregnate herself after the Sodom and Gomorrah cataclysm),close relatives of Noah, Lamech, Enoch  and so on…in conjunction with Nahash / Nehash/ Nagas, seems likely this tribe is representative of such bloodlines.  In the Bible used to mean ‘inclusive’/comprehensive; keeping secrets or  information within the limited circleof the group. . .

In Deuteronomy 2.19 YHVH ordered for people of Ammon to be left alone…(an order not much obeyed); similar to the ‘mark of Cain’ in this perhaps.

This is a packed narrative; the name Tamar means ‘dark’, as in the  ‘tamarind/date-tree’, and symbol in the Near East of the (unknowable/ mysterious) gods. As we shall see shortly, the date-palm tree from the earliest era was associated with the gods, and sovereignty, as well as fertility and the land.

There are more than onewomen namedTamar in the Old Testament who are impregnated or raped by relatives! (Gen 38.6-30).The girl Tamar represents thereforethese hybrid lines; as does her brother Amnon who acts according to type with the Nephilim traits of unbridled sexuality and callouscruelty.

The ending of the story sees another of David’s sons – Absalom  (whosoon afterleads the rebellion against his father David) killing Amnon some two yearsafter the (incestuous) rape, to avenge his sister’s honour…


Soon after all this, events take a dramatic turn (2Samuel 16.16-19).

Two verses after Shimei’s actions, plotters discuss plans for the coup centred on David’s son Absalom(so that from 2Samuel 15.10-14 onwards Absalom is building a power-base within both Jerusalem, and Hebron, causing David to flee Jerusalem (15.14-37). Absalom takes advice of the foremost counsellors of Israel; Ahithophel and Hushai; Ahithophel counsels that David’s flight from Jerusalem (2Samuel 16.21-17.4)may enable him to –

Go in unto thy father’s concubines,which he hath left to keep the house; and all Israel shall hear that thou art abhorred of thy father;then shall the hands ofall that are with thee be strong.

So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel.

And the counsel of Ahithophel…was as if a man

had inquired at the oracle of  God:so was all the counsel of Ahithophel both with David and with Absalom.

Moreover,Ahithophel said unto Absalom, Let me now choose out twelve thousand men, and I will arise and pursue after David this night;

And I will come upon him while he is weary and weak-handed,and will make him afraid: and all the people that are with him shall flee; and I will smite the kingonly.And the saying pleased Absalom well, and all the elders of Israel.

But regarding the pursuit his father and his men, Absalom chooses the advice of Hushai the Archite,  who counsels a gathering of all the warriors of the tribes before challenging David and his forces. (17.7-14). At which (inexplicably) Ahithophel returns to his home, and hangs himself…

This has close parallels with the actions and personality of Judas in the New Testament; in the betrayal of David by one of his closest counsellors, for no discernible reason except further influence, or money – or as a survival strategy. A narrative highlighting the political world of the sovereign’s court; the intrigue and fast changing alliances in the centres of power of the state.

The term ‘ophel’ is highly significant in the Old Testament narrative of the establishment and building of the Hebrew capital Jerusalem. Indeed it was Solomon himself who extended the small area (re)captured by David from the Jebusites – the ‘city of David’ on mount Zion –northwards to the area called thereafter Ophel. (itself just south of Mount Moriah, the sacred hill-top where the Jerusalem Temple and later Temple Mount edifices were built).

While in Hebrew ‘ophel’ has no fully determined meaning, but can mean ‘swelling’, or ‘fortified place’, from Greek comes the meaning for ‘ophel’ or ‘ophis’ of serpent, a widely used stem, so that even rock formations serpentine in nature are called ‘ophiolites’. In Hebrew texts mount Moriah was considered to have a pillar of fire reaching from heaven to earth; potentially therefore signifying a central site at which the various ‘serpent’ energy paths of the world (carrying solar and cosmic energies) converge. Much as the angels in Gideon and in the story of Samson strike a rock (besides an oak-tree) and send a pillar of fire skywards. And much as the Sphinx, the ‘lion of the ground’ looks eastwards along the 30th Parallel North, towards the rising sun.

From the works of William Shakespeare, in the tragedy Hamlet the character of Ophelia gains enhanced meanings from the Greek stem, placing her at the centre of the Court and the ‘royal bloodlines’ narrative… her inner conflict (of the powerful but unbalanced solar and celestial genetics), present within so many of the characters in the Bible, overwhelms her before she is able to make progress.

Incidentally, after Absalom takes the advice of Hushai, the elder then hurries to speak with Zadok, the priest of Israel (at 2Samuel 17.14-16) – in order that he might “send therefore quickly,and tell David,saying, Lodge not this night in the plains of the wilderness, but speedily pass over; lest the king be swallowed up, and all the people that are with him”.

Zadok sends Ahimaaz (his son) and Jonathon (son of Abiathar) to warn David; they are forced to hide (with a village woman’s help) in the well at Bahurim, surviving in the process. (2Samuel 17.18) – further emphasizing the positive symbolic aspects of wellsand water used throughout the Bible.

The next chapter, 2Samuel 17, depicts the further course of the coup attempt, and support for the plotters and for David. At 2Samuel 17.28 Shobi* the son of Nahash (*to turn/transition point! shabat;rest/shebiya;captive) of Rabbah of the children of Ammon, (and another man) bring;

. . .wheat and barley,and flour,and parched corn and beans,and

lentils and parched pulse. And honey, and butter,and sheep,and

cheese of kine,for David,and for the people that were with him,

to eat: for they said, The people is hungry, and weary,  and thirsty,

in the wilderness.

And the next chapter is the battle in the coup attempt, in the fields and woods around Ephraim.(18.6)

It is here that Absalom meets his fate; 


And Absalom met the servants of David. And Absalom rode upon a mule, and the mule went under the thick boughs of a great oak, and he was taken up between the heaven and the earth; and the mule that was under him was takenaway.

 The captain of David’s forces, Joab the son of Zeruaiah is told of Absalom’s position; the messenger is reluctant to kill or harm the son of King David, obeying David’s orders to his men in this. Joab has no such fears, and taking 3 darts (javelins) thrusts them through Absalom as he hangs in the boughs of the tree. David receives the news back in Jerusalem, although is not told the details of his son’s death, causing him to weep and exclaim of the son who attempted to kill him; “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom. Would God I had died for thee, O Absalom my son, my son” (2Samuel 18.18).

After this the coup is over, and David rides through Israel and Judah to see the people and tribes and restore the unity of the nation.

When Absalom rides into the woods of Ephraim and into the branches of an oak tree where his head/neck is caught he then hangs, caught helplessly – in metaphor of his blood-line potentially. It bears relevance he is caught in a oak tree, as this is a symbol of the cosmic world-tree, the heaven/earth axis, within antiquity, and within the Old Testament; rather as the Norse ‘deity’ Odin was caught in the branches of the world-tree Yggdrasil, the axis mundi for nine days in a spiritual test of his being.(see Etymology pages for more on Oak/Ox/Axis/Octave/Oss, meaning strength or foundation, stemming from Proto-Indian-European roots, and possibly elsewhere).

(below) the testing of Odin on the world-tree Yggdrasil, (akin to druidic rites of passage) by Lorenz Frolich,1895 (wikimedia/ PD). The druids viewed the oak tree with great reverence, for unknown reasons.


 Absalom dies in the tree, after a period,when he is speared to death by David’scousin and captain of soldiers, Joab, as noted. Rabbinic literature makes clear the sense of tainted blood(line), in the advice of Hushai the Archite, David’s servant’, who counsels him in his grief that the fate of the son was sealed before birth, when David married the mother, Maacah¹, a captive; a disobedient and rebellious son being the inevitable outcome of such a union..! This is because she was a non-Jewish woman who was a captive from a war Judah under David’s early rule had with neighbouring Geshur, or was given by her royal father Talmai* to David as a ‘diplomatic’ gift…(*to whom Absalom fled when he killed Amnon in revenge for the rape; 2Sam.13.37-8. It is coincidental that Talmai is named as one of the three sons of the gargantuan Anak in Numbers 13.22, the three sons of Anak being Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai. And in another possible ‘encoding’ of hidden narratives/meaning, is the following coincidence; in 1Chronicles 9.17 is a very long section of names and lineages of sons etcetera of those who remained in Israel and Jerusalem when the elite were carried away to Babylon. Of the remnant, the ‘first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities, were the Israelites, the priests, Levites“, and so on (1Chr 9.2).A Levite gatekeeper is stated to be Ahiman; with him are named three relatives;

Akkub, Shallum and Talmon); 1Chronicles 9.17;

“(Of the Levites)… the porters were, Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren. Shallum was the chief;Who hitherto waited in the king’s gate eastward; they were the porters in the companies of the children of Levi. And Shallum the son of Kore . . . of the house of his father, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the gates of the tabernacle; and their fathers, being over the host of the Lord, were keepers of the entry”.

1Chronicles 9.31-2mentions the first-born of Shallum, Matthithiah who oversaw the ‘shewbread’ in the temple; and other Levite religious functionaries; then 1Chron9.35 states; “And in Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon, Jehiel, whose wife’s name was Maacah; And his firstborn son Abdon, then Zur, and Kish, and Baal, and Ner, and Nadab”, and so on.This is a list of virtually all names associated with the Philistines, the Rephaim, the Nephilim, and Sumer before then; and as we have seen repeatedly, Gibeah the home of the Gibeonites meanshill (frommighty, or high or tall) linking toall the pagan hilltop sites , and the ‘giants’ of Canaan – as well as the Cedars of Lebanonin similar sense) – confirming the connection to them in Genesis 6.1-4.

Finally Abdon is a close match to the namein the Book of Revelation 9.11 of Abaddon; the ‘angel of the bottomless pit’,mentioning also the Greek version Apollyon (Apollo), meaning in essence, ‘destroyer’. Abdon meanwhile means ‘one who works’, either as a slave or as an hired adviser etc, according to, stemming from the Hebrew root ‘abad’, ‘to serve‘ or ‘ work’. And yet the stem ‘abad’ also is used (as in Abaddon) to indicate to die, or disintegrate; (a certain duality of the same stem, with a differing last Hebrew letter). But either way the name holds connotations of servitude, pain, and sacrifice.

Incidentally, regarding Zadok the priest who sends his son Ahimaaz, and Jonathon with provisions to help David during the rebellion against him, has some kind of lineage links to these figures. Likewise of the Levite tribe, Zadok was the son of Ahitub, and the father of Ahimaaz. (1Chron6.8). Two verses, and several generations later, an Ahitub has a son Zadok, who has a son Shallum; whose great-great-grandson was taken into captivity to Babylon (1Chron6.11-15). But it is curious how the names of the three sons ofAkkub, or Anak are Ahiman, Shallum and Talmai more than once. So while these lists are incredibly complicated and confusing, some possibility exists the lineage of the high-priest Zadok is shown to be related to that of the bloodlines which (later) came back from the Babylon Captivity infused with the celestial genetics. And while the Captivity was in 598Bce, the lineages of the ‘sons of the gods’, or the ‘mighty men’ of Babylon such as Nimrod (great-grandson of Noah) existed directly after the Deluge; so Zadok, like David and Solomon, may be shown himself, through this narrative, to be related to them in some way – and yet as the Bible states, he one of the most virtuous men in Israel in God’s eyes, who had the Ark of the Covenant placed in his protection by David during the rebellion. His steadfastness is shown likewise by his sending his son Ahimaaz with Jonathon to warn Davidof events at court in Jerusalem (2Samuel17.18);moreover, he was one of the ancestors of Jesus Christ himself, according to the genealogy of Matthew (Mt1.14). So this is either a more positive bloodline of the ‘gods of Sumer’, or the virtue of some characters, such as Moses, Zadok and David, was strong enough to enable them to benefit from the bloodlines’ strengths, while rising above theirweaknesses.Possibly similar to the narrative to Simon Peter, as the essay on him examines later in this section.

And yet in the Book of Ezra, a central book in it’s description of how the ‘celestial bloodlines’ of Sumer and Babylon infused the existing nation of Israel, through the widespread taking of foreign, or ‘strange’ wives by Hebrew men while in the Babylon Captivity, the following list is mentioned (and repeated in Nehemiah7.6/45, Nehemiah being reckoned to be a second name for Ezra in some rabbinical texts of Judaism, according to Louis Ginzburg’s Legends of the Jews, 1909).

Ezra 2.1;  Now these are the children of the province that went up out of the captivity, of those which had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away unto Babylon, and came again unto Jerusalem and Judah, every one unto his city; . . .

Ezra 2.42; The children of the porters; the children of Shallum, the children of Ater, the children of Talmon, the children of Akkub, the children of Hatita . . . in all an hundred and thirty nine.

As Ezra 2.62 states, of those children of the priests who were born to a foreign mother; These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found; therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood.

Having noted the relevance of the ‘dark bloodlines’ to the numbers 7, 77, and 777 etc, as well as the reference to symbols (such as the date-palm) of the same lineages in the Song of Solomon 7.7, (and it’s links to women named Tamar who represent the ‘dark’ lines of the ‘unknowable gods’),thus pointing to the possible nature of the female narrator of this mysterious and poetic book, the only mention of the people known as ‘Shulamites’ is in the Song, at 6.13, the last verse before chapter 7. In the voice of the male protagonist itrefers to the female narrator as follows;

Return, return, O Shulamite; return, return, that we may

look upon thee. What will ye see in the Shulamite?

As it were the company of two armies.

What does this mean? It may be inferred to be a reference to the returning peoples of Israel from Babylon, many of who were now of the ‘strangers’ celestial or hybrid bloodline. Quite frankly an incredible connection to be found within the Song of Solomon.

Indeed, however, one of the only references to the name Shullam in the Near Eastern mythology of the first millennium Bce comes from; Sumer, where the Anunnaki celestial tribe had two minor deities, named Shullat and Hanish; these were believed to be basically attendants of the storm-god Adad, as well as being closely associated with military events! An omen text portrays them marching alongside troops… (cited by Schwemer, 2001), indeed some scholars such as I.Gelb assess their names were derived from the Akkadian sullatum despoil, and hanisum submission… this could hardly be a better description of the nature of the lineages of ‘Cain’ or ‘nephilim’ as they spread through the world as described in Genesis 6.1-4; and as their lineages survived the Deluge as shown thereafterin the Bible. The peoples such as listed in 1Kings 11.1; ”But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites”; all warlike peoples and nations, while the Edomites were the ancestral tribe of the Idumeans, the tribe of the extensive bloodline of Herod. And the word ‘stranger’ is used as a code for the bloodlines by Simon Peter in particular, Moses also, as we shall see later on…

And indeed, the two ‘heralds’ of Adad appear in the Epic of Gilgamesh, (one of the first texts ever to depict the hybrid lineages of the gods and humans) at a key time; the onset of the Flood (Tablet XI, l.99-);

“Shamash had set a stated time:

‘In the morning I will let loaves of bread shower down,

and in the evening a rain of wheat!

Go inside the boat, seal the entry!’

The stated time had arrived. . .

I watched the appearance of the weather–

the weather was frightful to behold!

Just as dawn began to glow

there arose from the horizon a black cloud

Adad rumbled inside of it

before him went Shullat and Hanish,

heralds going over mountain and land.

The Anunnaki lifted up the torches,

setting the land ablaze with their flare,

Stunned shock over Adad’s deeds overtook the heavens,

and turned to blackness all that had been light.

The . . .land shattered like a. . .pot

All day long the South Wind blew. . .

blowing fast, submerging the mountain in water,

overwhelming the people like an attack.

So perhaps the reference by the narratorto the name of the Shullamite in the song of Solomon, and two armies would have raised such long established associations… it may actually be interpreted further to this, as a subtle indicator of the ‘conflicted’ aspect of the celestial bloodlines, which increases towards the most unbalanced Nephilim lineages. This inner conflict comes from the inherent dualities of these celestial bloodlines, being both ‘heroic’ and ‘destructive’… it is thiswhich king David appears to be referring to when saying ‘he is weak this day’ on his coronation day, as mentioned, at 2Samuel 3.39;

And I am this day weak, though anointed king. And

these men the sons of Zeruiah be too hard for me;

The Lord shall reward the doer of evil according

to his wickedness.

Likewise the fact that his name itself means ‘illness’ or such… so perhaps the ‘two armies’ of the Shullamite refer to ‘inner forces of the self’, by which those of such nature are condemned to experience a psychic state of continual‘civil war’… exemplified by the character of such ‘heroes’ as Samson; and something the strongest characters, such as Abraham, Enoch, and Noah, Moses, King David, Solomon, St Peter and so on,appear to be able to control, andperhaps even resolve to some extent within themselves. In this may be the difference existing in the many works of antiquity between ‘destiny’ and ‘fate’.

And as the stories of Tamar, Maacah, and the wife/sister of Cain; Awen indicate, there is quite an emphasis on the female progenitors of the ‘celestial’ lineages, for some reason. Awen, is linked by name to the Egyptian ‘city of the sun’, Awen or Awn, or On,`(Heliopolis in Greek) where the Sun was worshipped; pointing in the woman’s name to the solar, celestial genetics of the nephilim, lines of Cain, and perhaps, possibly,to the lines of the Anunnaki too (where ‘An(u)’ means ‘the heavens’).

Chapter 7.4 of the Songof Solomon also mentions the snow-capped mountains of Lebanon, and Damascus; the mountains are seen to be closely linked with both the Cedars of Lebanon throughout the mythology of both the Bible and the Near East, as in the Epic of Gilgamesh; and moreover, through this, to the gods of antiquity believed to have established some of their earliest sacred sites on earth at the Cedar Forest, at Mt Hermon and Mt Lebanon, and the immense Temple of Baal-Jupiter at Baalbeck in the Beqaa valley nearby. Associations of the cedars to the gods, and to the mighty men, and ‘giants’ of the Old Testament serve to link Solomon more closely to these themes, linked as he is to these via his temple, his palace (named after the Cedars of Lebanon), his foreign wives, and the hill-top pagan sites of Lebanon he was swayed to worship the gods of, (such as the Phoenician/ Philistine god Ba’al, meaning ‘Lord’, etc). That these were all associated with the celestial bloodlines containing the ‘powers of the sun’ is one reason why so much solar imagery is included within the story of Solomon’s life additionally to his name. Likewise the ch.7.7 reference in the Song to the date-palm holds many resonances to the divine; for as Tom von Bakkel notes in his paper ‘The magical meaning of cedars and palm trees depicted on cylinder seals’, both the cedar tree, and the date-palm were symbols closely associated in Sumerian poetry/mythology to the gods, the Anuna, from the first Sumerian civilization onwards in Mesopotamia. According to von Bakel ‘palm-front’ meant ‘womb’ and hence ‘new-born’ (p.4);in other examples, the chief female goddess Inanna, later known as Ishtar, was associated often with cedars and cedar-oil (In one poem,“Everybody hastens towards Inanna. . .In the pure places of the plain, at its good places, on the rooftops, in the sanctuaries of mankind, incense offerings like a forest of aromatic cedars are transmitted to her” (p.7,op.cit).Likewise many depictions and poems connecting the Anuna with date palms and cedars existed throughout the first Sumerian civilization, and no doubt in the related Akkadian, Babylonian and Assyrian societies, which were successively leading nations throughout the region.

So the symbolism of the Song of Solomon, like much of the Old Testament, would have raised many associations in it’s hearers of the ‘divine’ rulers who helped guide civilization ‘in person’ from the fourth millennium Bce onwards.

(Indeed, it is possible to speculate that the shape of the date palm, in both it’s leaves patterns, and of the date, resembles both the Vesica Piscis, the Milky Way, and the female yoni – hence their association to life, fertility, and creation, in its feminine aspect.

Likewise the Sumerian Tree of Life, although many academics assess that this symbol possessed characteristics equated by the Sumerians as male aspects of fertility..! (the word ‘gish’ as in Ningishzida the ‘Lord of the Good Tree’ referring to the male’s organ as well as ‘tree’.) Perhaps considering the celestial nature of the symbol, like that of the Vesica, it is fair to ascribe both male and female meanings of fertility to them among others; perhaps in the symbolic combining of male and female constituting as such the alchemy of cosmic energies – an esoteric concept emphasized in The Bible most noticeably in the ‘marriage’ of king Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (‘of seven’, pointing to the relevance of the Octave in understanding the marriage of matter and energy, of male and female, of the Sun and the Moon, and so on).

To return to the Hebrew histories described in the Bible, the texts apparently state those returning from Babylon with ‘mixed’ genetic lineages were not put from the tribes of Israel, but only from the priesthood; thus providing a theoretical route for the lines in question to become another part of the nation’s heredity, due to the practical difficulties of separating a gene-stream (which had thousands of individuals from over seventy previous years of conjoining) priorly established in the tribes of Israel. And we get to the crux of the matter, namely the introduction of ‘celestial’, or maybe ‘nephilim’ genetics into post-Deluge Hebrew bloodlines – in the chapters following on from the lists of the men who went into captivity in Babylon – in Ezra ch.10, which is entirely about the foreign wives some of the Israelites have married;

“… the people wept very sore… and Shechaniah said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land” (Ezra10.1-2). In reply, “Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel. Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your fathers,, and do his pleasure; and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives”. (Ezra 10-10).

But in a detail which indicates the significance of the events described, the text continues;

“And then all the congregation answered and said with a loud voice, As thou hast said, so must we do. But the people are many, and it is a time of much rain, and we are not able to stand without, neither is this a work of one day or two; for we are many that have transgressed in this thing” (Ezra 10.12-13)..!

And while a Shallum is listed in Ezra 10.24 as ‘divorcing’ his wife – again the theme of conflict – as many of the other men do, no mention is made of any children. In fact all the book says is that they ‘put away their wives’ (Ezra 10.19), (and offered a ram for their trespass, ie for a not particularly serious offense). No narrative exists of whether the many men, women and children so concerned were separated from the tribes of  Israel, while Nehemiah ch.7 lists over 20,000 children who are presumably to be separated from the tribes, or perhaps just disallowed high (religious) office, as Nehemiah 7.64 implies. And again, this does not include any children grown to adulthood during the 70 years of potential bloodline-related marriages within Babylon. So the books of Ezra and Nehemiahmay be inferred to confirm the inner-narrative, without actually resolving it.

So this synchronicity of names, of a father and three sons, would appear to be a subtle way of drawing attention to the connections of such gene-streams within the tribes of the Israelites circa 540 Bce. . . and likewise linking the lineages to Babylon (and thus the Sumerian ‘celestial’ lineages) where the Israelites had been captives for 70 years. Akkub incidentally, means ‘lowest’ or ‘cunning’, as such being descriptive of ‘the sons of Anak’. And curiously, the period of the Babylonian Capture from 603-538Bce was the moment when the scribes and compilers of the Hebrew scriptural texts were introduced ‘fully’ to the Sumerian traditional lines of cosmic consciousness, given by the celestial beings the Anunnaki to their cities and religious groups – and likely when many of the allegories and metaphors within the Old Testament concerning these lineages were devised and introduced… be they positive or otherwise in tone.


Indeed, the narrative of Shallum holds quite some further interest; as seen, he is a Korahite Levite chief gate-keeper at the eastern King’s Gate, who returns to Jerusalem from Babylon some time after 539Bce. We have seen within the multiplicity of metaphors for the sun thoselinking it essentially to the East where it rises each day; a state of affairs which prevails even upto today with many Eastern nations’ flags…

The passage, we have already seen, is at 1Chronicles 9.17-19; “And the porters were, Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon and Ahiman, and their brethren. Shallum was the chief. Who hitherto waited in the king’s gate eastward: they were porters in the companies of the children of Levi.”

So considering his potential role as a link to the Sumerian ‘celestial’ bloodlines, that of gatekeeper is a perfect metaphor; much as the person of Noah and his small family can be said to have occupied the same role. And interestingly, the Babylonian deity Oannes, a version of the Sumerian /Anunnaki deity Enki was later turned into Janus in Roman mythology, the ‘janitor’ or ‘gatekeeper’ who keeps the doorway of the winter solstice, at the mid-point between the old year and the new. And this ‘janitorial’ concept of Janus is how Rene Guenon describes him in Sacred Symbols, 1962.As we note elsewhere in this section, this role links him to both Sumerian, and biblical characters such as Ningiszida and Dumuzi, (as the two angels who descend to earth in the Akkadian ‘Myth of Adapa and the South Wind’ to take him to the heavens) –associated likewise by some writers, such as Hallo and Simpson, with the two angels who take Enoch to the highest heaven to receive the blessing of God and immortality. Both deities are also connected with the underworld,(as in Inanna’s Descent into the Underworld) also, relating them to aspects of the afterlife, as well as fertility; (while Dumuzi is closely associated with the date-palm, symbol of the gods, unknowable darkness and the womb).

In one basic sense they represent or belong to the class of ‘celestial beings’ who ‘incarnate’ or descend into the material world or dimensions, thus connecting the two, while experiencing loss or ‘death’ themselves through their actions . . .as Jesus says of the wheat seed which must first ‘die’ and be buried before it can begin new life.In the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh this theme is very skilfully portrayed by the trauma the gods and goddesses experience whenthey escape the Deluge in their ‘celestial ships’, thus rising above the cataclysm (in Tablet XI). They weep for the loss of mankind, experience thirst and hunger for the first time, and repent of their acquiescence with Enlil’s plan for the destruction of the earth and it’sfirst civilization, which they helped create andoversaw. In the New Testament Simon Peter clearly fulfils the (Oannes/Janus) role of gatekeeper (hence the Keys of St Peter), with his nature being partly celestial, partly earthly, a facet made clear in numerous ways, such as repeated linguistic phrases mentioning both the ‘heavens’ and the ‘earth’ (Matthew 16.18, and 18.18, etc). . .  and the many links of Peter with metaphors of rock, or stone; as well as fishing, (from which comes episcopal as in the first Bishop of Rome, etcetera), which fits neatly with the depiction shown earlier of Oannes as hybrid man and fish.

So Shallum as a gatekeeper,both celestial and human, fits this theme very adequately in his occupation. St Peter refers to the eight people who survived the Deluge in the Ark of Noah, pointing to the significance of this ‘bottleneck’ in human history. Further details point to the same metaphorical meanings; he is at the King’s gate – kings being a symbol of ‘heavenly’, as well as ‘earthly power’, as we have seen made to be a mid-point between the gods and humanity in genetic terms. And the seemingly insignificant role of a city gatekeeper is shown to be something a little more important in other verses;

“And Shallum. . . and his brethren, of the house of his father, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the gates of the tabernacle: and their fathers, being over the host of the LORD, were keepers of the entry” (1Chr 9.19).

This verse itself is of great interest; it details the significance of their role, and links the entire lineage/ family with the ‘host of the Lord’. This phrase is used in other books of the bible to refer to the ‘sons of god’, or ‘celestial’ orders, such as the seraphim.

The lineage of the Korahites too has some significance – in Numbers 16.1-33, Korah the cousin of Moses and Aaron claims that as he is a great-grandson of Levi, he too should be a leader of the Israelites in the wilderness. But YHVH tells Moses to stand firm against the base challengers to his authority. By verse 32 they are punished;

And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods. They, and all that appertainedto them, went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them; and they perished from among the congregation” (Numbers 16. 31-33).

This rebellion is mentioned by St Jude in the New Testament, at Jude 1.11 – ‘Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core’. . .

And in final confirmation of these deeper links of the bloodline, the first description in this chapter includes that they were ‘two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown’ (Numbers 16.2) – in fact the same words used to describe the nephilim themselves in Genesis 6.1-4. Likewise Enoch in his eponymous book described the descent of the 200 or so ‘sons of the gods’ to earth following their decision to take human wives to themselves.

Another passage indicates the position of the family of Shallum is towards the higher levels of societythan initially implied;

 “And Mattithiah, one of the Levites, who was the firstborn of Shallum the Korahite,had the set office over the. . . shewbread, to prepare it every sabbath” (1Chron 9.31-2)

The shewbread was an important part of Hebrew religious rites in the Bible, representing in 12 pieces the Twelve tribes

of Israel; also the ‘bread’ of heaven that was given to the Israelites in the wilderness during the escape from Egypt, ‘manna’. Indeed bread is used innumerable times in the Bible to represent the ‘wisdom of God’ as he gives it to the blessed. Hence the use of bread in the Last Supper by Jesus, in the wafer in Holy Communion services, and so on.Andof course, breadwas used in the Epic of Gilgamesh long before this, by Utnapishtim (Noah) in a similar metaphorical role as Gilgamesh is tested spiritually, as the Sumer section relates.

Quite strangely again, after the verses describing the role performed by Mattithiah, in 9.31-32, it states at 9.34;

These chief fathers of the Levites were chief throughout their generations; these dwelt at Jerusalem.

35. And in Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon, Jehiel, whose wife’s name was Maachah.

Thus leading full circle back to the ‘mighty’ men of Gibeah, a hill-top pagan site, and a woman named Maachah.

One more piece of this complex (!) jigsaw is to be found in Genesis 36, which lists the generations of Esau, who ‘sold his birthright to his brother Jacob for a mess of pottage’, in continuance of the Cain and Abel duality of bloodlines, repeated several times in the Old Testament. So at Genesis 36.15 the narrative states;

“These were the dukes of the sons of Esau: the sons of Eliphaz the firstborn son of Esau: duke Teman, duke Omar,

duke Zepho, duke Kenaz,Duke Korah, duke Gatam, and duke Amalek: these are the dukes that came of Eliphaz in the

land of Edom”.

Obviously a different person to Korah of Numbers 16.1, and yet the link is meaningful. As has been seen, firstly, the giants of Philistine (Rephaim, or Nephilim) were from Gath, most famously Goliath, although he has several brothers and relatives of similar stature. In Genesis 6.4, one of the bible’s only clear statements about the Nephilim it states “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of god came in unto the daughters of men”.Likewise Amalek is a term for the ‘Anunnaki’, or rather, those descended from them; so the prophet Balaam says in Numbers 24.20 ‘Amalek was the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish forever’, ie the biblical narrative of the Anunnaki and the Sumerians, as with Korah; so the passage links Korah unequivocally with these hybrid celestial blood-lines from Sumer, Babylon and Assyria. . . it is unsurprising therefore that such lineages produce the Edomites, from whom came the line of Herod, containing many rulers and despots with the blood of men on their hands*. The theme, in other words, of the negative aspects of some lineages in particular, from Cain, Tubal-Cain, Nimrod etcetera onwards.For a study of the narrative concerning Balaam and the angel, and Balak, king of the Moabites, see the section later on Moses, for there are many points of overlap between the themes of this passage, and the life of Moses. . . in particular the hill-top pagan site of Pisgah, overlooking the field of Zophim, where Moses dies and is buried (Deuteronomy 34.5-6); the latter name of which translates simply as ‘Watchers’.The word ‘adama’, and likewise ‘edom’, is related in Hebrew to ‘field’ itself(or the earth’s dust, or soil or clay, which was gathered and had life breathed into as a man by the Lord in Genesis ), ie can be viewed as meaning bloodline also, from Adam onwards.

*(perhaps why both David, and Moses have someone in their life say to them; “Thou art a bloody man”. . . indicating a lineage connection which both men benefit from (as being of a ‘celestial’ hybrid line), yet must ‘rise above’, and are partially ‘compromised by’ at occasional times, hence the limitation of blessings from YHVH toward the end of their lives. . .) And incidentally, considering the (unstated) importance that the Old Testament places on bloodlines – for reasons we now begin to understand – the original Korah in Numbers 16.1-33 was a cousin of Moses and Aaron. Likewise Talmai was a royal king in Geshur (2Samuel13.37) and the father of David’s wife Macaah, the mother of David’s children Absalom and Tamar.

So, as we have also seen, in Jude1.11 he mentions three names as sinners; Cain, Balaam, and Core (Korah). It is fitting somehow therefore that St Jude is the patron saint of lost causes; for as David, Solomon, Moses, Enoch, Simon Peter and others show, there is always a way to seek redemption.

So this one small section of the Bible concerning Shallum,at 1Chronicles 9.17-19, points to one of the ways in which the Sumerian genes of the nephilim – and perhaps the Anunnaki – entered into the Hebrew bloodlines, during the period of the Babylonian Captivity.



Another possible route for the mixing of Hebrew and Mesopotamian gene-streams within the events of the Bible comes from the recounting of some of the invasions, sieges, exiles and enforced migrations of certain tribes and peoples, in relation to Israel and Judah withinthe Old Testament. (Although not in the sense of ‘mass migrations’ caused by environmental catastrophes etcetera, of which history has several examples…)

So for example, in 722 Bce, the Assyrian king Shalmaneser V overthrew Samaria, in Israel in the north, after a three year siege. Several of Israel’s tribes were taken into captivity, and taken back to Assyria.(2Kings 17.5-6).As verse 18 notes, this was in punishment for the Israelites failure to follow YHVH’s statutes, commandments, and so forth, which led to divine displeasure;

“And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the Lord their God, and they built high places in all their cities, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city” (2Kings 17.9).

Furthermore, “The Lord was angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight. None was left but the tribe of Judah only.” Many thousands were taken into captivity by the Assyrians. And incidentally, the bible then states that the Assyrians populated Israel with their own people, (2Kings 17.18) – of significance because like the Akkadians and the Babylonians, the Assyrians were of the ‘celestial’ bloodlines of the Sumerians, as evidenced by their cities such as Nineveh being established with temples dedicated to Ninurta, the Anuna deity of Sumer later associated with Nimrud, the great-grandson of Noah who was a ‘mighty hunter before the Lord’, in Genesis 10.8).

Likewise 2Kings17.24 states; “And the king of Assyria brought people from Babylon, Cuthath, Avva, Hamath, and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the people of Israel. And they took possession of Samaria and lived in it’s cities” . . .

Thus leading to them being called ‘Cuthites’ in Talmudic tradition. This was part of the Samaritan heritage from then on, meaning that by the era of the New Testament, the Samaritans were looked upon by the Israelites as an ‘unclean’ peoples. However, debate exists as to this narrative, with the alternative view being that the Samaritans were descended mainly from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh who remained in Israel after the Assyrian conquest; in support of this 2Chronicles 30.1 seems to imply the same, which Samaritans have always claimed since then, to be genuine tribes-people of Israel.

Moreover, 2Kings 17.25-33 states that because of the circumstances related to the repopulation by Assyrians, the new settlers worshipped both the gods of the land, and of the lands from which they hailed; versions of the Anunnaki in other words, as the names given imply.

This is clear from the names; Avva meaning to ruin, or overturn, is very similar to the mythic ‘mother of the line of Cain’ (from the Book of Jubilees, etc) – Awan, the purported sister of Cain, there being so few people on earth at that point in the Bible (Gen4.17). Awan means ‘iniquity’, or to ruin, to overturn; a very good description of the innate nature of the lines of Cain. Awen was also the name of ‘On’, or ‘An’, the Egyptian name for the significant city called ‘Heliopolis’ by the Greeks, in all languages meaning the ‘city of the Sun’. Curiously another name for Awan is ‘Aclima’ in Islamic writings; it may connect directly to Ashima, which also means ‘offence’, mentioned in 2Kings17.30, when listing the pagan gods the incoming peoples worshipped at Samaria;

“…and the men of Hamath made Ashima” – additionally, the name also may mean ‘a lion, a symbol of the sun’…

The Sepharvaim were a people brought in to the town after the Assyrian re-population; and they worshipped the deities Addramelech and Anammelech, to whom they sacrificed children in the fire – as ‘melech’ in Hebrew means (celestial) messenger or being, the name may mean ‘the lord is King or Prince’; and is also readable asthe lord (Addra) Moloch, as the passage 1Kings11.7 directly names; one of the worst pagan deities of antiquity in the Near East. The prefix ‘Ana’ gives the name the meaning ‘Anu is Lord/ or King’… another (again negative) reference in the Old Testament linking to the Sumerian deities the Anunnaki. One point with relevance that is raised by some commentators, such as ‘’ is that ‘thereis no evidence in cuneiform literature that would point to the presence of human sacrifice, by fire or otherwise, as part of the ritual”; the predominant societies or cultures which did practice such rites werein the Levant, in the region of Canaan and Syria, thus causing some writers to look to links between there and the Assyrians; after decline from c.1050Bce for two or three centuries, it was during the period of the Neo-Assyrian empire’s re-growth under Tiglath-Pileser III, from 745-727Bce that the empire achieved control of the Levant all the way to the Egyptian border. Likewise Babylon was conquered in 729Bce… Thus the practices mentioned, while nominally Assyrian may actually have been Syrian in origin..!

The debate as to the nature of the Samaritans by the time of the New Testament may imply some ‘inter-mixing’ of the Assyrian and Hebrew cultures, or indeed peoples, took place. Or alternatively that the tribespeople remaining after the exile to Assyria were the forefathers of the Samaritans. (Nevertheless, by the time Jesus lived the name of the Samaritans was particularly low, and was used as a ‘racial’ insult, hence the Tale of the Good Samaritan confounding expectations…)Immediately after  the return of the Israelites from Assyrian captivity in Israel, the Samaritans did play a part in the new life of the nation; partaking in Temple repairs (2Chronicles 34.9), worshipping in the house of YHVH (Jeremiah 41.5), and so on. Modern commentaries such as the Encyclopaedia Judaica give credence to the assertions of the Samaritans in this respect, such as their being of the lineage of Ephraim and Manasseh, and until the 17th century a high priesthood was believed to exist descending directly from Aaron through Eleazar and Phinehas. (EJ, vol 14,col.727).

In the New Testament the longest conversation Jesus has with any individual is that with the Samaritan woman at the well; a narrative again centred around questions of marriages, and the establishment of bloodlines. (This is at John 4.1-42). This meeting took place incidentally at ‘Sichar’ – also known as Sichem, or Shechem (meaning ‘shoulder’, or spine/ backbone). This is the site where Abraham reached the ‘Great tree of Moreh’ in Genesis 12.6-8, the same tree presumably as the oak where Joshua assembled the Israelites to make them choose between YHVH and foreign gods they had begun to also worship. Thus a new covenant was affirmed here with God, highlighting the higher-dimensional’ nature of the site. Hence the name Shechem, or backbone, as a symbol of the heaven-earth axis existing there.Shechem is also the site of Jacob’s Well, where he first met the girl in ‘the land of the people of the east’ (Gen29.1) of Abraham’s lineage; because despite travelling hundreds of miles back towards Haran, Rachel was the daughter of his mother’s brother (Gen 29.10).

(Another point of note is that at this well the mouth of the well is covered by a stone, which Jacob rolls away; this is parallel to the Eben Shettiyah in the foundation of the Temple of Jerusalem, the stone placed over the ‘waters of the abyss’ to keep them in abeyance; thus Jacob’s action at Gen 29.10 in rolling the stone away is to allow a flood of the waters of fertility…symbolic in both personal, and wider terms). Curiously, in antiquity Egypt the hieroglyph spelt ‘sekem’ meant ‘vitality’ or life, a meaning which has been applied since then in usages connected to agriculture programmes etc; giving indication again of the links existing between ancient Egypt and Israel at the highest levels of wisdom.

Concerning the questions arising from the relatives of King David, his son Absalom having killed Amnon and fled to Talmai (2Sam13.37), having started a coup against his father (2Samuel 15) had pursued the forces of David to battle at a woods in Ephraim riding a mule; “from where the mule went under the thick boughs of a great oak, and he was taken up between the heaven and the earth”(2Samuel 18.9) – symbolic of the hybrid bloodlines again, quite probably. . . and his fate in this ‘world tree’, the oak, is to be speared by the cousin of David, the violent captain of his men, Joab (one of the three ‘sons of Zeruiah’, (with meaningsrelated to; ‘neck’, ‘confine or bind’, ‘sharp’, ‘cleave’ or ‘cleft’ in Syriac and Chaldean, or ‘rock’ – and so on. Much as Simon, called ‘satan’ by Jesus, is named by him Cephas, ‘rock’, and shown to be rash and violent, divided within himself, andcapable of cruelty).

And to return to examining the effects of the potentially‘celestial genes’ contained within the family of David at the court in Jerusalem, the children of Maacah and David certainly had problems; her daughter was Tamar, who we have already met in her (unfortunate) role as symbol of the ‘dark’ bloodlines…as well as victim of Amnon’s rape.

The name Maacah, (the daughter of Talmai, the mother of Tamar and likewise ofAbsalom)means; ‘oppression’, or pressure. The woman Maacah is also said to be the mother of Hanan, a ‘mighty’ man of Israel – relating to the Nephilim ‘mighty men of old’ description, as seen many times (1Chron.11.43). Additionally it is stated in the Old Testament that the country or town of Maacah was ruled by Og, one of the last rulers of the giant Rephaim in Canaan… (Joshua12.5) linking to the nephilim bloodlines again, as well as semantically by the meaning ‘oppression’, or ‘pressure’ …

Of course, it can be said that Absalom’s rebellion/ coup attempt stemmed from the rape of his sister Tamar by David’s first-born son Amnon, who was born to his first wife; for king David did nothing to redeem the honour of Tamar, or to punish Amnon – he was just told to leave the capital for a year or two, thus breeding lingering discontent in Maacah and her children.

Yet another indication of the sense in the Bible of the women of the ‘dark bloodlines’ being used for their reproductive powers comes from the name of David’s first wife; for Ahinoam as she was called was also the name of the first king of Israel’s wife – Saul’s wife, Ahinoam daughter of Ahimaaz (1Sam.14). There is no stated link between the two, and yet they are often considered to be the same woman. So David deposed/ succeeded Saul, and his first wife may have been Saul’s widow. The subtextual message being that bloodline women were kept for purposesof ensuring genetic ‘purity’ within the bloodlines as they evolved over time. (And as we have just seen, Ahiman was the name of one of the three sons of Anak (Numbers 13.22), and one of the gate-keepers along with Shallum, Talmai, and Akkub) (1Chronicles 9.17), and the son of Zadok at 2Samuel15.27, entrusted with care of the Ark of the Covenant. Certainly possibly a case of a popular name, or alternatively, an ‘keyword’/ indicator of significant lineages. . .


Related to these narratives isthedepiction of what might be termed one of the wise-women of the Jewish society. InDelphos, Greece, the Pythia, or ‘pythonesses’ relayed the prophecies of the Oracle at the Temple of Apollo, and were symbols of the deep powers of the subconscious sensing of reality. The Old Testament has similar women associated with feminine ‘instinctive’ wisdom, whoalso often play a pivotal role in key events – one of whom in the Old Testament who is a ‘wise woman’ consulted for her wisdom at the town of Abel-beth-Maacah.

She appears immediately after the events of Absalom’sattemptedcoup, in what is an amazing chapter, 2Samuel.20.Put succinctly, a man called Sheba then starts a revolution in Israel against David’s rule. He is named as David’s wife and Solomon’s paramour the Queen of Sheba are,although the spelling of ‘sheba’ varies in the ‘Queen of – ‘ and some other examples by a single Hebrew letter, aleph instead of ayin. This may alter the meaning from ‘seven’ or ‘oath’, ie ‘to swear upon seven bonds, or seals’, etc, to also possibly mean ’man’ or ‘captive’ at the same time. There is some sense of aptness here in the sense that the negative bloodlines are portrayed as seen numerous times throughout the Bible, as a form of ‘captivity’, or slavery, tying in here with Sheba in 2Samuel20 where he is also described as ‘a man of Belial’(‘worthlessness’/ the ‘devil’)…

To follow the events of 2Samuel20, they begin;“And there happened to be a man of Belial (Satan) whose name was Sheba. . . who said. We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance of the son of Jesse: every man to his tents, O Israel”. (2Samuel 20.1)

Another Sheba associated with the lives of David and his family, for what must be a specific purpose of meaning; there is more complex politics contained within the narrative here. After the rebellion of Absalom David knows the new insurrection must be dealt with quickly; having appointed his nephew Amasa as the new captain of his forces – unusual in thatAmasa had been Absalom’s captain of forces, so perhaps David appoints him as a sign of reconciliation and healing (2Sam19.13)*–he sends for him to come to Jerusalem to organise an expedition. As he doesn’t arrive at Jerusalem within three days David fears the loyalty of Amasa may have swung to the new insurrection of Sheba. So he appoints a new commander, Abishai (likewise one of the three ‘sons of Zeruiah’) to instead lead the counter-strike.

*thus causing Joab to say to David ‘thou lovest thine enemies, and hatest thy friends’ (2Sam19.5-6).

So Abishai, the ‘mighty men of David’ and his brother Joab set off towards the north-west; after six or so miles they meet Amasa and his forces, at “the great stone, which is in Gibeon” (related clearly in name to the ‘mighty men’ of the Nephilim bloodlines, and pagan hill-top sites, as noted already, while the stone is possibly a symbol, a ‘marker-stone’ of the sanctity of the settlement, as at Bethel). Here Joab goes to embrace Amasa, David’s new ‘captain’ but as they clasp plunges a sword beneath his ribs, killing him! (2Sam20.10) The reasons for hisdoing so are not made clear; it may be in revenge for having been replaced by him as David’s ‘chief of forces’! It may have been because Amasa had fought for Absalom – or possibly in case Amasa was now loyal to Sheba – but this latter choice seems unlikely…

When all the people saw that  Amasa “wallowed in blood in the midst of the highway. . . and stood still” Joab drags Amasa out of the road into a field, and covers him with a cloth. Upon which all the men watching choose to follow Joab ‘to pursue afterSheba’ (20.13). Sheba, who in fleeing the men of David ‘went through all the tribes of Israel’ seeking shelter, finally arrives ‘unto Abel of Beth-Maacah’, and the tribe of the ‘Berites’ – ‘and they cast up a bank against the city, and it stood in the trench; and all the people that were with Joab battered the wall, to throw it down” (20.15). Joab and his men surround the town, and plan to lay siege and hence destroy it if the people there shelter Sheba. Then a ‘wise-woman cried out of the city’ seeking to speak with Joab. She begins;

Then she spake, saying, They were wont to speak in old time, saying, They shall surely ask counsel at Abel: and so they ended the matter. I am one of them that are peaceable and faithful in Israel; thou seekest to destroy a city and a mother in Israel; why wilt thou swallow up the inheritance of the LORD?

And Joab answered and said, Far be it from me, that I should swallow up or destroy. The matter is not so; but a man of mount Ephraim, Sheba the son of Bichri by name, hath lifted up his hand against the king, even against David. Deliver only him, and I will depart from the city. And the woman said unto Joab, Behold, his head shall be thrown to thee over the wall.

Then the woman went unto all the people in her wisdom. And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab. And he blew a trumpet, and they retired from the city, every man to his tent. And Joab returned unto Jerusalem unto the king” (2Sam20.18-22).


So this incredible, complex and meaningful section of 2Samuel, (which can be quite easily overlooked, as just a few of the many events of king David’s life), appears to be an in-depth examination of the choices and paths people situated toward the centre of power take in their journeys through life, as well as the variations of the effects the bloodline(s) of the “mighty men of old” have upon them. This is encoded into the narrative in subtle and detailed ways.Also it may be viewed as being a description/ commentary upon the manoeuvring which has characterized political power-plays throughout history. Few other sections of the Bible feature such stark political narratives…

In continuance of a related story, when David visits Judah(2Samuel 19.16) the man Shimei ‘hasted and came to meet king David’; and begs forgiveness, for “that which thy servant did perversely the day that my lord the king went out of Jerusalem”. ie. his cursing David and his men on the side of the hill as they passed through the deserted landscape…Again Abishai requests that Shimei be put to death, for cursing ‘the Lord’s anointed’ (2Samuel 19.21).

But (19.22) David refuses to put any man to death on the day of his reaffirmation as Israel’s king, and also of Absalom’s death.

2Sam19.23;Therefore David said unto Shimei, thou shalt not die. And the king sware unto him.

This shows a very human, forgiving, wise side of king David, indicating the fine balances at work in David’s life, and inner being. . . but later, on his death-bed, he reminds his (anointed) successor, his son Solomon, that this guarantee of mercy expires with him..! He further says to Solomon(1Kings2.8-9, which follows on from 2Samuel) –

And behold, thou hast Shimei…which cursed me with a grievious curse,in the day when I went Mahanaim…but Isware to him by the Lord,saying,I will not put thee to death with the sword.

Now therefore, hold him not guiltless;for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou ought to do unto him; but hishoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood.

The very next verse is of the death of David, making these King David’slast words. Thus, kingship has been established in Israel. (see 2.Samuel 23 for alternative last words.)

(Although the line of David and Solomon was not destined to last long; following the death of Solomon the twelve tribes of Israel and Judah gathered at Shechem (the ‘heaven-earth’ axis point, as we shall see shortly), and rejected Rehoboam the eldest son of Solomon as leader of the united tribes. Ten of the twelve tribes chose instead Jeroboam , a ‘mighty man’ of the tribe of Manasseh, splitting the tribes thereafter as Judah and Benjamin ruled themselves in the southstaying loyal to the descendants of David and Solomon. The ten northern tribes ofIsrael were ruled from c.960Bce by the dynasties of Jeroboam until 732Bce, when (as mentioned) the Assyrians invaded and laid siege for three years, after which they took the peoples into captivity in Assyria, as well as populating Israel with their own peoples).

And in the story of the proposed succession, and rejection by the tribes of Solomon’s son, there is further evidence supporting the themes being looked at; for in proposing the kingly lineages of Israel as represented by David and Solomon to be of the Sumerian ‘celestial’ bloodlines of the Anunnaki as they spread throughout the Near East from c.3,200Bce onwards, Solomon’s son’s name bears great relevance.

So the son who the tribes reject as king because of his sinful nature, is called Rehoboam (1Kings11.43); in 1Kings12 he shows this by rejecting the morally sound advice of the tribe’s elders (12.8) in favour of the young men he has grown up with.

But the primary reason his name supports the idea of the Sumerian lineages of kings (among other lines) is that in Genesis 10.11 Rehoboth-Ir is a city in Assyria which was built by none other than Nimrod, one of the proposed links between the lines of Sumer and the Israelites. Rehoboth-ir lays between Nineveh and Calah, (another name for the ancient town of Nimrud…). In additional support, when the names are examined closely, it can be seen they are composed of the stem ‘rahab’; as mentioned, Rahab is used by Isaiah to describe the ‘dragon of the deep’ which Isaiah and Job say God cut to pieces (ie in the line of the Babylonian myths of Marduk destroying the ’sea-serpent’ Tiamat. In this sense the name indicates the forces of chaos within the ‘abyss’ which threaten order within the Creation. Rahab is also interpreted widely as representing Egypt, and as such means human pride, and arrogance. It is also assessed by some as having meanings related to ‘violence’ (NOBSE Bible Name List), for reasons which become clear, representing the unbalanced celestial lineages of Sumer as it does…

Indeed, as 1 Kings 2.12 –  shows, the first actions of King Solomon are not to do with celebration, or an affirmation of the kingdom and the people, but with the ‘settling of scores’, or the establishing of his authority (in connection with those who challenged his father and his succession)…in fact, the entire narrative of the end of David’ssovereignty and the establishment of Solomon’s is an unedifying montage ofintrigue, political scheming, ambition, squabbling, venality, violence, the breaking of family bonds and ties, and bloody reprisals…a commentary on the by-products of kingship, perhaps.

Thus the first verses of Solomon’s reign describe; dealing with his brother Adonijah – being the elder brother  Adonijah had attempted to gain the support of the priests and tribe leaders of the elite for his claim to inherit/take the kingdom. Once Solomon’s right to rule was affirmed by the dying David, and he was crowned, Adonijah then asked Beersheba, he and Solomon’s mother, to ask Solomon to give him the hand of the attractive girl Abishag who gave David her vitality/comfort in his last days..!Solomon refuses, saying ‘let him ask for the kingdom too'(because of Adonijah’s actions) – and sending one of the ‘sons of Jehoiada’, Benaiah, has Adonijah killed.(1Kings 2.22-5)

Next, (1Kings2.26), he banishes the high priest of the Lord, ie the chief priest of Jerusalem/Israel – Abiathar – for supporting the ‘coup’ attempt of Adonijah, telling him that for his actions  ‘thou art worthy of death’…but because he bore the Ark of the Covenant before David,and shared all the sufferings of his father over the years, he is instead banished to his home area, Anathoth(a conjunction of Annunaki and Thoth?)

And after that he hears (1Kings2.28) that one of the ‘sons of Zeruiah’, one of his former captains, Joab, who lent his arms to Adonijah’s recent attempt at the throne, and who killed Absalom,has taken refuge in the sanctuary of the Tabernacle of the Lord, holding onto the altar…Solomon is unmoved by this, and sends Benaiah to kill him saying ‘Go,fall upon him’… this he does, telling Joab he is to receive no mercy for, in Solomon’s words, the ‘innocent blood which Joab shed,from me,and from the house of my father’.(1Kings2.31-4), after which he is buried alone in the desert (1Ki2.34).

And finally he deals with Shimei;(1Kings 2.36) Sending for Shimei he orders him to build a house in Jerusalem, and live there, and not leave the bounds of the city; on the day he passes across the Kidron brook, he will die; “thy blood shall be upon thine own head”.

 Shimei agrees, and complies for three years; until two of his servants run away to a neighbouring tribal area; which causes him to ride there to bring them back… but King Solomon is told of this, and calls Shimei to him again;

1KINGS 2.42 …

Did I not make thee to swear by the LORD, and protested unto thee, saying,Know for a certain, on the day thou goest out,and walkest abroad any whither,that thou shalt surely die? And thou saidst unto me, Theword that I have heard is good.

Why then hast thou not kept the oath of the LORD, and the commandmentthat I have charged theewith?

The king said moreover to Shimei, Thou knowest all the wickedness which thine heart is privy to, that thou didst to David my father: therefore the LORD shall return thy wickedness upon thine own head;And King Solomon shall be blessed, and the throne of David shallbe established before the LORD forever.So the king commanded Benaiah…which went out and fell upon him,that he died. And the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon.

Showing a storyline which is finely nuanced. This entire narrative serves in this way to focus upon the contradictory aspects of the ‘kingly’ bloodline; the genetic ‘kingliness’ flows through the veins of David – (‘and I am this day weak’,ie.essentially conflicted,compromised) -and his relatives, and has its effects upon the actions, and thoughts of them all. 

One of the most bizarre, and significant passages of the Old Testament regarding the nature of kingship perhaps is theNahashwho was the king of Ammon at start of Saul’s reign, whose forces attacked the town of Jabesh-Gilead, laying siege to it; the surrounded inhabitants sued for peace, whereby he gave them one week to consider his terms; these included the demand that – every occupant give up one of their eyes..! a strong implication of the worst aspects of the bloodline,perhaps.

 This occurs in the first book of Samuel –in fact it is 1Samuel11.1–11(!);

Then Nahash the Ammonite came up and encamped against Jabesh-Gilead; and all the men of Jabesh said unto Nahash,Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee.And Nahash the Ammonite answered them, On this condition…that I may thrust out all your right eyes, and lay it for a reproach upon all Israel.

(Upon which the elders asked for 7 days to think it over (as you would!), during which rescue arrived in the form of Saul, Israel’s first king!) – of note here, the rescuing tribes are said to have numbered 330,000, a cosmic #;the ‘children of Israel were three hundred thousand, and the men of Judah thirty thousand’  (1Samuel11.8), ie 10:1 ratio making 11x 3,highlighting the 11th harmonic as might be termed.

This cosmic# ratio/value is also present in the numbers of workers who were building The Temple of Solomon; in 1KINGS15-16 it relates that there were 70,000 men ‘that bare burdens’, and 80,000 ‘hewers in the mountains’  – and overseeing these workers were ‘three thousand and three hundred (3,300) which ruled over the people that wrought the work’; making clear again the 10:1 ratio that creates the 11 x 3 dynamic. It is notable that the value is shown to be active at the higher directive level(s) where material reality is created; as the workers create the Temple under higher (harmonic) direction.

And their 7:8 proportion is also relevant – it is raised by Solomon in the proverbs of Ecclesiastes,as mentioned earlier, saying in Ecclesiastes 11.1 and 11.2; to “give… unto 7 and 8…for thou knowest not what shall be in the world”.

Possibly in reference to the 7 notes of the octave, or the 8 notes including the initial note doubled, as a new octave starts…likewise David is the 8th son of Jesse, contrasted with the other seven.

As would be expected of values related to the king Solomon, this # is moreover closely connected to the Sun;

the (gravitational) mass of the sun: earth = 330,000:1.

So these values have cos# meanings as well as material significance in terms of the Sun

and the Earth. This is reflected in the (encoded) number of 1Samuel 11.8 –

√5/2 = 1.118 (+.5=φ, ie 1.618); further, √5³ = 11.18033 – and similarly, the escape velocity of earth is exactly 11.18 km/s.

As well as 330,000 there is association in the Bible of the number 333(000) -for example-

         864,000 / 333,000 = 2.6181 (φ²)

      – and in fact,  φx √φ (1.6181 x 1.272) = 3.33.

 which is connects 333 and phi (φ) with the Sun’s diameter.

The 11 and 3 ratios are linked to the planets also, within the ‘Sun – Earth – Moon’ harmonics as we have termed it in section 2. So, for example, the ratio of the Earth’s (equatorial) diameter to that of the Moon’s is 7920:2160 miles, or 3.66:1; in other words 11:3

proportions berween the two planets. So this 11:3 ratio gives both the length of the Earth’s sidereal year, (366 days), and additionally the Moon’s diameter proportion to the Earth’s (1:3.66). This is also expressable as 27.32% – the same figure as the Moon’s orbital period of one lunar month, at 27.32 days, a ‘synchronicity’for which there is no apparent reason. The relations of the Earth and the Moon to the Sun are likewise indicated in certain measurements, such as, ‘one day’ of 24 hours is 86,400 seconds, while the Sun’s diameter is 864,000 miles…. indeedfurther ‘inexplicable’ harmonics of time, space and matter exist between the three planets – so finely in tune with each other for aeons that they are the only system which has produced visible organic life (on the Earth’s surface) within the known universe. Something we examine in a little more depth in the Geometry and Cosmic# section)…all potential reasons, by the way, why the proportions are encoded into the numbers given in the Bible for the armies of Israel and Judah in relation to the siege of Nahash, and the Ammonites. As we shall see, the figures given are apparently excessive for any armies existing in the 10th century Bce in the Near East, by a considerable factor.

That there are links to the Sun, Earth and Moon in the numeric ‘code’ of 330/333 finds strong support in the Book of Deuteronomy – one of the key sections of the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, traditionally ascribed to Moses. This is where he is nearing completion of his life’s work, of bringing the Israelites out of Egypt into the land of Caanan under the Lord’s guidance, and indeed, is nearing the end of his life… at this time he gathers the tribes of Israel, to bless his twelve sons and the people;


And this is the blessing,wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the Children of Israel before his death. And he said, The LORD came from Sinai,and rose up from Seir unto them;he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints; from his right hand went a fiery law for them. Yea,he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand:and they sat down at thy feet; everyone shall receive of thy words.

In verse 33.2 the sun, and the LORD are identified metaphorically; ‘…came from (behind) the mountain of Sinai, rose up from Seir, shined from mount Paran’, brought the blessings of the light, ‘in a fiery law (the divine order) for them’.

This is the clearest equating of the Sun with the (blessings of) the Lord…as verse 33.3 likewise states. In fact the Hebrew word used in this verse is ‘habab’ – it is used only once in the entire Bible ( and means love, in the sense of the love that God feels for his people…an apt description for the sense conveyed in these verses.

(Incidentally, this short phrase ‘the LORD cometh with his ten thousands of saints’ is ascribed in Jude 1.14-15 to the patriarch Enoch, providing some authentication of the Book of Enoch existing in the 2ndor 3rdcenturies Bce; indeed there are an extensive number of phrases used in the Book of Enoch which were then used also in later New Testament writings. Some academics consider there to be upto a hundred examples of such phrases, etc).

Another cioincidence comes from Exodus 25, when YHVH gives the Israelites the dimensions for the Ark of the Covenant to be built; 2.5 cubits by 1.5 x .5 cubits. This makes it’s length:width and height ratio 1.6666 ;1. The harmonics of the hexagram, and the Vesica as we have seen; and incidentally half as it is of 3.333 : 1. This is curious considering the cosmic energies which the Ark seems to not only represent, but contain within it’s frame; it is used in the destruction of the Walls of Jericho along with the many repetitions of the law of seven (Joshua6.1-27); it is captured by the Philistines who then use it to hopefully defeat the Israelites (1Samuel5.8). This is at Gath, home of the giant Goliath and his relatives; but causes the Philistines to develop ‘emerods in their secret parts’ (5.9) – this may be a metaphor for the ambitious nature of the giants, and ‘mighty men of old’ (as in the Tower of Babylon), who want the energies of the heavens for their earthly ambitions and desires. But the Philistinesare made ill though across the seven months they hold it, as noted; so they beg to return it to the Israelites. They are so scared of it though they let the two cows who are pulling it decide where to take it! (1Samuel6.8-9). Incidentally, the two ‘milch kine’ journey to Beth-shemesh, ‘whereon they set down the ark of the Lord’ (6.18) – this meaning ‘the house of Shamash’, the Sumerian deity of the sun. Not only is this confirmation of the cosmic energies of the Ark, for the next verse relates of YHVH, “And he smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the LORD, even he smote fifty thousand and threescore and ten men”! (6.19)


The word for light in Hebrew is ‘Or’, coming from the Sumerian ‘Ur’, meaning the same. From Sumer to the Babylonian era, Orion was called Ur-Annu, meaning the Light of the Heavens, the second half stemming from Anu, father of the Anunnaki, whose name means simply ‘heavens’. (So as Ki– in Sumerian was the word for Earth, this made the Anunnaki ‘those who from Heaven to Earth came’… thus making the conjunction of matter and energy the essence of their name).

It is from this root word for divine order and light that the Roman word origere meaning arise/originate stemmed.

From these sources our language today uses the same meaning for words such as; order, orchestrate, origin, organ, orientation – ie.those concerned with the harmonic functioning of celestial systems; the correct metabolism of the body; and so on. The French use the stem word Or to mean gold, the metal that represents and resembles the Sun.An example of a concept embodying this and several other cos# matters is that of the Ouroboros, the Greek version of a serpent curled around the world with it’s head touching it’s tail. This symbol, from at least c.1340Bce in Egypt onwards was used to symbolize the circle of ‘eternity’ in esoteric and alchemical matters, and has occupied a place in virtually every civilization since then; for example in the Rosicrucian and alchemical treatise Atalanta Fugiens ( – fleeing), published by Michael Maier in Germany in 1617-1618, a text containing 50 or so abstract images alongside epigrams, prose, and musical pieces, is a depiction of the same symbol.

(left) the first known depiction of the Ouroboros, from the Tomb of Tutankhamun, the 18th dynasty Pharaoh (circa 1330 Bce) in the Valley of the Kings at Thebes, the sacred site at Luxor.Wikimedia.CC-by-SA 4.0. (right) from an alchemical text dating to 1478 in Europe.(Wikimedia, PD)

As the symbol of the light of the heavens as they interact with the sphere of the earth and the material world the ‘ouroboros’ has definite connections with the gaze of the Sphinx at the Giza complex; the ‘lion of the ground’ as it has been called looks directly east towards the rising sun along the 30th Parallel, on what is thus one of the earth’s major geometric division lines. So the lion/serpent figure placed within the Pyramid complex at the geometric centre of the world’s land-masses looks along a ‘dragon/serpent-line’ (containing the ‘lion/serpent’ energies of the sun and the cosmos) as they travel through the earth’s surface on a path running from where the Sun rises each day, in a linewhich circles the entire globe. In addition, as we see in the Egypt section, the Great Pyramid at Giza had several features built into it’s design pointing to the constellation of Orion, which was representative of the Egyptian deity Osiris during antiquity. So the entire site, and the cosmic consciousness contained within it’s design and construction, would appear to have some essential connection to the energies of light and the higher dimensions as they vitalize the world. The central point being the organisation of the world’s systems of life in opposition to the forces of chaos, and entropy.

The family of Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel, came from Sumer, his birthplace being called the ‘land of Ur’, providing another link in the interwoven layers of connections in the Bible.  Incidentally, Abraham’s grandfather in Ur was called Nahor; (close in pronunciation to ‘nahash’). He was the ninth in descent from Noah according to the Book of Genesis, making Abraham, the ‘father of nations,’ (Gen.26.4)eleventh – again, a significant value, or harmonic in cosmic #.

And in keeping with the seraphim linked meanings of so many significant characters (see section iv) Nahor means ‘scorched’ (as wellas nostril, or snort), much as sarap means ‘parched’. The entire family of Lot are linked to this meaning, as are the Angels of the Lord who destroy Sodom and Gomorah with the powers of the Sun(Genesis ch.19) – Abraham being coincidentally Lot’s uncle. Lot’s wife for instance, who looks back at the cataclysm is turned to a pillar of salt, in part a symbol of the desert, salinisation, and the powers of the sun taken to excess. The Ammonites of whom Nahash was the ruler came from the lineage of Lot and his daughters, linking the two again on multiple level – Lot’s daughters plied their father with wine in the cave on a hill soon after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and conceived by him, fearing ‘there is not a man in the world to come in unto us’ or such… (Gen19.31).Ammon was the son which came from the younger sister, while the elder gave birth to Moab(Gen.19.38); each respectively creating the lineages or tribes of the Ammonites and the Moabites. Both have many connections to the Sumerian celestial bloodlines, akin potentially to the nephilim or such; for example, when describing the actions of Solomon in worshipping the pagan gods of his foreign wives (at 1Kings11.1-14), it lists several. These include Ashtoreth, goddess of the Zidonians, Milcom the ’abomination of the Ammonites’ (11.5), Chemosh the ‘abomination of Moab…and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon’ (11.7). It is at 1Kings11.11 that YHVH says “Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes…I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant”. Incidentally, or perhaps not, it is at 11.14 that “The LORD stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite; he was of the king’s seed in Edom”. This is approximately the sixth time the word ‘satan’ is used in the Old Testament in the sense of an ‘adversary’, or (divinely inspired) opponent. The word is likewise used to describe Solomon’s father David, at 1Samuel29.4, when the Philistines use it of David. as he has ‘slewn his ten thousands’ of them..! And incredibly it is next used after that to describe Abishai, one of the three ‘sons of Zeruiah’, at 2Samuel19.22, again when Shimei is before the king, on the day of David’s re-affirmation as king after Absalom’s failed insurrection; “And David said, What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah, that ye should be this day adversaries unto me”… quite conclusive proof overall of the themes of this section. We willconsider additional themes related tothis later in the section.


 The size of the army in the Nahash passage of 1Samuel11.8 is far greater than any other time or biblical reference, making it possibly as much a metaphorical figure as a real one. Another illustrative example is in 1Chronicles 21.5 David counts his army as 1,570,000 ! Most scholars concur this is very unlikely*, and as such may instead be symbolic; and indeed,noting the cos# associations already found, it is noteworthy that Pi/ 2 = 1.57 08, as  we have seen a key value in the octave between 1 and 2.

* antiquity Israel would have been unlikely to be able to support population figures in the millions (no archeological sites support such figures either), leaving the possibility the figures given are allegorical or used for other reasons.

At the Battle of Kadesh in 1275Bc between the Egyptians and the Hittites, (two of the foremost empires of the era), in one of the  major battles of the time, each army numbered around 20,000 men each; a much more realistic figure for the 2nd millennium Bce.

The biblical confusion may stem from a dual-meaning of the Hebrew word eleph; used as a word for ‘thousands’ it has the alternative meaning of ‘a person’s clan’, ie part of a tribe…so 330 clans would equal around 10-15,000 men fit to fight.

There are some interesting connections within the short passages of 1Kings11.1, and 1Samuel11.1 –  firstly, the encoding of the cosmic#  111.1/ 1.111 (√1.23456),and 111.8(√5/2, or 2.236/2).

 Secondly the link of the king’s name to David’s relative, or bloodline, as well as the Nehash – the Healing Serpent which Moses raised on a cross in the desert. And further, connects this to the Nagas,which this book estimates to be the source of all the following uses across cultures in antiquity; and the etymological source, then and now, of the word ‘snake’; from PIE (s-)nego. This is still used in India today for the Indian cobra (nagas nagas)! And origin of the words for nerve (via Greek,neuros),neuron, sinew (PIE; s-neu,snake-like) and so on . . !

We discuss in the Etymology section how leylines/energy-lines across the earth are considered in antiquity to be ‘serpents of the ground’, indeed that the word Sion / Zion derives from cognates of sinew (sionu), an enabling, connecting concept where energy and matter conjoin (words connected to the PIE term for serpent, ‘s-nego’;*(s)neu – tendon, sinew, source of Sanskrit ‘snavan’ ; band, or sinew. Proto-italic / Greek – (s)neuros – a sinew, tendon, nerve, muscle, vigour, force, power, energy, strength… a cord string bow or wire).

It is possible to theorize that  a). the Nagas are closely linked to the Anunnaki,(as implied possibly by the terms Nahash theAmmonite/Anakim etc,and  b). that the Nagas operate according to a higher, or cosmic agenda, not from the perspective of human affairs – in other words they are somehow associated with the ‘angelic order’ the Seraphim as featured in the books of Genesis and Isaiah, etcetera.

This may be a possible explanation of the outrageous demand made by the king Nahash of the Israelites…for it is only 3 verses earlier when Samuel (via the LORD) warns the people that in requesting a king instead of a prophet to rule them, ‘to be like the other nations’, they will end up giving their wealth, their children, even their lives, to their worldly rulers.(1Samuel8.11-22)…yet they refuse to reconsider upon which YHVH has Samuel appoint earthly Saul to be their first king.

 It may be that the demand of Nahash was an (ironic) comment upon the choices made, and an example of both a sovereign’s cruelty, as well as the ‘callous impartiality’ of the Nagas – something the Sumerian deity Enlil appeared to possess in great quantity .

when condemning mankind to be destroyed in the carnage of the Flood in Gilgamesh.

Related is the saying of Jesus,in the New Testament; ‘If thine eye offends thee, pluck it out’,(Matthew 18.9) ie.the demands of heaven are higher than those of the world. But the people of Israel were not prepared to ‘pluck their own eye out’, and thus began the path that (inevitably?) led to their inconstancy before YHVH – who punished them with the Assyrian exile, the Babylonian Capture, and the centuries of instability up to the Roman occupation around the time of Jesus.

So this short section of the book of Samuelshows the great depths of meaning contained within the Bible – in particular;

– the nature of ‘imbalanced’ bloodlines,like that of Cain and Lamech,or Gilgamesh and Enki

– possibly helps to indicate the nature of the influence of the Nagas–‘serpents of wisdom’ – in worldevents, in their positive  aspect, as witnessed by Jesus belonging to the bloodline of Adam,Jesse,David. Also by his saying ‘…be wise as serpents…and meek as doves’ ie. balance the consciousness of the head and the heart (and the body). Something it may be said Solomon tried to do in his wisdom and rulings; and likewise his father king David, in the many positive aspects of his character, and reign.

 – the effects of the bloodlines are hard to separate from the negative consequences…and people such as David show the ongoing battle within such individuals between the varying aspects of their natures… all of which lends some support to this section’s focus  on the antique civilizations’ emphasis within their mythsand religious texts and artworks of the ‘contradictory’,or dual-natureof the vitalizing energies mankind receives from the ‘heavens’, (especially certain lineages of people); an appropriately subtle guiding perspective for ‘early’ civilizations.


Wells/Rivers/Stones/Oaks/Ladders/Angels/Heaven –

Concepts of aHEAVEN-EARTH LADDER withinthe Bible

and the building of places of worship at them.

We saw in the Squared Circle and Vesica Piscis sections how the conjunction, or ‘meeting-point’of the higher energies of the celestial sphere with the lower dimensional aspects of ‘material earth’  is portrayed in the Bible as the four rivers of the Garden of Eden flowing outwards from the (higher energetic) centre.

And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison; that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold” (Genesis 2.10-11).

In geometric terms of the 360° of the circle we therefore find 4 quarters of 90° each, whereby cosmic energy is now ‘oriented’ harmonically to the world,and dimension(s) we materially exist within. This is very often the underlying concern when the Bible makes reference to ‘the four points of the compass’; in much the same way as the ‘angels who measure with their cords’ are described in the Book of Enoch, and in Sumerian myths such as Gilgamesh, and many of the most relevant books of the Bible, such as in Job, Isaiah, and Revelations. What they appear to be measuring are the dimensions of the earth, and significant points on it’s surface. . . and considering the frequent references to North, South, East and West in the Bible, even in the oldest books such as Genesis, thought to have been written at some time between 500 and 1000 Bce, presumably the compass actually existed by such times…

As we have seen, there are many symbols of the Squared Circle as representative of this meeting of heavenly and earthly energies; including the Knights of Malta/ Maltese Cross, where each quadrant’s ray touches where the circle and the square meet, at 8 points on the symbol, so if a square is drawn outwards from the inward points of the four rays this completes the square and equal circle design.Similarly the representation of Jesus at Chartres cathedral with a four rayed star and circle behind his head; (see G.Strachan’s book on Chartres Cathedral and Gothic architecture p.31 and 71 for more on this);

(left) Jesus with four-rayed star within circle behind his head, within the shape of the Vesica Piscis, at the West Portal of Chartres Cathedral, built between 1190 -1220 Ad.

Attribution; Wikimedia, Public Domain

Indeed this four-rayed symbol, which effectively places square and circle of equal circumference together, predates the Christianity, Hebrew and Greek civilizations; see the photographof the stela of king Shamsi-Adad V from Nimrud in Assyria, dating to circa 814Bce shown right. The British Museum states simply that the symbol in the centre of his chest is that of the sun-god; this being Shamash as seen in Sumer and the epic of Gilgamesh, (hence the king’s name, as well as Adad, god of thunder and storms!) and as such, again indicates the symbol is of the energies of the sun and it’s light as they bring life to the earth.Indeed the Babylonians and Assyrians likewise had a four rayed star symbol (right) which closely resembles the sphere of the earth divided geometrically into four mountains and four rivers pointing to each quarter of the compass;clearly the forerunner or predecessor of the concept of the four rivers of the Garden of Eden in the Book of Genesis, considering the influence of the Sumerian line of wisdom on Hebrew civilization via the Babylonians.

(left) Four-rays/rivers star from Tablet of Shamash at Sippar, Mesopotamia c.870Bce.

Attribution; Wikimedia, OSMuhammed Amin, Public Domain

  • if that is, the Bible can be interpreted to have been written to contain complex metaphors within seemingly simple facts; in other words has ‘encodings’ related of meaning concerningalternativematters not directly referred to. This would indicate also, as Gurdjieff and Ouspensky etcetera maintained, the Bible, (like all sacred texts)contains throughout it’s diverse books the ‘esoteric language’ of symbols and metaphors,to communicate meanings of higher consciousness. (Meanings which are potentially beyond the power of words to effectively or adequately describe).

(The tendency to interpret every detail of ancient texts such as Gilgamesh only literally is the source of many misunderstandings and misguided conclusions; metaphors, such as the Ark of Utnapishtim measuring 60 x 60 x 60 cubits (ie cube-shaped) clearly contain more meaning when understood as encoded higher wisdom rather than physical description. For example connecting the Ark to the concepts of the Cube, as in the Temple of Jerualem’s Holy-of-Holies, The Heavenly (cubic!) City described by St John in the esoteric/Gnostic text the Book of Revelations, The Kaaba of Islam, and so on; also to the concepts of the ‘box’ (tebar), as the word used only twice in the Bible, for the Ark of the Covenant, and the basket Moses floated in, may be seen to contain metaphoric significances).

The ubiquity of the cross within the circle in civilizations such as the Assyrian one following in the foot-steps of Sumer, is a good example of the conscious use of symbols designed to convey abstract concepts whatever the language spoken, and indeed, variations of this symbol have existed for the majority of the history of civilization.

So the widespread concepts, often more ‘abstract’, or deeper than initially may seem, throughout antiquity of how the heavens’ energies reached and disseminated through the Earth may be seen to be one of the key subjects of the bible.

And this section therefore will begin with what is a short, quite often overlooked narrative within the (packed) events of the Old Testament, namely the passage describing how Jacob slept at a well one night, and dreamt repeatedly that a ladder stretched up  from where he was to the heavens. Being terrified throughout the night, by this ‘celestial’ experience, in the morning Jacob awoke

and remarked; ‘How dreadful this place is’, marking the site of the well with a stone, to honour it as the ‘gate of heaven’. As a quick note, the name Babylon stemmed from Bab-ili, meaning ‘gateway of the gods’, which could be reference to the city itself, or to the lands of Mesopotamia around it, as homelands of the Anunnaki for several millennia.

It is this inter-dimensional character of many special places upon the Earth’s surface, and the network of (sacred) buildings humanity has erected at them from (broadly speaking) the neolithic era of the 4th millennium Bce onwards which this section will look into, providing as it does a link between ‘cosmic number’ and the various metaphors of antiquity concerned with the pathways between energy and matter, or the influences of the higher dimensions.

There are several furtherlinked passages in the Bible which refer via allegory towhat are (effectively) sacred sites,at points where the world axis/‘heavens gates’are located (at crossover nodes within the earth’s energy-lines and fields) – and as we shall see, this clarity is signified by very often by the presence of water – both in the myths, and the actual sites said to be ‘gateways’ to the higher dimensions. The list of such revered ‘higher-dimensional’ sites includes in Britain places such as Stonehenge, Glastonbury Tor, Avebury circle, Holy Isle Lindisfarne just off the coast of Northumbria, Newgrange in N.Ireland, Skara Brae in the Orkney Islands, St Michael’s Mount in Cornwall, and many others; and world-wide, such places as Jerusalem, Lhasa (the capital of Tibet), Angkor Wat, Mount Mandara in India,  in America Mount Shasta in California, and Mt. Denali in Alaska, in South America historic sites such as Macchu Piccu, Teotihuacan, Cuzco, Tenochtitlan, Ollyantambo, Nazca and so on; the Easter Islands and other sites in the Pacific; in Australia Ayers Rock, and so on; all have been considered to be special places for centuries if not longer, and it is theorized that the world-wide energy grid(s) equivalent to the Earth’s energetic bodies link many of these sites, havingsignificant node-points between different energy-lines or fields precisely where these sacred sites have been located since antiquity. (And thus enabling the network to function efficiently by preventing (over-)building taking place at these sites).

So  to look at the passage describing the experience of Jacob, at Genesis 28.10; Jacob has just taken the birth right of his elder brother Esau from their father Isaac, by dint of taking advantage of the elderly Isaac’s lack of sight and impersonating his elder brother. After this he leaves home to travel to Mesopotamia,to avoid his angered brother for a period of time, as a tricked and dispossessed Esau states a wish to kill his brother (Gen 27.41).  So Jacob’s mother tells him to go to Haran,in northern Mesopotamia, making it part of the  Old Assyrian Empire in 2000Bce, (which grew just after the Akkadian civilization, the Eastern-Semitic Mesopotamian culture following on from the Sumerian one)where  her family are situated; her brother Laban, and her father Bethuel (28.2), the son of Abraham’s brother Nahor. The name Bethuel means the ‘House of the Lord’. . .  linking another central character of the Hebrew religion to Sumer and the ‘divine’ or ‘celestial’ bloodlines which originated there. But on his journey he stops overnight at a well in the desert, at Beer-Sheba, the ‘Well of Seven’.

 GENESIS 28.10-19:

And Jacob went out from Beer-Sheba,and went towards Haran.

And he lighted upon a certain place,and tarried there all night…and hetook of the stones of that place,and put them for his pillows,and laydown in that place to sleep.

And he dreamed, and behold a ladder setup on the earth,and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold theangels of God ascending and descending upon it.

And behold, the LORD stood above it,and said,I AM the LORD God of Abraham thy father,and the God of Isaac:the land where thou liest,to thee will I give it, and thy seed.

And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth,and thou shaltspread abroad to the west,and to the east,and to the north,andto the south;and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

And behold,I am with thee,and will keep thee in all placeswither thou goest,and will bring thee again into this land.

And Jacob awaked out of his sleep,and he said, Surely the LORDis in this place;and I knew it not.

And he was afraid,and said,How dreadful is this place! this is noneother but the house of God,and this is the gate of heaven.

And Jacob rose up early in the morning,and took the stone thathe had put forhis pillows,and set it up for a pillar,and poured oil upon the top of it.

And he called that place Beth-el;but the name of that city wascalled Luz at the first.

Indeed, the first point of interest is that his mother told him to travelto Haran, and Padam-aram (both being areas of northern Mesopotamia linking the family of Abraham to the Akkadians as well as ‘Ur of the Chaldees’ stated to be the birthplace of Abram and his wife Sarai), to go to the family of her father,  Bethuel.  Haran the town means ‘the road’ or ‘crossroad’, and is cognate to the Babylonian ‘haranu’ meaning the same. Haran is also said in the Bible to be one of the Neo-Assyrian empire’s conquests in the 8th century Bce (2Kings 19.12, Isaiah 37.12) and a trading partner later with the Phoenician city of Tyre (in Ezekiel 27.23).

So as we have seen already,  the number of ties and links of the Hebrew Patriarchs and their families to regions of Sumer, Akkadia, Babylon and Assyria are complex, and extensive, something which shows the (unstated) significance of these places, (and the gene-streams too of these civilizations) in relation to the many other Near Eastern cultures existing during these periods.

So to note briefly, Abraham, the common Patriarch of three world faiths, the Hebrew, Christian and Muslim religions, came from ‘Ur of the Chaldees’, in southern Iraq, ie. Sumer, born into a highborn wealthy family in Haran, led to Canaan by YHVH where he established the nation of Israel, at Shechem (Gen 12.6-8), then pitching his tent just east of Bethel.

(One metaphorical significance of this action as a mark of the establishment of Israel is that the site of Bethel is a heaven-earth axis; or ladder, or foundation, or ‘world-tree’. And the Oak of Shechem is an example of such a ‘tree’ joining the heavens and earth. So in this world-axis meaning, firstly Shechem as ‘shoulder’ looks to be indicative of the spine, as the foundation of the human body; and the mention of the tent likewise points quite subtly to the necessity of the support, the framework of the tent-poles as such). And indeed, in Egyptian hieroglyphs, ‘sekem’ had the meaning of ‘vitality’ or ‘life’, effectively exactly the same meaning as the metaphor of Shechem in the Bible.

So, as we shall soon see, Shechem and Bethel are key sacred sites in Israel, from this point onwards, and have many metaphorical and linguistic details associated with this aspect of their nature.Later in his life famine forced Abraham to move to Egypt, seeking food for himself and his family. In keeping with his powerful high-born social position and nature, when in Egypt he immediately  had meetings with the Pharaoh, with the Israelites being given many resources; though following the strange story of him telling his wife to tell the Pharaoh they were brother and sister, to avoid Abram being killed by a lustful Pharaoh, they were asked to leave Egypt; from there going back to Canaan and Shechem. Isaac (sent by his father Abraham to Sumer to marry one of their relatives still living in the family homeland there – meeting and marrying the Sumerian Hebrew girl, Rebekah); Jacob, the son of Isaac, likewise sent to Sumer to marry a tribal relative – Rachel. He moved to Egypt as an old man, when his son Joseph provided for his family in famine/ and during his lifetime fathered the 12 sons who began the tribes of Israel); Joseph (Jacob’s son, Isaac’s grandson, and Abraham’s great-grandson, was born in Sumer – Haran – then moved to Canaan when six years old/ as a youth sold in slavery to Egypt; becomes advisor to Pharaoh, rescues land during 7 years famine/he and family become trusted servants of the Pharaoh)- and so on.

Sothe scene of the narrative during these 4 or 5 generations of the line of Abrahamcontinually moves back and forth between Canaan/Israel, and Sumer (Ur of the Chaldees/Haran/N.Iraq) and Egypt, (particularly to the city Joseph came to in slavery before rising to the high role of Vizier, in the mentioned city of On/An/Awn (Heliopolis in the Greek language), linked to celestial and solar meanings,and linked as such to Anu, the father of the Sumerian gods).

The lineage is Shem (meaning ‘Sumer’) – Nahor – Terah – Abraham (and brothers Haran/ Nahor younger) – Isaac –

Jacob – the 12 sons/ tribes of Israel, and so on. Abraham’s brother Haran had family in Ur including Lot, who joined Abraham in journeying to Canaan on the word of Abraham’s father Terah. (There are arguments that Abraham’s claim to the lands of Canaan as promised by YHVH was kept within the Hebrew tribe by his son Isaac marrying one of the Hebrew clan from Haran, rather than a Canaanite woman; and the narrative of Abraham is one centred much upon questions of land settlement, patriarchy of the tribes of Israel, and so on).

It isduring this journey back to his ancestral homeland in Sumer therefore that Jacob has this ‘mystical’ or ‘higher-dimensional’ experience, thus naming the site Bethel, the ‘House of God’ (28.19) –as well as in the same period of time marrying  two of his kin-folk Laban’s daughters, Rachel and Leah, in Sumer (29.16-35),meeting  with ‘the angels of God’ (Gen32.1), and being given the name of Israel by a celestial being in what are again, strange and unusual circumstances; the text says Jacob met a man and fell to ‘wrestling with a man throughout the course of a night (Gen 32.24-30), after which the mysterious man (or angel)says “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel; for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. . . And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved” (Gen 32.28-30). So the text quite clearly links both the site, and the bloodline with the higher dimensional connections existing within the narrative.

Also of note is the meaning of the name Beer-Sheba, which translates asthe ‘well of  seven’  – thus indicating the connection of the site to the  (law of the) Octave which governs the doubling (or halving) of energies/ frequencies. This is at the heart of describing how energies ‘reduce’ in frequency/ vibrational rates, as they become ensconced in matter – or vice-versa as energies develop from matter towards the higher-dimensions, with each new octave being a discrete phase of the processes of change and balance. And an essential aspect of the sacred sites being discussed, as well as in wider terms the forces of life within reality, and the energies of the self.

The use of a stone to signify the site in this way joins the energies of the heavens with the physical materials of the Earth, and signposts how sacred sites’ and their buildings the world over – the temples, monasteries, cathedrals and stone structures etcetera- differ in energetic terms to ‘ordinary’ buildings.So the passage describing Jacob’s experiences is effectively the source-history of all sacred sites and churches and temples, the world over, in it’s depiction of places where energies ascend and descend through the octaves of evolution and involution, with an increased clarity and force.

There is another reference to sacred ground, atJoshua 5.12-15, Joshua being one of Israel’s earliest prophets, and a head-priest of the nation;

And (that day) the manna ceased; neither had the children of Israel manna anymore; but they did eat of the fruit of the land of Canaan that year.

And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand; and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?

And he said, Nay, but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come*. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?

And the captain of the LORD’S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy.

*(showing the different agenda of the cosmic/ higher-dimensional visitor to that of men).

It is a curious coincidence between the two passages, that Beersheba means ‘well of seven’, and the story of the destruction of the walls of Jericho, (Joshua 6.1-5) as instructed to  by an angel of the Lord, requires the Israelites to circle the walls of the city  for seven days, then on the seventh day seven priests direct the people to shout and blow seven rams horns so that the walls fall down; this is descriptive of the powers of sound and frequencies in the creation and destruction of matter..! And connects them with the cosmic frequencies at the heart of the Creation, and material reality, as described metaphorically in the New Testament Book of St John; ‘In the beginning was the Word’, ie the downward reaching energies of the cosmos which effectively create the world and visible reality.

With regard to the narrative of Joshua 5.12 and the appearance of the Lord’s angel by the oak tree, the angel tells Joshua to ‘Loose thy shoe…’; in Eastern cultures the foot, and the shoe are seen as symbolic of  the ‘lowest’ aspect of the material body, covered in the dust of the world. Similar symbolism exists within the Old Testament, such as in the Book of Daniel, when his ‘patron’ King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon dreams of a statue made of gold at the head, then silver in the chest, bronze in the stomach, and has feet made of clay (Daniel 2). So in Joshua it is bringing attention to the sacred nature of the site – in much the same way that some religions require a person to wash their feet before entering a church, and leaving their shoes at the door.

The act of Jacob in setting a stone as a marker of the site’s special nature is likewise an act which describes the history of sacred architecture, indicated also by his anointing the stone with oil.

  Genesis 28.22

And this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God’shouse; and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.

The reference to the tithing of a tenth is interesting, as the tetractys symbol shows – as does the Qaballah – the connection of the numeral ten to the material level of reality. In the tetractys the levels of the ‘pyramid’ are 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10

thus leading to the saying that ‘from 4 comes 10’, as all the levels of reality are obtainable from these four numbers; with four additionally representing the ‘four-square’ reality of the world, as shown in the compass, the clock and so on.

Another coincidence is that we have seen the importance of Piand Phi related harmonics; 5.5,7,11,14,22,28,44 etc in the Great Pyramid, and the squared circle. So 28/ 22 = 1.272 7,  effectively the square root of Phi – √φ–and the relationship of the circle to the square of equal diameter, or 4/π  (thus 28/7 : 22/7). That this relates to proportions found to be significant within the Great Pyramid in particular shows some relevance to the content of the verse. . .

 The importance of these central themes is reflected immediately inthe very next verse, and chapter,(Genesis 29.1-3) where he travels to the ‘land of the east’ and sees a well which they have a stone set over – they then feed the three flocks of sheep, and replace the stone. These are all capable of being interpreted metaphorically; the well as the fount of divine energy/ love; the stone as protecting the integrity of the well in the dust of the land; and the sheep as the faithful of the Lord who are fed by the shepherds and the Lord. And indeed as we see later, the Temple of Solomon was said in rabbinical sources to have a stone (the Eben Shettiyah) set over the well in the foundations of the building which was centred over the ‘waters of the abyss’ – in exact replication of the above passage on a different scale, and indeed is an exact conceptual match for Greek descriptions of ‘omphalos-points’ such as at The Temple of Apollo at Delphi. This was said by them to have been identified by Zeus himself in antiquity as the navel-point of the world. (And where subterranean forces emanating from other dimensions were considered to be constantly welling up from caves and fissures around the site.)

Following on from the first mention of Bethel, the ‘House of the Lord’, there is more at Genesis 32.24-34

 Genesis35.4 -15

And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods…and all theirearrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.

And they journeyed…and the terror of God was upon the citiesthat were round about them.

So Jacob came to Luz…which is in Canaan.*

And he built there an altar and called the place El-Beth-el;because there God appeared unto him.

But Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried beneathBeth-el under an oak; and the name of it was Allon-baccuth.(meaning; the Oak ofweeping/remembrance)

And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob; thy name shall not be any more called Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name;and he called his name Israel.

And God said unto him, I am God Almighty; be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee.

And Jacob set up a pillar in the place where he talked with  him, even a pillar of stone; and he poured a drink offering thereon; and he poured oil thereon.

And Jacob called the name of the place where God spake withhim,Bethel(house of God).

* in support of the theme of the  sacred heaven/earth axis – is the meaning of the word Luz– defined as – ‘a small bone in the human spinal column, believed in the Muslim and Jewish traditions to be the indestructible bone from which the body will be rebuilt at the time of the resurrection.’ ( And from the words of the Lord it may be equated with a ‘fount of divine blessings’, as he promises Jacob he shall be the father of Israel, and nations of multitudes.

Likewise, Shechem in Hebrew means ‘shoulder’ , relating to the spine/ body again, and the strength ‘which carries the load’. If we look at the Sumerian /Assyrianstela of the Tree of Life, and the gods giving wisdom to mankind (by inserting it into the back of the man’s neck, at the occiput), it can be seen that the deity Shamash is pointing  or inserting a pine-cone (from which stems the name the ‘pineal gland’; a Phi symbol with the spirals within the cone,  possibly; or a subtle incorporation of the tetractys pyramid which describes the higher-lower dimensional links) into the spine of the man at the point of the neck where the brain and the body meet. And indeed, the pineal gland – the ‘seat of the soul’ as described by Rene Descartes, or the ‘third eye’ in Eastern philosophy – is located at the rear of the head, just above the brainstem, in proximity to the rear occipital region of the skull. ‘Occiput’ itself stems from the ox/oak/axis/ cognates within PIE, Babylonian/Assyrian, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English French and other languages, relating it perfectly to the ‘world tree’/ spine/  axis themes being considered within this section . . . and points to the universality of the metaphors so used, within ‘reality’, and within the human frame.

Bas-relief stela of deity inserting ‘pine-cone’ into the neck of a man besides the (geometrical) ‘Tree of Life’. One of antiquities key images for more than 1000 years, containing several widely used symbols. Reproduced innumerable times from Sumer, to Babylon, Assyria and elsewhere, in varying degrees of quality, even within the same culture. (Note the similarity of the headwear /ribbon of the man to the shape of the spinal column leading from the brainstem and location of ‘the third eye’, the pineal gland). See the Sumer & Gilgamesh section for more on this artwork’s complex symbolism.

Attribution; cos# contributor; photograph, from the British Museum, 2022.

So what we’re seeing in all these myths and metaphors is a symbolism of the ‘temple of the body’, or how the body is made in the ‘image of ‘God’, or the Cosmos; a basic of cosmic wisdom in antiquity, which the cultures involved said stemmed from ‘divine’ sources. And the like nature of key aspects of the world to the human body and the cosmos, in a very straightforward example of the hermetic adage ‘As above, so below’.

We see again in this passage regarding the burial of Deborah,the ‘matriarchal’ figure of the early Hebrews, the special character of the place; this is confirmed by the oak tree, (again) used as symbol of the heavens-earth axis (or cosmic World Tree); and the stone and the oil also again, fulfilling the purpose of sanctifying the site. Debora is buried under the ‘house of god’ beneath the oak,(which also means ‘protection of spirit’ according to some interpretations). This is related to it’s associations to strength/ the spine,and the heaven-earth axis…  in fact the meaning of name Allon in OldGerman,and Hebrew is ‘oak’and/also ‘precious’, supporting this point. A further reference to an oak tree confirms it’s symbolic significance –

 Joshua 24.24-6

And the people said unto Joshua, The LORD our God will we serve, and his voice we will obey.So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem. And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the lawof God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak,that was by the sanctuary of the Lord.

Ouritalics; and a passage with virtually the same emphasis in all points to prior ones – a sacred event (the covenant, to symbolize orenshrine God’s plan for mankind); the placing of a stone in precise spot to mark the event/place; which is placed beneath an oak, (symbol of the cosmic axis/ spine/ world tree); to be a connecting point between man and God; and again this is at Shechem, the ‘place of the shoulder’. In fact having noted axis/oak/ox/octave all stem from this shared meaning – it is possible even the word ‘bone’itself, (from the Latin oss); with all effectively meaning strength/ foundation/ supporting framework / connection between heaven and earth.

More support of this theme of the oak tree, comes from a passage in the excellent book ‘Hamlet’s Mill’;

“The first ark was built by Utnapishtim in the Sumerian myth; one learns…it was acube,measuring 60×60 x 60 fathoms,which represents the unit in the sexagesimal system where 60 is written as 1. In another version, there is no ark,just a cubic stoneupon which rests a pillar which reached from Earth to Heaven. The stone…is lying under a cedar or an oak, ready to let loose a flood,without obviousreasons.” (p.219)

The cubic nature of the stone links it to the Holy of Holies in the Temple of Jerusalem, the Ark of the Covenant, the City of Heaven in Revelations, and the Kaaba in the religion of Islam, as well as the hexagon and the cube, as we explore in the Geometry section . This importance is forreasons unknown,but perhaps related to the unity of the proportions in both geometry, and in music terms, within the ratios of 1:2 which constitute the doubling of an octave. If an open string is halved in length it doubles the frequency of the note, and as such increases itself by one octave; something explored in great depth by Pythagoras and his school in the 6th century Bce, the Chinese philosophers of the same time, and others. If it is open, ie. 1:1, the tone of ‘unity’ is considered to hold within itself all the other notes of the octave as overtones, which resonate in harmonic proportions to the note, and can be derived by dividing the length of the string in discrete mathematical fractions. So likewise harmonic musical proportions, of unity, fourths and fifths in particular, are used in the sacred architecture of related civilizations such as the Egyptians, the Hebrews (particularly in the Temple of Jerusalem), the Greeks in much of their architecture, and in Islamic mosques and buildings which, again, are highly conscious in their use of maths and geometry within their religious symbolism.

So the cube – and the hexagon, which is a two-dimensional version of a cube – is one of the most important proportions in cosmic-number. Santillera and von Dechend continue;

“In Jewish legends/rabbinical texts it is told that ‘since the Ark disappeared there was a stone in it’s place… which was called ‘Foundation Stone’. It was called foundation stone ‘because from it the world was founded’.And it is said to lie above the waters that are below the holy of holies.”  (ie. stone as symbol of material reality/ the ‘cube of time and space’/ the atom?) Similarly John  Michell writes; “The Ark may be identified as a symbol with the cube of the New Jerusalem (Heavenly City), and both refer to the

foundation rock at Jerusalem, placed at the centre of the world to keep down the waters of the abyss’ (p.44); with ‘waters’ being as much interpretable as cosmic energies as simply water per se.

The ground-breaking English writer John Michell spends some timein his book ‘City of Revelation’ on the cosmic number meanings and concepts contained within the measures of the sacred sites of the Heavenly City in Revelation, Jerusalem, Glastonbury, Stonehenge and so on. Of the Temple Mount and the Eben Shettiyah he writes;

“The numbers so far examined (864, 666, 144, 7920,etc) are predominantly solar in character, identifying Jerusalem as the rock on which the institutions of the nation are founded, the centre of its. . .life. According to Jewish legend, the waters of the Flood vanished into the cleft in the rock on the site of the Temple, and the Foundation Stone was placed above to press them down. On this stone is built the temple. One day, it is said, the waters will rise up again, thrust aside the rock, and pour out another great flood to destroy all civilization” (p.46)

The Foundation Stone (shown right, from 1915) was also the point from which God had created the material world, as a pearl grows from around a speck of dust; or perhaps as planets and stars accumulate around a central point of rock or metal; the basic metaphor however is of the embryo growing from the umbilical cord, something contained within the belief that the world was built from around the foundation stone of the temple mount at Jerusalem, making it the ‘navel-point’ of the entire world.

As such this is clearly metaphorical in nature; so where did this concept arise from? Well, this is essentially identical to the definition of Enki/Ea,as ‘he whose home was water’, and as Lord of the South’ or  the Ab-zu/Ap-su (the ‘abyss/depths of water beneath the earth/to the ‘south’) which gave life-force to the earth and all life on it.

Omphalos (navel/ umbilical) marker stone from the Temple at Delphos, Greece.

The Ap-su, or ‘abyss‘represented the ‘subterranean water which fed the earth’s rivers and therefore all animals, and crops. While later versions of this ‘underworld’, like versions of the ‘abyss’ became slightly negative or fearful of the concept, associating it with death and the underworld as in Greek mythology, the original Sumerian etc Ap-su was the source of all life, hence one reason why it’s deity, Enki/Ea was ‘he who loved waters’, and the architect of the Sumerian civilizations field-systems of canals , ‘reservoirs’ and pools, irrigation channels and so on that made agriculture, and thus civilization possible. . . Sumerian creation myths also stated that the mankind was created from ‘the waters of the father’, Enki. In the Myth of Enki and Ninhursag; The Creation of Dilmun and other Travails (Dilmun being the original ‘garden of Eden’) it describes where the first humans, domesticated crops and farm stock were all created, and gradually developed into the agricultural bases of civilization. For an example of the potential narrative of the genetic creation of all these central aspects of later civilization, the domesticated plants came from one relatively small area of the Anatolian and Armenian highlands in the northof the Fertile Crescent.(It can be no coincidence that Sumerian and Hebrew myths aligned in placing the site of the beginning of the New World after the Flood in this area near Mt Ararat, mirroring the emergence of these crops etc in c.8000Bce, after a Flood estimated to have wiped out all previous civilizations in c10,800Bce). The Myth (briefly) reads as follows;

Pure is Dilmun land (Eden). Virginal is Dilmun land. Virginal is Dilmun land. Pristine is Dilmun land”.

“. . .upon Ninhursag he caused to flow the ‘water of the heart’, She received the ‘water of the heart’, the water of Enki”. 

So the myth combines sexual conjunction of male and female, with the notion of virginal ‘birth’, something which is clearly significant, and containing inner meaning. And in the multi-faceted or -levelled nature of the deities of the Anunnaki’s roles, Enki’s as ‘Lord of the Ab-zu’ was correspondingly of the instinctive centres of the human being, at the level of the stomach. In wider terms the instinctive brain concerned with physiological matters, of survival, reproduction, and so on.

So the ‘abyss’ beneath the Temple of Jerusalem takes on a deeper metaphysical role as well as merely ‘water reservoir’ or source for the city, as the mythology concerning the Deluge indicates is so.Michell quotes Dr Ralph Patai, who writes in his book, Man and the Temple;

“Nor was the cosmic significance of the Temple exhausted with the light that emanated from it. In the middle of the Temple, and constituting the floor of the Holy-of-Holies, was a huge native rock which was adorned withJewish legends with the peculiar features of an omphalos, a Navel of Earth. This Stone of Foundation was the first solid thing created, and was placed by God amidst the as-yet boundless fluids of the primeval waters. Legend has it that just as the body of an embryo is built up from it’s mother’s womb from it’snavel, so God built up the Earth concentrically around this Stone, the Navel of the Earth. And just as the body of the embryo receives it’s nourishment from the navel, so the whole earth too receives the waters that nourish it from this navel” (Michell, City of Revelation,p.31-32)

This mythology clearly connects the Hebrew consciousness concerning sacred sites with that of the Sumerians as displayed by the concept of the Ap-su, and Enki. And as with him, the waters referred to may be seen as being physical, energetic upon the material plane, or alternatively, energies within the human psyche; in this sense they are the waters of the subconscious which nourish the self, preventing the person from becoming starved of the ‘waters of life’ and condemned to a life of intellectual and emotional sterility. . . any intellectual system of rational thought can be made to appear the best way of interpreting reality, and the best course of action – witness communism in the 19th century. As Michell states on p46, “The great fanatics, as Chesterton remarked, are also great rationalists” But objective truth belongs to a deeper level, which requires an openness to the forces of life as they ebb and flow.So it is this sense that the Anunnaki and Enki related the subterranean waters of the Ap-su. Hence these waters are where Utnapishtim, the Sumerian Noah tells Gilgamesh to descend to the bottom of, to find the Plant of Life.

Yet like the deepest aspects of the human subconscious, the Ab-zu, or Ap-su is a place of universal energies with little form or structure which can therefore take expression in varying ways; Sumerian and related cultures developed the mythology of the Anzu-bird for instance, which characterized the negative aspects of the ‘abyss’. In the main myth concerning this being the Anzu bird steals the Tablet of Destinies from Enlil’s sanctuary, and is pursued by Ninurta, the Wild Bull of Heaven (see image, taken from Austen Henry Layard’s 1853 survey of his dig at the monuments of Nineveh; the plate (V) reads ‘bas relief at a small temple at Nimroud’ (now in the British Museum);

Some sources consider the subject of the relief to be Marduk chasing and killing Tiamat, the ‘serpent of the deep’ as related by Babylonian mythology in particular, whereas others believe it is probably Anzu and Ninurta (Black and Green, Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia).But either way the Anzu bird appears clearly to represent chaos, disharmony and evil. In this may be found the connection in the Bible to the ‘serpents of the Deep’, Rahab, Leviathan, Tiamat(as named in Babylon), Tanniym and so on – and presumably the New Testament referencein Revelations 12.7-9;

 “And there was war in heaven; Michael and his angels* fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels./ And prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven./ And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent called Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him”…

This begs the question though, of the positive aspects of the serpent portrayed in the Bible, for example the Seraphim, the Nahushtan, the Brass Serpent made by Moses to heal the Israelites, the two staffs of Moses and Aaron creating different serpents at the Egyptian court of the pharaoh, and so on; perhaps as indicators of the potentials of the energies of the abyss… similarly it is the ‘urnu-snakes’ in Gilgamesh which enable the craft of Urshanabi and the hero to travel to the ‘far-away’ (celestial place) where the survivor of the Flood, Utnapishtim resides, after being granted immortality by Enlil after the Flood had receded.

*(As we see in the Ley-lines of England section, the presence of lines of churches dedicated to St Michael upon ‘dragon-lines’ of energy traversing the lands of Britain, and across Europe to Israel is related by some to this relationship, not necessarily in this case of ‘war’, but of balancing and control).

So the abyss, and it’s waters have not only had different meanings in different cultures, but were viewed in dualistic terms also, as the waters ‘of life’, as well as of ‘death’, or evil…the Tablet of Destiny stolen by the Abzu-bird and taken to the abyss represents the usurpation of celestial order and consonance created under the divine aegis.

The duality of the energies of the abyss is reminiscent of the view in antiquity in Sumer, Egypt and elsewhere of that of the energies of the Sun; shown to be life-giving, and yet elemental and capable of causing destructive and unbalanced behaviour in certain individuals; as we see in the story of Samson, for example. Gilgamesh likewise is presented with deeply ‘contradictory’ aspects resulting from his ‘celestial’ inheritance, aspects of self related to the unresolved dynamics of genetics, and the subconscious…

But the waters of the Flood, already seen to be the constituent parts of the Abyss ‘present’ beneath the Temple of Jerusalem are therefore the ‘waters of life’, in a non-physical sense too, which nourish the world. Only the Deluge saw a massive excess of them, destroying much of life and humankind, in what is clearly, in both Sumerian and Hebrew versions, a purgative event allowed to wash away the accumulated impurities of life on earth.

And so in keeping with the original source of the concept, the Anunnaki, the waters of the abyss as discerned at Jerusalem in antiquity are not simply destructive;John Michell states on p.46; “Yet these waters are not merely a destructive force, they are a necessary element in fertility. The eastern garden has a fountain at the centre from which waters flow along channels to irrigate the plants. If the fountain dries up, the garden dies; if it flows with too great force, the garden is washed away. The same is true of the symbolic fountain that penetrates the surface of the conscious, intellectual mind, and fertilises it with the waters from the deep chasm of the unconscious. Order, discipline, the rock of faith, the intellectual law, the rule of Caesar, all these are required by human nature, which demands. . . an organised society. But however perfectly laid out the garden is, without water it is sterile. . .” He goes on to link the saying of Plato, that periodically civilizations are destroyed by either fire or water, with the two polarities of the human nature, intellectual or rational organisation, and subconscious tides of primeval energy. This concept is repeated in both myths related to Egypt and Giza, and to Enoch, in their need to create safe places to store cosmic wisdom for the well-being of mankind in a form resistant to both fire and flood.

In “Hamlet’s Mill’ the book quotes the legends of King David,the Temple in Jerusalem,and the sacred stone in the foundations which covers and restrains the abyss, the Eben Shetiyyah;(referenced by Santilla from L.Ginzburg,The legends of the Jews,1954).

In considering Jerusalem and other sites termed through history as ‘omphalos’ ie navel-points to the higher dimensions, it is curious to note that when Gilgamesh is directed to the bottom of the Ap-su – he attaches weights to his ankles in order to sink down far enough to gain it;only to then have a serpent steal it the same night; this serpent is called ‘the lion of the ground’ in the poem, thus linking it to lung mei – dragon-lines, or telluric energy-pathways, along which the forces of life are spread throughout the Earth.

See the (amazing) Book of Job for related verses; Job 38.30-3; “The waters are hid as with a stone; and the face of the deep is frozen. Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?/ Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?”

As a last point for consideration, the use of the concept of the ‘waters of the abyss’ held beneath the key ‘omphalos’ points of the world such as Jerusalem, in this way ensured the fertility of the land.Much as Sumerian cities such as Ur, and Nippur likewise held sacred status in their mythology, as being essentially ‘higher-dimensional’ in their location within the land and world, due to the gods’ placing of them according to the Ap-kallu’, or ‘seven sages’.

So as we see in the section on Sumer and the Epic of Gilgamesh, the poem, written in it’s first version around 2,800 Bce as far as is known, is the first, and oldest example of a Grail Quest in the history of mankind. So in this Gilgamesh and Enkidu endeavour to travel across mountains and deserts, to the Forest of the Gods in Lebanon to defeat the terrible Guardian of the Forest, Humbaba in a fight to the death. After that, they battle and kill the ‘Wild Bull of Heaven’, set upon them by the scorned goddess, Inanna; the Bull is possibly a metaphor for the Anunnaki deity Ninurta, incidentally the probable inspiration for the biblical character Nimrud, ‘mighty man’ of Babylon who was ‘mighty before the Lord’ as a hunter.This event followed swiftly by the death of Enkidu by the order of the gods, Gilgamesh journeys further through exhausting and otherworldly experiences to travel to ‘the Faraway’, (possibly outside of the limits of the Earth), to meet Utnapishtim, the survivor of the Deluge. He was granted (with his wife) residence in the ‘faraway’ ie cosmos, by the (noticeably impersonal but ‘just’) ‘Lord of the Command’ (of the Earth), Enlil.After this story of the Flood is related by Utnapishtim, Gilgamesh then fails in his test to be granted eternal life, and returns the way he came to his city of Uruk-haven. But the real Grail Quest is shown to be that achieved by Utnapishtim and his wife, whereby the prize granted to them is eternal life. And not only that, but as in the Arthurian grail cycles, the fertility of the land is shown to be dependent upon the spiritual virtues and success of the candidate – thus as in the Bible (with Noah and his relatives, and the Ark of all living creatures), the success of the grail quest results in a new era of fertility and life in the land, (and failure results in the opposite). Thus in this way connections can be seen to exist between the Sumerian, the Biblical, and the Arthurian ‘grail’ works of literature in terms of the spirit, and the energies of life within the land and the self – clearly as important within grail quests as the more obvious adventures they are often associated with.

                                          *                             *                                *                                        *

More biblical examples of the different nature of Bethel exist; (at Judges 20.26)it relates how ‘the Ark of the Covenant’ was sited at Bethel, likewise indicating the manifestation of Divine power at the sacred site… and 2Kings 2:2-3(!) says Elijah visited Bethel, ‘and the sons of the prophets were resident there’.In Judges 20:18/20.26 the people of Israel travel up to Bethel in their distress to ‘ask the counsel of God’.

 The presence of underground water sources being strong indicators/ factors of sacred sites has already been discussed; so for example, beneath the ‘navel-point’ of Chartres Cathedral. Santillera comments upon the Temple of David (Solomon?) in Jerusalem,as being built above a subterranean water course also; then mentions a similar feature pertaining to the Muslim holy site of the Kaaba, the ‘cube’, designed to reflect cosmic harmonies in the material world. The Kaaba is built directly over a well, once in early Islamic times used to give refreshment to the  pilgrims visiting the site… (Hamlet’s Mill,p221.)

All of which metaphors, stories, and images are closely related to the cosmic# themes raised in (this chapter’s study of) the Bible; themes concerning heaven-earth gates/energy field nodes; sacred stones or pillars/sacred architecture; and further to this, the abyss/ the atom, subterranean /cosmic ‘waters’. . . all indicating the coherency and the complexity of the metaphors used to describe the nature of the Creation, or of the ‘creative principle’, as well as the pathways these forces take in the material reality of the earth.

As mentioned, the etymology of oak/ox/octave/axis/ relating to heaven/earth ladders, is fundamentally related to the axis of the ‘spine’/ladder/’world tree’. And from this comes a potential key to the meaning of the name Enoch. It will be remembered that the name of the key Sumerian deity Enki stems from two words; En Ki – Lord of the Earth.

So correspondingly it can be seen that En Ochdivides into the stem-words for ‘Lord of the Axis’ (or Octave), meaning the Heaven-Earth ladder, placing Enoch as a connecting point between them. A very apt description of both the role of Enoch in transmitting to mankind the wisdom of the heavens when he returned from his celestial journey with the angels, and  indeed, of the journey he takes which ‘ascends the cosmic tree’ (or ‘heaven-earth’ axis/ladder) through the ten levels of the heavens, from the lowest to the highest. So a very descriptive and revealing meaning is linked to his name if viewed in terms of the etymological group of words centred around ox/octave/oss/axis…

Another group of linked symbols used in the Bible and indeed widely throughout antiquity are thefountain / eye / well-spring– these are used as metaphors for omphalos points through many cultures of the Near East in antiquity; so in the bible gives metaphorical meaning to incidents such as when YHVHhimself breaks open the rocks to bring forth a spring of water for Samson. This could potentially beapplied via analogy to the splitting of the atom, if it is accepted that the consciousness (individually or otherwise) which created the books of the Bible was cosmic in nature. Examples of ‘divine energy’ also are represented as ‘shoots of flames or fire which rise upwards from the ground, as we examine in a while. Again, in these examples the angels ‘strike the rock’ with their staffs, thus bringing energy from matter, as the splitting of the atom does.

Thebackbone/axis metaphor illustrates the role fulfilled by the sacred sites situated at crossover/harmonic points in the world’s energy fields – from Jerusalem to Lhasa,to Angkor Wat,Cuzco,Tiahuanaco, to Glastonbury, Stonehenge,Cuzco, Ollyamtambo, Nazca, Petra, Mount Shasta, the Grand Tetons, the Easter Islands and so on.  These areas are thus seen as energy-centres/gate-ways which enable the free flow, and refinement of all the cosmic energies which constitute the earth’s energy fields and processes; in this way constituting a continual process of transformation within the Earth of the inner (energy) octaves of the planets, the Sun, the Milky Way and so on…


In the Epic of Gilgamesh from around 2800Bce, from early to mid-Sumer civilization onwards the first verse is concerned with the same themes being considered;

He built…the wall which gleams like copper...

Take hold of the threshold stone, from ancient times

Examine its foundation,inspect it’s brickwork thoroughly

 …did not the seven sages themselves lay out it’s plans?

There is one other (short) reference to the place where Jacob slept and hadfearful visions, the sacred site/navel-point in the land; and this is at Judges 1.23; again the previous but no longer used name is mentioned, a rare emphasis, but which serves togive context to the metaphor, (Luzbeing an ancient word for a (sacred)part of the spine, connecting the individual with the higher dimensions).

Although the general view is that Luz means ‘turn aside’, or ‘crookedness'(or ‘almond tree’), the meaning of it as ‘bone, particularly one in the spine’ is also accepted – ie. at, citing Lagarde (backbone),Winkler (sanctuary),and Cheyne (strong)…though at the same time misinterpretingthe ‘bone’ meaning for a ‘rocky height resembling a bone’.

  JUDGES 1/23;

And the house of Joseph sent to de-scry (spy out) Beth-el.(Now the name of the city before was Luz).

The next verse says that the local man who helped the forces of Israel into the city went with his family to the ‘land of the Hittites (N.Iraq/ Assyria), and; ‘built a city, and called the name thereof Luz; which is the name thereof unto this day’…

The prophet Gideon likewise has a higher-dimensional experience; again, an angel of the Lord visits him beneath an oak tree, to direct him as a servant (or prophet) of the people of Israel;

  Judges 6.7

And it came to pass,when the children of Israel cried untothe LORD because of the Midianites,

That the LORD sent a prophet unto the children of Israel, which said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I brought  you up from Egypt,and brought you forth out of the house of bondage;And I said unto you, I am the LORD your God…but ye have not obeyed my voice. 

And there came an angel of the LORD,and sat under an oak whichwas in Ophrah,that pertained unto Joash..and his son Gideon.

And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him,and said unto him, The LORD is with thee, thou mighty man of valour.

Gideon asks of the angel (6.13-14);

If the LORD be with us,why then has this all befallen us?

And the LORD looked upon him, and said, Go in this thy might,and thou shalt save Israel from the hand of the Midianites.

Gideon takes his (cosmic) visitor as a ‘man of god’; as a mark of respect,like Samson’s father when visited (by an angel), asks his guest to wait while he prepares some meat and broth for him. He also professes doubt that he can lead Israel to victory in battle,and asks for a sign ‘from heaven’.

Having made the meat and broth, he ‘brought it to him under the oak’.The angel then instructs him;

   Judges 6.20.

And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Take the flesh andthe unleavened cakes (bread),and lay them upon this rock.

Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of his staffthat was in his hand,and touched the flesh and the cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock,and consumed the flesh and the cakes. Then the angel of the LORD departed,out of his  sight.

And Gideon said,Alas,O LORD God! for because I have seen an angel of the LORD face to face.

Then Gideon built an altar there unto the LORD,and calledit Jehovah-shalom.

As with the angelic visitor to Samson’s parents, the angel that ‘descends’ from the realms of pure energy to the level of the earth does not eat any of the offerings of respect; and displays virtually identical powers;

Judges 13.19.

So Manoah took a kid with a meat offering,and offered it upon a rock unto the LORD; and theangel did wondrously… For it came to pass,when the flamewent up toward heaven from off the altar,that the angelof the LORD ascended in the flame of the altar…  

 As the highlights/italics of Gideon’s experience show, this short passage exemplifiesseveral of the highly significant themes raised in this study;

Firstly, the meat and broth,representative of matter and the flesh,are placed on the (sacred) stone, (sacred site)under the oak, (symbolic of the World Tree/heaven-earth axis) – and then the angel touches it with his staff; symbol of divine power (orpossibly representative of the axial relationship between heaven and earth, or energy and matter, as the spine connects the two; or as Gurdjieff states. “Every stick has two ends”. (see the Etymologysection for the shared stem for cause/ course/ corridor/ chord/ cord/cors etc, as well as that for oak/ ox/ axis/ occiput / octave/ oss, etc).

Also the fire which rises up,(here and elsewhere) thus is symbolic of a.the power of cosmic energy especially at such connecting points upon the earth’s surface, and b.within the body, as energy ascends (and descends) the spine,in botheveryday life, and when enlightenment is achieved – seeexamples such as those concerning the (Hindu) idea of the Kundalini fire ascending the spine and illuminating the inner energy centres, the chakras. Coincidentally,considering the name the ‘well of seven’ (Beer-sheba) and all the seven-related symbolism encoded into the Bible, in Eastern ‘philosophy’ there are seven chakras (energy-centres), from the seat of thegroin to the crown of the head,as well as seven notes in the octave into which transformational energies are divided.  Thus adding meaning to the etymology/semantic understanding of the word chord,and chordata; the body-form of vertebrates centred around the spine which life has favoured for around 540-20 million years, since the Cambrian Explosion, for creatures of the sea, land and air, including of course humans.

 And as we have seen in the chapter on the Vesica Piscis and sacred sites, there is a strong connection throughout history between the oak, underground water-courses, sacred sites, and (mostly symbolically), lightning..!

This in addition to the  meanings ascribed to the oak tree, regardingstrength, protection, the World Tree, and so on.

For example, the Tarot card XVI (16),the House of God/ Blasted Tower is often depicted as or with an oak tree being blasted by lightning for unknown reason. This depictionhas an actual correspondence with material reality, for the following reason; oaks in particular among trees have a high need/propensity for water or damp ground. This leads to them very often being sited near to rivers and streams, or alternatively over subterranean water-courses/ areas; so when lightning strikes the earth, it is more likely in general to strike where water (and oak trees) are located! So the three things are related essentially; while many sacred sites are also situated directly above such subterranean water-courses. Chartres Cathedral is a great example, Glastonbury Tor has it’s famous well for visitors at the base of the hill, and Hamlet’s Mill states that the Kaaba is sited over a well.

 Many wells and rivers and streams were accorded sacred status in antiquity, across the world, from the Near East, to India, to Europe and Great Britain. Sir Norman Lockyer, the Victorian academic who helped found the field of archeo-astronomy (as well as discovering and  naming helium through spectroscopy!) studied this phenomenon, including religious ceremonies and practices such as tying ribbons in trees overlooking the water-courses, in the groves and streams of antiquity and history.

 Straight after the end of the provision of manna to the Israelites (as they ‘settle’ into everyday reality after the intense reality of the trials of the wilderness), and the visit of the ‘captain of the host of the Lord’ in Joshua 5,in Joshua 6.1 the story continues with the destruction ofthe walls of Jericho. Of all the various strands we have considered in this book concerning the cosmic# implications of 7, and 7.77, there have been connections highlightedto the geometries of the Great Pyramid,those of the harmonics of Pi and Phi in the squared circle,and  the law of 7 and the Octave…

And one of our study’s central characters, the son of Cain who laments that avengement for his guiltof his lineage will be ‘not seven but seventy sevenfold’ is Lamech. In Genesis 5.28 we aretold that Lamech (of the Sethite line), the son of Methuselah and grandson of Enoch, and the father of Noah, lived for exactly 777 years!

Whether this Lamech is the same as Cain’s son or the Lamech of the ‘opposing’ Sethite line is a question that is almost moot, so intertwined are the two lines, or ‘connected to the gods’ of Sumer.

So the following chapter in Joshua 6 provides some insight into the awareness of the writers of the Bible regarding the centrality of the octave in all physics – of frequencies of light, and sound-  in the chemistry of the Periodic Table of Elements, and so on. The octave in other words, is central to how the world is created and shaped by energy; a factimplied  within the strange and incredible story of the Walls of Jericho;

  JOSHUA 6.1.

Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel; none went out,and none came in.

And the LORD said unto Joshua,See,I have given into thine hand Jericho,and the king thereof,and the mighty men of valour.

And ye shall compass the city,all ye men of war,and go around about the city once. Thus shalt thou do six days.

And seven priests shall bear before the ark seven trumpets of rams horns; and the seventh day ye shall compass the city seven times;and the priests shall blow with the trumpets …

And it shall come to pass, that when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, and when ye hear the sound of the trumpet,all the people shall shout with a great shout;and the wall of the city shall fall down flat.

…as the following verses relate.

The mysterious Ark of the Covenant, containing the Tablets of the Ten Commandments that YHVH gave to Moses at the top of Mount Sinai, in it’s wooden carved container is also involved in the priests’ circuits of the city. We have already seen how the presence of the Ark within the Holy-of-Holies, on the day of the Temple’s dedication caused a great cloud of smoke (‘the Glory of the Lord’; 1Kings8.10-11) to fill the space when the sacred music was performed by the musicians.Thus adding another clear source of ‘divine energy’ to the mix…making this a fascinating story with hidden depths and meanings beyond that of the visible, one with potential symbolic meanings too. Something every story featured in this section has had as a sub-text. For critics of the Bible’s narratives as ‘unbelievable’, it is fair to note that not only is sound and frequency at the heart of the creative principle of the material universe, in consonant patterns of frequencies (harmonics), as shown by the ‘Word’ of the Lord, but sound waves can be dissonant too – and have effects upon buildings, and living beings also. The science of acoustics in this regard can be show to have been studied in the 6th century Bce within the school of Pythagoras, although some people argue that the Egyptians were studying the effects of tonal sound vibrations and frequencies from an earlier date than this.Virtually all of the highest civilizations

of the period equated the Creation with music; for example the Chinese belief in the Twelve Cosmic Tones as noted by David Tame in ‘The Secret Power of Music’. So Chinese society’s uses of music, from at least a thousand years before the time of Christ were based around the concept of the primal tone or sound of the universe, as the Indian concept

of Aum likewise stated. In China this sound was deemed able to be broken down into twelve Cosmic Tones, or notes

(presumably much like the twelve notes of the octave with seven major and five minor as known today). The Primal Tone was called ‘huang chung’ which translates to ‘Yellow Bell’. Within society the emperor was referred to by the same title, (similar in a way to the 17th century French king Louis XV being called the Sun-king), as the representative of ‘divine will’.

This group of notes was thus a link between man and the cosmos. One way this was evidenced was the use by the Chinese court of tuned bells or strings to harmonize the weights and measures used in all Chinese regions, to ensure commercial ‘integrity’, societal trust, and harmony with cosmic values. Likewise the changes between seasons, such as the arrival of Spring were believed to be discernible by use of musical notes/instruments. How these things were achieved is examined in more detail in the ‘Cosmic Wisdom and China’ section.

Sound vibrations are known by science to have the ability to cause injury to human beings*, whether of frequencies below or above human hearing (infra- and ultra-sound respectively) as the result of modern life, and noise pollution such as traffic/industry, or such.Alternatively as the result of worse; some states’ armed forces within the world have experimented with making sonic/infrasound weapons – these can seriously injure humans (via the stomach it seems – see Gavreau, 1957), as well as even building structures. A stark reminder of the potentially dual uses of the powerful energies of the universe. Some police forces have also begun to use infra- or ultrasound weapons to deter or disperse crowds of people (these being frequencies below or above human hearing)

In fact the infrasound frequencies created by weather systems, particularly extreme events such as storms, tornadoes, tidal waves, earthquakes and so on, are now being used by scientists to gain advance notice of such events. This understanding was helped by observing  the reaction of animals just before the tidal wave of the Indian Ocean in 2004, when they fled the coastline for no apparent reason in the hour beforehand.

*see ‘The Boiled Frog Syndrome’, by Thomas Saunders for much detail on this).

And on a more positive note, ultrasound has been used by scientists for refining numerous technologies of sonic basis, involved in a whole array of fields; structural analysis, range-finding, flow-analysis, cleaning, disintegration, welding (!), chemistry, communications, and so on. It has also been developed by medical scientists as not only a powerful diagnostic imaging tool (ie internal scanner), but also is starting to be applied as a ‘light touch’ form of healing.

There is also the case of the scientist Nikolai Tesla, the Serbian researcher and inventor credited by many with ‘creating the modern electronic age’ of the 20th century. Tesla experimented with many arcane and abstruse concepts which much later attained a working reality, including the invention of the technology of AC alternating current, oscillators and generators such as the Tesla coil, power-transmission technologies, early X-ray imaging work, a radio-controlled boat and numerous other inventions and developments; one relevant example is the series of experiments he conducted in his New York laboratory researching vibrations.

“I was experimenting with vibrations. I had one of my machines going and I wanted to see if I could get it in tune with the vibration of the building. I put it up notch after notch. There was a peculiar cracking sound. . .I put it up a little higher. Suddenly all the heavy machinery in the place was flying around. I grabbed a hammer and broke the machine. Outside in the street (in Lower Manhattan) there was pandemonium. The police and ambulances arrived. I told my assistants to say nothing. We told the police it was an earthquake. . .”

When asked by a reporter what he would need to destroy the Empire State Building he replied “Vibration will do anything. It would only be necessary to step up the vibrations of the machine to fit the natural vibration of the building and the building would come crashing down. That’s why soldiers break step crossing a bridge”. 

So in all, the Bible would appear to be far ahead of it’s time in asserting the power of sound and frequency to affect the structures of the material world. Let alone convey the frequencies of the cosmos to the human ear through sacred music.


Leading on from some of the cosmic # related themes and metaphors embedded within the Old Testament /Bible, we can see thatmany of the most relevant passagesare placed at numerically significant points within the framework of the books; in such a way as to indicate a conscious procedure for doing so. . .

 In particular we find that the cosmic# s of Pi (3.1415), Phi (1.618), 1.111 (the√1.2345…), and 3.45(6) (a highly significant # related to the√3 (1.732),and to 432/ 864 (and which crops up everywhere,such as the squared circle,pi and phi relations,the Gt Pyramid, and so on…) All these numbers can be said to be consciously joined with specific themes or subjects in terms of verse and chapter numbers in both Old and New Testaments, beyond all likelihood of simple coincidence…and if these instances arenot coincidental, what does this imply about the consciousness of the minds which wrote the books of the Bible,even at dates stretching backas we have seen with the book of Leviticus shown likely to be proven to have originated c.1100 Bce, or in many of the other books of the Old Testament found in the store of texts called the Dead Sea Scrolls. To devise a system of encoding which hasbeen overlooked –‘seen’but not noticed – by virtually every single person to read these holy books, is an incredible fact. Only now are these areas becoming easier to discern, in what is a newera of information dissemination on subjects such as sacred number.

So as we saw with the initial appearance of David in the Old Testament, the use of’coding’ with regard to chapter/verse number is potentially used as a form ofindicating cosmic(#) significancewithin the verse ‘highlighted’ in this way.

The following list is a short summary of some of the clearest examples ofthis form of encoding,with the central point being the importance of the event; each one is at a key moment in the unfolding of events within the Bible, or is at a point where God – YHVH – or Jesus  speaks,as this list shows…    






















MARK  16.18:DISCIPLES GIVEN POWER to take up SERPENTS/  ”  ” “





GENESIS 2.22 – And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a

                                       woman, and brought her unto the man.

GENESIS 3.4/5 – the serpent speaks to Eve in the Garden of Eden.

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die.

For God doth knowthat in the day ye eat thereof,then your eyes

shall be opened,and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

GENESIS 3.14/15 – the LORD curses the serpent in Eden.

And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this,thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of thefield; upon thy belly shalt thou go,and dust  shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

There does seem to be a discernibleintention in these placings to link the serpent, with the value central to the geometries of the circle and spheres, namely Pi – this may be an indication of a potential subject being the serpent/Ouroboros energy-lines which circle the globe – as we see in the 30thParallel, which circuits the globe under thegaze of the Sphinx…or the serpent in Gilgamesh which steals the Plant of Life, and sheds it’s old skin immediately, in a metaphor of renewal.

EXODUS 34.5/6:  –  at the top of Mount Sinai, YHVH appears, and gives Moses the Tablets of the Covenant;

And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. 6. And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth.

NUMBERS 22.22:  – the first mention of an ‘adversary’, a ‘satan’ to Balaam, to oppose him on his wilful path.

And God’s anger was kindled because he went; and the

angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary (satan)

against him.

NUMBERS 3.14/15 – the LORD speaks to Moses.

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai,saying,

¹⁵Number the children of Levi after the houses of their fathers, by their

families; every male from a month old and upward shaltthou number them.

NUMBERS 3.45– the Lord reveals his name to Moses.

(And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying)

Take the Levites instead of all the firstbornamong

the children of Israel…and the Levites shall be mine:

I AM the LORD.

Is this possibly the first statement of Jehovah’s key revealing of his name,and nature to humanityie 

‘I AM THAT I AM’ ?Well actuallythe first time God says  this is at:

    EXODUS 3.14/15 –

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM; and he said, Thus

shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto


¹⁵And God said moreover unto Moses,Thus shalt thou say  unto the children of Israel,The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham,the God of Isaac,and the God of Jacobhath sent me unto you; this is my name forever,and this is my memorial unto all generations.

 Nb*- Although a virtuous man, and faithful through his trials, Job failed to fully understand the workings of the Lord, (and Satan) – and because of his excessive complaints, was denied the appellation for posterity of ‘the God of Job’…(unlike Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob).Louis Ginzburg, The Legends of the Jews, (1909).

DEUTERONOMY 34.5 – the death of Moses overlooking the ‘promised land’.

And the LORD said unto him, This is the land which I sware unto Abraham,

unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying, I will give it unto thy seed: I have caused

thee to see it with thine own eyes, but thou shaltnot go over hither.So Moses

the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word

of the LORD.

   JOSHUA3.3/4/5… –the LORD blesses Joshua.

And they commanded the people,saying,When ye see the ark of

the covenant of the LORD your God,and the priests the Levites

bearing it,then ye shall remove from your placeand go after it.

Yet there shall be a space between you and it,about 2000 cubits

by measure;come not near unto it,that ye mayknowthe way by

which ye must go;for ye have not passed this way heretofore.

And Joshua said unto the people,Sanctify yourselves;for tomorrow

the LORD will do wonders among you.And the LORD said unto Joshua,

This day will I magnify theein the sight ofall Israel,that they may know

that,as I was with Moses,so I will be with thee.

And thou shalt command the priests that bear the ark of the covenant,

saying,When ye are come to the brink of the waterof Jordan,ye shall

stand still in Jordan.

And Joshua said unto the children of Israel,Come hither, and hear the

words of the LORD your God.

 JUDGES 16.18  – Delilah betrays Samson.

And when Delilah saw that he had told her all his heart, she Sent and called for the lords of the Philistines, saying, Come up this once, for he hath showed me all his heart. Then the lords of the Philistines came up unto her, and brought money in their hand.

 1.SAMUEL3 3/4/5/6– The LORD speaks to Samuel in the Temple.

³And ere the lamp of God went out in the temple of the LORD,

wherethe ark of God was,and Samuel waslaid down to sleep.

That the LORD called Samuel,and he answered, Here am I.

And he ran unto Eli,and said,Here am I;for thou calledst me.And

he said,I called not;lie down again.And he wentand laid down.

And the LORD called yet again,Samuel. And Samuel arose and went

to Eli,and said,Here am I;for thou didst call me. And he answered,I

called not,my son; lie down again.

1 SAMUEL 11.1 –the Israelites offer kingship to Nahash. (as we see, he is representative of the Nagas).

Then Nahash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabesh-Gilead; and all the men of Jabesh said unto Nahash, Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee.

1 SAMUEL 16.18 – King Saul’s men look for someone to comfort him in his madness.

Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite (David), that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD is with him.

1.SAMUEL3.14/15– The LORD tells Samuel the House of Eli is condemned.

And therefore I (YHVH) have sworn unto the house of Eli, that the

iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be purged withsacrifice nor offering


And Samuel lay until the morning,and opened the doors of the house

of the LORD. And Samuel feared to show Eli the vision.

1KINGS 3.14/15 – The LORD promises Solomon his blessings.

And if thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen thy days. …and he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and made peace offerings, and made a feast to all his servants.

1KINGS 11.11 – The LORD passes judgement on Solomon.

Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant.

ISAIAH 22.22  – The Lord predicts the coming of Jesus.

And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder, so he shall open, and none shall shut and he shall shut, and none shall open.

2SAMUEL.22.2 – David’s words when saved from death at the hands of both the giants of the Philistines,and Saul;

And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer.

JOB 38.19 (φ) – the Phi  ‘golden’ point between 0 and 1, ie 0.618 / 0.3819;

Where is the way where light dwelleth? And as for darkness, where is theway thereof?

MATTHEW 3.14/15  – Jesus asks John to baptize him;

But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized

of thee, andcomest thou to me ?

And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now;

for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.

     MATTHEW 16.18 /19–Jesus ‘ordains’ Peter.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter,and upon this rock I will build

my church; andthe gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdomof heaven;and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven;and whatsoever thou shaltloose on earth shall be loosed in heaven…

 MATTHEW 18.18;repeated words from 16.18

       (note; 1/1.818 = 0.555)

Verily I say unto you,Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be boundin

heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earthshall be loosed in heaven.

If two of you shall agree on any thing… (that which they ask)…it shall be done

forthem of my Father,which is in heaven.

MARK 3.14/15 – Jesus ordains the twelve apostles, and grants powers.

And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him,

and that he might send them forth to preach, And to

have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:

And Simon he surnamed Peter.

MARK 16.18: – Jesus ascends to heaven after granting powers to the twelve apostles.

And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall

they cast out devils; they shall speakwith new tongues.

They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing,

it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick;and they

shall recover.

So then after the Lord had spoken unto them,he was received up

into heaven,and sat on the right handof God…

So MARK 16.18 are Jesus’s lastwords to the disciples (after the resurrection), before his ascension to heaven…

      JOHN 3.14/15 – the words of Jesus on his fate.

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness,even so must the son of man be lifted up;That whosoever believeth in him should not perish,but have eternal life.

(For God so loved the world,that he gave his only begotten Son,that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life).  

(Perhaps the most famous and often repeated verses in the entire Bible…)

  REVELATION of ST.JOHN 16.18 – the prediction of the ‘end-times’.

And there were voices,and thunders,and lightnings; andthere was a great earthquake,such as not was sincemen were upon the earth,so mighty an earthquake,andso great.And the great city was divided into three parts,and the cities of the nations fell…

REVELATION 11.1 – the sacred geometry of the Temple.

And there was given me a reed like unto a rod; andthe angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the templeof God,and the altar,and them that worship therein.


 We saw in another section how Jesus statedin Revelations 1.8;‘I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending’, and in John 8.12 ‘I am the light of the world…’

 Now as well as obviously indicating the ‘first and the last’ as would be inferred, there are some quite subtle possibilities raised by Alpha (1), and Omega (0) thatareto do with the line and the circle.

These may be interpreted to represent; the male/female energiesunited in the Tai Chi symbol into everything that exists, the Tao. This division is expressed in theI-Ching, the Chinese Book of Changes extant since the 6th century Bce, with yin and yang beingshown by yarrow stalks or ‘heads or tails’ coinscombinations.

A curiouspoint in relation to the I-Ching is that it is said to bestructurally very similar to that of DNA! (see Martin Schonberg, etc).

Moreover the founders of the I-Ching are said to be FuHsi (and NaKua/Nuawa) – the pair we have already seendepicted with intertwined serpents tails in identical manner to the Sumerian Ningishzida, one of the Anunnaki who was likewise closely associated with fertility /the Tree of Life/ the male organs, and hence genetics and DNA, (itself formed of the same archetypal double-helix).

 Indeed, furthermore, the binary aspect of yin or yang is similar to the binary code which made the invention of the computerpossible; this is more than coincidental, for the inventor of calculus and binary code, the German scientistWilhelm Leibniz acknowledged that his interest in the structure of the I-Ching inspired to greater or lesser extenthis creation of binary counting systems.

Pi and Phi may likewise be said to be representative of the circle (0),and the line (1) also, (although the Phisymbol itself –φ -is effectively a combination of 1 and 0).

The basic idea of matter being represented by the 1 (such as the proton ‘mass’ at the centre of the atom) and energybeing represented by the 0 (ie,the electrons which circle the centre) brings the study of Alpha and Omega into the realmof physics and the atom, even Quantum physics, where polarity (1) and spin (0) are likewise manifested.

  As we study in the Ley-Lines of England section, the two main types of the many standing stones archeologicalsites on Dartmoor, England  are either stone circles, or stone rows (usually double lines)…a very neatencapsulation of the 0 and the 1 – and considering the unerring accuracy of the neolithic (druids’) sites spread across Britain,Europe and the world,in terms of being based upon celestial alignments (for astronomical calculations), and also their designs and locations, this looks to be very possibly an intentional symbolism. At Avebury and Silbury Hill in Wiltshire, the double row of stones (called the Avenue) stretching a mile from Avebury ends at the neolithic circle called the Sanctuary, besides West Kennet Long barrow. The Sanctuary is a stone circle, thus creating with the Avenue a line with a circle at one end of it, (and Avebury at the other) possibly symbolizing the spine and the head (again, the body (1) and the head (0), or matter and energy). Incredibly we see in the Ley-line section how the longest ley-line in England, the Michael and Mary line (366.35 miles long) passes within a mile of Avebury, 0.4 of a mile (640metres) of Silbury Hill, through the same field as the Long barrow, and within 6 metres of the circle, at the ‘neck-point’ of the symbol, where energy and matter conjoin… this at a point by the road from where the ancient ‘trail’ or ‘straight track’ called the Ridgeway runs across southern England to a point in Bedfordshire less than a mile north of the Michael and Mary line. (This track dating certainly to pre-Roman times, as many of England’s major routes did…) The point by the Sanctuary is precisely 172.8 miles from the end point at Great Yarmouth, ie twice 86.4, or half 345.6 miles..! (while the North-South line from the Isle of Wight to Holy Isle, Lindisfarne is 346.1 miles in length itself. See ‘Cos# and the Earth; the Ley-lines of England’ section for much more on this).

Thus in this respect the ground-plan looks to be very likely the result of advanced (cosmic) consciousnessfrom the Bronze Age, circa 2000Bce or probably earlier.

For Jesus to say that he was Alpha and Omega is for him to say that he is the (symbol of?) unified matter and energy-the self-perfection described by the Gnostics,alchemists, Rosicrucians and so forth as the mystical (chemical) wedding of the male and female energies of the cosmos. And places Jesus at the centre of the godhead, within the creative powers of theuniverse, energies which find expression at the atomic level upwards – and indeed, within the physics of light itself…

A closer look at this letter shows there are some highly interesting facts to be found in the study of the word ‘Alpha’, as the Greeks labelled the first letter of the alphabet…

 The letter came from Sumerian/ ABA/ Semitic/Hebrew sources; originally a pictograph of a bull’s horns (a visual image of an object);

– where it represented- an ox, symbol of strength or support, or ‘foundation’. The cow’s horns of the ox pictograph of the Sumerians were, in time, turned sideways by the Hebrews, to form aleph. The Hebrew language was one of the first to create an alphabet of 22 letters, with each said to represent a division or aspect of cosmic energy, and with it’s own particular number.(From this came ‘gematria’, the study of the numerical character of specific words, names and so forth, based upon synchronicities existing between objects, people etcetera, and the words used to name them. . .)

 As the first letter, in nearly all NearEastern ‘Semitic’ alpha-bets (from SABA  to Hebrew – to Phoenician – to Greek – to Latin, where it assumed its shape and name of Alpha, or ‘A’ we  use today…) it’s value or number wasone, and it represented the unity of God, and the heavens, and the original source of all things. Much like the open string of an instrument is in ratio of 1:1 and contains all the octave’s  notes within itself. This points to the significance of the cube, which has dimensions of 1:1:1 and likewise represents divine unity.

Coincidentally, it is a fact that the word‘Aleph’ is composed of 3 letters in Hebrew, thus indicating the three-fold nature of the ‘godhead’;Aleph (1), Lamed (30), and Pey (80) – giving the word a sum total in gematria of 111 !            

For all the reasons above,and it’s uses in the Bible and Jewish religion, it is therefore highly appropriate that it is the (Greek) letter Alpha (α) which is used to represent in modern physics the Fine Structure Constant.

As we have seen, or note in Notes & Numbers, the Fine Structure Constant –or alpha–  1/137.0359992O6 – is significantly related to the speed of light – 186, 282 m/s – as well as to Pi (π), Phi(φ), and several significant cosmic # values. Indeed scientists say that the fine structure constant determines many of the key characteristics of light; here are a few quotes by various physicists and writers on alpha;

137 is the inverse of the fine structure constant…the most remarkable thing about this remarkable number is that it is dimension-free. Werner Heisenberg once proclaimed that all the quandaries of quantum mechanics would shrivel up when 137 was finally explained.” L.M.Lederman

Only three constants are significant for star formation; the gravitational constant, the fine structure constant, and a constant that governs nuclear reaction rates.”Ian Stewart

The bridge between the electron and the other elementary particles is provided by the fine structure constant…an expanded form of the constant leads to equations that define the transformation of electromagnetic energy into electron mass/energy”.Michael A.MacGregor.

And so on; and from this website’s perspective alpha is found to be in relationship with many of the values held in antiquity to be part of the geometric nature of reality;

For example –  314.1592/2 /1.37035999206 = 114.6 265

(114.6 being a highly significant value;

 360/ 3.14159  = 114.6

365 x π/10 = 114.6

 1.273/1.111= 1.146  ie. √φ /√1.23456789…

90 x 1.273    = 114.6

38.19 x 3     = 114.57

 141.41 /1.234  = 114.59

So 157.079 / 1.23456789 = 127.2 345/  1.11 02  = 114.6

  “         x  1.11141 = 141.41

314.159/38.19 x 0.1665 84589 = 1.37035999206

ie.    π/ φ(minor)x 1/6 =α

All these values are connected within the hexagonal geometry of the Vesica Piscis and Ad Triangulum system.

Another example of the recurrent harmonies that arise in this subject is;

    365.24   / 1.370359992 =  4 x 66.6 (!)

ie  the solar year /   α    =  4 x 66.6

(the # of solar power – for good or bad- is 666 – according to the traditions of cosmic #. See John Michell,etc).

And finally; 123.456789 x 3 = 370.370367

= 369 + 1.37036

ie.   3  x 123= 369

  +   3 x .456789 = 1.37067

   In fact 3 x 123 = 369

and 3 x .456786666 = 1.37035999 8 (α) **

A connection which ties together several of the most interesting #s in this book.

   **(in similar manner,     34.56/ π  = 11.000789 666 …)  

The second number we will look at in this section is 369 itself; an example of the centrality of this in the Bible is it’s description of the crucifixionof Christ – there being threeseparate references to the time, or the hour on this unique day; namely, the 3rd,6th, and 9th hours.* Andconsidering the wealth of cosmic # metaphors and codes written throughout the Bible, this facet of the depiction of the day’s events may be a subtle reference to the significantvalue 369. *(Mark15.25/15.33/15.34, etc)

Why is it, a value so rarely encountered even in Sacred Geometry texts, so important ? In effectan overlookedkeystone of the entire subject…

For the numbers of 3 6 9 were equally accorded significance by two of the 20th centuries greatest, and yet ‘non-mainstream’ individuals, Nikolai Tesla, and Georges Gurdjieff.

Tesla, the infamous scientific researcher and inventor, said of the number, and related matters;

“If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6, and 9, then you would have the key to the universe”.

“If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration”.

“What one man calls God, another calls the laws of physics”.

“My brain is only a receiver; in the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength and inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists”.

“The gift of mental power comes from God, Divine Being, and if we concentrate our minds on the truth, we become in tune with this great power. My Mother had taught me to seek all truth in the Bible”.

These words may seem less than objective, and yet his work stands vindicated as being truly ahead of his time.

A curious fact raised by these quotes from Tesla is their compatibility with the works of the major 20th century figure Georges Gurdjieff, whose writings and life have inspired many thousands of people to fulfil their true potential as humans, by developing their intellectual, emotional, and instinctive centres in balance while learning of the complexities of the human ‘frame’, ie. the inner structures of the mind, the body and the heart  – as well as the spirit.

So, with regard to Tesla’s statement regarding our minds receiving information from the centre of the Cosmos, Gurdjieff maintained that we are defined by the 3foods which we assimilate constantly; foods without which we would die.The ‘food’ of the chest level is breathing, and of the mind is impressions, or the flow of information of the nervous system, without which we would die in 3 seconds! Energies, or impressions which come from all levels of the cosmos, as different centres of the body receive (and function with) the energies of the seven levels of the cosmos as defined in the Ray of Creation. So each level of the cosmos has it’s designated centre within the human being, which in the totality enable the correct functioning of life within the person – this is why historically esotericism states that ‘man is a symbol of the divine’. (‘Person’ by the way in it’s Latin meaning means per sonnare, to ‘sound through’; signifying these connections between the self and the universe.In this way the nervous system is a link between the dimensions of energy, and matter, being comprised of both, and is sensitive to the higher dimensions as they reach us.

“Each day it is necessary to receive the food of impressions. Then you can say with serenity that you are not a dog, but that you are in the image of God”! (Talks recorded at Gurdjieff’s Paris flat, 1947).

Gurdjieff taught many theories and symbols, as well as practices, to his pupils ; people such as P.D.Ouspensky, Maurice Nicholl, J.G.Bennett, A.Orage, Kenneth Walker, Fritz Peters, C.S.Nottand many more, all of who published books detailing their experiences with him at Fontainbleau and Paris (as well as in Russia and Asia Minor as a large group of around 30 men and women walked 250 miles across the Caucasus mountainsto the west during their flight from the chaos of the Russian Revolution) .And one of the most wide-ranging and innovative of the symbols Gurdjieff taught was the Enneagram, which he introduced to western civilization.

The Enneagram can be said to represent the workings of the processes of reality in terms of the doubling/halving transformation of energies within matter, through the steps of the octave; with the 7 notes, and 2 intervals (at mi-fa, and do-si) making 9 in total. This can be applied to virtually any process imaginable, so ubiquitous is the Law of Seven and the Octave, according to Gurdjieff. In this way the Enneagram can be studied from a mathematical, or geometric, or conceptual perspective, as well as being extensively developed for understanding the ways in which personality forms from the‘essence’ (or individuality) we are born with. (See Helen Palmer’s excellent work on this).

Examples given by Ouspensky and others include the Food Octave whereby the food we eat is digested, and undergoes the steps of transformation which provide energy to the level at each step,(reflective of the energies of the different levels of the cosmos or Ray of Creation within us) as well as producing the refined energies stored in the body for use in creating further life either within, or outside of the organism.

This shows us that we have aspects of– or the energies of –  each of the seven levels of the Cosmos including those of our sun, our galaxy, all the constellations and galaxies of sidereal space, etc within us, in different proportions. These include fuel of each type of refinement, each of which reflects the vibrational rate of the different dimensions, from highest to low, for our correct functioning within all our internal organs and energy centres.

 As can be seen, the 369 triangle is separate from the other numbers, and each #can be viewed as the centre of the three sub-divisions of the nine; 234, 567, & 891.In Enneagram psychology books,such as those by Palmer, which are concerned with how essence ‘chooses’ which of the three forms of ‘perceiving’ to concentrate on as the personality forms before the age of ten. In this process a combination of personal and environmental factors largely decide the basic type personality assumes as it ‘supercedes’ essence most typically – and which to a large extent determine many of the issues and experiences of a person’s life. Ultimate development according to Gurdjieff writers is the full awareness and exploration in life of the strengths and limits of the self’s chosen form; with the hopeful aim of eventually ‘rising above’ the incompleteness of the personality-based structures of self, and a re-connecting with one’s essence.

So 234 are ’emotion-based’centres, 567 ‘intellect-based’, and 891 are ‘instinctive/physical-based’…with 3 6 9representing, as can be seen, the ‘centre’ of each type/centre.

So the 3 6 & 9 points represent,as such, and among other things,the ‘untouched’ centre of each of the three divisions forming a triad of +/-/=   while the remaining6 numbers form a sequence of 142857 1428571 etc; theoretically in terms of self-development, ‘perfected man’ is one who is balanced essentially in all three centres of perception and being, to greater or lesser extent. For some reason, considering his experience in all the major religions of the world, at the highest inner levels – Greek Orthodox Christianity, the Sufis orders of Islam, the Buddhist authorities of Tibet, and many others – Gurdjieff did consider Jesus to have been the only man ever to have reached a certain level of being; ‘man number 8’ as he termed it, in Ouspensky’s ‘In Search of the Miraculous’.This is one level above what any human can achieve,and would be based,even at the ‘lowest’/’stomach’ level, in the non-ordinary higher potentialities of the human form, the higher emotional and intellectual centres; these are centres of consciousness we all possess, but very rarely experience in ‘ordinary life’ – so any being at this level would no longer be ‘human’ as we know it. That Jesus is defined as such shows his unique and once human nature.

So the biblical narrative of Jesus’ crucifixion appears to be showing his cosmic importance, and perfection, at what is the crux and fulfilmentof his life, by the emphasis on the hours of 3 6 and 9 -presentas signposts therefore, of  the process of his ‘divine completion’ in all aspects and centres.

  To return to Alpha,and theSpeed of Light, the following equation indicates such connections;

                      186,282 / 1.37035999206 / π = 43,270

 As we saw in the Egyptsection, the Height of the Great Pyramid is (most likely intentionally) in the proportion of 1:43,200to the polar radius of the Earth, linking it to the 432,000m radius of the Sun as well as the 43.3 % proportion of the √3 ratios of the Vesica  and the Ad Triangulum system…andalso the 43,200 seconds of the day ie. in 12 hours…all of which examples are connected as shown in the diagrams of the precedingsections. Additionally the radius of the Sun is actually closer to  432,500miles/865,000diameter than simply 432/864.

From these equations, and many more instances, it may be considered that close geometric relationships exist between; the speed of light – alpha – the Sun, planets, Earth and Moon – the mathematical values of Pi, Phi, the square roots of 2,3,and 5 and more; in fact are at the heart of the energies of sunlight, and life. This is in alllikelihood why these cos# values are encoded into the ‘fabric’ of the Bible – for if the source of the books of the Bible was cosmic in origin, such values would not only be known, but also fully understood, even two thousand years agoor more, whenthese works were being written.

PART V.SIMON PETER; Satan, Strangers, the Seraphim and the Nagas; Narjis and the Sufis.

MARK 3.14/15;              And he ordained twelve, that they should be with

him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast

out devils: And Simon he surnamed Peter.

To return to the previous encodings from the four synoptic gospels, the verse shown at  Mark 3.14-15 holds hidden layers of meanings. This apparently simple statement is in fact linked with the many semantic associations which connect Simon Peter to the concept of the ‘satan’, or ‘opponent’/ adversary.

A possible coincidence surely, considering Simon Peter is ‘the rock upon which’ Jesus builds his church?  And yet the word ‘rock’ or ‘stone’ itself is closely related to biblical concepts of satan, for all kinds of applications such as the parables of Jesus; and in fact, many of the events of the New Testament, words of Jesus, and place and family names tied to Peter, point us in this direction.

So in this section we will examine some of the many connections between Simon Peter and Satan…and what deductions or relationships can be drawn from this ‘hidden’ theme of the Bible.

      1.Samuel 16.14, ‘an evil spirit from the LORDtormented him.’

There are so many connections to the ‘devil’ in Simon Peter’s story in the Bible it is hard to know where to start; but it is safe to suggest, this is at the very heart of the narrative of him. With the qualifying statement that what the devil is may well be very different to common assumptions or beliefs… as we saw with King David, and Solomon, being of the lineages of the gods of Sumer is an essential part of their ‘destinies’ too, (though whether positive or negative or balancedlineages is hard of answer).

 To start at the start therefore, in Genesis 5, the slaying by Cain of his brother Abel begins the division in lineage of Adam, between the line of his son Cain, and from the replacement of Abel, the line of Seth. And as Genesis 4.17-25 and Gen. 5.3-32 show, the two lines are the same names;

‘ And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived and bare Enoch’

So the line goes; Cain,Enoch,Irad, Mehujael, Methusael, Lamech; Jabal/Tubal-Cain.

And Seth’s line is; Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah,Lamech;Noah.

And directly then the next chapter in Genesis is of the Watchers, or Nephilim;

Genesis 6.1-4

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that,  when the sons of gods came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

This takes place before the Flood, as does the Book of Enoch (from which the Bible most probably drew the information of the ‘fallen angels’ the Watchers or Nephilim – in fact there are over 100 references in the Bible to words and ideas from Enoch). In the Bible this is given as the reason for God deciding to destroy mankind; so as such, the events described took place not in Israel,even though Enoch was a patriarch of Israel, but most likely in Sumer, or the Fertile Crescent of northern Mesopotamia.

Placing the events squarely in the sphere of influence of the Anunnaki as they worked to establish the first communities on the earth, between the genetic creation of mankind, the granting of civilization (covered by the King Lists of Sumer, such as WB-62, at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford) the Flood of c.10,800 Bce, and then the descent of the Anunnaki to begin civilization in Sumer circa 3,700 Bce. It is these King Lists which have been at the centre of this section’s thesis, in that Kingship was handed down from the ‘gods’ (cosmic visitors) to mankind, via the bloodlines of the Anunnaki; and the lineages then of the ‘hybrid’ human kings who began to help the creation of civilization. It is thehybrid nature of the lines which is at the heart of the Bible’s narrative of the conflicted nature of kingship, as represented by the lives of Saul, David, Solomon, and thereafter others. And perhaps any type of ‘worldly authority’, as Simon Peter may be seen to represent as the first ‘leader’ of the church, and Bishop of Rome. . .

In support of this is the fact that the word ‘king’ in Hebrew derives from the letter ‘Qayin’ – as does the name Cain. This perspective, on the line of Cain being linked somehow to the lines of Kings within the Bible, has led to some writers, such as Laurence Gardner proposing that the ‘mark of Cain’ (Gen4.15) ‘set upon Cain lest any finding him should kill him’ is in fact the ‘granting of kingship’, or similarly, of the first ‘coat of arms’… and is symbolized in the book of Genesis by his being a ‘tiller of the ground’, meaning having dominion over the lands. It was shown earlier how indeed, the lineages of kings in both Mesopotamia, and in Israel were considered to be ‘of the Lord’, ie celestially inspired – but in all instances, not without imbalances and drawbacks, which characters overcome to greater or lesser degree.

So this early section of the Bible depicts the lines of Cain and Seth being opposing gene-streamsof good and bad; juxtaposing the two lines; then describes the creation of lines of the Nephilim which led to the Flood, and the reduction of mankind’s gene-stream to Noah and his family.. But if the lines are linked, then Noah, the root-source of mankind post-Flood, is of the lines of the gods, whether they be of the positive, or negative examples of these.

Is this a fanciful combining of similar themes in the chapters of Genesis mentioned? Let’s look at the story of the conception of Noah to Lamech and his wife as described in the Book of Enoch, and related texts in the books of Noah, and Jubilees, some of the apocryphal (hidden) books(otherwise known as pseudographia) of the Hebrew canon.

Some of the non-canonical books may be classed as such as being most probably the works of men rather than divinely inspired; while others which were little known may have been restricted in their circulation by virtue of their being kept secret by the inner religiousorders who used them. Whether the Books of Noah, and Enoch and Jubilees among others were of this category is uncertain.

The Book of Enoch, first brought to Europe by James Bruce in 1778, and confirmed by parts of the same book which were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 at Qumran(believed to be part of an Essenes brotherhood repository)contained chapters describing the immediate circumstances of Noah’s birth, linking him and the lineage to ‘celestial’ genes;when Noah is born, his appearance shocks his father; for he has bright white hair, and skin. His eyes are bright, and his face ‘shines like the Sun’… so his father Lamech cannot believe this child is his! He says his son’s appearance is that of the gods, though whether the Anunnaki, or their off-shoot, the Nephilim is unclear. Indeed, the appearance of the ‘cosmic beings’/’gods’ who created mankind from infusing their celestial genetics was reptilian from the start; hence the hybrid man-fish appearance of Enki/Ea, or Oannes and the Annedoti in Babylon – the collective term meaningthe ‘repulsive ones’ according to the writings of Berossus. And while of course, many passages in the Bible connect the energies of heaven with ‘light blazing forth’ from people’s face and so on… something which is connected to the celestial and solar-based genetics of the ‘fallen angels’ in possibility. Moreover Jesus himself says, “Be wise as serpents, and meek as doves”. . .linking back to the celestial (genetic) infusion the Anunnaki gave to early mankind (constituting the fall?), as well as the wisdom contained within civilization mankind received.

So when Lamech asks his wife if she has slept with ‘one of the Watchers’ she responds by asking would he tread upon his wife’s finer feelings? Methuselah the father of Lamech travels to the ‘extremities of the earth’ to consult his father, Enoch, who lives there while writing the secrets of heavenly wisdom (to pass on to mankind to help rebuilding after the forthcoming Deluge. Enoch was blessed by having been taken up through the heavens, by two angelic beings to hear the words and plans of the Lord). Hearing the report of Methuselah, Enoch answers;

I have shown you that in the generation of Yared my father, those who were from heaven disregarded  the word of Yahuah. Behold they committed crimes, laid aside their class, and commingled with women. With them also they transgressed, married with them and begot children. A great destruction therefore shall come upon all the earth, a deluge, a great destruction shall take place in one year.

The child which is born to you shall survive on the earth, and his three sons shall be saved with him. When all mankind who are on earth shall die, he shall be safe and his posterity shall beget on the earth giants, not spiritual but carnal. Now inform your son that he who is born is his child in truth, and he shall call his name Noah for he shall be to you a survivor. He and his children shall be saved from the corruption which shall take place in the world, from all the sin which shall take place in his days. Afterwards shall greater impiety take place, for I am acquainted with holy mysteries, which Yahuah himself has discovered to me, and which I have read in the tablets of heaven. Generation after generation shall transgress, until a time when the righteous shall arise, and crime shall perish from off the earth, until all goodness come upon it. Now go and tell your son that the child which is born is his child in truth, and that there is no deception.”

 (The Book of 1Enoch, ch 106).

 Thus the matter of Noah’s lineage has more questions than answers in this  book and other related ones. It is more than coincidental – ie. stands interpretation as an ‘allegorical sign-post’ –  that Cain and Seth’s lineages have identical names, indicating the two lines are somehow intertwined, in ways difficult to discern.

This entire narrative and imagery is linked by the complex use of (Sun-related) 777 encodings, which are present in both the Old and New Testament, and relate to questions of blood-line, and of sin – ie the bloodlines of Cain and ‘those who were from heaven and took wives from the daughters of men’. So the words of YHVH (Gen.4.15), Lamech (Gen4.24) and Jesus (Matthew 18.22) repeat the 7 and 77 etc related theme. In fact, in the Song of Solomon, at 7.7, the daughter of Jerusalem mentions the grapevine (symbolizing bloodline) and the date-palm (the tamarind tree, a long-time symbol of the ’gods’ in the Near East, as well as meaning ‘tree of darkness’ – hence pointing to the ‘unknowable’ nature of the ‘gods’. One (brief!) example is in the already featured Tablet Of Shamash, from Assyrian ruled Sippar in Sumer, circa 855Bce, a sacred tablet awash with cosmic symbolism, such as ;

the peak of the canopy and date-palm supportstwo Anuna; who hold measuring cords from the ‘heavens’ down to the sun-symbol of a four-rated symbol of Earthwith four ‘rivers’ which point to the quarters of the compass, reinforcing the ‘angels with measuring cords’ theme; the Anuna headwear of ‘horns’; Shamash the sun-god holding a ‘rod and ring’ cord for measuring and encircling/ protecting the Earth or the Creation; wearing clothes of a design of ‘water’ (fish-related pattern), indicating the ‘celestial’ genetics of Enki, Oannes etc; a smaller Anuna standing besides the humans ‘introducing them’, identifiable also by the ‘horned’ headwear – and possibly a depiction of the younger generation of Anuna-human hybrid bloodlines present in Sumer and thereafter. And lastly, a date-palm tree besides Shamash, completes the canopy above Shamash, adding the sign of the unknowable celestial beings, the Anuna. Also symbolic of the female womb in Sumerian mythology, as well as the concomitant fertility of the land.

The inscriptions dedicate the Tablet to Sin (the moon-god father of Shamash), Ishtar, and Shamash.

And as Sitchin notes in The Stairway to Heaven, there is an almost identical scene drawn in the Book of Coming Forth by Day (or the book of the Dead) at the British Museum, in a page from the ‘Papyrus of Queen Nejmet’. In it two angels hold cords extending across the scene and around the sun. Most relevantly, both Cordholders are situated, and measuring, at an omphalos point, signified by the conical symbols akin to the Greek ones at Delphos.

(Also Sitchin notes, in addition to Enoch’s showing two angels going ‘north to measure the secrets of the earth’, is a Ugaritic (form of ancient Semitic-related cuneiform language) text which states that from the peak of Zaphon, from Ba’al ‘a cord strong and supple stretches out, heavenwards to the Seat of Kadesh’. This means sanctuary, or refuge in the southern desert of Canaan and Judah, near to Beer-Sheba and the Wilderness of Zin. It was from the mountain Baal-Zaphon that the Israelites escaped the pursuing Egyptian forces by YHVH holding back the waters while they crossed at the Red Sea, after which the pursuing forces were then drowned. (Exodus 14.2-4, Numbers 33.7). Baal-Zaphon was called the Lord of the North’ in Ugaritic, stemming perhaps from his being called also the god of sea and storms Hadad, (whose name is clearly derived from the Anuna storm-god in Assyrian and Babylonian cultures Adad) and came to represent North to Israel, in Isaiah 14.13, Gen 13.14, and so on. . . )

So a considerable amount of complex mythology is linked to this mysterious and beautifully made tablet, including the tamarind date-palm.

To return to the narrator of the Song of Solomon, she says of herself ‘I am dark but comely’ (ch.1.5), pointing obliquely to her solar-related genetics, and the nature of the genes. There are 2 females named Tamar, meaning ‘darkness’, in the Bible who are impregnated by their own kin, indicating by this the imbalanced genetics of the ‘dark’ bloodlines. Likewise when Cain and his wife give birth to Enoch ‘of their line’ (Gen4.17), there are no other women except the family of Adam and Eve in the world by the Bible’s account, making it possible to infer the line is started by Cain and his sisterunfortunately!

Indeed in Jubilees 4 she is named Awen meaning iniquity or potency – linking this name to the sun-worship  centre in ancient Egypt at An or On- or in biblical Hebrew ‘Awen’! And again, all the versions of this city, such as Heliopolis mean basically the ‘powers of the sun’. Further still, this links to the original civilization Sumer, where the name Anu, the ‘Father of the Heavens was the earliest word for  ‘(divine) light’. (Solomon the name contains thus ‘Sol’, ‘Om’, and ‘On’, all being names for cosmic and solar energies within the Hebrew, Egyptian, and Greek civilizations of antiquity. . .)

So, further pointing to the dualities of the nature of the celestial but unbalanced‘dark lineages’, to be found within the finest details of the Bible.

If the ‘sons of the gods’ in Genesis are the descendants of Enki (in particular) and his original generation of celestial nature, they combine the positive ‘celestial’ genes of Enki, Ninhursag/Nintithe ‘mother of life’, and so on – which created mankind over the millenia through infusions at various points in the evolution of ‘homo sapiens’ – with the more earthly genes of early humans. Also the Nephilim lineswere created of human-god hybrid offspring through (unauthorised) intercourse, rather than genetic procedures in the ‘Birthing Room’, described as a laboratory effectively in the Sumerian myths(see The Myth of Enki and Ninhursag; The Creation of Dilmun and other Travails (Dilmun being the original ‘garden of Eden’ where the Anuna settled on earth, and developed mankind, domesticated crops and farm stock, and gradually developed the agricultural bases of civilization). For an example of the potential narrative of the genetic creation of all these central planks of later civilization in one circumscribed area, the Fertile Crescent, the Myth reads as follows;

Pure are the cities – and you are the ones to whom they are allotted. Pure is Dilmun land – and you are the ones to whom it is allotted. Pure is Dilmun land. Pure is Dilmun land. Virginal is Dilmun land. Virginal is Dilmun land. Pristine is Dilmun land”.

Though Enki and Ninhursag conjoin their energies to create this, the nature of their union was thus described as‘pristine’ and ‘virginal’. Descriptions include; “. . .upon Ninhursag he caused to flow the ‘water of the heart’, She received the ‘water of the heart’, the water of Enki”.  So the early Sumerian creation myths do contain descriptions which allow for the interpretation of ‘celestial creation’ to be something different to intercourse.

As an example of this, additional Sumerian creation myths such as that of ‘Enki and Ninhursag’, and the ‘Myth of Grain and Cattle’ depict the steps taken by the deities in creating humankind, and plants and domesticated animals which hold special significance for mankind. Nearly all involve a ‘creation birthing room’, (unusual as a concept for 3000Bce), and the gods providing of their substance, be that blood, or sperm, to conjoin with ‘earthly material’, symbolised by clay, etcetera.  The similarity to the creation of Adam and Eve from ‘dust’/ from the rib of Adam (argued by some to mean ) may well show where the Hebrew writer(s) of Genesis and the Old Testament  found some of the ideas of their myths – alternatively this may have been a widely held belief in the Near East in antiquity… From Samuel Noah Kramer’s quotation of the Sumerian Creation of Man (p.69-70, Sumerian Mythology, 1961), the deity Enki narrates;

“O my mother, the creature whose name thou hast uttered, it exists,

Bind upon it the. . .of the gods;

Mix the heart of the clay that is over the abyss (‘dust to dust’)

The good and princely fashioners will thicken the clay;

Thou, do thou bring the limbs into existence,

Ninmah will work above thee,

(goddesses of birth) will stand by thee. . .

O my mother, decree thou the new-born’s fate,

Ninmah will bind upon it the . . . of the gods,

. . . as man . . .”

Whether these lines from the earliest Sumerian creation myths, written more than a thousand years before Babylonian and Hebrew versions, are describing genetic ‘engineering’ is a matter of debate, and yet the possibility alone is an intriguing one.

But the main difference it may be deduced concerning the Nephilim actions as detailed in Enoch, Noah, Jubilees, the Bible, and other texts is the significant change to the original processes by virtue of their being unauthorized and unplanned physical liaisons. The details of how this affected the differences in character of the lines are unknown, and yet would indicate a less objective, more ‘egotistic’ ‘raison d’etre’… And within this narrative is the story of Cain, Enoch, Lamech, Noah and so forth, and the intertwined lineages. It is the Cainite Lamech who voices his despair at the (genetic) burden he cannot be freed of, but must carry, at Genesis 4.23;

Hear my voice ye wives of Lamech; for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold’

SIDE-BAR – the domestication of the 8 staple crops in the FERTILE CRESCENT c.9-7000Bce, (below), and EDEN.

The text of ‘Enki and Ninhursag’ details the relationships which gave birth to some of the younger Anunnaki deities, as well as the creation of Dilmun, the prototypical Eden, and of 8 or so special plants. (These are very reminiscent of the 7 or 8 staple crops of the Fertile Crescent with which the agrarian living of civilization was made possible, throughout the Near East, and Asia and Europe in particular. This came in the period after 10,800 Bce assessed to be the date of the Near Eastern ‘Flood’ which destroyed much of the civilization of antiquity as such. By 8000 Bce the crops central to the evolution of civilization were in place in their wild forms which were very close to the domesticated forms known since then; so all these wild growing crops – emmer wheat, einkorn wheat, barley, lentils, linseed flax, peas, chickpeas and so on grew uniquely and were domesticated in the small region of the Near East known as the Fertile Crescent, from the 8thmillennium Bce onwards (as were the domesticated versions of wild sheep, cattle, goats, pigs, donkeys and so on); thus ensuring that civilization took root in these areas first. How such a small area held such significance is difficult to adequately explain. The Sumerian myths, like the biblical ones, suggest that this  situation was connected to the highly conscious activities of celestial influences. . .)

(see the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature published by Oxford University for the full version of this and other Sumerian myths; and Jared Diamond’s (Pulitzer prize-winning) ‘Guns Germs and Steel’ (1997) for much on the incredible circumstances of early agricultural developments here which favoured this small area of mountain regions around Mt Ararat as the start of civilization).


In other words his actions have been according to type, punishment will be severe, and change – or forgiveness – will be a long time coming; possibly the numbers refer to the period of time appropriate to matters of the spirit, that is, across generations, iea natural correction or balance will arise not in 7 generations, but 77 generations.The continuance of a curse effectively…Thus the near impossibility of his burden, especially when the situation is made worse by negative actions of violence. Thoughthis passage, as with God’s curse on Cain, does upon close reading hold out the possibility of eventual forgiveness, if it is earned.

In this way the line of Cain, born of Eve after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden, is associated intimately (though not explicitly) with the (unbalanced) powers of the sun (777) and furthermore, in being the first murderer and fratricide, is linked to the devil.Also with the serpent of Eden, and thus with the celestial genetics of Enki/Ea/the ‘sons of the gods’. Indeed some apocryphal texts state that Eve allowed the serpent to mate with her, creating the line of Cain. The mother of Tubal-Cain in this lineage, the wife of Lamech, is Zillah. This name means ‘shadow’ or ‘dark’ indicating simply the nature of the gene-stream. She is the third woman to be mentioned in the Bible, showing the significance of the lineage involved…

Two of Cain and Lamech’s immediate descendants too are marked as such; Lamech’s son Tubal-Cain (Gen4.22) is the ‘an instructer of every artifice in brass and iron’; this connects him to those taught the ‘secrets of the heavens’ in the Book of Enoch by the 200 ‘fallen angels’ which included all forms of wisdom, astrology, healing, prophecies, technology and metallurgy, (in similar way to Enki, and Oannes/the Annedoti the ‘serpent-deities’ who introduced the arts of civilization to mankind). In keeping with this non-spiritual, ‘earthly’ theme the name Tubal-Cain in Hebrew actually means; ‘world’, and the flowing along of a course of action… as well as his being the ‘first blacksmith’ with all the consequences of that, in terms of the development of civilization, the production of increasingly sophisticated ways of producing metals such as steel, and therefore weapons of war – and of conquest and empire.

And in Genesis 10, the generations ensuing from the sons of Noah are listed –Shem Ham and Japheth. We saw in the first section the possible correlation between Lamech’s three sons, and Noah’s three sons who peopled the earth after the Flood; so the lineage of Japheth corresponds to that of Tubal, indeed Japheth has a son named Tubal again indicating the primary/foundational nature of all of the 3 sons, plus the links between the two lines.

The 3 sons of Noah peopled the 3 continents of Europe, Africa, and Asia as follows;

Shem father to peoples of – Asia up to the Euphrates, Iran, Assyria, Chaldea, Sumer. The Semitic peoples.

Japhethfather to – parts of Asia and Europe. Europe, Ukraine, Greece Romania Russia.

Ham peopled the lands of – Syria, Arabia, Canaan, Egypt and Africa.

To return to our original point, concerning the bloodline links, Genesis 10.8 lists;

And Cush (the son of Ham) begat Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord.

This connects the lineage of Noah directly with the Nephilim bloodlines; firstly as a ‘hunter’;when the offspring were born ‘giants’ they began to devour all the works of man, and even began to eat humans -the oppression, and corruption of morals thus causing the necessity of the Flood. So any biblical references to hunters, (or fishermen) hold these resonances, as we shall see shortly. Secondly Genesis 6.4 describes the offspring as follows;

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the

daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men

of renown’…

Now Nimrod the great-grandson of Noah is clearly being described as such. Many warriors of David (among others), particularly his bloodline relatives are referred to as being ‘mighty’ men, again creating a perceivable but unstated connection. Many of David’s warriors are termed ‘gibborim’, a direct reference to the ‘giants’ of old… And this class of offspring of the ‘sons of God’ who were ‘mighty men of old’, who were ‘giants in the earth’,is linked via lineage to – the bloodlines of  Sumer!

So at Genesis 10.10 “And the beginning of his (Nimrod’s)kingdom was Babel (Babylon, ‘gateway of the gods’); and Erech (Uruk, home city of Gilgamesh, the ‘semi-divine’ king by virtue of his mother being a deity of the Anunnaki) and Accad (Akkadia) and Calneh(within Assyria, home city of the ‘mighty’ deity Ninurta, the ‘Wild Bull of Enlil’ and the probable role-model for Nimrod), in the land of Shinar (Sumer). Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh (leading city of the Assyrian empire)…” and so on. All the places we have studied in this section as being those the Anunnaki created throughout antiquity forming the consequential (and concurrent to some extent)Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian and Assyrian civilizations, or ‘empires’;(thus the Biblecorrectly delineates in this way the line of transmission of ‘celestial consciousness’ the Anunnaki introduced to mankind, as well as their related bloodlines).

This theme of the effect upon civilization of the ‘mighty men’ from such bloodlines is key not just to the Flood;the narrative of the mighty ‘men of renown’ – born with powers of great vitality stemming from high proportions of ‘celestial’ genes, but of alsouncontrollable appetites and personalities – is equally at the heart of thestory of thebuilding of the Tower of Babel, written in Genesis 11. Indeed it is stated in Hebrew rabbinical sources such as the Book of Jubilees that it was Nimrud who was the motive force for the building of the Tower…likewise, in “The Antiquities of the Jews” ( Josephus states that;

“Now the multitude were very ready to follow the determination of Nimrud, and to esteem it a piece of cowardice to submit to God, and they built a tower, neither sparing any pains nor in any way being negligent in the work”…

In the Bible, Genesis 11.1 begins;

 “And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech; and it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar… And they  said, Go to, let us build a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.  And the LORD said, Behold the people is one, and they have all one language, and this they begin to do; and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do… So the LORD scattered them; abroad from thence upon the face of the earth, and they left off to build the city. Therefore the name of it is Babel, because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth; and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of the earth ” (11.1-9)

As well as echoing the description at the start of the Book of Job of Satan as ‘walking to and fro, upon the face of the earth’, a repeated refrain, this passage helps to explain the sin of the 200 ‘fallen angels’,  in passing on to humans the ‘secrets of the heavens’  – now ‘nothing will be restrained from them’… Likewise that of the serpent in the Garden of Eden telling Eve what would happen if she ate of the Tree of Wisdom;

Genesis 3.4-5; “And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye surely shall not die. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil

So upon close reading the Bible shows us that the line of Seth in the person of Nimrod (son of Cush – Ham – Noah) is connected to both the Cainite lineages, andto the Watchers /Nephilim lineages which came through the first civilization, Sumer.Thoughthe positive potentialities of the lineage of Adam and Eve, who representas such the ‘archetypal’ man and woman made in the image of God and the creation, and the line stemming from Seth isshown by the inclusion of Jesus – ‘perfected man’ and ‘incarnate god’ -many generations later.

In confirmation of the often mentioned ‘duality’ of the celestial bloodlines within the Bible and elsewhere, the term ‘Watchers’ is applied to the Nephilim very often, and yet used in many texts of antiquity to refer to positive angelic orders; for example in the Persian ‘Zend-Avesta’, in Syriac liturgies, and in the Bible;

 Daniel 4.13;

“I saw in the visions of my head upon my bed, and behold, a watcher and a holy one came down from heaven”.

Likewise in Isaiah 21.11 the prophet writes;

“.. .he calleth to me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night?  The watchman said, The morning cometh, and also the night; if ye will enquire, inquire ye; return, come. . .”

In the Book of Jubilees the term ‘watchers’ is applied to the Anunnaki, and then to the Nephilim offspring of the tribe who descend to Earth to mate with women… meaning that the term is really just a way of classing beings as ‘celestial’, or heavenly – again making the distinctions between good or bad examples of them difficult to discern when no categorical meaning is attached to such references…

(Seir itself gives rise to the Hebrew concept of the seir im, demons which inhabit desert areas; a good metaphor for the dry, waterless results of the excesses of the powers of the sun, while also linking to the ‘parched’ nature of the fiery serpents/angels, the seraphim. . .)

So there are many other examples of the positive nature of the Watchers/ ‘watchmen’ (!) are in the Bible, indeed the original Egyptian word for the Gods – the Neter – means ‘watchers’ in it’s form of N-T-R. (Arabic/Semitic languages are based upon the form of 3 consonants –the triconsonantal root – indicating the basic meaning, with interspaced vowels denoting gender, tense, number and so on. Nephilim for instance has the root of N-P-L. Shalom meaning has the root of S-L-M, meaning wholeness, peace, complete or safe, from which many words have been derived, such as Solomon, salaam, Jerusalem and so on).

So in connecting Simon Peter to ‘satan’ the words of Jesus connect him to the lineage of Enki and the Anunnaki, the serpent of Eden, the lineage of Cain, (with it’s  links to the negative aspects of the serpent), to the Watchers and to theNephilim. Or more concisely, all these aspects are related to the inter-related concepts of ‘satan’, the serpent, and the Anunnaki deity Enki. (As we discuss elsewhere, nowhere in the Bible is the ‘serpent of Eden’ actually called ‘Satan’ or ‘Devil’. . .)

Anyway, without asserting any definitive conclusions around this complex subject, does the Bible show any other signpostsof relevanceto this incredible narrative concerning Simon Peter? What of  the ‘character’ of the apostle as shown in the Gospels and afterwards?


–  SIMON PETER –is shown to be an incomplete person, a flawed character, and is actually called ‘Satan’ by Jesus, a point overlooked by those who wish to believe God would only use perfect, ‘blessed’ people to fulfil his plans, clearly an understandable if limited belief. Also a narrative that shows that some characters may be those who God requires to change before being blessed. As Jesus says, ‘the least in heaven is greater than Abraham’.

Actions of Simon Peter in the synoptic gospels include; cutting the ear of man off at the arrest of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane. Later the same night he denies any knowledge of, or relationship with Jesus (when questioned) three times, even when warned he will do so – making it possible that he was ‘fulfilling a role’ in so doing? Or suffering the stress of events? He falls asleep,against the injunction of Jesus, while Jesus suffers all night in the garden of Gethsemane in communion with God and his inner self, just before his arrest. Peter misunderstands Jesus severaltimes when asked about central issues; he is shown as not understanding the message of Christ in it’s essential respects, as not being able to understand ‘Love’,  while acknowledging that Christ is the ‘Son of God’. He resents Mary’s closeness with Jesus and complains and sows dissension in this respect, so that Jesus even upbraids him for criticizing others. Jesus also gives the Parable of the Seeds, in which those thatare sown onrocky ground do not take root or grow.

And yet occasionally Simon Peter is the most perceptive, and trusted of the disciples. He is taken along with the disciple John by Jesus alone up the mountain, to witness the ‘Transfiguration of Christ’, and hear the Lord speaking from the heavens to bless Jesus. Also to witness the appearance of Moses, and Elijah, two of the most important prophets or leaders of Israel in the Old Testament. Peter actually shows his ‘literal-mindedness’ by saying ‘should we build a tent for them to stand in, to hide their brilliance?’. . . (Mark9.2-13)

Jesus also blesses Simon Peter with the quotes already mentioned in above sections; Matthew 16.18, and Matthew 18.18. among others.

He is also the first apostle to enter the empty tomb after the crucifixion,(John 20.1-9) and the first apostle to see the resurrected Christ, just after Mary Magdalene, on the Sunday. (Luke 24.34).

After blessing Peter in Matthew 16.18 –

‘…for thou art Peter, and upon this rock shall I build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven’,

Jesus begins to tell his disciples of his forthcoming trials and torments, and eventual crucifixion; Peter ‘took  him and began to rebuke him(!) saying, Lord, this shall not be unto thee’…

Which prompts the reply of Jesus; 16.23 ‘But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me Satan; thou art an offence unto me; for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men’

In other words Peter’s beingis still rooted in the perspectives of the lower‘earthly consciousness’; the undeveloped consciousness of the normal intellectual and emotional centres, plus thethree stomach sub-centres (the ‘instinctive/physical’; social; and sexual centres in Gurdjieff’sdefinition) where survival of the (physical) self is the main concern(ie based primarily in the reptilian centre). In Matthew16.24; “then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”

So taken in conjunction with all the satan/devil references we are examining, the words of Jesus to Simon Peter begin to look more literal than ‘metaphorical’ as might be initially presumed.

Incidentally, it isonly two verses after this, (at Matthew 17.1-4) that Jesus takes Peter, James and John up a high mountain; 17.2 “And was transfigured before them; and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light”.

 A passage strongly  ‘supportive’ ofthe virtues in Peter’s character in some respects– whilealsolinked potentially to the events concerningthe baby Noah when born. ie the ‘hybrid’ genes in Noah and his lineage were thus shown to be ‘of the sons of the heavens’ by his face ‘shining like the sun’ when he was born (in the Book of Noah/ Enoch/ Jubilees/ Giants, etc). Another related example is when God gives Moses the Tablets of the Law, on Mt Sinai; when Moses comes down from the peak, his face is ‘shines brilliantly like the sun’, so much so in fact that he has to wear a veil made by the other Israelites (Gen.34.29-33.) In the Middle Ages artists depicted Moses as having horns (like the gods of the Anunnaki), said to be because of this passage –which some writers say stems from a misunderstanding of the Hebrew words used in that ‘his face was ‘horned’ with brightness’ being translated over-literally in the Latin translations in the first centuries Ad. But it is a valid proposal that this circumstance links Moses to the (bloodlines of the)  Anunnaki, as is the case with Noah in Enoch and the Qumran Scrolls, etc. (more on this in a forthcoming section on Moses, Enoch and the Seraphim) The most famous example of this convention of depicting Moses with horns is the statue carved by Michelangelo in Italy in 1515 – this (see image below) is now displayed in Rome in the church of; St Peter-in-chains! (ie,fitting the metaphor used throughout the Bible of anyone who is captive within the genetics of the ‘celestial’/dark bloodlines, as personified by Cain, Lamech; and we believe others such as Moses, Enoch, Noah, Nimrod, Abraham, Saul, David, Solomon, Peter and so on – where each individual must face the darkness within their own lineages, and rise or fall accordingly)…

Moses; statue by Michelangelo, 1515,Rome.

There is further symbolism connected to this subject, of Peter’s ‘captivity’ to the genes of his bloodline, in the circumstances of his life; his death and imprisonment by the emperor Nero (circa Ad 64), and his earlier imprisonment byHerod, detailed in the book of Acts, chapter 12.6-21. In this he is chained between two soldiers one night in the prison (Acts12.6) when an angel of the Lord appears; it ‘smites’ Peter upon the side and his chains fall free. The angel tells Peter ‘Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals…cast thy garment about thee, and follow me” (12.8), raising again the symbolism related to ‘gird’ and ‘belt’included in Jesus’ prophesy about Peter at John 21.18 (“when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not”) .They walk out of the prison, then through the gates of the city, so that by the time Peter ‘comes to himself’ (12.11) he is near the house of Mary, mother of John. This entire passage may be interpreted to mean many things, such as the power of the heavens to achieve the ‘impossible’; or of faith in extremely difficult circumstances – or perhaps acceptance of the circumstances of life… but the theme of the possibility of dealing with the genetic inheritance he is born into may equally be interpreted within the story. And immediately after this passage comesthe death of King Herod, having just executed the guards who let Peter escape, with his death coming directly at the hand of the angel of the Lord (12.19-23);

And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory…”. (Acts12.21-3)

This passage encapsulates the Bible’s many strands of reference to people who elevate themselves above all humanity, such as the Pharaoh in the book of Genesis etc, andmuch as the nephilim lines are the ‘sons of the gods’. Likewise the Roman emperors of the line of Caesar who deified themselves/ claimed divine origins, and possibly the similar nature of the kings of the Babylonians etcetera. (And yet the Hebrews deified their rulers as the ‘anointed of YHVH’, which was the reason why David would not kill Saul even after his attempts on David’s life; and as we have seen, links existed between the celestial lines of varying nature and many of Israel’s founders, such as David and his family…but in general and as a broad principle, the Hebrew and Christian religions within the Bible stand almost uniqely in the ancient world of the Near East for the equality of every man before the Lord.)

The next item of Peter’s inner nature comes fromLuke 22.31; first is the statement of Jesus;

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satanhath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat;

but Ihave prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not; and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren’.

After which Peter promises he is ready to die for Jesus, prompting Jesus to reply that ‘…the cock shall not crow this day,before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me’.

A strange statement beneath the surface in 22.31; for having noted the presence throughout the Bible of the ‘serpent’ of Eden, representative of Enki, and the Anunnaki, plus the role of the satan as ‘servant of the Lord’, as an ‘opponent’ or ‘accuser’ (ie judge), the function of Satan in this instance seems to support that perspective; Satan ‘has asked’ – and that ‘he may sift you as wheat’, ie test the character of Peter.One point of note is the use of wheat in the metaphor, suggestive as it is of asymbol of the life-creatingpowers of the sun, as well as the repeated associations in the Bible of bread with divine knowledge and blessings. This symbolism helps toassociate Peter with the themes of wisdom/ knowing, as the serpent in Eden promised Eve and Adam their ‘eyes shall be opened’, and they shall ‘be as the gods’ if they ate of the Tree; and the serpent’s associations to Enki the wisdom-giver.

(See also the serpent’s association with the Plant of Life at the end of the Epic of Gilgamesh. . .)

Secondly the passage links Peter to the cycle of life and death, light and dark embodied within Jesus’ allegory of the seed of wheat, which must be buried in the ground before it can give forth life. . . a cycle very much contained in Greek mythology by the story of the fertility-goddess Persephone forced to live in the underworld for half of the year. Similarly in Babylonian myths of Inanna (Ishtar) and Dumuzi, as well as Sumerian myths of Ningiszida and Tammuz/ Dumuzi, the heavenly ‘gate-keepers’ (as in the myth of ‘Adapa and the South Wind’) who must descend to the underworld. So this duality is perhapstowards the centre of questions regarding Simon Peter’s being.

An additional question implied here also is ‘why’? – why has Satan desired to test Simon Peter, in particular?Unless his nature has something in particular which must be tested? None of the other disciples go through similar experiences, pointing to a possibly essential difference. No further mention of this circumstance is made in any of the books of the New Testament, leaving it as a literal ‘non-sequitur’ which must be explored by the individual.

Considering the assertion in these pages that he is connected in some wayto the lines of Cain/Lamech etc, there is the conversation between Jesus and Simon Peter in Matthew 18.21. This passage is as follows;

Then came Peter unto him and said, Lord, how oft shall my

brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Until seventimes?

Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times, but

until seven times seventy seven.

This short passage is phrased in words which instantly recall the words of Lamech despairing of his sinful nature, caused by his bloodline heredity. (‘Lamech shall be avenged (punished) not sevenfold, but seventy and sevenfold’). Whereas the Lamech of the Seth lineage, Noah’s father, lived to the age of 777 years! (the ‘celestial’ genetics of the pre-Flood era lines being so strong that these extended life-spans were a primary characteristic of the pre-Deluge patriarchs, or kings, in both the Bible (Genesis5.1-32), and Sumerian King Lists).

Thus the words of Jesus signpost with the numeric ‘identifier’ present throughout the Bible of seven, seventy seven and 777 etc, that Simon Peter is related to the same (solar) bloodline, of Cain. The nature of the bloodline is signified by the use of the word ‘sin’, centering the question upon the negative lines . Likewise the use of the word ‘brother’ in the question indicates it is concerned with family andbloodlines -even Simon Peter’s in particular (!) – indeed is reminiscent of the first brothers’ conflict in the bible, Cain and Abel.

It has also been noted in other sections on this site that 7, and 7.77 etcetera are numbers closely associated with the harmonics of the Sun(ie re the Sun’s diameter, 864/1.11= 7.77, or 864/ 1.23456789 = 7. And it is therefore of significance that the ‘powers of the sun’ symbolized by this number are the essence of the genetics of the ‘celestial’ bloodlines. Powers which create ‘mighty men of renown’, but are easily turned to imbalance and excess.

A further set of connections between Simon Peter and the ‘celestial’ bloodlines of Sumer, positive, negative or otherwise, comes from the collection of myths based around the meeting between him and Simon the Magician as detailed in the Bible in the Acts of the Apostles 8.9-24 – this concerns the battle between the two when Simon the Magician offers money to Peter if he will teach Simon how to perform the miracles of the apostles. If the negative aspect of Simon Peter’s ‘divided’ or ‘hybrid’ self may be said to be symbolized by this character,(something the Bible may be considered to do if information is presented metaphorically as well as literally), there are some details within the story which are highly salient.

Firstly, Simon the Magician is from Samaria, (and is called the ‘bad Samaritan’ in some versions/ retellings); the origin or meaning of the name Samaria is ‘little Sumer’. The reasons this came about are unknown, but possibly relate to a small early grouping of Sumerians having settled in the area. It is telling that Mary Magdalene, believed by the majority of scholars to be Mary of Bethany mentioned in the Gospels (John 11.1-2, 12.3, Luke 7.36, 10.38-42, etc etc) was therefore from the village of Bethany, situated in the region (of the modern West Bank) known and referred to as Judaea and Samaria, a term used even in the 20th century by the United Nations, and by Israel…

And interestingly, as we saw earlier, 2Kings 17.15-24 tells of the Assyrian forces of Shalmaneser V laying siege to Samaria for three years, and then taking the Samarians into captivity in Assyria. And more than that; “And the king of Assyria brought people from Babylon, Cuthath, Avva, Hamath, and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the people of Israel. And they took possession of Samaria and lived in it’s cities” . . .as well as introducing the worship of pagan gods referred to as ‘abominations’ (such as Molech). These imported peoples were the predecessors of the New Testament ‘Samaritans’, who were viewed as ‘unclean’ because of this aspect of their history. And yet another example of the intermingling of the bloodlines of the Israelites with those of the peoples of Sumer-related lineages of the ‘heavens’. . .

Next, he is closely associated with the tenets of Gnosticism, or what gradually by 200 Ad became viewed as ‘heretical’ Christianity, (with links to the wisdom of Egypt, as shown in works such as Trismegistus Hermes, which were based primarily on myths of Thoth, the Egyptian deity), advocating the duality of the energetic and material dimensions, as well as union between man and woman as a way of attaining spiritual enlightenment and completeness. Simon Magus’ paramour is a ‘sacred prostitute’ called Helen; Justin Martyr’s work in 155-157 Ad states that after being rejected by the Apostles Simon found his way to Rome, where he met Helen. His understanding of her significance, which is a brief but complicated exposition of some of the ideas and tenets of some strands of gnosticism, was as follows; in the beginning God had his first thought, or Ennoia, which was female (the equivalent of Hebrew/Greek Sophia). From this divine ‘marriage’ of being and manifestation came the orders of angels in the heavens; but the angels rebelled against this female principle, and created the ‘sinful’ material world as a prison for her, imprisoning her in the body of a woman. She underwent numerous reincarnations, including Helen of Troy, before eventually incarnating as Helen, a slave and prostitute in the Phoenician city of Tyre. It was in this lifetime that Simon appeared, to rescue theEnnoia Helen, and in doing so redeem or enlighten mankind. . !

It is curious that the various myths and texts dealing with the relationship between king Solomon and the Queen of Sheba are linked inextricably with this theme of male-female alchemy, especially considering that the tale, even in the Bible has extensive cosmic number and alchemical symbolism attached within it.And secondly, has links as such with various strands of Gnosticism. The complex adjoining of themes within the Solomon and Sheba mythology hasthe following links to the those studied in this Bible section, including; the Song of Solomon in which the female narrator says’ I am very dark, but comely’ (as was the Ethiopian Sheba possibly, the epithet for whom is the ‘Queen of the South’). From other sections we have seen the Sumerian deity Enki/ Ea was called the ‘Lord of the South’, and discussed the symbolism of this to include meaningsrelated to the subconscious (reptilian, stomach-based instinctive centre of consciousness) intuition for which the sibyls of Greece at the Delphic Oracle were known, a place where higher-dimensional influences arose from subterranean fissures according to historical sources. These women were referred to as ‘Pythoness’, further supporting the serpent-based wisdom of the instinctive centre ascribed to Enki, the ‘giver of wisdom’ to mankind, and lord of the ‘depths’ or the ‘south’, the ‘ab-zu’, or ‘ap-su’. It is possible to conclude therefore that many terms of language even today stem from this complex of symbols related to the ‘south’ as depicted by the Sumerians; words such as ‘sud’ in French for south; sub- as in subconscious, submarine, and so on – as Enki gives his ‘Noah’ – Utnapishtim – advice on how to survive the Flood;

“Avoid death – build a boat,

 Abandon possessions, save thy life”,

as the deity of the subconscious/ instinctive centre. Much of the serpent symbolism of Enki, Oannes etcetera relates to the reptilian centre  of the stomach concerned with ensuring the survival of the individual. Even ‘Utnapishtim’ can be interpreted as ‘one born of the fish ‘people’, or ‘of the waters’ perhaps, again linking to Enki, and to the subterranean depths – the ‘ap-su’, or ‘abyss’ – of the subconscious.In Gilgamesh’s version of the Deluge, this role of the instinctive subconscious is shown in the narrative by Utnapishtim entrusting the navigation of the Ark to Puzur-Amurru, the ‘helmsman’, or ‘navigator’, who is ‘separate’ in a sense to Utnapishtim and his family, ie separated from issues of personality, perhaps. The manifestations of this deepest instinctive consciousness within the human mind are so separate as to be unknown (in order partly to protect the physiological functions such as heart-rate and breathing etc from interference by the conscious mind). But they tend also towards awareness of matters of forthcoming events related to survival of the self – ‘disasters’, problems, dangers etc – the instinctive mind is able to perceive – thus adverting the self on a subconscious level to testing circumstances in the immediate future. As the pythonesses at the Delphic oracle were able to do.

(And the more in balance – or incorporated into theentirety of consciousness – with the consciouslevels of mind and emotion, the more harmonious are the instinctive mind’sfunctions and benefits).

So Sheba as the Queen of the South is a figure who incorporates all these meanings within her self, as a pythoness, or ‘woman of instinctive/intuitive wisdom’ in other words. So much symbolism in the myths around Sheba and Solomon relates to the Sun; and it is the energies of the sun that vitalize the genetics of the celestial beings the Anunnaki, and the associated gene-streams of their bloodlines created with human women; including the nephilim, who are identifiable by their unbalanced solar energies. Thus sun-associated symbolism in the Bible and elsewhere implies a link to the ‘powers’ of the heavens in this way.

In assessing the import of the mythology of the Solomon-Sheba relationship or ‘marriage’, they clearly represent male, solar, rational energies on his part, and female, lunar, subconscious energies on hers; the symbols and metaphors of both indicate that the narrative does contain a deeper application than simply to the meeting of two particular individuals. In other words, the relationship has, or has been given, universal meanings, relatable for example, to the complex philosophies of alchemy, many of the meanings of which apply to the marriage of psychological or physiological energies within the self. This alchemical ‘marriage’, whether within the self, or in relationships, was thus seen as a ‘holy grail’ from which perfect fulfilment could be achieved. . . presumably from the time of such philosophies creation in the first centuries of the millennium, and definitely by the time of the Middle Ages in Europe, when alchemy became widely known and even practised across the continent, although taken solely to be referring to the production of gold by many then.

In the Bible, Moses, Samson, Noah, Solomon are all depicted as being connected in different ways with these energies. And all moreover are depicted as being ‘within’ the celestial bloodlines, making their narratives more ‘remarkable’, even ‘archetypal’. The story of Samson is so absurd and exaggerated in many respects that even Hebrew observers in the Middle Ages questioned it’s veracity as a record of events. . .

At the heart of the ‘extraordinary’ narrative, therefore, isSamson, a clearly chaotic and unbalanced individual from birth, empowered by his genetic inheritance, yet undermined by it too, so unable to cope is he. His story, told at extensive length between Judges 13.2 and 16.31, four whole chapters of Judges, contains numerous instances of sun-symbolism, such as the (honey of) the bees, in the lion’s carcass; the foxes in the wheat-field with their tails ablaze, and so on The Jewish commentary the Midrash states of Samson that he was ‘like a bell; he went once this way, once that’, showing the chaotic nature of the unresolved solar energies within the genes of the (incomplete) personality. (See The Legends of the Jews, by Louis Ginzburg, 1909). Although described as a ‘judge of Israel’ Samson is certainly shown as being less than perfect. It is in his pursuit of a female partner and counter-balance moreover, that many of the most significant, violent, and terrible circumstances of his life are created. Delilah in particular is someone he knows is unsuitable, while wishing it was otherwise (from Judges 16.4); the name ‘Delilah’ has it’s roots inLilith, the Queen of the Night (the negative bloodlines), depicted with birds talons for feet in Near Eastern mythologies, while Sorek,meaning ‘vine’ or ‘grape’ in Hebrew studies may also relateto ‘saurian’, as in ‘reptilian’ from Greek times onwards.He tolerates her treachery for as long as he can, before eventually giving up his innermost secret, in what is a last desperate attempt at connection. But he actsalso not so much in hope as in resignedrecognition, that he will never find a womanhe can trust as a partner and an equal. . .(Judges 16.18-).

 The Song of Solomon features the female narrator saying at 7.7 “Thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to a cluster of grapes”, linking to the themes throughout the Old Testament of bloodlines (the vine) and gods (the word tamarim for the related date-palm being also a word for the ‘divine’, stemming from tamar, ‘dark’ or ‘unknowable’. . .)  Date-palms are part of many significant places and their names; Exodus 15.27, Numbers 33.9,  Judges 4.5 (the ‘palm-tree of Deborah, the prophetess and judge of Israel’), Judges 20.33 (Baal-Tamar and Gibeah, pagan city of the ‘mighty men’), Ezekiel 47.19, 48.28 – and many times in reference to Jericho, the ‘city of date-palms’. See ‘The Shiloh Excavations’ at for more on this. So again, at chapter 7.7 the Song of Solomon links to the ‘celestial’ bloodlines,  in some of the numerous ways they are referred to symbolically, through something as innocent as the date-palm, the grape-vine, as well as through number. Note the reference to ‘stature’ too in the verse, pointing to the ‘mighty’ stature of some of the lineages.

The idea that being in close proximity to God causes the face to ‘shine like the Sun’, is clearly of relevance, as stated of Moses on Mt Sinai after he speaks with the Lord at the mountain-top, when his friends make him a veilto cover the brightness of his face; but as the birth of Noah shows in the non-canonical books of Jubilees, Enoch and Noah, the sub-text indicates the nature of the ‘sons of the Watchers’ to be a genetic inheritance in this way. The innate duality of the original ‘celestial’ nature of the hybrid bloodlines is reproduced in the stories of Solomon and Sheba; whether this ‘blessing’ is positive, or contains the negative potentials of the nephilim is a matter of debate in each case. Hence the many links to both God, the Sun, and to djinn, or demons, in the many many versions of the couple to be found throughout history, in the Bible, Coptic (Egyptian), Hebrew, Ethiopian, Islamic and other versions.

For example, from the Qu’ran 27.23-24;

I found there a woman ruling them, and she has been given of all things, and she has a great throne. I found that she and her people bow to the sun instead of God. Satan has made their deeds seem right to them and has turned them away from the right path, so they cannot find their way”.

Likewise in the Qabbalah Sheba was considered one of the queens of the demons, and sometimes identified with Lilith, the demonic, negative, or possibly ‘night’ aspect of the feminine within the Near East. And lastly, bringing us back to where we started this ‘digression’ into one of the great ‘male-female’ marriage cycles of the Near and Middle East in folklore throughout history, in Ashkenazi Judaism the character of Sheba was merged with that of Helen of Troy (Encyclopedia Judaica).

Of interest are the themes ofthe (Gnostic) sacred feminine, celestial beings incarnating in semi-human lineages, ‘sinfulness’, and redemption – all of which are a part of Sumerian mythology, as well as mostly being part of the sub-texts of the life and character of many in the Old Testament, as well as Simon Peter himself, (although Peter had few positive relationships with women; although, that said, the New Testament relates that he was married, and had an extended family, something he refers to himself several times).Some of the details of the story of Justin Martyr runparallel closely to Simon Peter’s life, such as the inclusion of the Phoenician city of Tyre (meaning ‘rock’), and then Simon Magus’ journey to Rome. Simon Magus was also possibly the inspiration for medieval stories of Faustus, including the version by Goethe, Faust; (curiously Faustus asks the demon Mephistopheles to bring the shade of Helen of Troy for him to see in Marlowe’s version. . !)the negative aspects of Simon (Magus? Peter?) finding full expression in this myth, perhaps at a time of evolved religious beliefs, as we have seen already, to those of antiquity.

The themes of slavery, and prostitution likewise relate symbolically to the burden and inescapability of the unbalanced genetic inheritance of the Sumerian bloodlines, as they were represented from the 3rd millenniumBce onwards, and on through the books of the Bible. Something we thusargue is an inner-meaning of many of the stories and references to ‘slavery’ within the Bible; and as we shall see later is repeated in the later Islamic myths of the descendent of Simon Peter, the Roman princess Narjis sold into slavery in the Holy Lands and redeemed by her virtue, and  marriage into the family of Al-Askari, the Eleventh Imam of Shia Islam, from the union of who came the mystical Twelfth Imam, the Mahdi.

One last detail is the following picture of the representation of Simon Magus at the Basilica of St-Sernin (or ‘Saturnin’; Saturn represented the lineages of the ‘Archons’ according to Gnostic theologies, while those of Jupiter represented virtue, similar to the lines of Seth and Cain). This churchis in Toulouse, France, and dates to the early 12th century; as can be seen, Simon Magus is in close proximity of imps and devils, and interestingly, his hat is identical to the ‘horned’ or ‘serpent’ headwear of the Anunnaki. Considering this church was constructed between 1080 and 1118-1120, this is a fascinating, if not amazing circumstance! And this date for the stonework is confirmed according to the article “St-Sernin of Toulouse: The apotheosis of Medieval Pilgrimage Basilicas” to be found at website , ‘The marble altar and seven bas-reliefs are the work of a great artist, Bernard Gilduin and his workshop from 1095 to 1110Ad. . .at the same time, in the first quarter of the 11th century the artists of Moissac brought their craft to Toulouse, and from the meeting of styles was born one of the great masterpieces of the 12th century, the Miegeville Door. Framed by St Peter and St James walking among demons, it is a scene of great beauty; above the frieze of scrolls topping the dancing line of apostles is an almost round boss showing the Ascension of Christ’.

The second image,below-right, is of Simon Peter himself,sited directly over Simon Magus, with two angels above his head; if it was conceived symbolically the entire montage could be viewed as a symbol of the dual (subconscious)nature of Simon Peter, containing both celestial and infernal aspects –  his higher and lower selves, unitedwithin hismaterial self, in effect. . .a theme which the Bible points to numerous times in his life.So the composite from the highest centre downwards, (ie head:chest:stomach– or; higher centres:conscious self:subconscious) reads; angels – Simon Peter – Simon Magus / devils; (thus ‘potentially’ adding a fourth level, as Gurdjieff stated the stomach is divided into ‘moving centre’ functions concerned with movements, and instinctive centre functions of purely physiological nature, such as breathing, heart-rate, digestion, the organs, the workings of the nervous system and so on…

Images list;

a.Simon the Magician, St Sernin basilica, Toulouse.1118-20 Ad.Attribution; wikimedia. Public Domain.  

b.Simon Peter above Simon Magus; St Sernin.Attribution; Wikimedia Public Domain.

c.One of the Apkallu, the celestial ‘seven sages’, from anAssyrian stela, with Anunnaki head-wear. c.840Bce, British Museum.

This theme of the different nature of Simon Peter is considerably supported by many additional details concerning the life, events, and relatives of Peter. While a number of the significant events in the narrative of Simon Peter are positive, and indicate the position of trust he occupied within the group, many of the events regarding the actions of the apostles in the ministry of Jesus, and the rush of events towards the end of Jesus’ life show him in a more negative light; his‘betrayal’ of Jesus when he denies knowing him, done to ‘save his own life’; his cutting the ear of a Roman guard off at the time of Jesus’ arrest; falling asleep in Gethsemane when asked to keep watch as Jesus wrestled all night with the inner torment of his burden; his negativity (even jealousy) towards Mary Magdalene; his frequent misunderstanding of the message of Jesus; and so on, all combine to show that whatever Peter is, he is certainly not perfect. Or even close, as might be expected of the equivalent of the Old Testament prophets, ie of unquestionable personal character, and the ability to understand the non-rational /sublime nature of the highest states of consciousness. So Peter is indeed different for some reason to these figures, and to the other apostles. And yet he is ‘blessed’ along with James (the brother of Jesus) and John (‘the disciple Jesus loved’) to witness on the high mountain the ‘transfiguration of Jesus’, and to hear the voice of the Lord, and see the figures of Moses and Elijah. (Matthew 17.1-9) Also he is blessed to be the first apostle to see the risen Jesus (Luke 23.34), although Matthew 28.9 records that Mary Magdalene sees Jesus prior to this.

But the subtle clues add up in the narrative of Peter. One of the most noticeable associations included in his story, and in his writings is the concept of being  ‘strangers’ , in a strange land; ostensibly denoting the difficulties the early Christians will face in their relations with all the other peoples of the world; Gentiles who are no longer part of the Jewish religion, or community, yetunable to accept the Roman or Greek gods or ways – and so on. And yet Simon Peter, as we have seen, is the personification of a ‘stranger’ on a deeper level, in his difference to men, and has awareness too of his inner-nature; as indicated by Moses’ naming his son after the word, plus the explicit admission in Ezra 10 of the remiss act of many Hebrews in taking ‘strange’ wiveswhile in Babylon. Thus the first words of his book begin 1Peter1.1;

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.

The Roman Catholic Church in Rome was begun by Simon Peter, according to the historians of the time, and the Church, becoming in this way the ‘bridge’ between the people of the flock, and God. The first place mentioned in 1Peter1.1 may be symbolic of this, of his role as a ‘bridge’ – or ‘pontifex’ –  in effect, but as much between the celestial bloodlines (of whatever nature), and humanity as between god and humanity… thus giving new meaning to the words in 1Peter3.19;

“By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison” (as does Enoch in the Book of Enoch, in that instance as the ‘highest representative judge’ of mankind for the Lord; the two angels show him sinful spirits imprisoned in the ‘higher-realms’, who beg Enoch to intercede with the Lord for them ; but the Lord explains their punishment will not be changed…)

Within the Bible the use of ‘rock’comes to mostly signify that which is fully material, devoid of spirit or energy, or the ‘waters of lfe’. So Jesus relates the Parable of the Seed and the Sowers; when the Seed is sown on ‘rocky ground’ it finds no purchase there or water, and thus withers. This metaphor of the rocky ground may be applied to the ‘dark’ bloodlines– as may the desert; or wilderness and so on; in this way echoing the words of the Lordin the garden of Eden;

“ Unto Adam he said, …because thou hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake…Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, til thou return unto the ground. For dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return”. (Gen 3.17-19)

 To the serpent the Lord says this;“Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life”. (Gen 3.14)

And in next chapter to Cain as his punishment;

Now thou art cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand. When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength… a fugitive and a vagabond thou shalt be”. (Genesis 4.11-12)

So as the symbolism concerning, and used by Peter in his writings isnegative in many aspects,his adoption of the appellation ‘stranger’ and coded words of 1Peter1.1 may hold the meaning that he offers a bridge to redemption for those whoare of the ‘rocky ground’ as described by Jesus in his parables;‘sinners’ – or‘satans’ – or more simply, of the bloodlines of Cain.

And a quick look at the words of the (short) book of 1Peter confirm these very themes, of his beingconcerned with a subtly different agenda;

If so be (that) you have tasted that the Lord is gracious, To whom coming, as unto a living stone,

disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God and precious… but unto them which be disobedient,

the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner. And a stone of

stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word…

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people: that ye should

shew forth praises of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. Which in time

past… had not obtained mercy, but now hath obtained mercy. Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers

and pilgrims…”


The themes of exile and alienation, of ‘otherness’ to the vast majority of mankind may be clearly discerned in these verses beneath the literal text referring to the early Christian communitiesThe original meaning of the word ‘satan’ was indeed as an ‘adversary’, an ‘accuser’, a (divine) judge; as such being a ‘stone of stumbling, a rock of offence’, standing in the path of the wrong-doer.. In the Old Testament it is used to refer to human adversaries (ie.1Samuel 29.4) and then otherwise; in 2Samuel 24 Jehovah sends ‘the angel of Yahweh’ to inflict a plague on Israel lasting three days. In this period 70,000 people die. 1Chronicles 21 repeats this story but uses the word ‘satan’ instead.

According to the Book of Jubilees, written around 200Bc, Mastema, the leader of the ‘fallen angels’ is described as acting in the role of ‘Satan’ in requesting Jehovah to test Abraham’s faith by requiring him to sacrifice his son…

Many other examples exist within the Bible of a ‘satan’ who does the Lord’s bidding; in Zecharia the ‘satan’ is a heavenly ‘prosecutor’; in 1Samuel 16.14 regarding Saul “an evil spirit from the LORD tormented him”; the Book of Job is entirely based upon the actions of Satan towards Job’s outer life, performedwith the explicit permission of the Lord, to test the character of Jobby ‘removing God’s blessings’ under extraordinary circumstances. An angel from the LORD (2Sam.24.16) is part of YHVH’s actions in killing 70,000 of the Israelites in punishment for David taking a census of the tribes, a puzzling passage. . .(2Samuel24.1-17 in particular) as the first verse says the Lord wished to punish the people so ‘moved David’ to number them. . . indeed some modern simplified versions of the Bible state that ‘Satan’ was the motive force of David’s actions in verse 1 of the chapter. In like manner to 2Sam.24, the Book of Revelations, labyrinthine and confusing in it’s narrative depicts seven angels of the Lordinitiating the full stages of the apocalypse and destroying much of life, and mankind, on earth..!

And one last example is when the priest and messenger Balaam disobeys Jehovah’s orders, and goes to some pagan hill-top shrines with Balak the leader of the Moab tribe, who then requests of Balaam the priest that he decry his tribe the Israelites;

“And God’s anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary against him”

(Numbers 22.22).

So in all, this role or nature of being may well be a worthwhile perspective from which to view Simon Peter, (while further clarification of the Lord’s attitude is necessary…)*

*Peter does actually fill the role of ‘divine accuser’ in the early Church in Israel, so that two members of the church actually die ‘ on the spot’ when he accuses them of with-holding monies for themselves.(see below/Acts 5.3-10)

So do any other connections or clues exist within the pages of the Bible in this sense of Simon Peter as ‘satan’?

Rome, the place of Peter’s establishment of the Church, and his death at the hands of the Roman Emperor, is called ‘Babylon’ in the final book of the Bible, Revelations,  with the Roman Empire representing the ‘Babylon’ of the Christian era, thus placing Peter within the centre of the abstract ‘worldly empire’, though as a Christian.

Incidentally, concerning his death, Pope Clement I of Rome posted the first record of it written between 80-98Ad describing the crucifixion ofSimon Peter by the Emperor Nero. Eusebius writing in 232Ad likewise referred to his crucifixion in Rome; and Origen around the same time wrote that Peter requested to be crucified with his head downwards! Why downwards? The reason stated is his claim to be unworthy of dying the same way as Jesus. But itcould  certainly be argued to be a symbolic reference to his nature of being a ‘satan’, the ‘opposite’ of Jesus –

The crucifixion of St.Peter in Rome, painting by Caravaggio

c.1601, in Rome also.Attribution; wikimedia, Public Domain.

– or it could equally be in like manner to the bronze serpent hungupon the cross in the desert, created by Moses – linking him to the Nahash (or ‘Nehushtan’ as it is sometimescalled), and thus with the Nagas.(As mentioned by Jesus when talking of his own fate, at John 3.14/15). The nature of the Nagas as being ‘celestial serpents’ which dwell ‘beneath the waters’ of sacred lakes is related to the nature of the Sumerian deities of the Near East who were depicted as serpent-men hybrids(namely Enki/Ea (‘he who loved water’), and Oannes, the fish-human hybrid, who swam up from out of the Persian Gulf with the other Annedoti – the ‘repulsive ones’ – to create civilization…)

This may be a formative reason for the fish-related symbolism of the Pope’s (fish-shaped) head-wear, as well as church matters related to bishops being named ‘episcopalian’ ie from ‘piscine’; fish. And Simon Peter, the ‘fisherman’who was the first ‘bishop of Rome’, is locatedsquarelywithin this traditional mythology…

The twin themes aligned with this strand of Near Eastern mythology are those of the Nagas and the ‘Seraphim’ – the latter the ‘flying’ serpents of the wilderness, who were ‘fiery’ in nature, and tormented the people of Israel in the wilderness on behalf of YHVH; similar to the ‘satan’ figures who were ‘accusers’ for the Lord in the Old Testament. As further sign of the ‘contradictory’ nature – or inner duality associated with them – the seraphim were described by Isaiah as singing in heavenly choir at the foot-stool of the Lord in the highest heaven (Isaiah 6.1-7)

And the Nagas, parallel to the biblical Nahash though based in Hindu and Buddhist mythology of the Asia East, celestial serpent beings who dwell ‘beneath the waters’ of sacred mountains such as Mt Meru in India, another ‘omphalos-point’ conjoining the lower and higher dimensions. Like the seraphim, the Nagas appear to have complex agendas, which often involve helping mankind with their wisdom and ‘celestial service to the Lord’, but also for the same reason can be sometimes ‘angels of the Lord’ who visit destruction upon sections of mankind. . . akin to king Nahash in 1Samuel11.1.

In other words, examinations of these two celestial ‘orders’, as well as concepts attached to the Sumerian serpent-deity Enki, which may have been symbolized in the Serpent of the Garden of Eden, make these strands of allegory’ contained within the Bible’s deeper waters extremely hard to categorically understand.

So Simon Peter’s  connections to ‘rock’/stone/satan/obstacle/adversary/violence/Rome/Babylon/the devil/ serpents/ fish/water/hunting/ Nimrud/ Sumer/Oannes/gate-keepers/angels/the underworld/ strangers/aliens/ and exile(s)are extensive (!) – and yet (like the seraphim) his characteristics and associations are still not identifiable as being ‘good’ or ‘evil’; a frankly incredible narrative for the personentrusted with establishing the religion of Christianity in the West !

A reading of the places,names,and acts of Simon Peterin terms of his family and friends, with these potential dualities in mindleadsto more highlyinteresting material.

Among other semantic hints is that of the description Jesus gives to Peter  when he first makes him a disciple, calling Peter a ‘fisher of men’, (as Peter and his brothers are fishermen in the Sea of Galilee). Not only does this link Peter with the fish/men hybrid of Oannes and the Annedoti bloodlines,as just mentioned, but additionally has an implication of other-worldly predation, as the Nephilim were in nature ‘hunters’, indeed they were accused of eating all the resources of/ oppressing the earth, so great were their appetites. This is one meaning of the reference in Genesis to Nimrud the Hunter. (Gen10.8-9).

And this is not the only link between all of these related strands; in the cos# section above  we saw in 1Kings3.14-15 how immediately after Solomon is crowned king he journeys to Gibeon, ‘the high place’ where Israel sacrificed and worshipped, in what was apparently a manner of worship imbued with ‘pagan’ undertones, somewhat similar to the ‘groves and high-places’ decried by God in this period (1Kings3.3 highlights this uncertainty); so Gibeon has associations with pagan influences – Solomon stays the night there and during his sleep hears the voice of the Lord; he is offered the choice of wisdom or riches, and picks wisdom, upon which YHVH promises him he shall have both during his reign. The relevant point here is the lineage to which his father David is indicated as belonging to, of one of the ‘bloodlines of the gods’  (not definitively positive or negative in character). So in Genesis 5.4 the lineage of the Nephilim is described ‘There were giants in the earth in those days, and also afterthat, when (the daughters of men bore children to the sons of the gods) the same became mighty men, which were of old, men of renown’.

The description of the Nephilim correlates closely to how Nimrod is described as we have seen in Genesis 10.8.It may be argued that the phrase ‘a great hunter before the Lord’ gives Nimrod a ‘cosmic’ nature, (ie semi-divinity of birth) as might be expected from the character said to have ‘established’ the cities of Sumer, and been instrumental in building not just Babylon, but the Tower of Babylon itself; another symbol of the nature of unrestrained, or unbalanced growth.

Thus great ‘hunters’, warriors, leaders and soldiersof renown are potentially related to the more negative lineages of the Bible. And there are several alternative names for this bloodline(s) in the Bible, (and other texts such as ‘The Book of Giants’, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran in 1947); the Rephaim, Anakim, Zimzam, and Gibborim. This last name means ‘mighty’ and applies in much the same way as ‘the mighty men of old’, relating to war in particular. There are several notable warriors, particularly who fought for king David, who are called Gibborim(2Sam23.8/1Kings1.8/1Chron11.26/1Chron29.24) as in mighty men, indeed the ‘gibborim’ are even called giants by some writers, such as Josephus, and Philo (De Gigant), as being men of extraordinary stature.

A chapter in Ezekiel lists the many peoples who have caused ‘terror on the earth’ (Ezekiel 32) promising that “I will vex the hearts of many people, when I shall bring thy destruction among the nations” (32.9) – the Egyptians, Assyrians, Elam, Mescech, Tubal (ie Tubal-Cain), Edom (home of Herod’s line), the ‘princes of the north’, the Zidonians (ie Sidon,the ‘place of fishers/hunters’), and so on. The verses of Ezekiel 32 are thus a list of those who were ‘mighty on earth’, who lived ‘by the sword’ and caused terror. And a concise list of the several strands examined in this section.

So, in a juxtaposition of the associations between these potential lineages and that of David and Solomon, the experience Solomon has the night before his coronation,where Yahweh questions and then blesses his reign, takes place in the settlement of  Gibeon, a place where the Tabernacle of the Ark remained after the ark was moved to Jerusalem (1Chron15.14-25), and from where several ‘mighty soldiers’ or men come to fight for Israel. (1Chron12.4, etc). The alternative meaning of Gibeon as ‘high place’, or ‘high hill’, indicating again the presence of powerful energies, and accelerated growth…

So in fact it assumes the meaning of ‘pagan worship’; for just before the passage quoted in the cos# section, 1Kings11.11, (‘Wherefore…thou hast not kept my statutes which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant’), the reason for the Lord disowning Solomon is made clear;


And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and went not fully after the LORD, as did David his father. Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech the abomination of the children of Ammon. And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense andsacrificed unto their gods.

So in all, the bloodline of David and Solomon is related to these themes in multiple interwoven ways.

Indeed this may be viewedin the the links between David’s line and Nahash, the (Nagas related) king of Ammon. As well as other linguistic similarities all centred around the stem of Nahash, it is curious to find two examples of the female name Na’amah in the Old Testament; firstly as the daughter of the Cainite Lamech and Zillah , (one of only a few women named in these genealogies); and the second Na’amah is an Ammonitess, and the only one of Solomon’s wives to have borne him a son (1Ki 14.21,31; 2Chr 12.13) …the Kebra Nagast, the ‘Book of Kings’ relates that Solomon sired a son with the Queen of Sheba; as she returned to her home from Jerusalem he was born in Ethiopia.It also contains the prophecies of Enoch, (concerned with the bloodlines of the sons of the gods), and discussions of the royal blood of kings, (indicating it was cohesive but probably drawn together from multiple sources, at some time in the 1stmillennium.) (while in India, the royal cobra is called the naja naja, a Latinization of the Sanskrit nagas)…

Indeed as seen already, it is at 1Kings 11.1that we see; ”But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites” – virtually the same names and tribes as those listed by Ezekiel above (in Ezekiel 32.9) – the Hittites being in the north of Iraq towards Assyria, Turkey and Asia Minor.

And at 1Samuel 11.1 the Ammonite king Nahash lays siege to Jabesh-Gilead, and offers to spare them/ make a covenant with them if they allow him to ‘thrust out all their right eyes’… a complex narrative pointing to both the cruelty of the Cainite celestial bloodlines, as well perhaps as the impersonality or impartiality of the Nagas celestial agendas…particularly if the deal offered is considered in conjunction with the saying of Jesus, ‘if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out’ ie if it gets in the way of the growth of the spirit… thus pointing to the serious, even ‘cruel’ nature required by those servants of the Lord to be ‘judges’, or ‘opponents’, or ‘satans’ – something Simon Peter likewise displays, in the passage concerning Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5.3-10; something we shall look at shortly.

Likewise the presence in Solomon’s life narrative of Sun-symbolism, reflects these concepts of the genes of the lineageshaving a higher proportion of the celestial powers of the Sun. (So the Kebra Nagast relates that the night before Sheba left for her homeland Solomon dreamt that ‘ a sun had left the land of Israel”, making the symbolism of their ‘alchemical marriage’ clear).

Solomon the name likewise means ‘the Sun’ in the languages of the Indo-Europeans, and the Egyptians , and Greeks;  Sol, -Om and -On are three words related to the sun; On* was the ‘City of the Sun’ located near modern-day Cairo, otherwise called by the Greeks later Heliopolis…), or ‘Awen’/ ‘An’, connecting it to the Sumerian root word Anu, meaning ‘the light of heaven’, as well as the sister of Cain, called Awen also, from whom the line of Cain possibly stemmed).

From the life story of Solomon,  the first reference in the Bible to the number 666 is in connection with ‘talents’ or bars of gold; the metal which is symbolic of the sun, as is the number itself , representing in the near-exclusively male energy of solar light.

Despite this welter of information sounding entirely negative towards David and Solomon this is not so; they are ‘blessed of the Lord’ in their reigns, and establish the nation of Israel; but the sub-text does indicate a potential for misuse or development of the (genetic) powers they embodied, which is shown in their various misbehaviours and misdeeds, which ultimately lead the Lord to limit both of their ‘blessings’.Indeed the name Solomon actually means ‘fair penalty’, or  ‘recompense’, indicating this relationship and a ‘balancing’, as well asthe presence of a degree of ‘guilt’ somehow within their lives or beings.

These extensive themesare encoded extensively within the Bible; for example, the birthplace of Peter (and Philip and Andrew) is stated to be Bethsaida (John 1.44-45/12.21) – this means ‘the House of Fish’/fishing, but it’s literal meaning is ‘house of hunting’…

Whilelinked to the biblical theme of the brother/disciples being ‘fishermen’, and alsoto thethread through antiquity from Enki/Ea/ Oannes, it also provides another connection to the ‘mighty hunters’ of the Nephilim.

An alternative reference to Bethsaida in the Bible is a city east of the Jordan that is a bare desert-place ie uncultivated scrub-land used for grazing – another metaphor for Peter, conceivably and potentially linking to the seraphim (whose name can mean ‘dry’ or ‘parched’, and again, likewise, the serpent of Eden, told by the Lord ‘dust shall thy have in thy mouth all thy days’,as punishment (Genesis3.14). As are Adam and Eve when expelled from Eden soon after; “Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life… In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, til thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Gen3.17-19).

Jesus also ‘curses’ Bethsaida, along with Chorazin, for not recognizing his miracle healings in their towns – saying;

MATTHEW 11.21-6

Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would haverepented long ago, in sackcloth and ashes.But I  say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgement, than for you. And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven,shall be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been  done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But  I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgement, than for thee.

(all of which raises the question of why Tyre and Sidon in particular are taken as examples by Jesus here. Likewise by Ezekiel in chapter 28 of his book. And also, why a town can be considered guilty of punishment, when it is the individual who is judged- this question leads back to the most famous example of this dichotomy, the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah – indeed, the next two verses in Matthew contain references to these towns). Canthe judgement of towns be a metaphor as such for the judgement of specific lines,or types of geneticnature?

The Hebrew base for Sodom is unclear, but meanings ascribed include ‘flaming’,violent,excessive – all indicative  of the nephilim, and furthermore, characteristics from the Gurdjieff perspective of themisuse of the energies of the sex centre. (Located within the stomach-basedinstinctive centre, alongside the social and physiological ’sub-centres’). This does not necessarily express itself only in sexual behaviours, but in mis-directed, impulsive and fervent behaviours; all of which are egotistic, rushed and unsustainable…as well as often harmful to others.

The name Gomorrah means in Hebrew ‘to grip,or bind; to deal tyrannically with,to enthral or worship’ (Ab*)ie emphasizing those who act towards others in a compulsive or cruel way,giving no choice to people – and within the self, those who are in the grip of their own passions,desiresor perspectives, to the point where they cannot ‘see reality’ ; or those within the grip of the effects of their unbalanced genes.

It is in this sense that the NOBSE Study Bible Name List gives Gomorrah the meaning of ‘Submersion’. ie in the currents of everyday life,or the self, which deluge the ability to see; to have one’s head underwater. And there is great support for this from Gurdjieff circles, where the works of Dr Maurice Nicholl (The Psychological Commentaries…)examine the passage where Jesus walks on the water precisely with this meaning, of rising above the ‘pull’ of the flow of everyday life, of being ‘free’ from the self’s ‘lower’ concerns, and psycho-dramas which prevent clear consciousness or growth.

Freedom from being ‘engrossed’ in lower matters of the self, in other words is a central aim of self-development.

And as the Bible shows, it is Simon Peter who attempts to mimic Jesus’ action, succeeding momentarily, but lacking true ‘inner freedom’, he plunges beneath the waves..! (Matthew17.15 likewise refers to a man asking Jesus to heal his ‘lunatick’ son, ‘for oftentimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water’. John Michell in the City of Revelation notes the use of theses two extremes in antiquity to characterize the dangers of either excessive and constraining authoritarianism, or the opposite of a deluge of ‘freedom’ which washes away all social structures in a purgative, and destructive wave of energy. On a personal level the former represents the solar, rational mind which always ‘knows the perfect answer’ ; and the latter the lunar, subconscious energies of raw life – the abyss, the ab-zu, or subterranean reservoirs of water – which will burst through such ‘repressive’ structures if life is becoming an arid ‘desert’ of rationality. . . So Plato for example cautioned against either extreme, according to Michell, on p.30. To many writers, Simon Peter is considered to represent the worldly structures of authority, the outer structures of the Church in Rome, in what is not so much repression as ‘control’. Much in the way the builders of the empires of antiquity, in the Age of Aries, the Ram, from 2000-0Bce were authoritarian figures, who were replaced by the universalism and ‘democracy’ of the Piscean Age. So in this sense, and in the New Testament, he is rarely equated with the ‘waters of the spirit’, which bubble up from the subconscious in other early church members).

But to return to the narrative of the bible, where does the Bible say Jesus walked on the water – on the Sea of Galilee, near to land belonging to Bethsaida. (Mark 6.45-52./ John 6.16-24/ Matthew 14.22-36).

In other references the desert Bethsaida gives every impression of being another metaphor of ‘the rocky ground’ upon which the Seed is unable to flourish… indeed the ‘mara’ part of the word Gomorrah refers to the gradual effect of small actions, (Ab*), in particular the related noun ‘yoreh’ refers to the ‘time of the agricultural year when light rainfall makes seedlings bud, but not bear fruit yet’…

It is at Matthew13that Jesus relates the parable of the Seeds and the Rocky Ground.(Matthew 13. 1-8 followed by the parables of the Sower/Tares of the Field(18-3O),and of the Mustard Seed 31-32); and in the next chapter that Jesus walks on the water (Matthew 14.22-36), near to Bethsaida.

The second part of the word Beth-saida refers also to the ‘hunter’, as we have seen linking to(descendants of) Nimrod the Hunter. Could ‘-saida’ be related etymologically to Sidon ? Indeed, Sidon does mean place of fishing, or of hunting – directly the same as Bethsaida.

The words ‘hunter’ or ‘fisher’ may mean, effectively, ‘desire’ – ie this is who Jesus was talking to/ intending – people ‘blinded by (hunting for) their desires (sink beneath the waves of life)’? And the motive cause of the ‘sons of the gods’ descending to earth to couple with the ‘daughters of men’. So this adds a different emphasis to the epithet Jesus applies to Simon Peter, that he is a ‘fisher of men’, when viewed from the perspective of Peter’s possible inner nature.

*In the Book of Jubilees texts found at Qumran, the wife of Enoch is named as Edna; meaning ‘pleasure’… there are two other spouses so named in Jubilees, namely the wives of Methuselah (the son of Enoch whose son is Lamech, Noah’s father), and Terah, the father of Abraham (homeland; Sumer). All three men (and women) are therefore part of the lineage of which Noah is the representative example, indicated as being the child of a ‘son of the gods’…

TYRE – means rock (see previous interpretations of rock/stone/rocky ground for metaphorical meanings, (in fact Ab* states that Tyre is the Hebrew equivalent of the Greek name Peter) -a famous biblical town, often mentioned alongside Sidon, Tyre was a Phoenician coastal town in the south of Lebanon, and north of Jerusalem. It is noteworthy, the head builder/craftsman of Solomon’s Temple, who was called Hiram, came from Tyre.  So this may put in context why  Jesus said of Peter ‘This is the rock upon which I shall build my church’, although the symbolic meanings attached to the metaphor are central too, as we have seen.

Note too the strange story of Simon Peter’s actions to (or effect upon) the couple who cheat the nascent Christian church of some money from a land-sale, in the first years after Christ – (Ananias and Sapphira, in Acts 5.3-10). When Peter asks the man Ananias why he withheld from the church monies from the sale, the man falls dead on the spot! Then 3 hours later the wife of Ananias (Sapphira) enters, unaware of events; when Peter asks her the same question she then falls down dead..!

This tale is either pointing to Simon Peter’s cosmic role as ‘satan’/judge/’accuser’ – or possibly ‘seraphim’ /’destroyer’/’angel of the Lord’, such as destroyed the cities of the Sodom and Gomorrah with the powers of the Sun, or the plague in1Chronicles21- or alternatively, as being representative of the negative Herod-like aspects of some of the bloodlines of the serpent. But as a ‘defender of the faith’ this is clearly excessive. . .

From this perspective the passage may show the negative bloodlines’ typical immaturity, inflexibility and excessive violence; as well as a lack of understanding in Peter of Christ’s message, and thus an unforgiving nature in the exercise of authority given to him… supporting the ‘outer’ nature of Peter’s role, as stated.

Or perhaps the story shows equally these different aspects. This is a question difficult to answer. (And in fact, the section in Acts does not say Peter wished any ill, or attempted to cause any injury to them – so in effect it may have been not Peter’s will or doing, but that of the Holy Spirit)! The meanings of Ananias (‘Yahweh has been gracious’) and Sapphira (‘to be calmly and harmoniously composed’) do indicate a definite quiet sanctity to their natures…and observers have noted the gradual loss of authority of Simon Peter as the early Church evolved.

It is a feature of the books of the New Testament after the death of Jesus that Simon Peter  had a position of some authority in establishing the church within Israel and the Near East. But over time the more ‘complete’ disciples assume natural authority ; John, the disciple ‘Jesus loved’, James the brother of Jesus, and St Paul, the opponent of Christ who was converted on the road to Damascus by a blinding flash andthe voice of the Lord speaking to him.

The relationship between Peter and Paul seems to be perfunctory at the very best. Indeed in Galatians 2.1-21 Paul criticized Peter publicly for hypocrisy and cowardice, for abiding by Jewish eating laws when eating with Jewish dignitaries visiting the church at Galatia, so ‘disowning’ the gentile Christians of his own church in their early days of establishing a Christian identity. In his book,at 2Corinthians11.3-14 Paul writes of the problems of the earlychurch as it spreads across Asia Minor and the Mediterranean countries;

³But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through it’s subtilty,

so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or

if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which

ye have not accepted,ye might well bear with him.

For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.

But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge…

…I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service…

But what I do, that will I do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the workers of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

Considering the dynamics of the church as it formed, it may be inferred that Paul was referring directly to one or more of the apostles who he believed to be spiritually  incomplete; of all the candidates Simon Peter clearly stands out as the potential subject of these words, a conclusion in keeping with the words of Jesus also.

Although Paul has disagreements over circumcision with James and his closest friends, on his second visit to Jerusalem 14 years after his first,  Paul states (in Galatians2) that James, Cephas and John gave ‘unto me the right hands of fellowship’ (ie. that they separatelypreach unto gentiles and Jews) …‘but when Cephaswas come unto Antioch I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed’. Ostensibly for the matters mentioned, but it is possible these declarations are stating deeper judgements regarding character.

So if Paul was divinely made aware of the apostles’ realities, (as his experience on the road to Damascus indicates), living away from the main body of the church for nearly all of his years as he was, he would have been aware of Peter’s (hidden) inner-narrative;that of being of  a ‘satan’, and thus, very possibly, of the ‘bloodlines’ issue stemming from Sumerian times on. In fact Paul’s calling Peter ‘Cephas’ as seen above, means he is calling him simply ‘rock’ (or ‘foundation’) – making it likely used by him in the pejorative sense relating to the city of Tyre, and to the satan. . . and in the sense that rocks and stones are nearly always used in the Bible to indicate the material earth, strong in its structures but not imbued with spirit. The ‘rocky’ ground and the stony desert are descriptive metaphors of such,  where there is little or no water, the stuff oflife; and hence, the ‘seed’ is unable to grow.

Whoever the subject is, the following words of St Paul seem to indicate the church as established by one or more of the leaders is questionable in morals or substance, writing (2Corinthians 12.13-15);

For what is it wherein you were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong.

Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you, and I will not be burdensome to you. . . for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.

And I will very gladly spend, and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved”. . .


To examine some of the other information given of Simon Peter’s life in the Bible,  seeing the wealth of associations and relationships which even the smallest of details canhold; 1Peter says he is in the church at Babylon,  pointing to the Sumerian roots of the Old Testament narratives, as well possibly to the ‘Babylon’ of Revelations that he will travel to eventually, Rome.

The number of bloodlines in the Old Testament which are related to these Sumerian deities is also noted; all contain ‘celestial’ aspects, some being balanced while others are highly unbalanced – such as the Nephilim, and the lines of Cain, and of Nimrod. The latter, a descendant of Noah’s son Cush, was ‘a mighty hunter before the Lord’, in Babylon, and was ruler when the Tower was built, according to pseudoepigraphical sources such as Jubilees. (The theme of excessive, uncontrolled or irresponsibly utilized power is at the heart of the Tower of Babel narrative, perhaps something the life story of Peter reflects in some ways).

For example, in Joshua 15.13 Caleb drives out three sons of Anak, (or three-fold ‘subdivisions’ of the Anakim, who are in effect theNephilim, or the Anunnaki) called Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai. And yet in 1Chronicles 9.17 is a minor list of the Levites, (the ‘priest-class’or tribe of Israel without a specific region) who returned from Babylon to Jerusalem in 538Bce, which contains the names; Akkub, Shallum Ahiman, and Talmon. There are few explanations of this symmetry, but as we saw in the lines of Seth and Cain, such parallels are indicative of some form of relationship. This curiously structured, (indeed improbably accidental) similarity is indicative of the way in which the bloodlines of ‘the gods’ of Sumer found their way through the civilizations from Sumer, to Assyria, and Babylon, which is where the bible states these three sons of Akkub were born, following the marriage of their father to one of the ‘strange’ foreign wives within Babylon during the Israelites 70 year captivity there, between 598 – 539 Bce. The book of Ezra, chapter 10 details the extensive number of families created by such marriages, and effectively admits the near impossibility of changing the situation, despite the efforts of the congregation to identify and ‘isolate’ such women; for the children remain within the tribe, presumably. . . and incredibly, Ezra 2.13 sees the first use of the number 666 in the Bible, when listing the children of Adonikam, one of the many Israelites who married foreign women in Babylon!

Foremost in Ezra 10 is the use of the word ‘strange’ to describe these foreign women – and it is the same word which Simon Peter uses to describe himself, and his relatives and fellow church members as they move across the Near East and Asia Minor into Europe, and Rome.

The first reference to a ‘satan’ as noted, at Numbers 22.22 is when an ‘angel of the Lord’ is called to stand in the path of Balaam,a non-Jewish priest who refuses to do the Lord’s bidding and bless Israel to his master Balak, the king of Moab.

So it is certainly apposite that the story of Balaam immediately after, at Numbers 22.39 places him at several mountain tops; namely firstly just east of the crest of Nebo, Balaam and Balak, journey to ‘the high places of Baal’ (22.41), which some academics believe to be the extremity of mount Siaghah, ie. the summit of Pisgah. Note this association between the site(s) and the hill-top places of ‘pagan’ worship extant throughout the Old Testament. Balaam next travels to the high point of Mt Pisgah itself (Num 23.14) with Balak.  Again, moredetail connects these sites to deeper matters; for as 23.14 states, “And he brought him into the field of Zophim, to the top of Pisgah”… and Zophim means; ‘the watchers’!

Moreover, as students of Hebrew will know, the name ‘Adam’ means ‘field’ – so it may be inferred further that the use of the word here relates to the matter of ‘bloodlines’ and genes of the Watchers. . .

Incidentally, the only other time this name occurs in the Bible is in the birthplace of the father of the prophet Samuel; 1Samuel 1.1 states “Now there was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim, of the hill-country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu“, etc. . .

Further links between these semantic clusters are to be found within the pages of the Bible; for example, in 2Kings 17, in the 12th year of Ahaz king of Judah, the king of Assyria finds cause to invade the land, besieging Samaria (‘little Sumer’) for three years then taking Israel into captivity in Assyria (2Ki17.5-6). The narrative states this is part of YHVH’s divine punishment of the Hebrew peoples;

For so it was, that the children of Israel had sinned against the Lord. And walked in the statutes of the heathen, whom the Lord cast out from before the children of Israel, which they had made. And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the Lord their God, and they built them high places in all their cities, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city.

And they set them up images and groves in every high hill, and under every green tree” (2 Kings 7.7-10).

And the third hill-top site Balaam visits is the ‘top of Peor, that looketh towards Jeshimon’, (or the ‘desert of Judah’), at Numbers 23.28. This is stated as the place where Moses is laid to rest in the earth.(Num.34.6).

After these various journeys Balaam and his companion build an altar and sacrifice someanimals to YHVH. Balaam speaks of the blessed nature of Israel, which angers Balak, who then tells Balaam to leave and go home, though “I had thought to promote thee to great honour, but the LORD hath kept thee back from honour” (24.11). But Balaam asserts he spoke as he was directed by the Lord; moreover, he says, ‘there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall arise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth… And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also, and Israel shall do valiantly”. . . (Num 24.17-18)

Seir, for instance denotes the presence of intense negative emotion, and unreasoning violence, or ‘horrible’ characteristics (, and was home to the Edomites, the bloodline tribe of the Herodian family. (In fact the Hebrew word ‘seirim’ mans a specific type of desert-dwelling ‘hairy’ or ’bristly’ demon)… in the Old Testament the Horites of Mount Seir are destroyed by YHVH, at Deuteronomy 2.22, to be heard of no more – thus confirming the ‘222’ encoding of the Bible appearing to be concerned with the negative bloodlines and peoples. . . the book of Genesis states at 32.2/36.8 that Mount Seir was adopted as a homeland by Esau, the vengeful brother of Jacob who became the ‘father’ of the Edomites;from which came the Herodian lineage (also called the Idumeans).

This speech depicts the destruction of several of the regions peopled by the lines of Cain etc, ie is foretelling their eventual defeat, and the ultimate obsolescence of the Anunnaki.

He continues and brings in a people associated by some with the Nephilim bloodlines; the tribe of Amalek, possibly a derivation of Molech the Canaanite god who demanded the sacrifice of children in the fire– the name means ‘king’, though the tri-consonantal root m-l-k as used in the Bible and Hebrew means ‘messenger’, particularly celestial messenger, (as Jesus refers to John the Baptist in Matthew 11.10).

However, this terrible practice was followed by some of the Israelites at certain points in the period covered by the Books of Kings, leading to divine punishment; in fact, it is possible that king Solomon put ‘children through the fire’ in this way, when under the influence of his various wives(as seen at 1Kings 11.7).Balaam says of the tribe of Amalek;

And when he looked on Amalek, he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was the first of nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish forever /And he looked on the Kenites, and said, Strong is thy dwellingplace, and thou puttest thy nest in a rock

(Num 24.21)

 – the Kenites derived their name from that of the Cainites, as they were predominantly associated with metalwork, as were the descendants of Tubal-Cain, the offspring of Cain and ‘an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron’(Gen4.21). In so developing metal technologies and weapons of war Tubal-Cain made endemic the first murder, by his ancestor Cain of Abel.

So the entire passage of Balaam would appear to be concerned with the symbolism and associations of these places to the ‘bloodline’ tribes and religions which existed at that time. Balak is the son of Zippor, (Num23.18), his name the same as that of the wife of Moses (Zipporah; Exodus 2.21) which means; ‘bird’, or alternatively ‘doom’. The ‘bird’ aspect may be referential to the higher, celestial nature of the Anunnaki genetic lines. In further corroboration of these themes, the first child of Moses and Zipporah is named Gershom, at Exodus 2.22 (!), this name meaning ‘stranger is his name’.

²²And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom:

   for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land.

In the sense of ‘Watcher’ (or such), thus connecting the lineage of Mosesfurther with the concept of the ‘stranger’ (ie. as a hybrid celestial:human) as put forward particularly by Simon Peter, in the words of 1Peter, as we have already considered (on page 65).

And in support of the theme, the name of the sister of Moses, Miriam, may be taken to mean the sea, or more accurately ‘the bitter waters’; an apt summary of the celestial/ Sumerian bloodlines.

Thatthis place of pagan hilltop sites is the location of Moses’only experience of the holy land of Israel, and then of hisdeath and burial likewise may be said to link him and his bloodline in one way or another to those ofthe Watchers and Sumer of celestial/hybrid nature, toquite a degree. It is certainly possible that the Watchers, may be representative of the highest divinity, and stand separate from the Nephilim. There are no definitive answers to this. Questions of the morality of his ‘being’ are likewise a moredifficult subject than can be assumed by terms such as ‘good’ or ‘bad’. . .

As regards the wife of Moses, Zipporah, the daughter of Reuel  (Jethro), there are some interesting statements in the description of their lives which connect Moses and his wife, and king David, and the ‘mighty men of old’ and related bloodlines.So, we have seen how David was humiliated by Shimei (‘he who hears’) on the hillside when David and his men passed by (2Samuel 16.5-13) while facing defeat by the coup launched by David’s son Absalom; as the passage shows, hecasts dust and stones as well as angry words at David and his armed men;

And he cast stones at David and at all the servants of King David; and all the mighty

men were on his right hand and on his left.

⁷And thus said Shimei when he cursed, Come out, come out, thou bloody man, and

thou man of Belial. (Satan)*

The LORD hath returned upon thee all the blood of the house of Saul,  in whose stead

thou hast reigned; and the LORD hath delivered the kingdom into the hand of Absalom

thy son; and behold, thou art taken in thy mischief, because thou art a bloody man,

*although some critics maintain that ‘Belial’ simply means ‘worthlessness’ in Hebrew, it is used in the sense of Satan throughout the Bible such as 2Corinthians 6.15, and in a slightly different form of ‘Beliar’  (‘the lord of the forest’)is likewise a name for satan. Noticeable too is the link to the ‘guardian of the Cedar Forest’ in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the destructive and violent non-human servant of Enlil named Huwawa or Humbaba, and the source for the giant Hobabish (meaning ‘serpent’) in Near Eastern mythology such as the Book of Giants, originally from Iran but then spread widely through western and central Asia. The giants in question being the nephilim, or rephaim of the Book of Enoch and the Bible, the lineages of Cain, (born of Enki the serpent-god as the ‘walking’ serpent of Eden, in Jewish commentaries…)

A clear indication of potential hidden realities – though the relation of Shimei to the defeated family of Saul makes his words appear to be simply the head-strong result of high emotions.

One of David’s relatives, Abishai (16.9) asks to punish these words calling the ‘king of Israel’David a man of Belial, and ‘thou bloody man’. . . But David says ‘what have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah?’, by which he means of his aunt’s sons they are men of violence; ‘so let him curse, because the Lord hath said unto him, Curse David. . . Let him alone, and let him curse, for the LORD hath bidden him’.(2Sam16.11)

This small verse gives support to David knowing both the bloodiness of his heredity, and the inner pressure exerted by the higher dimensions on his character. He is fully conscious of his own (lifelong) battle between duty, ambition, and genetics. And yet at the end of his life he advises his son Solomon his promise of safety to Shimei will die with him(1Kings2.8-9); these are David’s last words, as he dies at 1Kings2.10.  Thus one of Solomon’s first acts as king of Israel is to demand of Shimei that he never passes from the boundaries of the capital city Jerusalem; and three years later he executes Shimei for what is a (technical) breach of his promise. (1Kings2.36-46).

Regarding the words of Shimei to David,  curiously Zipporah says much the same words to her husband Moses, when they are considering at what age to circumcisetheir son, while travelling back to Egypt(at Exodus 4.18-28). Yahweh (YHVH) tells Moses;

²²And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn. ²³And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me; and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. ²And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him (Moses).

²⁵Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.

²⁶So he let him go; then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.

²⁷And the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him. And Moses told Aaron all the words of the LORD who had sent him, and all the signs which he had commanded him.

An incredible passage, of many possible meanings; related most possibly to the question of the circumcision of infants within Egypt; having had adult circumcision performed on himself in Midian, Moses and wife and child journey to Egypt; where YHVH ostensibly seeks to kill Moses or the child on account of him not being circumcised, forcing Zipporah to quickly perform the action. Again, this seems confused somehow; because non-circumcision within Egyptwas acceptable, due to the persecution circumcised Hebrews suffered from the Egyptians..!

Again though, thesestrong words are thrown at Moses, as with David, with the appearance of being simply the result of high emotions – and yet they arecapable of having much greater depth attached to them if viewed from the perspective of the bloodline nature of Moses (and Zipporah), as being ‘compromised’ by the basest aspects of the ‘celestial’ genes; as the mighty men of old, and the numerous tribes, lineages and people related to them. Something we shall examine in the next section, on Moses and his depiction throughout history with horns.

To end this section, just a quick consideration of related Books within the Bible with aspects which bear relevance to this question, one which is by no means the most significant of the Bible, but of great interest nonetheless.

The Book of Job is another curious mixture ofdiscernible perspectives, in what is one of the OldTestament’s deepest books in terms of links and references to the cultures and eras of the Near East, particularly Sumer and it’s off-shoots… and as well as the focus of attention onthe nature and role of Satan in the opening chapters, there is in Ch.41.1-34  one of the longest passages on the ‘nature’ of Leviathan (or Satan) in the entire Bible. Indeed ‘Job’ the name has the Hebrew meaning of ‘the adversary’, a clear link to the original word or role of  ‘sheitan’,while obviously there are several ways of viewing the meaning of the name considering the narrative of the book, one of the richest books in the Bible for allusions and links to many of the other cultures and mythologies of the Near East of antiquity.

That Simon Peter calls himself and his family ‘strangers’  in a strange land extends beyond them beingoutside the borders of Israel, to their being actually different to the majority of humanity. . .  as shown by using the phrase in the opening words of his first book;


Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.

Few of the books of the New Testament make such frequent allusions to the idea of being ‘a stranger’, as Peter draws attention to the possibilities raised by he and his relatives inner natures/’destinies’… much as first Lamech, Moses, then king David faced up to their precarious circumstances, and tried to balance the scales between their destinies, and their (pre-determined?)fate. There is one more point of connection between these inter-related areas of meaning, and this is one that combines some of thesecentral sub-texts with encoded numbers, in the following way.

The blessing  we see Jesus conveys upon Simon Peter at MATTHEW 16.18 (φ) is linked to other passages concerning the biblical concept of ‘satan’ (as ‘divine prosecutor’) – something Simon Peter is effectively described as throughout the New Testament. – in a quite extraordinary way.

In the Old Testament, we see the first use of the word satan, meaning adversary, or (divine)‘prosecutor’ is placed at Numbers 22.22 when YHVH sends an angel of the Lord to block the path of the unwilling prophet of Israel;

NUMBERS 22.22: 

And God’s anger was kindled because he went; and the

angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary (satan)

against him.

After Moses is named, (Exodus 2.10), he then kills an Egyptian, and is forced to flee Egypt (Exodus2.11-21),

EXODUS 2.22;

And she bare him (Moses) a son, and he called his name Gershom,

for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land.

Now in ISAIAH22.22 the ‘lord of hosts’ YHVH says the following of Eliakim who he establishes as ruler of Jerusalem and Judah;

And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder;

So he shall open and none shall shut; And he shall shut, and none

shall open.

This is ostensibly a prediction of the future role of Jesus – and yet the idioms of language used are an exact match to Matthew 16.18 (φ)regarding Peter;

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven…

– thus  the two passages relate in oblique manner. The mention of the words ‘rock’ (symbol of stony ground/ desert, and satan),  and ‘hell’ in Matthew 16.18 are relevant to the theme under consideration. Additionally the word ‘key’ in both passages isclearly not coincidental; and indeed, the Keys of St Peter hold further metaphoric meanings related to cosmic number and symbolism, as we shall examine in the next section. The role of Peter as a gate-keeper is apposite in that two of the earliest representations of ‘celestial gatekeepers’ are Ningiszida and Dumuzi in the Middle Babylonian story ‘the legend of Adapa’, portrayed as the two door-keepers of the celestial palace of Anu (linked by some to the two angels who escort Enoch up through the heavens to see the face of God in the Book of Enoch. . .)

And thus these two deities were representative of both the heavens and the subterranean underworld; the latter perhaps as deities of fertility. This duality is suggested in the Bible by the words of Jesus relating the ‘powers’ granted to Peter in both heavens and earth. In a curiously circular manner the French writer Rene Guenon in 1962 in his work ‘Symbols of Sacred Science’ related the dual-role nature of Simon Peter to the Roman/Greek god Janus, the deity with two faces. This came from his being the god of the cusp of the New Year, thus being situated at a point where he looked both forwards to the coming year, and back to the preceding one.

So Guenon writes (p.170); “Janus, under the aspect (of the two solstitial gateways) is the janitor who opens and closes the doors of the annual cycle, with the keys which are one of his principal attributes; and we recall in this connection that the key is an axial symbol”.

He goes on to link Janus with the two biblical Saint Johns, saints of the two solstitial feasts of December and June, without perhaps noting the extensive symbolism within the narrative of Simon Peter linking him similarly to Oannes/ Janus. The identity of Janus stemmed originally from the Babylonian deity Oannes, the god we have seen to have extensive links with the Sumerian deity Enki/Ea, and like Enki was depicted as a hybrid fish/human.

This again parallels quite closely the depiction of Simon Peter as a fisherman, a ‘hybrid’ being, and a ‘gatekeeper’ as the Keys of St.Peter, and many references to ‘heaven and earth’ in Peter’s narrative imply.

And there is another passage; at 2Samuel 22.2, immediately after the description of 4 different ‘giants’, namely ‘Ishbi-benob’, ‘which was of the sons of the giants’ (ie, bloodlines of the nephilim) ‘Saph’ of the Philistines, the unnamed Philistine  brother of Goliath, and a giant of ‘Gath’, (2Samuel21.16-22), the book describes the words of king David; ‘in the day that the Lord had delivered him out of the hands of his enemies’ (the giants, Philistines, Saul etc);

2Samuel.22.2;        “And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer”

which affirms the faith David has in God, as well as raisingthe theme of rocks or foundation- which link additionally to Simon Peter, the city of Tyre (meaning ‘rock’), and Satan; with the theme of the‘celestial’/human bloodlines of the giants acting as a backdrop to the story.(And coincidentally after Isaiah 22.22, the next chapter, Isaiah 23 is concerned with describing YHVH’s punishment of Tyre for seventy years in some detail).

The association of the many chapters and verses centred around 222 etc to that of the ‘satans’, and related bloodlines, is confirmed to be a conscious encoding by another example, this time of the wisdom of Solomon, (as already seen, he and his father David, relatives and several wives were shown to be related in significant ways to the ‘celestial’ hybrid bloodlines of Sumer and the Anunnaki, including but not necessarily of, the nephilim);

 Proverbs 2.22; “But the wicked shall be cut off from the earth, and the transgressors shall be rooted out of it”.

Incredibly this theme has further links; in the fifth book of the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible which are traditionally ascribed to the authorship of Moses, is a description again of four or five of the ‘tribes of the giants’; from Deuteronomy 2.19-23;

And when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, distress them not, nor meddle with them: for I will not give thee of the land of the children of Ammon any possession; because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession.

That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummins;

A people great, and many, and tall as the Anakims; but the Lord destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead;

²²As he did to the children of Esau, which dwelt in Seir, when he destroyed the Horims from before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their steadeven unto this day;And the Avims which dwelt in Hazerim, even unto Azzah, the Caphtorims, which came forth out of Caphtor, destroyed them, and dwelt in their stead.

So this collection of peoples listed, including Deuteronomy 2.22 is effectively a list of the tribes of the giants (ie. descendants of the Nephilim)- the Zamzummim are another form of Rephaim, as are the Anakim, all of who live in or around the nation of Israel/ Canaan/ Lebanon at that time. And most relevantly in this respect, these bloodlines or tribes are shown to exist after the ‘purging’ of the ‘sons of the gods and their monstrous offspring’ which was the reason for the Flood..! Because if the Ammonites called them the Zamzummin, they existed after the Ammonite tribe came into being; and the Ammonites, as mentioned, are descendants of Lot and his daughters!  Lot being Abraham’s nephew who escaped the conflagration of the destruction of the sinful peoples of Sodom and Gomorrah only through the benevolence of his patriarch uncle, while his wife didn’t survive– thus providing one explanation ofhow the ‘dark’ bloodlines are shown to have survived the bottleneck of the Flood when only Noah and his family (eight people precisely according to Simon Peter in his book 1Peter3.20).

Indeed the short verse of 1Peter3.18-20 is concerned with the same issues of the ‘captive’ bloodlines;

“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he

might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the

Spirit:By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited

in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls

were saved by water” (. . !)

As we have noted, the powerful yet ‘cruel’ Nahash was the king of the Ammonites, and also an ‘ally’ of king David; just some of the many subtle links which exist between these various strands within the Old Testament.

 In fact there is some debate in biblical hermeneutics circles as to how characters like Goliath, or Og, etc etc happen to be post-Deluge figures. From this website’s researches it can be seen to be quite clearly one of the key sub-texts of the Bible.

Simon Peter and other religions of the Near East.

Simon Peter has some highly interestingconnections to other religions than Christianity from both his life-story/ narrative, and also the symbolism attached to his being a ‘gate-keeper’ to ‘heaven’, as suggested by ‘the keys of St Peter’.  A symbol with quite an extensive amount of semantic and geometric associations throughout history.

[So the role of gate-keeperas just seen, was first mythologised in Sumer by the pair of celestialbeings Ningishzida and Dumuzi, (both deities associated with the underworld, fertility, growth and healing) in the ‘Myth of Adapa’, which has several similarities with the narrative of Enoch, a fact noted by Sitchin among others in ‘Divine Messengers…’

The keys  are most often depicted in a geometric fashion with keys crossed. Geometrically the keys of St Peter have found echoes in the work of artists such as Leonardo DaVinci, and Durer too – possibly because of the ubiquity of the axis with crossing sine-waves in mankind’s consciousness. For example the symbols the Rod of Asclepius, and the Caduceus are closely related – as is the Nahash symbol made by Moses; this can be said to resemble an X-Y axis with a sine-wave crossing along it, if the symbol is turned around 90° from vertical to horizontal.

The Keys of Peter also resemble in a slightly stylized form the two serpents intertwining of the Sumerian symbol of the afore-mentioned Ningishzida, as shown in the depiction of him in the Libation of Gudea image at the fourth image shown, as the serpent in centre, (with two winged dragons holding what might considered to be gate-posts*; thus pointing to the celestial‘ gate-keeper’ role, as well as that of fertility god, and chthonic god of the underworld…); as in the lines of the sine-wave crossing an axis, the double-helix of DNA, the Rod of Asclepius which forms the modern symbol for medical matters, as shown on an ambulance door-panel here; etc.The latter image here, from the Adda Seal c.900Bce, Enki the water/serpent deity of Sumer who created plants, animals, and humanity through genetic interventions in the ‘Creation chamber’, shows fish within water coming from his shoulders; and again, the similarities to the twin-helix of DNA are apparent, an amazing coincidence considering his role as ‘chief scientist’ in Sumerian mythology as mentioned.

*this interpretation is raised in the study ‘Gudea and Ningishzida – A Ruler and his God’, Ludek Vacin.To briefly look at Ningishzida as a possible ‘mythic’ precursor of St Peter, we shall quote the words of Ludek Vacin describing one aspect of his various roles, found in many Sumerian and Akkadian hymns, narratives, poems and songs;

“The god’s role in the Netherworld is explicitly mentioned in Ningiszida A; ‘King, you who carry out commands in the Netherworld, you who carry out it’s business’, and in the fragmentary lines 64-75 of ‘Ningishzida’s Journey to the Netherworld’ which refers to insignia of Ningishzida’s office, and to his office of a Netherworld Chamberlain itself. His infernal character is also reflected in the overall imagery of hymns Ningiszida A-D showing him as a warlike, frightening deity associated with snakes, magic and flood-waves. Moreover he appears as a Netherworld deity (along with Dumuzi)in the Death of Gilgames, in the version from Meturan relating that the words of dead Gilgames shall be as weighty as those of Ningiszida and Dumuzi once the hero becomes a governor of the Netherworld entitled to pass judgements and render verdicts…”

Keeping in mind the additional role of Ningishzida as a primary fertility deity, and ‘heavenly Chamberlain to the throne’, this perspective is perhaps a good one to view the ‘celestial’ role of St Peter, in combining both his divine, and infernal characteristics as described by the Bible. Hence the several New Testament references of Jesus to St Peter’s authority in matters ‘on heaven, and on earth’, (Matt 16.18/ 18.18, etc) ie bridging both higher and lower dimensions… as well as the famous saying of Jesus;

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast younger, you girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest; but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not”. (KJV John 21.18).

As well as being germane to Peter’s character and destiny or fate as a martyr, one perspective holds that this verse refers to an intrinsic part of life, in the gradual transition of the self as it moves from youth to adulthood to old age; much as an arrow rises and then falls in it’s natural arc.And the symbolism of what is a cord, or a belt is such that it may also be interpreted to refer to celestial spheres, such as Orion’s Belt, or the Kuiper Belt etc. It may, however, also be a judgement upon Peter himself, as a ‘satan’ the Bible surreptitiously indicates he belongs to the lineages of…

Confirmation of some of the associations between Simon Peter and the ‘dark’ bloodlines comes from a usage of imagery centred upon the belt in a section of the Bible we have already studied in part ii, ie the events centred around king David and his family. So at the end of his life David instructs his son Solomon with regard to certain people of the royal court. Having noted David’s despair at (being the same as) the ‘sons of Zeruiah’ – his cousins – born to apparently innate violence and bloodthirstiness (much like Peter’s despair at being one of the ‘strangers’ he refers tonumerous times), the king instructs his son with regard to the captain of his forces, Joab, one of his cousins;

Moreover you know yourself what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, and what he did to the two captains of the hosts of Israel, unto Abner, and unto Amasa, whom he slew, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war upon his girdle that was about his loins, and in his shoes that were on his feet”. (1Kings 2.5).

Thus associating the two, Joab and Simon Peter on some level, one which Peter stoops to when he pulls his sword as Jesus is arrested, cutting off the ear of a Roman soldier, (thus causing Jesus to then heal the wound, and rebuke Peter). Feet are associated with the lowly, or lowest levels, as in the dream of Daniel regarding a statue with a head of gold, chest of silver, stomach of bronze, legs of iron, and feet of clay. (Daniel 2.32-33).

In Deuteronomy 32.35 YHVH says; “To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them shall make haste”… pointing to the punishments YHVH intends for the base and violent- and of course Peter the name is connected to the lowest part of the body, as ‘podiatry’, ‘pedal’, ‘pedestrian’, ‘quadruped’ etc show. All stem from the Latin ‘pedale’ meaning of the foot, which stemmed from the PIE root *ped, meaning foot. Peter’s name came from Greek ‘Petros’ meaning rock, after being named ‘Kephas’ by Jesus – yet the meaning remains the same of the lowest level of reality, on the energy-matter continuum. The term ‘satan’ itself meant, as we have seen, a stone in the road of the wrong-doer, an obstacle, adversary or opponent.And indeed, Deuteronomy 32 refers to the subject at hand in verses 32.31-2 immediately before verse 35;

For their rock is not as our Rock (YHVH), even our enemies themselves being judges. For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah; their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter”.


So these pictorial representations of intertwined serpents and similar all have levels of meaning, from the atom, to DNA, to energy, and the human being where the bilateral symmetry of the body is centred around the vertical axis of the spine. As such both the keys of St Peter and the entwined serpents may be said to symbolize the geometries of the hexagon, which as we have seen is a central aspect of the Vesica, and related symbols.  The hexagon, as we have seen, is closely connected to Pi, Phi, the irrational roots of 2,3 and 5, and other values within the extensive field of cosmic number. Note the hexagonal geometries shown within the ambulance symbol above, similar to the Keys of St Peter in portraying a central heaven–earth axis, with sine-waves to either side which cross at a point on the axis. The inverted cross symbolizes the death of Peter when he was crucified upside down, according to historical writings by Tertullian, Origen, and Jerome and others in the3rdand 4thcenturies, at his own request.

Similar geometries are intrinsic to symbols concerned with depicting atomic energies, such as the pathways of electrons around the nucleus, or in symbols of radioactive materials.

With regard to the cultures which were the source of the entwined serpents, both early symbols were said to originate from ‘cosmic beings’ involved with the transmission of ‘celestial wisdom’ to mankind, to help with the creation of civilization, both in Sumer and China, (as well as Egypt and India)… and incidentally, both were concerned with genetics and questions of DNA, characterised by the two intertwining ribbons which constitute it’s form. The Chinese deity considered to have been the source of this in pre-history was FuHsi, (or Fuxi);

“The great heavenly Fuxi…in remote antiquity replaced Suirenshi (the legendary creator of fire) and became Emperor. His merits and achievements were great, he devised the eight tri-grams, invented writing, instituted marriage, and taught humankind to catch fish, grow plants, and keep animals”. Attributed to Gan Baozong, in the Tang Period (618-907).

According to tradition he had a snake’s body, and human head, but here is also a depiction of him as fully human (below right) –most depictions of him, and his paramour NaKua, (or Nuwa, or Nugua – related in all probability to the Proto-Indo-European root word ‘(s-)nego’ from which both Nagas, meaning ‘royal cobra’, and ‘snake’ both stemmed), do indicate their hybrid human and serpentine nature, as well as their representing cosmic forces such as Yin and Yang.Much like king Solomon and the Queen of Sheba represent solar and lunar, or male and female energies in the alchemy of light, and life.

Depictions of FuHsi as human (right), and (left) with NaKua,from Astana Cemetary, 651Ad, Tan dynasty, Xiang Museum, China; and(centre) the Pakua, or Eight tri-grams, believed to have been introduced by FuHsi.

And this is not the only existing links the mythology of Simon Peter has to the Nagas and related mythology throughoutother eras and religions of the Near East.

In the canon of Islam, Simon Peter is said to be the forbear of Narjis,said to be the Roman (slavegirl) mother of the Mahdi – the mystical 12th Imam who Shia Muslims expect to reappear towards the end of the world,as a Holy Messenger and guide.

The various myths of Narjis aver that she was a Roman noble/princess, inspired to follow behind the forces of the Papacyin their journey to fight in Holy Land in the crusades. Captured by Islamic forces, taken as a slave to Iraq – rescued/bought from slavery/ by righteous Imams (the family/ direct descendants of the Prophet Muhammed) who recognised her as highest of European stock-  descended from Caesar on her father’s side, and Simon Peter on her mother’s – so in effect, a Roman  princess.

(According to Wikipedia she is known by various additional names, foremost of whichis Anna; possibly a stem of Anu,the father of the Anunnaki, which is also the source for the name of Bethany in the Bible by which Mary Magdalene is known; the Beth/Houseof – Anu).

Proving her fidelity and devotion to  God in her words, she converted to Islam, and wasaccepted by the family of Al-Askari; married to Imam Hassan Al-Askari, the 11thImam (!)and gave birth to ‘the awaited holy spirit’, Al-Mahdi (the Guided One) as Shia texts say the Mahdi disappeared from the material world in line with Gods Will according to Islamic legend,and will reappear when needed at some crucial point in the future. This disappearance rather than death is called the Occultation- and is similar in nature to the highestbiblical characters Enoch and Elijah who were so righteous that they both ascended to heaven while still alive.(Genesis 5.24/2Kings 2.11)

If you examine the holy books, myths and legends of Indian history, thescriptures of both Brahmanism, and Buddhism , there are some moredetailed understanding/ division of the ranks of the Nagas in antiquity;

 World rule nagasmay be divided into 4 separate classes or levels; primitive dragons– Europe; spiritual Dragons – East primarily, which take on semi-human form; divine Dragons, ie. cosmic beings. (aliens?) seraphim? And lastly, (Supreme Divine Nagas) (Arch-Angels?). This categorisation belongs entirely to history though, and has no significance in interpreting the modern era; as Gurdjieff and Ouspensky stated many times, the lower, unconscious levelswithin society, (or the world, or life) have little idea of the aims of thehigher levels of consciousness, and may or may not know anything of higher matters. So it does provide a perspective for understanding some of the mechanisms of ‘divine’ influencing of the events of history, while making any further assumptions extremely difficult. The wisdom of Solomon(as reputedauthor) gives confirmation of thisin the Book of Proverbs;

Counsel is mine (YHVH’s), and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength. By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth” (Proverbs 8.14-16). Likewise Proverbs 21.2; “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water; he turneth it whithersoever he will”…

Now bearing this in mind, it becomes a little clearer how Narjis (or Narges Khatoun in some spellings) in the historicalmyths of Shia Islam fits into this categorisation. Considered by many Shias to be the mother of the 12th Imam – she has a detailed and complex ‘mythology’; (*the first Arabic writer to examine the life and character of Narjis was Al-Mas’udi, a historian, geographer and natural philosopher known as the ‘Herodotus of the Arabs’). Nowadays nearly all Twelvers accept the biography of Narjis as a Roman princess…

  – she is said to be a descendant of Simon Peter – one of the most clearlydual-naturedpositive/negative figures in the Bible; while this intrinsic dichotomy, or nature,appears to be reflected in the way that the Nagas are said to be sometimes dedicated to helping mankind, and at others completely uninterested in human agendas.This is mirrored in the narrative of the fiery serpents the Seraphim, who both torment and injure the Israelites in the wilderness of the desert (forcing Moses to create the brazen serpent the Nahash to heal their wounds somehow), and yet who also form a choir of angels singing hymns to the Lord in the highest dimensions..! Mirroring also the strange agenda of king Nahash who asked an eye of each of the inhabitants of Jabesh (1Samuel 11.1-2, and 12.12); possibly in the sense that Jesus said ‘If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out”. . !(meaning in other words, the spiritual should take precedence over the material…perhaps as a comment shortly after the Israelites demand of YHVH a king to lead and protect their nation at 1Samuel 8.4-22; itself a seemingly unavoidable progression considering the divine injunction they create and protect the state of Israel in the densely inhabited land of Canaan…)

Also considering much of the serpent/devil imagery and associations directed towards Peter by Jesus, the Roman princess aspect of Narjis locates her within the celestial bloodlines of Sumer as described in the Bible, flowing down to the lineages of royalty in the Near East, Peter and Rome.

So Simon Peter fits perhaps into the European Nagas; reflected by his travelsand final destination, Rome. Also by his end (upside down crucifixion, like the Nehushtan)and his repeated comments re himself and his family/descendants as ‘strangers‘…and by Jesus saying – “I have given you to Satan, Simon, that he may sift you…” (ie. ‘test his inner being’, rather than to punish or destroy).

Rome – functions in the Bible as a metaphorical location akin to Babylon, so that it represents  equally;  empire/ slavery, to possessions, or pleasure, or self, or genes/enslaved to the negative bloodlines, of Cain/ ‘strangers’/or possibly Nagas.

Indeed the slave-trader who brought her to Samarra Iraq (from wherever she and other European ‘camp-followers’ were taken captive) had the name Umar bin Yazid Al-Nakhas.

This contains not one but twovery significant references; the Yazidi tribe of central Asia, as reported by Gurdjieff in Meetings with Remarkable Men,are sometimes considered, or reputed to be ‘devil-worshippers’, (although the true perspective is uncertain as their culture is a closely guarded and secretive one). And secondly, the name Al-Nakhas (Al=the son of-), raises the (etymological) clue again of the Nagas/the Nahash…

Additional clues include her alternative names of Anna, (ie related of the Anunnaki), Magdalena, (symbol of the ‘dark’ celestial lineage redeemed by virtue, and via ‘Bethany’ connected to the ‘house of Anu’), and Liliana (related again to Anu, but primarily to the Near Eastern deity Lilith, said to be a slightly negative or ‘night-time’ aspect of Ishtar, the great Near Eastern goddess of femininity and child-birth. Like ‘Magdalene’ Liliana has positive/negative echoes in the ‘Song of  Solomon’ where the narrator calls herself ‘the lily of the valley/the Rose of Sharon’. Also saying ‘I am black, but comely’, relating to the metaphorical meanings around ‘darkness’, as well as the (imbalanced) powers of the sun which characterize all these bloodlines’ genetics. The Black Madonnas (or ‘vierges noir’) have been venerated in Europe, and across the world as symbols of the Holy Virgin and female divinity since the 4th century Ad, with links to the pre-Christian goddesses of Ishtar and the Near East also.

The negative aspect of Lilith links Narjis to that of the ‘Roman’ bloodline of Simon Peter in it’s lower aspects, as we have seen.

Moreover, according to the story as told she is bought for 220 gold pieces (half of the440harmonic; presumably her husband-to-be, the11th Imam, represents the other half of the cos#,from the conjoining of which comes the cosmic result, the birth of the Mahdi) – and she mentions at the same time the words ‘I would not be your slave if you were King Solomon himself’ to a different bidder. As we have noted Solomon has close connections to Cos# and gold in the Old Testament, and is the first character linked to the number 666 in the entire Bible, this being the amount of gold given to Solomon. (apart from Ezra 2.13, when listing the children of Israelites who have foreign, pagan mothers, taken as wives by the Hebrews when in the Babylon Captivity. . .therefore being children of the Sumerian ‘celestial’ lineages  such as the nephilim).

Both his name – and Gold – and 666 have metaphorical connections both to the sun and to the serpent. (666 being the # of male solar power).And of course the meeting of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (meaning ‘seven’)is presented as an allegory of the alchemical conjoining of male (solar) and female (lunar) energies, within the ‘process’ of the octave.

Equally relevantly considering the serpent /Nahash strands of symbolism in the Bible is the Greek word Ophitae* who revered the serpent as the ‘symbol of divine wisdom’ (

– the shipments Solomon is said in the Bible to have received of these vast amounts of gold whenbuilding the Temple in Jerusalem are stated to have come from Ophir; a place-name which has never been satisfactorily linked by biblical scholars to any town, or country throughout the world. We have already noted the meaning of the word ‘ophite’ to mean ‘serpentine’ in our analysis of the events in David’s life in 2Samuel.

Thus the brief words of Narjisraise associations of King Solomon, cosmic#, gold, 666, serpent-wisdom,/’worship’, international exploration/trade networks, solar energy,light, the alchemy of male and female, and (the sacred geometry of) the Temple.*

*Zecharia Sitchin in ‘The Lost Realms’relates the name Ophir to its ‘reverse’, Peru, which was indeeda nation ‘blessed’ by incredible amounts of naturally occurring gold (and valuable tin) deposits, a characteristic which ledthe Spanish Conquistadores to commit the most abject of cultural and societal desecrations… whether trade routes existed between the Israel and Lebanon in these biblical times and Peru is uncertain, but cannot be discounted offhand; as we see elsewhere, Cornwall as a source of tin was visited in the second millennium Bce – and possibly earlier – by traders from the Mediterranean, and North African civilizations which required tin to complete the process of metallurgy producing bronze. Thus linking Cornwall with the Nahash (the Brazen Serpent created by Moses c.1400Bce) as symbol of ‘knowing secrets’ particularly concerned with the higher technologies of metal refinement and production in the ancient world… it is doubly fitting therefore that there are major world ’dragon’ or ‘serpent’-lines running from Cornwall to both the other side of England (the Michael and Mary lines), and to Israel (the Michael and Apollo lines). Something we examine in the next section, concerning the Ley-lines of England.

Narjis,blood-relation of Simon Peter, stands in the line of European Nagas – hence a slave…who through her efforts and moral struggles overcomes her negative side, (happily) fulfilling her positive potentials…

Indeed, in related etymology, the Arabic word for the bright star in the left ‘shoulder’ of Orion(called Bellatrix-The Huntress- in modern astronomy) is Najid (The Conqueress). In the sense of Nagas/Nahash as thepotential source of the consciousness and the ‘hunter’ bloodlines considered in the Simon Peter section above, this word relates many of the themes under consideration, and moreover to the Great Pyramid’s affinity/focus on Orion. As well as antiquity’s etymologicalsource for ‘Orion’ being said to be Ur-Anna, Sumerian for the Light of the Heavens, thus uniting several central themes -the light of stars and the Sun, the Anunnaki, the Nagas, Orion and the Great Pyramid!

All these legends and myths and references point to the existence of a number of complex and deep inner narratives in history that are a/on a plane above politics, and conventional history, and b/ therefore not easily unravelled, or understood. . .

For example, from this line of the 11th Imam, Al-Askari and his wife Narjis, grew the Muslim Sufi brotherhood of the Naqshbandi* – the ‘symbolmakers’  or ‘signmakers’/engravers…(possibly similar to concepts of the Logos, which creates reality at the highest energetic levels of the cosmos, as well as containing concepts of the ‘imprint of the Lord’ on the heart of the aspirant sufi or seeker).The Sufi saint Baha’uddin Naq’shband being in the lineage of Sayyid Ali Akbar, the 2nd son of Al-Askari and Narjis providesanother etymological link to Nagas/ cosmic#. For example, the king of Ammon -Nahash– enters the biblical narrative at 1Samuel 11.1 –  this links with broadly with the 11th Imam Al-Askari and his wifeNarjis, and their 11th generation descendant Bauh’uddin Naq’shband Bukhari and the subsequent Nashqbandi Sufi brotherhood. Bauha’uddin lived from 1318-1389 CE in Bukhara, Uzbekistan mostly. Another coincidence is the common belief that the original sufi order which coalesced around Baha’uddin was of an Iranian, or Khurasanian character as it leads towards central Asia – the latter name meaning ‘where the sun arrives from’ or ‘the Eastern Province’ of ancient Persia… a further coincidence is that the Naqshbandi have a canon of Eleven Principles, or ‘the rules or secrets’ of the order which all adherents must learn and follow as spiritual exercises and guides in life (number 10 of which is ‘awareness of numbers’…). J.G.Bennett, the follower of Gurdjieff’s teachings, and in later life a writer on extensively related subjects mentioned the many connections existing between Gurdjieff’s life-story and the order’s history and teachings; the Bokharian dervish ‘Boga-Eddin’ in Beelzebub’s Tales to his Grandson is of course Bauha’uddin but with the ‘h’ in his name pronounced differently ! This is mentioned in Bennett’s ‘Masters of Wisdom’, published in 1995.

The grave of Narjis still exists today, resting besides that of her husband the 11th Imam, as well as his father Al-Naqi(‘the distinguished’), who wasthe Tenth Imam – at the revered Al-Askari shrine at Sammara, in Iraq.


This unusual or unexpected artistic form was a common-place of art depicting Moses in the Middle ages. This is saidto have been not through the wish to indicate hidden ‘devil’-related aspects of Moses’ character, but the result of the words used in the 4th century Latin Vulgate translation of the Hebrew Bible created by St Jerome;

(left) The most famous depiction of this is the statue of Moses, with two (small) horns on his forehead, by the great Italian artist Michelangelo, done in 1515. The statue is now to be found at the church of San Pietro Ad Vinculi (St Peter in chains) in Rome.  (Attribution; Wikimedia, Public Domain).

The Bible describing Moses’ appearance when he received the Tablets of the Ten Commandments from the Lord on Mount Sinai used the word – qaran – an ambiguous interpretation, as’qeren’ means ’emitting rays’ or ‘shining’ as well as horns… (Hebrew /Arabic words have a three consonant root/ stem (ie.q-r-n) which the two vowels added then create the finer meanings). St Jerome translated it as horns instead of emitting light from his face. (Exodus 34.29-35). So brightly does the face of Moses shinelight that the elders of Israel make a vail for him to wear when he comes down from the mountain-top!

“And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone; and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him (YHVH)” (Exod.34.35)

The associations of light surrounding the face and head of ‘enlightened’ individuals are frequent throughouthistory, and gave rise to the tradition of representing saints with a halo.

And yet this ambiguity of meaning may not be so clear when the subject is examined closely…as theoffspring of the Anunnaki/Watchers/Nephilim/Rephaim were said to have white hair and skin that ‘shone like the Sun’, as well as eyes which were blue…much like Noah in Enoch and various Hebrew texts of antiquity within the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls was described.

In the Book of Genesis, when bringing the Ten Commandments down the mountain, having received them ‘from the Lord’, the face of Moses similarly shines with light. Moreover he has many associations with the Nahash/Nagas/Seraphim,performs several miracles involving serpents, and is connected by birth and circumstance to the ‘celestial’ bloodlines …as we shall see in this section..!


In the Michelangelo statue – his eyes look to be ‘possibly’ clear blue (ie balanced towards the reptilian ) and his hair and beard are ‘serpentine’… additionally his feet appear to be ‘cloven’ slightly – so it appears Michelangelo was aware of the esoteric nuances of the narrative; for an orthodox Catholic understanding in 15th century Italy would never have considered Moses to be linked in any way to the bloodlines of the ‘sons of the gods’ mentioned in Genesis 6.1-4

The 19th and 20th centuries saw the (re)discoveries of the ancient world’s first true civilization, that of Sumer, as well as the following Mesopotamian civilizations of Akkadia, Babylon, and the Assyrian empire.And in many, or all of the thousands of artistic depictions of the ‘tribe of the Anunnaki’ – the ‘gods’ as theywere called, or as possibly, ‘higher cosmic beings’ – they werealways identified as such by the wearing of – horns, orhorned head-wear. No human ruler, no matter how powerful –  Hammurabi, Ashurbanipal, Nebuchadnezzar – and related to the gods by part of their name, was ever depicted wearing the Anunnaki head-wear, even if shown with, or alongside, other symbols related to the Anuna, such as in the third picture below, of the Babylonianruler Hammurabi, the instigator of the great law-codes, receiving his kingship from Shamash, circa1750Bce in Babylon. The fourth image is of an Anuna deity portrayed in a representation of the Tree of Life, widespread throughout Mesopotamia for thousands of years; in this instance at the NW Palace of Ashurnasirpal II, 883-859 Bce, Nimrud.

Sumerian creation myths set the narrative for millennia that the Anuna were responsible for the (genetic) creation of mankind, by the ‘interleaving’ of their celestial ‘substance’ with early forms of human predecessors; hence in Genesis, (following on from Sumerian Creation myths), God takes a lump of clay and breathes life into it, making man a cosmic being of a mixture of the earth and the heavens; myths/stories in Sumer described the Birthing Room/laboratory of the chief scientist Enki, and the Heavenly Earth mother, Nin-Ti,the wife of Anu, the Father of the Heavens doing exactly this…So homo sapiens was created by the conscious mixing in the lab in various ways, and proportions, the heavenly DNA of ‘the gods’, and the earthly DNA of the humans.

In Samuel Noah Kramer’s translation of the Sumerian Creation of Man (p.69-70, Sumerian Mythology, 1961), the deity Enki narrates;

“O my mother, the creature whose name thou hast uttered, it exists,

Bind upon it the. . . of the gods;

Mix the heart of the clay that is over the abyss

The good and princely fashioners will thicken the clay;

Thou, do thou bring the limbs into existence,

Ninmah will work above thee,

(goddesses of birth) will stand by thee. . .

O my mother, decree thou the new-born’s fate,

Ninmah will bind upon it the . . . of the gods,

. . . as man . . .”

The full homo sapiens being was created with three centres; physical,mammalianand intellectual. The Anunnaki infusionof ‘celestial’ genes largely gave proto-human groupings,the hominids etcetera, an advanced fore-brain capacity, whilst also– theoretically – adding a strongly ‘reptilian’ genetic element, this being the nature of the Anunnaki as shown by depictions of ‘hybrid’ deities  such as Enki being part ‘serpent’/ piscine (ie, having scales) in form… this potentially describes the’fall of man’ – in the completion of homo sapiens’ over a long period of time c.75-35,000 years ago, the Adama was possibly made further reptilian,(besides the existing inner,reptilian brain system) adding a level of wisdom based around self-awareness, survival questions, and technologies and crafts concerned with such issues, such as complex navigation, as well as‘abstract’ questions such as understanding mankind’s place in the cosmos, and the earth’s place within the planets and the stars.

*Later more recent Anunnaki-homo sapiens ‘matings’ of the Watchers led to imbalances in bloodlines such as the Nephilim, as described in Genesis 6.1.                 

The offspring of such liaisons, from the males of the ‘sons of the gods’ and  ‘the daughters of men’ led  to the Nephilim, a race of ‘giants’, rapacious and predatory. It is this lineage that was represented by the son of Adam and Eve, Cain,then Lamech,Tubal-Cain, Nimrod (the ‘mighty hunter before the Lord’ Gen.10.8-9),who the Book of Genesis states “And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah”; ie connecting all the Mesopotamian culturesin what is a correct depiction of historic events occurring from circa 2100Bce onwards until 600Bce. . . and furthermore has additional significance in outlining the diffusion of the bloodlines of Sumer.

Sitchin proposes that this genetic-stream was the result of the following; after the creation of the Adama,(c100,000 -75,000 years ago(!), either in the highlands of E.Africa, or towards the Persian Gulf.If the King Lists of Sumer are considered as accurate and not symbolic in the numbers given, the process may have taken even longer).

The Anunnaki ruled humanity as it’s ‘parents’ – the pre-diluvian King Lists of Sumer, most famously WB-62 kept at the Ashmolean museum in Oxford, are a reflection of this, with theextended life-spans of the Anunnaki making them appear as immortal to humans; hence the seemingly impossible lengths of thelives of the Kings at that time, such as reigns of 21,600. (The heavenly time-cycle of Niburu, 3,600 years, constituted a celestial ‘year’ ie complete periodic orbit of the sun and the solar system).

In the Bible this is reflected by the extended life spans of Enoch,Methuselah,Lamech,Noah and so on, less than the Anunnaki,and more than humans, at around 500-900 years each.

At some point before the Deluge, according to Sitchin, the situation for the Anunnaki younger generation was that they were 600 on Earth, and 300 or so on the circling ‘heavenly station’ – the Igigi, ‘those who turn’. But they were nearly all male, which led to problems; the Anunnaki were a tribe, as the Greek gods, and indulged in all the behaviours and passions of humans… but not in riotous self-will as the Greek pantheon of gods often displayed. Obedience to the mores of the heavens, and the leadership of the unyielding ruler of the tribe, Enlil, was a constant. Even his elder brother Enki, though marginally less important position-wise due to different mothers, was obedient to the overall ‘commander’ of Earth as Enlil was called. He, and all the Anuna have to plead, reason with, and cajole (!) Enlil to forgive Enki’s ruse which allowed mankind, through Utnapishtim, to survive the Deluge, ordained by Enlil in the council of the gods.

And the events leading up to the Deluge, as stated in Genesis, were that of the problems created on earth by the depredations of the Nephilim ‘giants’. As during the long period prior to c.10,800 Bce human women – the ‘daughters of men’ – had grown in beauty and attainments, and were seen to be capable of reproduction with the Anunnaki males (ie the marriage of genes could beachieved not in methods of genetic reproduction in the ‘laboratory’, as Enki and Nin-Ti had created humans, but in physical relations between male and female). And this was the problem; the resultant offspring were not only not within celestial law, but gross andimbalanced beings – ‘giants’,in the words of the Bible, as well as other sources such as the Book of Enoch, which some scholars estimate was the source for the section in Genesis 6.1-4.

This narrative is supported by the presence of parts of the book of Enoch at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1947; these (sadly somewhat decayed and physically ‘disorganised’) Aramaic texts dating back to the pre-Christian era contained several parts of the Book of Enoch. Later texts found in Iran and  China (!) of  the Manichean Book of Giants (extant in 221 Ad) likewise contain the same myths and narratives… But 1Enoch is very possibly as old if not older than the Book of Genesis, as Genesis telescopes the extensive events and details of Enoch into a few short verses.*

*in fact in his introduction to the Book of Enoch (standard version,2015), Dr J.Winter states that not only did the Qumran scrolls discoveries provide authentic evidence of Enoch pre-dating the New Testament, but also that there are many examples of language used by Jesus which are also used in the Book of Enoch. Showing that Jesus was very possibly aware of, andapproved of the canonicity (and contents) of the book. It was in the 2nd and 3rd centuries when it’s apocryphal nature (‘hidden’ secrets to be kept by the inner esoteric orders of the religions) made it appear to the fathers of the churchto be unconformable with the accepted Scriptures. Or perhaps an innate discreteness prompted them to remove the text from the mainstream; it’s theme of the ‘sons of gods’ creating bloodlines by mating with human women thus led to various religious leaders in Jewish and Christian religious groupings recommending it’s removal and destruction at that period – leading to a lacunae,in Christianity at least, which apart from little-known versions of the book existing in Ethiopic, and Greek/Byzantine versions was to last for another 1500 years.

The names of the offending Anunnaki – the ‘Watchers’ are listed in the Book of 1Enoch, portrayed as such as the ‘fallen angels’ of the Bible; as they deviated from the moral standards of the Anunnaki and  ‘fell’ into physical intercourse with human women, which created the line of the Nephilim.

But as we shall see, the line of Enoch,Lamech,Noah etc, while shown to be righteous, is also shown in many intentional respects to actually be possibly of the same compromised line..!

For example the Book of Jude in verses 14 and 15 writes that  Enoch was to ‘…execute judgement on all, to convict all who are ungodly’; as we have seen, this role can also be ascribed also to the ‘shaitan’, the judge or divine ‘adversary’/opponent of the Old Testament. (as in the book of Job/ Zechariah 3/ the narrative of Samson/ Simon Peter in ‘killing’ the couple for with-holding money from the church – and many other examples, such as an ‘angel of the Lord’ killing 70,000 Israelites as punishment because David took a census (possibly in circumstances created by YHVH!) – 2Sam.24.1/ 24.16/ 1Chron.21.1/21.15-16).

Likewise Enoch described the sins of the nephilim in giving mankind the ‘wisdom of the heavens’, and yet was the conduit for exactly the same in the pre– to post Deluge era. So too while delineating the genetic difference of the ‘sons of the Watchers’, both Enoch, the Bible, and other books point to the shared lineages/ characteristics between the lines of Seth and Cain. So in short, all the details added together combine to point to an incredible and complexnarrative, which only becomes discernible once the possibility of it is accepted.

As for the Deluge, thistook place a short time after these results of hybrid ‘marriages’ had changed the nature of the celestial influences on earth. What Sitchin argues is that the periodin question, circa 14,000 years ago, saw the end of the (50,000 year long) Ice-Age, across many parts of the globe. And thiscritical juncture coincided with the return of Niburu’s periodic orbit to this solar system led to changes in the Earth’s gravitational equilibrium; as such it was foreseen by them that the immense frozen polar ice caps would slip from their positions as they melted and thawed, while simultaneously being ‘worked upon’ by Niburu’s gravitational influence; thus causing massive tidal waves, and flooding –and hence, the Deluge.

True to his austere type, in Gilgamesh Tablet XI the Lord of the Earth, Enlil proposes to use this forthcoming cataclysm for unclear reasons to allow the destruction of all mankind…whereas Enki, being more tolerant, and as creator of mankind, feels obliged toensure the survival of a ‘seed’ of mankind. Thus he warns Utnapishtim of the coming Flood, and the decision of the councilof the gods to destroy/not forewarn mankind. In this act may be seen the survival not only of humanity, but equally importantly, the celestial bloodlines (whether as examples of ‘enhanced kings’ bridging the gap between humanity and the Anuna, or as Nephilim and their offspring, is unclear). In the Epic of Gilgamesh the Noah-figure, Utnapishtim and his wife are not necessarily the only surviving humans, otherwise they would be forebears of Gilgamesh himself, indeed it is rather that they are unique in being granted ‘immortality’, as representatives of humanity deserving such blessings. They remain after the Flood in the ‘far-away’ (a higher dimension, or realm of the spirit perhaps, as perfected souls), and are not described as the ‘parents of humanity from that point on’ as Noah and his wife are. Noah is likewise depicted as the ‘most virtuous’ man on Earth, while additionally, for some reason, the surviving lineages of Noah are portrayed as the only survivors of the Flood; (eight people as Peter writes in 1Peter3.20), perhaps to emphasize the (highly difficult) strands of the story concerning the (genetic) corruption of mankind and the Earth and YHVH’s purgatorial actions, in their allegorical details and consequences. But as we have seen, somehow the ‘giants’ of the bloodlines of Sumer survive and spread after the Flood into numerous tribes and strands, indicating that the story of Noah is indeed allegorical rather than simple record of events. Moreover that somehow by the time of the Sumerian lineages of the Hebrew peoples as exemplified by the lineages of the sons of Noah described in Genesis 10, and later by Abraham and his extended family, the bloodlines of the Anuna were part of the Israelites’ ancestry…

The themes of celestial-human hybrids exist equally in Gilgamesh, as the hero himself is the result of such a union, although this is presented as natural rather than sinful, as the nephilim are in the Bible (although Gilgamesh is presented as ‘heroic’ and yet repeatedly falling short in spiritual terms).

In Gilgamesh the other gods obeyed Enlil’s injunction to warn no-one; but when the storm (Adad the god of storms) hit their lands, and they rose safe above the cataclysm, they experienced deep shock and grief;

The Anunnaki lifted up the torches,

setting the land ablaze with their flare,

Stunned shock over Adad’s deeds overtook the heavens,

and turned to blackness all that had been light.

The…land shattered like a…pot

All day long the South Wind blew…

blowing fast,submerging the mountain in water,

overwhelming the people like an attack.

No one could see his fellow

they could not recognise each other in the torrent

The Gods were frightened by the Flood,

and retreated, ascending to the heaven of Anu.

The gods were cowering like dogs,crouching by the outer wall.

Ishtar shrieked like a woman in childbirth,

the sweet-voiced mistress of the Gods wailed;

“Alas, the olden days have turned to clay,

because I said evil things in the Assembly of the Gods!

How could I…order a catastrophe to destroy my people!!

The gods… were weeping with her,

the gods humbly sat weeping, sobbing with grief,

their lips burning,parched with thirst.

Six days and seven nights

came the wind and the flood,the storm flattening the land.

And so on.  In the Gilgamesh section we see how Enlil is incensed when he discovers the survival of the familyof Utnapishtim (Noah),and the seed of all living things; but Enki and the other gods and goddesses upbraid him,having realized their attachment to mankind and the Earth…whereupon Enlil acquiesces, and blesses Utnapishtimand his wife. Much as YHVH blesses Noah and mankind after the waters have receded upon Mount Ararat…

Yet as mentioned, it is not only ‘later’ that celestial lineages appear; it is apparent that Utnapishtim/Ziusudra/Noah themselves are of the gods/human bloodlines (as is Gilgamesh). Especially as they are rulers/guides of mankind. So Utnapishtim means ‘he of the place/born of the fish-people’;  Noah means ‘respite’; possiblyfrom the negative effects of being of the imbalanced bloodlines, or of God’s punishments of mankind,particularly the Deluge…and Ziusudra (the Babylonian/Assyrian version) may incorporatethe stem of the Ap-su, the ‘South’, or ‘abyss’, or ‘depths’, represented by Enki.And there are many indications in the works ofantiquity that their lineages are of the Anunnaki. In the Book of 1Enoch, in ch.106,(alsoin the Book of Noah 6.1-6), when the infant Noah is born to Lamech, (the grandson of Enoch) and his wife, his appearance terrifies his father; Lamech is convinced his son is not his, but a child of the Watchers – something his wife denies;

“And after some days my son Methuselah took a wife for his son Lamech, and she became pregnant by him and bore a son. And his body was white as snow, and red as the blooming of a rose, and the hair of his head and his long locks were white as wool, and his eyes beautiful. And when he opened his eyes, he lighted up the whole house like the sun, and the whole house was very bright. . .And he arose in the hands of the midwife, and opened his mouth and blessed the Lord of heaven.

And his father Lamech was afraid of him and fled, and came to his father Methuselah, and said; I have begotten a strange son, diverse from and unlike man, and resembling the sons of the gods of heaven; and his nature is different and he is not like us, and his eyes are as the rays of the sun, and his countenance is glorious. And it seems to me that he is not sprung from me but from the angels, and I fear that in his day a wonder may be wrought upon the earth.”

Much like Eve says in Genesis when pregnant with Cain, “I have gotten a man from the Lord” – something said in Jewish rabbinical texts to reflect the circumstance of the Serpent of Eden coupling with her while Adam was elsewhere in the Garden. (Ginzburg, Legends of the Jews, 1909). (while also a pun on the name of Cain which means to ‘possess’, or obtain, itself indicative of the rapaciousness of the nephilim bloodlines/ genetics).Agood point here might be to ask, how does Lamech know what a son of the gods of heaven looks like? It is a consistent theme in antiquity that at this period the Anuna and then their human-hybrid offspring were identified by ordinary humans as ‘celestial’, or hybrid beings. . . comments upon the Anuna, or later as the Babylonians called them, the Annedoti, were that they were distinctly and clearly non-human in appearance. Possibly as in the case of Noah they were distinguished by being strongly different as were the ‘heroes’, or ‘men of renown’ as Gen6.1-4 describes them, ie possessed of a marked vitality, hence ‘glowing as the sun’… This difference in appearance seems to have been continued on into the Hebrew religion’s texts and narratives, even though by the time of c.500Bce the ‘gods’ had all but left the planet, or ceased to be a material presence upon it, while those people experiencing angelic visits or miracles are likewise often depicted as experiencing the light of the higher dimensions’ energies .

Lamech’s father Methuselah travels ‘to the ends of the earth’ to where Enoch resides as a guest of the celestial beings who took him up through the heavens to see God, (who blesses him with his role as a patriarch of mankind, and conduit for divine wisdom once the Flood destroys civilization. . !) Methuselah (who lives in the bible to the age of 969 years old – potentially a link to the Sumerian King Lists, where the humans created as the offspring of the gods – in order to rule as lineages of kings – lived extraordinarily long lives due to the influence of the received celestial genetics. . .) tells Enoch the situation;

“I thought in my heart, that the conception was the work of the Watchers, the pregnancy of the Holy Ones, and that it belonged to the giants (Nephilim) . . .and my heart was upset by this. . .”

When asked if Noah is human  or one of the Watchers, Enoch replies;

“I have shown you that in the generation of Yared my father, those who were from heaven disregarded  the word of Yahuah. Behold they committed crimes, laid aside their class, and commingled with women. With them also they transgressed, married with them and begot children. A great destruction therefore shall come upon all the earth, a deluge, a great destruction shall take place in one year.

The child which is born to you shall survive on the earth, and his three sons shall be saved with him. When all mankind who are on earth shall die, he shall be safe and his posterity shall beget on the earth giants, not spiritual but carnal. Now inform your son that he who is born is his child in truth, and he shall call his name Noah for he shall be to you a survivor. He and his children shall be saved from the corruption which shall take place in the world, from all the sin which shall take place in his days. Afterwards shall greater impiety take place, for I am acquainted with holy mysteries, which Yahuah himself has discovered to me, and which I have read in the tablets of heaven. Generation after generation shall transgress, until a time when the righteous shall arise, and crime shall perish from off the earth, until all goodness come upon it. Now go and tell your son that the child which is born is his child in truth, and that there is no deception.

The ramifications of his answer may be one reason why the Church forefathers categorised the Book of Enoch to be an example of ‘pseudepigrapha’, or ‘apocryphal’ in nature, ie not believed to be divine in origin. But the text survived, to provide another perspective on these matters raised in Genesis, and within the names, and details of the Bible – ideas often considered to be heretical in the history of Christianity (though a little less so in Hebrew streams of thought).

From this unusual perspective, it is interesting to note of Enoch, that despite his being honoured more highly than any other man in the Old Testament, at the beginning of his story has a description of his inner turmoil and sadness. The angelic guides arrive unannounced at his home one evening, to take him up through all the levels and places of the heavens – to indeed stand ‘before the face of the Lord’, (and then be given celestial wisdom to write down (in 360 books)and give to mankind to survive the destruction of civilization by the Flood a few generations after).  But when they arrived at his house, (in the Forgotten Books of Eden by Rutherford H.Platt, 1926) in chapter 1, verses 3-7 Enoch relates;

³After this… I completed of all the years of my life three hundred and sixty five years. ⁴On the first day of the first month I was in my house alone and was resting on my couch and slept. ⁵And when I was asleep, great distress came up into my heart, and I was weeping with my eyes in my sleep, and I could not understand what this distress was, or what would happen to me.

⁶ And there appeared to me two men, exceedingly tall, such as I have never seen on Earth.

Their faces were shining like the Sun, their eyes too were like a burning light, and from their lips fire was coming forth with clothing and singing of various kinds in appearance purple, their wings were brighter than gold, their hands whiter than snow.

⁷ They were standing at the head of my couch, and began to call me by my name.

– this passage is an indication, perhaps, of the (subconscious?) stresses such (positive) people of the (compromised) heavenly lines lived under, a point noted in the consideration of the Song of Solomon in an earlier part of the Bible section. Note the description of the angels closely matches all references in the Bible to the Seraphim, (as such closely related to the Nagas). Also the effects of being ‘divinely inspired’, or ‘of the line of’ the ‘Watchers’, as Enoch’s great-grandson Noah was described in the Book of Jubilees, and Enoch’s name implies in some way.

So how do the Seraphim and the Watchers relate to the Sumerian sources of the celestial bloodlines, as well as the wider mythology of the Near East, including the Nahash, the brazen serpent within the life-story of Moses?

Among many points of similarity, thesymbolism of the Anuna serpent-deity of Sumer, Enki/Ea; often depicted as having water pouring from his shoulders; or with serpent lower-half; or in the case of the Babylonian version of him, Oannes, wearing a fish-head head-dress and clothing; much like the Pope’s, hence ‘episcopalian’; and curiously the ‘mitre’ as these official vestments are called dates back to at least the Babylonians..!

Enki/Ea,the chief scientist of the Anunnaki, was highly reptilian in the many descriptions/depictions/epithets of him; andas Lord of the South/the waters he represented, (in the three-fold division of the human head-heart-stomach) the subconscious,reptilian,instinctive centre of the stomach, where the centres concerned with the body’s physiological functioning and survival are located. (His brother Enlil represented the Skies/North/Mind, and Anu, the heavenly Father of the entire tribe, represented the Earth/Equator/Heart). He also represented the Ap-su, the creative primordial powers of the (waters of the) abyss beneath the earth; equating in this way some of the ‘creatures of the deep’ in the Bible, sea-serpents or monsters such as Leviathan, and so on.

Moses was so named by the daughter of the Pharaoh ‘because he was drawn up from the water’ (Exodus 2.10) providing a very clear link to the water/serpent deities of the Anunnaki/Annedoti. (‘Ea’ itself means ‘he who loved water’) The images from Sumer and Babylon depicteda hybrid being with the upper body of a man and whose lower half  was a snake.

(left) (Oannes, depicted left, as he was called by the Babylonians).

(right)the Adda Seal, an Akkadian cylinder seal depicting among others Enki/ Ea,

with water and fishes coming from his shoulders indicating it is part of his being.

Enki, though, was the Anunnaki whose role included giving mankind technology and wisdom, and as such was responsible for mining and metallurgy, medicine, architecture, building and so on; a ‘knower-of-secrets’…

The writings of Berossus, the Babylonian historian writing in Greek in the 3rd century Bc largely support these themes; he wrote that mankind’s origins could be traced back to the god Oannes (precursor of Janus), who created mankind,as well as giving the first societies the ‘gifts of civilization’ ie astrology, agriculture,technologies,writing and art,religion,legal processes and so on.  It was in this sense of giving mankind the ‘arts and sciences of civilization’ that Enki/Ea was ‘representative’ of the intelligence of the reptilian centres, and as such, may have been incorporated in the writings which became the Books of Moses in the Old Testament, as the Serpent in the Garden of Eden. The Nephilim were accused by Enoch (ch7/ 8) of teaching mankind ‘charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants’ (medicine/healing?) Also how to make ‘swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates , and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them; and ornaments, and the use of antimony. . .and all kind of costly stones. And astrology. . . and the constellations . . . the signs of the earth . . the signs of the sun. . . and the course of the moon” – and so on, even as their progeny began to ‘sin against the earth’, and ‘. . . to sin against the birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another’s flesh, and drink the blood . . .’, so that ’as men perished, their cry went up to heaven”.

So the teaching of the skills of civilization were tainted by misapplication, and moral turpitude. But the studies of the planets and the sun and the stars in antiquity (such as in Babylon, and Egypt) did lead to significant progress in mathematics, geometry, astrology, geography, navigation and so on; effectively the laying the foundations of science in the Near East to be taken up by the Greeks. And strangely, Enoch, the man chosen to detail the sins of the nephilim and the remedy of the Flood, was also honoured by being given thirty books worth of ‘scientific knowledge’ by the angels, to write down on tablets, to survive the Deluge and enable civilization and it’s achievements to be rebuilt thereafter. And 1Enoch itself is testament to the amount of knowledge of the heavens and the earth passed on to him. So again, upon reflection there are some interesting conclusions in this regard.

In Sumer, Akkadia and so on, Enki was the instrument of ‘enlightening mankind’; similar to the serpent in Eden giving Adam and Eve knowing, saying to Eve ‘thou shalt be as gods if you taste of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge’. Also reflecting the Sumerian understanding of the Anunnaki’s genetic infusion of ‘celestial’ DNAwhich created ‘homo sapiens’, as depicted in the many Tree of Life stelae of Mesopotamia.

Knowledge of these Sumerian myths and narratives was present in the ensuing civilizations of the Akkadians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, and so on;  when Jerusalem was taken by the Babylonian forces c.603Bc, the elites of Jerusalem and Israel were taken in captivity to Babylon, for around 70-100 years. And during this time the Hebrew priests andphilosophers were exposed to the wisdom and the myths of Sumer, (introduced to mankind by the Anunnaki themselves) – as well perhaps to the gene-streams of the Anunnaki and the nephilim as had been introduced in to Sumerian and following societies. . !

As such the Old Testament is a continuation of the cosmic knowledge/wisdom given to mankind in the myths of Sumer and passed on to the Hebrew elites of Israel in Babylon– as well as a record of how the celestial gene-streams of the Anunnaki – and the nephilim – were preserved throughout the Akkadian, Assyrian, and Babylonian societies, before finding their way into Hebrew lineages too, during the same Babylonian captivity; a fact acknowledged in the extensive numberof Hebrew men who had married foreign and ‘strange’ wives, by the passages in Ezra ch.10 which repeat  the word; 10.2/10/11/14/17/18/44.

The word ‘strange’ is used throughout the bible as a euphemism for the celestial bloodlines, and is used more by Simon Peter than by any other writer, in acknowledgement of his bloodline’s nature.

This role of Enki connects strongly with that of the Nehushtan, the Brazen Serpent (bronze, or brass) – an ‘instrument of (cosmic) wisdom ‘ – and with the Nagastoo, the reptilian cosmic beings/demiurges of Eastern mythology and religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism.

The Nehushtan was a bronze serpent created by Moses in the desert to heal the people bitten by the Seraphim, the ‘fiery serpents’…(Numbers 21). This description of the testing of the faith of the Israelites in the wilderness is highly important, and deserves to be quoted at length, introducing as it does both the Seraphim and the Nachash into the Biblical narrative; (Numbers21.4-9)

“And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way of the Red Sea, to compass the land of Edom; and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.

And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.

And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.

Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, Wehave sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.

And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole; and it shall come to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.”

It is a curious invention though, considering Moses brought the 10 Commandments down from Mt Sinai that said ‘thou shalt make no graven images’; for the Israelites prayed and worshipped at the Nehushtan formany years afterwards, venerating it as a totem. Indeed a century later one of Moses’ successors -Hezekiak – tore the Nehushtan down exactly as idolatry–even though it is stated it is the Lord who directs Moses to create the bronze serpent. At Exodus 34.17 YHVH says; “Thou shalt make thee no molten gods”.

 Another anomaly of sorts is at Exodus19.21-3, where YHVH instructs Moses “Godown, charge the people lest they break through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish. And let the priests also, which come near unto the Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them. And Moses said unto the Lord, The people cannot come up to mount Sinai; for thou chargedst us, saying, Set bounds about the mount, and sanctify it” – which is strange in that it confirms somewhat the connection between mountain-tops and sacred places, while YHVH considered the hill-top shrines and groves of the Canaanites to be ‘abominations’ throughout the Bible, punishing Solomon for following such practices. YHVH likewise punishes the Israelites for making a golden calf to worship, in Exodus chapter 32.

A similar ‘incongruity’comes from Moses’ instructions to the Israelites the night before fleeing Egypt, to appropriate all their masters’ items of gold, considering the Second Commandment Moses introduced to the Hebrews (at a ater date, admittedly), ‘Thou shalt not steal’. The view of biblical commentators is that the word used in the passage is that the Hebrews asked their Egyptian masters to ‘lend’ them the gold items, which the Egyptians did willingly. . . as ‘fair recompense’ for their labours. But this just raises more questions; why does the text not say their masters ‘gave them’ the gold, but ‘lent’ it? And if it was a secret of the Hebrews that they were intending to leave Egypt and slavery, then they cannot have told the Egyptians the ‘loan’ was to be forever. . . or were they aware the Hebrews were leaving when they ‘lent ‘ them their gold? Some Christians believe that YHVH ‘leads’ the Egyptians to give over their gold willingly, as a form of recompense to the departing Israelites, a conclusion without apparent support in the text. It is just as possible that this narrative, of the ‘gold’ given to the Israelites as they leave Egypt, is a metaphor for the conscious transmission of cosmic consciousness from the Egyptians to the Hebrews. This helps explain the Sumerian and Mesopotamian roots of the Hebrew forefather Abraham and his family, and the repeated journeys back to Sumer, and to Egypt at this time in the Old Testament.Likewise the position of trust attained by Joseph in the Egyptian court, and similar. As such creating an allegory of the Sumer-Egypt-Israel nexus,or pathway, of cosmic consciousness – and of the celestial bloodlines, of varying types of character, existing between the same civilizations throughout antiquity.

As well as ‘punishing’ the Israelites in the wilderness, the fiery serpents of Numbers 21.6, are equated by virtually all biblical experts with the class of angels described by the major prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 6.1-4;

The etymology of the word ‘seraphim’ in Hebrew is estimated to stem from ‘sarap‘ – to burn; or ‘sharab‘ – to be dry, or parched. A puzzling basis for an order of celestial angels, surely? In one section they torment the Israelites when they are  wandering as a landless tribe in the desert (Numbers 21.6-9); in Isaiah 6.1-9 (and Rev.4.8) the Seraphim worship and sing in the presence of the Lord in the highest heaven. While Isaiah 30.6 associates the ‘saraph mecopheph’ with what many observers consider to be the ‘powers of evil’…likewise in Isaiah 14.29 the text states the Philistines should not rejoice the death of King Ahaz; for one worse than him, a ‘flying fiery serpent’ shall come forth; again therefore the notion of divine punishment, and the dichotomy of the nature of the angelic spirits which enforce it.

In the most extensive description in the Bible of the seraphim, in the Book of Isaiah, one of the most esoteric and important of the Old Testament prophets, he describes the following events as he is taken heavenwards, much like Enoch by the two seraphim in his experiences – Isaiah 6.1;

…I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphim; each had six wings. . . and one cried to another and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I, Woe is me! for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts. Then flew one of the seraphim unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar. And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away , and thy sin purged.

Thus connecting the seraphim, the ‘fiery flying serpents’  who attend upon the Lord,  yet again with aspects of fire – as the angels of the Lord destroy the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah with the ‘powers of the Sun upon the Earth’… while saving Lot, Abraham’s nephew and therefore of the lineage of Enoch, Noah and Moses (via Sumer) ; who are themselves of the ‘bloodlines of the Sun’ in genetic terms. These characters are able to  rise above their inner ‘baseness’ and fulfil their ‘celestial’ side; thus Lot is ‘part of’ Sodom and Gomorrah, but is granted mercy by the ‘angels of the Lord’ for his virtues, and allowed to escape with his family. But from the mentioned actions of Lot’s two daughters the Bible states came the tribes of the Moabites, and the Ammonites; (Genesis19.37-8) – both tribes associated elsewhere with the celestial bloodlines (so king Nahash was ruler of the Ammonites), thus pointing to the nature of the Sumerian/ Assyrian lineage of Abraham through Lot and other relatives such as Nahor the brother of Abraham.

The key description of the seraphim in Isaiah 6 provides other links; that the ‘house is filled with smoke’ is much like the Holy-of-holies at the Temple of Solomon when the ‘glory of God’ filled the chamber on the day of its inauguration – again, prompted by the use of sacred music…Exodus 24.16 likewise describes the ‘glory of the Lord’ covering mount Sinai for seven days when YHVH calls Moses to ascend to the top of the mountain to receive the law and the Ten Commandments from him.

Later in Isaiah 30.6 the seraphim are described as ‘flying dragons’, ‘vipers’, ‘destroyers’;

“The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent, they will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of camels, to a people that shall not profit them”.

Here it is interesting that the reference to the south links in to the repeated metaphor of the Sumerian (serpent-) deity Enki as Lord of the South, hence the subterranean depths of waters, the ‘abyss’, and the instinctive/reptilian centre of the stomach, the body’s primary source of life-force and energy. The female priestesses at the Delphic Oracle, the ‘pythonesses’ were similarly representative of the powers of the subconscious instinctive centre of the body and mind; while Jesus called her the ‘Queen of the South’, bringing such abstract features into consideration. As mentioned earlier, Solomon and Sheba’s relationship and ‘marriage’ may be one of the Near East’s most extensive cycles concerned with ‘alchemy’, and the marriage or conjoining of cosmic energies… the use by Isaiah of the word ‘burden’ and ‘beasts’ also raises aspects associated with the ‘dark’ lines of the nephilim, as well as links to the ‘celestial’ lineages as portrayed in the burdens felt by so many of the characters studied in this section, from Cain onwards virtually. The strands of narratives based around the subject as related in the Bible are extremely complex in their nature, let alone the sheer number of references to tribes, peoples and individuals as being so connected – even for just the overtly ‘dark’ lineages, such as the Rephaim etcetera.

So while the Nahashim Seraphim (the angelic seraphim) are the highest level cosmic beings involved with glorifying and praising God on his throne in the heavens, as well as helping the furtherance of mankind – as the episode in the wildernessshows, like the Nagas, the seraphim are capable of being unpredictable and incomprehensible from a human perspective.In following their own or ‘higher agendas’ as such at times, such as tormenting the Israelites in their trials in the wilderness with ‘fiery bites’, done at the behest of YHVH–the difficulty of ascribing a moral level to the ‘fiery flying serpents’ is a narrative which receives little attention. They can clearly be viewed from some perspectives of being representatives of the ‘satans’ of the Old Testament in particular, just by their serpentine nature, as well as frequent characteristics of violence, if not harsh cruelty. Especially as this seems to be part of the role of such ‘celestial adversaries’.

In Exodus 4.1-5 and 7, Moses and Aaron his brother throw their staffs onto the ground in a ‘magic’ competition with the magicians of the pharaoh – the staff of Moses turns into a ‘nahash’ serpent, a brazen serpent/ ‘knower of secrets’. That of Aaron into a ‘tanniyn’ serpent, a ‘destroyer’. The two types of serpent may be symbolic of the two different genetic-streams which flowed from the Anunnaki through Sumer, and into the lineages of the Hebrew tribes; or may be different aspects of the Seraphim, dual-natured as they are presented..!

So as the Book Of Enoch shows (quoted on p.85), as we saw in the Egypt section, and the experiences of the Israelites in the wilderness show, these ‘angels’ / Seraphim are characterized as a fiery cosmic beings, possibly servants of the divine, as well as seemingly/ possibly serpent-like and demonic.

These (deep) connections and themes are present therefore in the life /narrative of Moses, in the repeated  serpent/ Nehushtan – imagery present within his life-story in the Bible, as well as in his close associations with the Pharaoh and priests, who held the secrets of the long traditions of wisdom in Egypt, as well as representing the nature of human ‘evil’ (in its aspects of worldly power and domination of peoples). It is in similar vein that the Bible pays much (unobtrusive) attention to the importance of Sumer, Chaldea and Babylon in the genetic bloodlines of the Hebrew Patriarchs as well as their life-stories, as well as referencing the ‘sons of Anak’ (and various related lineages), and the Babylon empire as examples of opponents of the spirit.

The life of Moses is one of the clearest examples of the differing interpretations or perspectives the books of the Bible may provide. All for some conscious reason, it would seem, if ‘a’ cosmic consciousness worked it’s way through the composition of the many books across the millennia it was written and compiled. Something sometimes evinced by the complexity of the questions raised as much as the answers given.

As the ‘lawgiver’ of Israel, Moses attains his highest standing; yet repeatedly his life describes what may be termed ‘inner contradictions’ between the high standards of the laws and some of his actions on behalf of the Israelites against the ‘sinful’ Pharaoh and Egyptians etc. So as with the ‘borrowed’ gold, similarly Moses gained freedom for the Israelites from Egypt by performing several acts of ‘magic’ (involving serpents!) in the court of the Pharaoh (Exodus 7.1-14); seemingly in contravention of injunctions against ‘magic’ often present in the Bible, indeed forbidden upon injunction of death (Leviticus 20.6, 20.27) – other examples of God forbidding the use of divination, or witchcraft include 1Chronicles 10.13, 1Samuel15.23, and Micah 5.10-12 among many others.Again, it is nonetheless fair to say it is YHVH who commands him to, and performs the magic, or ‘miracles’; but in requiring a human to perform his magic YHVH thus indicates to mankind it may be performed at certain occasions by people without being sinful; a somewhat contradictory narrative again, perhaps to indicate a deeper point…

And for understanding the character of Moses, most clearly a sign of him being less than perfect is that he commits murder (for ‘righteous’ reasons) of an Egyptian who is beating one of the Israelites in the field, in Exodus 2.11-22, (immediately after being given his name Moses, ‘Because I drew him out of the water’ Ex.2.11) ending at Exodus 2.22 with Moses naming his son Gershom, saying “I have been a stranger in a strange land” – thus pointing to the same metaphor as Simon Peter repeats numerous times, indicating the problems of the ‘celestial’ bloodlines of Sumer within which he is placed. The several related ‘222’ number-encodings may well link therefore to Peter, and to ‘satans’ as designated by the Lord. In Exodus 23.9 when YHVH is giving the Law to Moses for the Hebrews, he says; “Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger; for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt”…

So thesearesome anomalies in the life and character of Moses which may be argued quite fairly to point to some hidden matters of ‘servitude’ and also the ‘spirit’, rather than to the ‘hypocrisy’ of Moses, as some may feel such questioning of his character implies. In fact his constant battle to attain sanctity is given some form of representation by his fighting for his life with ‘an angel of the Lord’, at the inn he stays at with wife and son on their way from Egypt to Israel.

depiction of Moses giving the Nehushtan,the ‘brazen copper serpent’ affixed to a pole to the Israelites in the desert. This curious totem had the effect of curing the ills received during the Exodus, specifically the injuries caused by the Seraphim, the ‘flying fiery serpents’ (and angelic order) sent by the Lord to test the Israelites. . !

(see Numbers 21.8)

Whatever the view of this, he created the Nehash, the brass serpent on a pole for healing, a strangeand troubling image. One which resembles symbols from both ancient and modern eras; firstly, it is similar to theSumerian depiction of the deity Ningishzida, on the Libation Vase of Gudea; as well as to the Caduceus, the Greek emblem of Mercury, and to the Rod of Asclepius, which is a symbol of modern medicine, as placed on medical vehicles to identify them as such; as well as bearing some resemblance to DNA’s interwoven helical strands…and additionally, if the Nehushtan is turned 90° it is effectively an X and Y axis, with a sine-wave travelling along it, (sine-wave sharing the etymological root of sinuous); in broader terms the pole may be seen as the (male) axis, and the serpent as the (female) circling energy, or as proton and electron – as the 1 and the 0 may be viewed as intertwined aspects of matter and energy.

The connection between antiquity’s ‘cosmic beings’ of Enki and Thoth, and the Nagas, and the technology/science/’knowing’ related to medicine, genetics, DNA/the ‘seed of living things’,and so on is clearly anything but coincidental – indeed is towards the heart of their roles during antiquity.

As we saw in the section on Simon Peter, the theme of being strangers, alone in a strange land is one used by many Hebrew prophets, in referring to their experiences and their helplessness in many situations in life, depending upon the kindness and mercy of leaders of other tribes/nations such as the Egyptian Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Herod and so on. This narrative includes Moses/Joseph/ Abraham/ Jacob/ Isaac/ David/ Daniel etc, who are all at the mercy of  non-Israelites at one time or another, and indeed receive help from them. The tribe members later imprisoned by the Babylonian and other invading forces, are similarly helpless, when the Israelites become ‘strangers in their own land’…

Yet with regards to their being ‘strangers’, the major prophets – Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Elijah, Jeremiah and so on, have few ‘associations’ with personal guilt, or culpability or character flaws – whereas Simon Peter does; and appears to be intrinsically ‘compromised’ somehow, rather like King David and his son Solomon; or even closer, like Samson, as an example of a ‘divine judge’ or ‘adversary/ satan’- a ‘mighty man’ (‘of the sun’) who gradually is shown to be inadequate and incomplete as a person, despite his powers . 

Incredibly,  Moses, who grows up a ‘stranger’ in Egypt also appears to be linked to these aspects of being and self, despite his clearly-established sanctity – a narrative perhaps highlighted by his killing of a man, as well as his being denied the blessing of entering with the Israelites into the promised land, after forty years of leading them through the wilderness. Likewise perhaps his physical battle with an angel of the Lord. The meanings implied within his life-story certainly point to these genetic differences. The Book of Exodus’ describes the circumstances of his being found as a baby by the daughter of Pharaoh, (Ex.2.10) floating in his ‘ark’ (‘tevah’)* in the reeds along the Nile;

And the child grew, and she (Moses’ mother/nurse) brought him unto Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses; and she said, Because I drew him out of the water”.

A depiction of Moses and the Nehash on enamel plaque from 18th century Germany,

now at the MmoA, America.

This essential facet of Moses relates him to the hybrid serpent/human deity Enki (or in Babylon called Ea- ‘he who loved water’), who created the first civilization of Sumer and it’s irrigation pools, channels, waterways and so on, and was happiest sailing and fishing in the marshes around the Persian Gulf.Equally clearly to Oannes the deity of Babylon as written of by Berossus, the (celestial) fish/man hybrid who swam up out of the Persian Gulf to bring civilization to mankind. (This propensity of the Anuna deities finds several points of similaritywithin the many fish and water metaphors within the life-story of Simon Peter).

*in support of this ‘mixed’, hybrid nature is the noteworthy fact that the only other time this word is used in the Bible is for the Ark of Noah, at Genesis6.14 (“so make yourself an ark of cypress wood; and make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out”), pointing in both instances to a divine means of escape; coincidentally, the ‘ark’ (the ‘compromised’ body/genetics?) of Moses’ is coated with ‘slime and pitch’ (Exodus 2.3)  – this can be interpreted as metaphor for the ‘dark’ or ‘conflicted’ genetic lineage into which Moses is born – as the genetics of Noah may be compared to both an ark which is covered in pitch, being both celestial but also compromised.

This is an aspect potentially supported by Moses’ being adopted into the family of the Pharaoh…and in fact Moses’ name very likely has some connection to the name of the Egyptian deity, Thuthmosis. And in complete support of this, it is stated in Genesis 11.3 when depicting the Tower of Babel; ‘And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar’. As we have seen, the Tower, and city of Babel is described in Genesis 10, and 11 as being built by Nimrod, the ‘mighty hunter before the Lord’ – and a descendant of Noah’s son Cush. So the link between Moses and Nimrod is made by the use of the slightly negative word ‘slime’, in describing both of their genetic inheritance as being ‘mighty’,  powerful, ‘celestial’, but (unacceptably) compromised, to varying extents.  In Genesis 14.5 the Bible lists some of the bloodlines of the ‘giants’; Rephaims, Zuzim, and Emim, the Horites, and the Amalekites defeated by Chedorlaomer, the king of Elam (W.Iran) and his allies. And likewise the word ‘slime’ is used just 5 verses later, when the five cities of the plain joined battle with the king of Elam, and his allies (Gen14.10);

And the vale of Siddim was full of slimepits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there, and they that remained fled to the mountain.’

The BDB Dictionary translates the name Siddim as ‘demons’, while others take it to mean ‘furrows’, or ‘field’, or ‘division’. It is at this point in the narrative that the victorious Elamites and allies ‘took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah’, including the nephew of Abraham, Lot and his family. Abraham (Abram here) pursues them with over three hundred of his ‘trained servants’ (Gen4.14), catching up with them at Hobah, on the left-hand side of Damascus (possibly showing the importance Abraham and his related lineages of Haran in Sumer placed on defending their bloodlines). Hobah means ‘hiding place’, but coincidentally  the name Hobab means ‘serpent’ (from a related Arabic word; BDB Theological Dictionary), possibly connecting the two names to the Nahash ‘knower of secrets’, and symbol of the deepest levels of the instinctive/ reptilian centre (of the stomach). Hobab is also the name given in Judges 4.11 of Moses’ father-in-law. (see below). Abraham’s brother is called Nahor, and as related at Genesis22.22-23, has eight children with his wife Milcah, and four with his concubine Reumah. This name translates in the Latin Vulgate 4th century translation as – Roma, providing a direct link to the ‘powers of the world’, as symbolized by Rome and the empire, in opposition to those of heaven. And coincidentally, of her four children with Nahor, one is called Maacah; ‘oppression’, as noted, and linked at Joshua12.5 via the ruler Og to the Rephaim in the time of Moses. (As we saw earlier, the woman Maacah was the wife of king David who then gave birth to Absalom and Tamar, with all the complicated narratives ensuing; and her father Talmai was one of the three sons of Anak, referring to the Sumerian deity of Anu, and the Anunnaki. In other words, in the abbreviated history of the Old Testament, the founders of the bloodlines of the nephilim and the Rephaim etcetera). Another of the four children of Nahor and Reumah is Gaham, a name which is difficult to translate in Hebrew, but is believed to mean something like ‘flame’, or ‘burning eyes’! Another pointer to the lines of Cain, and the seraphim, as being ‘fiery’, ‘dry’, ‘dusty’ and so on, and particularly related to Lot (Abraham’s other brother Haran’s son)  and the apposite destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by the powers of the Sun.(Gen19.23-24).Tebah incidentally, the third of Nahor and Reumah’s four children, means ‘to slaughter’ or ‘to kill”, (from ‘tabah’) – clearest of all as to the character of the lines of Cain and similar. So there are many links within the Sumerian heredity of Abraham and his lineage to themes of the celestial bloodlines, the nephilim, and the seraphim.

*in fact Hobab has further connections to the theme at hand; in the Book of Giants, fragments of which were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery at Qumran in 1948, – and believed to be part of the Enoch text(s) which were possibly the source for the account of Moses in Genesis 6.1-4 of the Nephilim – Hobabish is the name of a giant, believed to stem from Humbaba, the non-human ‘Guardian’ of the Cedar Forest, the Place of the Gods, in Gilgamesh). The Book of Giants itself is believed to be related to the similarly structured Manichean Book of Giants from Iran, dating to at least the 3rd century Bce. More on this book –versions of which have been found in Aramaic, Middle Persian, Sogdian (E.Iranian reaching to Uzbekistan, Tajikstan, Kazakhstan and Kirghizstan), Uygur, Coptic (Christian Egyptian) Parthian, and Latin – later in the year.

From Hobah Abraham bring his relatives and his nephew Lotback to Sodom where Lot and his familyhail from(of all the luck!), and meets the king of Sodom then. It is at this point that marks the appearance of one of the most respected priests of the Hebrew faith, ‘the priest of the most high God’ Melchizedek, who comes from Jerusalem to specifically bless Abram and his family (Gen14.18-20).

Returning to Moses (and the ‘slime’ of his Ark at Exodus 2.3), it is only two sentences after his being named Moses (Exodus 2.5-10) – linking him to the Sumerian deity Enki/Ea – and adopted into the Pharaoh’s household as a child (again indicating a connection to the highest levels of Egyptian ‘wisdom’ traditions), that seeing an Egyptian overlord beating a Hebrew –  ‘he looked this way and that, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand” (Exod.2.12) – perhaps showing in his forethought and violence the ‘base’ or immature character of the ‘dark’ bloodlines before any refinement is made in maturity / experience – much as Lamech was unable to rise above the warnings of his father Cain’s punishments, and repeated his sin of killing or violence. That Moses rose above his baseness is indisputable – he receives the honour and blessing of seeing the burning bush and speaking with an angel of the Lord (Exodus 3.1-2), then being blessed by YHVH himself on the holy mount Horeb (Exod3.4-6); therein chosen to stand up to the Pharaoh, and lead the Israelites from captivity in Egypt (Exod.3.7-10) – as well asthen through the years in the wilderness, receiving the Tablets of the Commandments from the Lord himself on Mount Sinai, being given responsibility for the sacred Ark of the Covenant, and so on.

The celestial side of Moses’ genes is signified in his ‘being drawn from the water’ too; the waters are used in the Bible to indicate life, consciousness, and the heavens themselves, as well as the extensive associations with the deities we have already seen, meanings which permeated the major civilizations of the Near East of antiquity.

This positive nature is reinforced in the next verses; when Moses flees from Egypt after his action becomes known, he find refuge in the ‘land of Midian’ where ‘the priest of Midian had seven daughters; and they came and drew water (KJV’s italics), and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. And the shepherds came and drove them away; but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock’. . .(Exodus2.16), similar to the first meeting of Jacob with Rachel, the daughter of his father’s relatives (in Haran, part of Assyria, itself said to have trading links with Tyre in Ezekiel 27.23), indicating the special association of wells, and water with divine blessings and love. (Genesis 29.1-14)  They tell their father, Reuel who invites Moses home; soon after Moses is betrothed to the daughter Zipporah, who becomes his wife. (Zipporah means ‘bird’; or ‘doom’ as used in Ezekiel 7.10,  both of symbolic meaning, and a semantic association commentators have traditionally struggled to interpret. Additional meanings of the name Zipporah include to ‘pierce’, ‘shriek’ or leap; if taken in conjunction with the ‘bird’ meaning these could be interpreted as implying  connection to the ‘dark’ bloodlines as epitomized by the Phoenician ‘goddess of the night’ Lilith, always depicted with owl’s in attendance upon her, and with talons instead of feet. We would therefore be quite confident in asserting that the unstated, but implied metaphorical link between Zipporah and Lilith is the best interpretation of her name that can be put forward). So having seen how the Kenite tribe of metalsmiths were descendants of the line of Cain, it is no surprise therefore to find that Zipporah and Reuel are of this lineage; (Judges4.11) ‘Now Heber the Kenite, which was of the children of Hobab the father in law of Moses had severed himself from the Kenites, and pitched his tent unto the plain of Zaanaim, which is by Kedesh’.

In fact Reuel is the father-in-law of Moses; and Hobab is the son of Reuel, ie Moses’ brother-in-law. argues that the word used to describe Hobab’s relationship to Moses –hoten – has a dual meaning of one who performs circumcision, meaning he may be his brother-in-law, rather than father. So Moses undergoes the ceremony before his marriage to Zipporah, having not been circumcised as an infant in Egypt due to the persecution of those shown to be Hebrew… Nevertheless, as noted already, Hobab itself has the actual meaning of serpent, as well as being connected with the giants known as Rephaim etc through the character Hobabish. (Alternative meanings of his name are to ‘embrace’ or hide, or hold near to one’s chest… maybe linking to the meaning of Nahash as ‘keeper/ knower of secrets’).

A further point supportive of the ‘dark bloodlines’ theme pertaining to the lineage of Moses stems from the name of his elder sister, who is called Miriam. The meaning of this name not only has some connections to the Egyptian word for ‘beloved’, but in Hebrew it is accepted to mean ‘the bitter waters’ or ‘sea of bitterness’ (as the latter half of her name equates with ‘yam’ meaning seas), or alternatively ‘disobedience/stubborness/ rebellious’ from the Hebrew verb ‘marar’. So several meanings associate the name with the heredity of the ‘celestial’ bloodlines, seen in the lives of Moses, Enoch, and David to be a mixed blessing.

There is a particularly noteworthy confluence of passages and characters concerned with the mountain-tops of Pisgah (and Nebo), besides Jericho and overlooking the Promised Land and the plains of Moab.

This is as follows; after 40 years of leading the Israelites through the wilderness Moses is told they have reached the land promised by YHVH to them, to be a ‘land of milk and honey’. Yet in one of the most surprising and even shocking decisions of God in the Bible, Moses is not to be allowed to enter the land of Israel, but can only ascend to the top of the mountain named Pisgah (meaning ‘division’) to view the lands. (Deuteronomy 34.1-5) This he does, and immediately after this in the text Moses dies, at 34.5-6.

Having already noted that mount Pisgah is besides, or part of Mt Nebo, the unstated connection is to the bloodlines of Niburu and the Anunnaki; for Nabo was the name of the grandson of Enki and Ninhursag; and was the ruling deity of Babylon in the first millennium Bce. And the two primary meanings of the Hebrew word ‘nebo’ also add support; the noun ‘nabi’ means to speak with authority, or to be a prophet – and the unused verb ‘nabah’ means to be high or prominent. Both contain aspects of the celestial nature of the beings and bloodlines of Niburu. The gods of the Anunnaki both those on earth and those who remained on Niburu, (such as Anu and his wife) were associated with the ‘heights’ from the 4thmillennium Bce onwards, and may have been a source for the pagan siting of many temples on hill-tops – likewise the regarding of (sacred) ziggurats and pyramids as ‘stone mountains’. (And as the hybrid ‘part-god part-human’ Gilgamesh and his friend Enkidu travelled to the restricted area of the ‘holy mountain’ of the Cedar-forest of Lebanon in the epic poem, written circa 3000-2800 Bce). As a related metaphor or description, the Cedars of Lebanon are mentioned more than 70 times in the Bible, used primarily as a symbol of the greatness of God, in terms of his power and his authority. They were used by the Phoenician builders of the Temple of Solomon and other buildings so much that his palace was called ‘the house of the Forest of Lebanon’, at 1Kings 5.6, 7.1-2, etc; possibly, in this way, a small signpost to the ‘mighty men’ associated with the extended family of David and his warriors, as well as to the ‘pagan’  hilltops and groves of Lebanon which the many non-Jewish wives of Solomon swayed him to worship). And likewise in the story of Balaam and the angel (Numbers 22.22-35) it is shown that Pisgah is indeed a hill-top pagan place of worship, bringing us full-circle back to why Moses can only view Israel from there across the river Jordan, then dies and is buried nearby, besides the vale of Zophim; the vale of the ‘Watchers’ (Deuteronomy 34.5-6).

Note too the association of the serpent(s) with the Sun, an ‘equation’ which underpins much of the symbolism throughantiquity.

 In fact, the head-dress of the Egyptian rulers and deities with the serpent attached to it was called the Uraeus/Ouraeuswas a stylized royal cobra (nagas nagas in India) attached to the front of the head-wear. The presence of the Ouraeus denoted the wearer was a sovereign, royalty, or deity, or divine authority.

(left) Egyptian Uraeus, Seti I offering to the Goddess of Truth,

Abydos. John Ward,1902.Wikimedia   Public Domain.

 Note the close linguistic similarity to OR- from which originate, organisation, order, ore ( etc – all stem/ are descriptive of the stewardship by the ‘light’ of the heavens and earth. So in Isaiah 45.71 he writes;

‘I am YHVH and there is no other. I am the one forming light (‘or’), and the one forming darkness’. . .

Orion also, was known as Uranna (‘light of the heavens’) in Sumer/Babylon, and of course, seen as Osiris in Egypt, and called ‘Orion’ in Greece and Latin civilizations. Similarly the Babylonian deity Oannes was sometimes called Uanna; both versions containing the word ‘Annu’, from the ‘father of the heavens, Anu, whose tribe was thus named Anunnaki (meaning ‘the tribe- who from the heavens- to earth came’). Like Enki/ Ea/Oannes, Moses came from the waters –  and Pharaoh’s daughter; ‘called his name Moses;and she said, Because I drew him out of the water’ (Exod 2.10); and additionally his name is possibly partly derived from Thothmosis too, so placing Moses firmly within the lineages of the ‘gods of Sumer’ (and of Egypt).

TheOuraeus was depicted in Egypt, in statuary and hieroglyphic forms; while Sumerian /Anunnaki were indicated by wearing ‘horned’ head-wear, something which could, in retrospect, could be serpentine (as were depictions of several of the Anuna as hybrid serpent/man, or fish/man; or representations of serpents besides their heads or shoulders – and in many instances of the arm and ankle bands worn by the various celestial beings such as the ‘apkallu’).

Akhenaten and Nefertiti, Egyptian stela. The sun’s rays are depicted with serpent’ heads, linking the solar energies symbolically with the serpent, as with the lion.

THOTH – like Enki –  gave wisdom to mankind; were deities of crafts/technology/architecture/metallurgy, etc etc.*

*Thoth is often compared to the Sumerian minor deity Ningishzida, of the Anu/Enlil lineage, who was worshipped in the Early Dynastic period of c.2900-2350Bce, in the ‘city-states’ of Lagash, Girsu (Gishbanda), Ur, Nippur, Uruk and some others. Ningishzida was also depicted as wearing the horned Anuna headwear, as well as with serpents emanating from his shoulders, as shown


The serpents from his shoulders, may be representative of the energies of life as shown in his role as a god of fertility. As noted, along with Dumuzi he was one of the pair of gate-keepers of the heavenly palace of Anu, the father of the Anunnaki and ruler of Niburu.This role of Ninhishzida equates him with the two angels who descend to earth to take Enoch up through the heavens to God’s presence, as well as other comparable ‘gatekeeper’ roles within antiquity.

That Ningishzida is viewed as a god of vegetation, and fertility, and the underworld, by modern archeologists/academics is certain. Ningishzida, which can be interpreted to mean either ‘tree’, or the male organ (according to academics), is thought to have been called “The lord of the Good Tree”, something relevant to cosmic#, in it’s connection to the World Tree axis between heavens and earth, seen in several examples throughout this study – and the centrality of the Tree of Life stelae in terms of higher energies, and the fertility of the world.

As we see, the Good Tree /Tree of Life may thus be viewed as a symbol of the geometrically harmonic transmission of energies between the higher and lower dimensions, or the ‘heavens and the earth’, both in ‘material’ reality, and within the human body; for example as energy is said in eastern philosophies to ascend the spine, from both the ground, and the lowest chakra in the body, located at the base of the trunk. The serpentine nature of pathways of life-force throughout both the world, and the human body, may in fact be the primary meaning of what are in reality extremely abstruse symbols.

For Ningiszida theextensive serpent imagery associated with him portrays them as being upon his chest/shoulders in the diagram on the left; and to the right, on the Libation Vase of Gudea (c.2100Bce) he is portrayed as follows;

The Seal of Gudea led by Ningishzida, from 1910 (left)

The Seal Cylinders of western Asia, by W.W.Hayes

The Libation Vase of Gudea, with Ningishzida in centre (right)

Intertwining serpents around a central axis..! In much the same pattern as DNA, and also sine-waves coiling around an axis too (as seen in that of ley-lines/energy lines around the Earth, among various examples)

Compare to FuHsi and NaKua (!) the Chinese paramour deities said to have been the founders of civilization, the I-Ching, astronomy,?and so on. The similarities in depiction, and  roles, are stunning, and point in the direction of (the overall role of)the Nagas/Seraphim.

 (Note as well as the serpent symbols connecting these cultures, the name NaKua/Nuawa is identical, in the same way that the Hebrew brazen serpent the Nahash was also close linguistically to the Indian ‘angelic’ serpent-beings the Nagas…from Sumer, to Babylon, to Hebrew Israel, to India, and to China and the wider Far East – and all of these among the most advanced of religions and civilizations throughout the history of antiquity).

(left) Chinese deities Fu-Hsi and Na-kua, (Astana cemetery) Tan dynasty 651Ad- andHindu depiction of Nagas pair at Belur, India.

The subterranean aspect of Ningishzidda’s role may relate to this matter of fertility contained within the depths of the earth, in the sense already noted of the (material and symbolic) waters of the Ap-su/abyss nourishing the land, in both Sumerian and Hebrew traditions… indeed, in contrast to the underworld setting he is ascribed most often to, indicating the interpretably ‘positive’ role he fulfils – as we saw was likewise the possible role of the ‘satan’ in the examples in the Old Testament, (as in Job, and Jeremiah). The other doorkeeper is Dumuzi(also known as Tammuz, spouse of Inanna/Ishtar in the famous poems/cycles,and in Gilgamesh), another fertility deity, one who thus ‘fulfils’ a role in the underground part of the (wheat-) seed’s natural life-cycle… a reality affirmed by Jesus in his metaphorical words at John 12.24;

‘Verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit’.

(another cosmic number – 1224 – see John Michell, City of Revelation, p.114-6 and his discussion of the gematric and geometric meanings of 1224, as well as Simon Peter and the 153 fish – 1224/8 – both being symbolic of the fertility of the energies of the cosmos).

And indeed, academics such as Franz Wiggerman (in Transtigridian Snake-gods, 1997, p.41) have hypothesized that links exist between Dumuzi and Ningishzida in their representations as subterranean fertility deities.

Overall therefore, the links between serpents, life forces, and subterranean (channels) and the axis points between higher and material dimensions all combine to point to quite sophisticated and  complex models of understanding, at the time of the these narratives and symbols’ creation (say 2500-500 Bc!).

This pair of celestial ‘guides’ are equated by Sitchin in Divine Encounters p.65 as identical  to the two angelic visitors who arrive at the house of Enoch to take him up through the heavens to receive divine wisdom, linking the myth of Adapa with the Hebrew one of Enoch.

Related to this is the semantic meaning of seraphim as fiery, or parched. Also, the confusing interaction ofpositive and negative bloodlines of serpents -as inGenesis 3.14-15:

And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this thou art cursed…upon thy belly thou shalt go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.

In this way possibly connecting the Seraphim (fiery,’parched’,dry, dusty) to the Serpent of Eden (who is not necessarily Satan, as explored above, although he is cursed by God in these words) in the sense indicated in Genesis 3.14-15. The connections between key moments of the Bible regarding references to the ‘serpent’ and the numbering of several of these verses with 3.14-15 (ie. Pi) does raise the possibility the serpent referred to is part of the circle of the world, ie the geometric nature of the earth and the cosmic energies which wrap around it within the air and the earth; making the ‘serpent’ in such terms very close to the Ouroboros, the symbol of ‘eternity’ which is wrapped around the globe in Greek myth. (Again linking with *Or- etymologies for the physics of light within the world, as used in the Book of Isaiah, one of the Old Testament’s major prophets).

(right)Symbol of Ouroboros, from a 14th century alchemical treatise.

We have seen already some of the connections between Abraham and his family in ‘Ur of the Chaldees’ to the upper strata of the Sumerian civilizations of the second millennium Bce. This points to how links exist between the bloodline of Lot, ie Noah,Lamech,Enoch, and the Watchers/Seraphim, with blue eyes,white hair, faces which ‘shine like the sun’, and patches of dried skin on the chest (the ‘badge of the priesthood’?). Also the links of the Seraphim to the serpents lineages of Sumer and the gods.

As the Book of Enoch shows, it is the equivalents of Ningishzidu and Tammuz, the seraphim/angels, who visit Enoch at his home in order to bring him aloft through the ten levels of heavens- to honour him with being ‘brought before the Lord’s face’ in his highest dimension; and show Enoch the secrets of the stars, the planets and the earth, to enable him to give this wisdom to mankind just before the Deluge (ie, introduce the higher sciences and crafts upon which civilization was founded, in the period afterwards when all progress was ‘lost’). In Sumerian mythology these two ‘guardian’ deities were associated with both the celestial palace of Anu, and the ‘underworld’, place of both the Earth’s underlying fertility, and site of the afterlife/death…like St Peter conjoining positive and negative concepts of differing levels of reality. (In fact the name Enoch likewise may be seen to mean En; ‘Lord of-‘, and Och; the heaven-earth axis, oak or octave; a stem from which oak gains it’s metaphorical meanings related to the ‘world-tree’, or Tree of Life, stretching through all the dimensions or levels of the universe). Further conceptual anomalies, contradictions or dualities, suggesting sophisticated concepts at root.

It is similar angels in Enoch who are first described in ch.61 by his angelic guides as being;

‘given cords that they may measure. . . they took wings to themselves,

and flew off to the north. . . all the measures shall reveal the secrets of the earth’.

Equally importantly, the two guides are described thus;

‘And there appeared to me two men, exceedingly big, such as I have never seen on Earth. Their faces shone like the

Sun, their faces were like a burning light, and fire was coming out of their mouths. . . and their arms were like golden

wings. . .’

When they take him to a mountain range; ‘the angels took me to a place where those who were there were like flaming fire, and when they wished they appeared as men’; this seems again descriptive of both the nature of the Seraphim/Nagas, and in the second half of the quote, indicative that they may have created genetic bloodlines in mankind through which they  ‘appear as men’…certainly this may be inferred as such, considering the emphasis the Book of Enoch places on recording the history of the Watchers/ Nephilim, the ‘sons of the gods who went in unto the daughters of men’, thus creating (negative) bloodlines of hybrid nature.

The experiences Enoch has through the levels of the higher dimensions are repeatedly of buildings made of crystals, with walls, floors, and so on ;

“And I went in till I drew nigh to a wall which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire; and it began to afright me.

 And I went into the tongues of fire and drew nigh to a large house which was built of crystals; and the walls of the house were like a tessellated floor of crystals, and it’s groundwork was of crystal. It’s ceiling was like the path of the stars and the lightnings, and between them were fiery Cherubim, and their heaven was as water.”

In another sacred house he sees a throne from which came ‘a river of flaming fire’…and so on, indicating in this way that fire is not just a tool of destruction as evidenced in many instances in the Bible, but an intrinsic part of the Creation.. a similar mystical’ experience comes in Exodus 24.10 when Moses and the elders of Israel are at mount Sinai to receive the Law; “And they saw the God of Israel; and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness”

The ambiguity concerningthe ‘fiery seraphim’, and characters such as Lot and his relatives, exists within many of the characters of the narratives we are looking at; in contrast to Enoch, a righteous man (who nevertheless suffers ‘great sorrows’ for unstated reasons), Lot is less objectively positive within his self.The sun is at the heart of the narrative of Sodom and Gomorrah, both the genetics of the ‘gods’, and the powers of the Lord used to destroy the towns of the plains; as Abraham says when pleading with the Lord to forgive Sodom and Gomorrah if some righteous people may be found within them; “And the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes” (Gen18.26-7) – this seemingly offhand comment is significant in aligning Abraham’s genetic lineage with the seraphim (whose name’s stem ‘sarap’ means ‘dried’ or ’parched’, etc) and also with the celestial lineages of the sun. Likewise the many references to the desert throughout the Bible hold ‘inner’ meanings, as we see below.At Gen.19.23 the cataclysm is described;

The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar. Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD, out of heaven.

Upon being rescued from the cataclysm of Sodom and Gomorrah with his daughters and wife, the angels plan to move them to safety to a place on the mountain (symbol of the divine); but Lot prefers to go to Zoar – a place name that means ‘little’, or ‘insignificant’ – in other words wishes to continue with his unproductive life-style.(confirming Gurdjieff’s dictum that no-one can help a person who doesn’t want to change on a deep level; and also his observations that nearly every narrative within the Bible is descriptive of the process of inner-change in all it’s possible pathways, especially towards ‘school-work’)…

In Lot’s case they travel to Zoar, but soon move on to the mountain anyway.(Gen.19.30) This inner lack of direction, or substance, is reflected in his wife’s ‘turning to look back’ at the destruction, thus being turned to a pillar of salt (Gen 19.26) (as Jesus asks, ‘what good is salt that loses it’s saltiness?’ – that stops ‘working’); and also in his daughters inebriating him thereafter in order that they might lay with him and conceive of a man, and thus preserve the ‘seed of our father’ (Genesis 19.32).

And the town Zoar was called Bela prior to then (Genesis 14.2,14.8); a word that means ‘destruction’, a further indication that it represents that which is not worth ‘saving’ in a person… as the phrase the ‘sons of Belial’ used as an insult to king David means the ‘sons of the devil’ or more literally, ‘of worthlessness’.

The name Moab means ‘who is your father/’, or alternatively ‘ the waters of the father’ (ie sperm); these meanings contain all the aspects we have been looking at; in asking who is your father, the blood-line may be traced back all the way to the point where the cosmic male genes were mixed with the earthly female genes, creating the hybrid bloodlines/the first ‘homo sapiens’ / or creating the Nephilim.

Additionally the question also indicates sexual promiscuity, a sign of the potential inner problems faced by the hybrid bloodlines.And the second possible meaning, ‘the waters of the father’ again indicates the significance of the genetic bloodline; while also referring to the celestial aspect, personified by Enki/Ea the ‘lord of the waters/ depths’, (the life-giving waters of the ab-zu), the ‘waters of the heavens’ in the cosmology of Genesis 1 and 2, and the waters of Life present throughout the Bible.

There is a curiously apposite passage in Joshua 15.19; ‘since you have given me land in the south, in the  desert of Negev, give me springs of water’; a question readable on more than one level – referring equally possibly to the metaphoric request for mercy in a terrible situation (of birth). . .’ ie related to the ‘ab-zu’ /south connotations of the (serpent-based) energies of the instinctive centre.

And the Hebrew meaning of the name Negev itself supports this posited link; for it means – ‘dry’, or ‘parched’, exactly the same as the Seraphim (and Nagas), and as the serpent of Eden is cursed to always have dust in it’s mouth).

Indeed these locations of the Cities of the Plain are all linked with the Nagas and their key concerns, in various ways, as this chapter has shown, which was probably the intention of the Bible’s authors. . . Sodom in particular in the Bible is symbolic of excess pride, and desire, and cruelty; the traits of the unbalanced reptilian blood-line/powers of the Sun, (and apparently of king Nahash, the ruler of the Ammonites at 1Samuel11.1). And it therefore is apposite that Sodom is destroyed by a ‘cataclysm like the Sun’ in Genesis 19; an event much like a nuclear weapon in it’s depiction of a thunderbolt from the heavens from which a trail of smoke then arises. It also reduces Lot’s wife in it’s aftermath – but not him – to ashes, or a pillar of salt, ie. dried by the Sun) when she turns and looks back at the explosion’s flash (allows the negativity inherent in her genes to predominate).*

* indeed it appears to be the case that nuclear weapons and energies play a key part of the Nagas role in their agenda throughout the millennia on Earth. Nuclear weapons representing as they do the (destructive) powers of the Sun, are thus symbolic of the unbalanced energies which these cause within the genes, and the psyche, of various unbalanced lines and individuals throughout history. . .

Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction certainly resembles a nuclear explosion; Sitchin conjectures that a nuclear explosion from the biblical era of Sodom and Gomorrah has left it’s marks upon a region in the south of the Sinai desert, a seemingly impossible happening and yet as the buildings of the ancient world signify, celestial influences higher than the human appear to have possibly been present at these times in the Near East and elsewhere. So whether this has been proved or disproved is still largelya matter of belief.

Like Edom above, Sodom combines the stem of Adam meaning ‘field’ – in Sodom’s case, it means to ‘fall violently upon the field’ as well as it’s meanings of fiery, or flaming. Notice Lot’s daughter ‘falls upon’ her father (with mis-placed sexual energy) to conceive a child when there are no men around immediately after the cataclysms of Sodom and Gomorrah; (Genesis 19.3O-38) in this way creating the tribes of Moab, and Ammon, and confirming the inner meanings of the narrative.

Thus it can be seen that Lot and his family, are close relatives of the bloodline of Noah, Lamech, Enoch, etc ie.of the (cosmic) bloodline of the Sun. Lot is the nephew of Abraham and Nahor, another linguistic indication of the Nahash/Nagas. And in what is another cosmic# link to the seraphim, who act with divine authority to ‘punish’ those lineages related to the powers of the sun, (as at Sodom and Gomorrah), the narrative of Nahash, king of the Ammonites* who ‘tests the Israelite’s faith’ (at 1Samuel11.1) has a similar theme at Numbers11.1, when the Israelites while in the desert displease YHVH by their lack of faith;

“And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord; and the Lord heard it, and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the Lord burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp”…)

*Ammon,by the way, means ‘ a people’ or ‘a great people’, while also meaning those who make, or are included ‘in a secret’ (*), pointing possibly to the ‘great men, men of renown’ aspect; and possibly to the ‘secret’ being the ‘affliction’ from which David suffered such unhappiness, and from which Noah offered some measure of ‘respite’, ie some mercy from the constant pressures imposed by the inherited genetics.

So the contradictions in many of the narratives and characters in the Bible who seem to be representative ofone of the several types of ‘hybrid bloodlines’ – such as Abraham rising consistently above all baseness within himself – is possibly one of the mysteries woven into the fabric of the Bible,in like manner to the extensive contradictions of the fiery,parched,celestial/’destructive’servants/ angels of the LORD, the Seraphim…

The serpent symbolism, as we have seen, is multi-levelled, and complex; for example in other sections we have seenserpents referred to as ‘lions of the ground’ ie. as expressions of the telluric conduits of solar and cosmic energies known as ‘ley-lines’…as the Sphinx, (also referred to as ‘the lion of the ground’) is a symbol of too; in this sense the serpent is descriptive of geometries of the sphere of the Earth; one reason possibly for the Pi-related numerical encoding in the Bible concerning serpents.(see above, section 2).

As such it is possible to say that the serpent, as in Egyptian art and texts may be emblematic of the ‘powers of the sun’…within sunlight, the Earth,the atom, and the genes.

This is a power which antiquity regarded as being highly dualistic in it’s consequences; capable of giving life and light, warmth and sustenance – hence the ageless traditions of  celebrating it’s zenith in the Summer solstice, as well as welcoming the return of the sun at the lowest point of its yearly cycle,the Winter Solstice –while also capable of being(or causing) unbalanced, incomplete, dangerous traits.

This notion of the dangers of ‘cosmic powers’ seems to have become less preponderant with the advent of the modern era of science in the 17/18thcenturies…while mankind has become more and more demanding of obtaining similar forms of power from the universe.

This dichotomy, or duality is very possibly the source of the ideas behind the Greek myths of Icarus and Daedalus, his father. While balanced, as in his father’s person, the solar/sidereal energies enable the ability to fly (towards the Sun); but when unbalanced, or excessive, or unconscious, the same vitalizing energies become a source of negativity, or reflect inner contradictions, which lead inexorably towards destruction…

(This is analogous to mankind’s modern-day scientific uses of the power of the sun; in the past century the development ofnuclear bombs/pollutant nuclear energies, and perhaps in the near-future more creative, positive uses, such as ‘clean’ nuclear fusion and renewables).

The association of the Sumerian deity Enki/Ea (‘he who loved water’) with the powers of life find expression in myths of the Bible/ Old Testament too; Enki was the god who ‘saved‘mankind from the Flood by warning Utnapishtim (‘he born of/from the place of the fish/the waters’) to build an Ark of dimensions 1 x 1 x 1 (or 60 units cubed). ‘Teva’/’tebah’ in Hebrew, meaning ‘box’ likewise relating the Ark to the cube, the geometries of which are considered essential part of the City of Heaven in Revelations, the Holy-of-holies in the Temple of Jerusalem, the Kaaba in Mecca in Islam; and the Ark in the Sumerian and Babylonian versions of the Flood featuring Utnapishtim/ Atra-hasis etc). So these themes of antiquity concerning the powers of the cosmos and how they influenced mankind were extensive and well-founded, throughout the millennia Bce.


Enki (the serpent hybrid deity believed by many to be the deity indicated by the walking serpent in Eden who impregnates Eve with Cain in Hebrew commentaries) warned/ protected Utnapishtim; who builds the Ark in Gilgamesh. (At the end of the epic the serpent steals Plant OfLife at the pool from Gilgamesh, in a similar ‘trickster-role’ as the serpent in Eden). Gilgamesh ‘the mighty man’ is born the son of a ‘divine’ king of Sumer, and classed as ‘of the gods’, or ‘two-thirds god, one-third human’;Enki (the ‘Lord of the Waters’)and Shamash (the god of the Sun) protect ‘heroic’ Gilgamesh in his travels, including helping his killing the ‘celestial guardian’/ ‘giant’ Humbaba/ Hobabish, before being tested by Utnapishtim, the Noah-figure – while it is Enkiwho at an earlier time warns Utnapishtim of the coming Flood (by breaking the rules of the divine council), and gives him the (cubic/cosmic#) design of the Ark. Noah, born with glowing bright white skin and blue eyes ‘of the gods’, as ‘bright as the sun’, builds an Ark when warned by the Lord of the planned Flood, created to wash away the results of the gods’/ Nephilim’ unauthorised matings with human women, the lineages of the ‘hybrid’ giants – which nevertheless reappear soon afterwards somehow).

The Lord protects Moses (‘he who was drawn from the waters’); floated on Nile in his Ark (tevah/cubic box) as a baby/ comes down from Mt Sinai with his face glowing with the light of the Lord (thus depicted with ‘devils’ horns from 4th century) / receives the Ark of the Covenant(tevah again, the only two uses of the word in the Bible) from YHVH/creates the Nahash serpent to heal the Israelites from bites from the ‘fiery serpents’ the angelic order the Seraphim (who are associated with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah through the use of the ‘powers of the Sun. The two ‘angels of the Lord’ who contribute to the destruction of the peoples perhaps unbalanced by celestial/ solar genetics in Sodom are equatable to the two angels who guide Enoch through the heavens in the Book of Enoch and then teach him all the ‘arts of civilization’ for rebuilding after the Flood – while Enoch is the great-grandfather of Noah, the possibly/probably ‘celestial’ hybrid being equated with the line(s) of Cain and Seth who YHVH selects to survive the Flood and re-establish mankind and civilization. And so on ad infinitum; all these characters have serpent-related symbolism in name or imagery or life-story, indicative of the solar energy / ‘divine’ infusion of DNA creating ‘homo sapiens’; (as well as showing the complex interactions of meaning between some of the texts of antiquity, such as the ‘mystery school’ text the Book of Genesis, the many relevant books of the Bible such as the prophets Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel etcetera, the Sumerian/ Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, and the Hebrew Book of Enoch, Book of Noah, Book of Giants, and so on, from the first millennium Bce. Likewise many non-Hebrew cultures such as that of the Phoenicians, or Persia had texts which referred in one way or another to these central subjects of gods, men, giants and kings).


With regard to the themes of secrets/wisdom/metallurgy, these meanings related to the Nehushtan – the bronzeserpent that Moses made to cure the bites of the ‘fiery flying serpents’– means‘keeper/knower of secrets’ / brazen (brass-made/alloy/hybrid) serpent. This ‘technological’ aspect of the Nahash, as well as the Nagas, finds resonances in several related subjects, such as the Ark of the Covenant.

And in this respect, it is apposite that Moses was the leader of Israel when YHVH gave the deeply mysterious object the Ark of the Covenantto the nation in the wilderness, to build to house the Tablets of the Covenant from mount Sinai (in Exodus 25). It possessed several features suggestive of ‘divine’/cosmic wisdom, or ‘higher technology’ including emitting helping destroy the walls of Jericho; emitting clouds of smoke in the Holy-of-holies on the Temple’s consecration day (1Kings8.10-11); and (lethal) electricity, which then killed several incautiousIsraelites who touched it (2Samuel6.8). It also caused illness to people who were in close proximity to it for extended periods;with various resulting symptoms –causing the Philistines who held the Ark for seven months various ailments, includingpainful ‘emerods’. Upon it’s return to the Israelites, at it’s first stop at Beth-shemesh (‘House of Shamash’, the Sumerian deity of the sun), YHVH strikes down ‘fifty thousand and threescore and ten’ simply for having looked into the interior of the Ark… (1Samuel6.19) – so in all it is clearly a symbol of celestial and solar power, in some way.

And the story of the Ark is one which may strangely indicate the complexities associated throughout history around the narrative(s) of the ‘gods’givingmankind cosmic wisdom, and the ability to understand and create technology. Alternatively, possibly, one which highlights the near-limitless potentials of technology created under conditions of the highest/cosmic consciousness.(Joshua1Samuel5/6).

The giving of crafts/technologies – such as agriculture, marine vessels and navigation, metallurgy in all many applications, and so on – relates to the instinctive centre of the stomach, as we examine in the Etymology section, being concerned with the strengths and capacities of the (subconscious) mind to learn skills which enable survival of theself (in particular, rather than the ‘abstract or ‘philosophical’ capability of the mind’).Hence Enki/Ea gave mankind metallurgy, metal-work, (and  other skills of’ divine intelligence’) from the results of mining he was in charge of; a typically symbolic and actual stewardship.The Ark of the Covenant may also, in it’s symbolism of the containment of celestial energies within a box, possibly be akin to the deeper instinctive levels of man’s being. This can be seen as one interpretation of the proverb of Solomon in the Bible; Ecclesiastes 10.8   ;  

 “Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall into it. And whoso breaketh an hedge, a serpent shall bite him”…

This brief proverb has all the wisdom of Jungian depth psychology, from a date which is approximately around nine centuries before the advent of Christ –thus around 2800 years at least before Jung; another amazing example of the (cosmic) wisdom to be found at every turn in the Bible, and in many other works from history.

(Note here the numerical ‘code’ of 108  (Moon radius = 1080m) and related multiples of 216,324,432,864,etc. (360/324 = 1.111! And 360/10.8 = 33.333, the sun and Precession related value encoded into the Bible several times). The number 108 has been accorded great significance in nearly all of the main religions, hence prayer bead necklaces contain 108 beads, and so on).

Lastly, Thoth’s name gave a line of Pharaohs the name of Thuthmoses – as Moses was raised in Egypt, his name is therefore most likely a derivation of the name of the deity.. . all these things point to Moses being part of ‘serpent’-based gene-stream which was the source (or result) of the infusion of (cosmic) wisdom to mankind  (both genetically and culturally)…

And Moses as such was depicted with horns/ serpent head-wear. Indeed, it is not impossible that the head-wear of the Sumerian deities is meant to represent not so much horns, as serpents – buthave simply never been interpreted as such..! For they do not ‘stick up’ at all as cattle horns do, but rather are ‘wrapped’ around the sides of the deities helmets, as snakes would appear.

(left) Ea/ Enki, from Old Babylonian period,c.18th century Bce. Nude Ishtar/Inanna figurine in the background. From Pergamon Museum, Germany.

Consider this stela from the British Museum,(below right) of the deity Shamash.In some versions,such as this,his arm-bands are depictions of acoiled serpent.This is the same in the winged deity/apkallu/ ‘seraphim’ from the NW Palace of Ashurnasirpal II, c.883Bce, Nimrud, N.Iraq shown in the image below left).

Concerning the Ark within which Moses was floated on the Nile, the (tar-like) coating on Moses’‘tevah’/ box, is actually called ‘slime’ – with the same word/ meaning applied in three other places in the Bible; Sodom(Gen.14.10), Edom (Isaiah.34.9) and Babel (Gen.11.3). Places which are all associated with the ‘compromised’ celestial lineages.

The word Edommeanwhile means ‘red’, pride/arrogance, Esau demands of his brother Jacob– ‘give me some of that ‘adom’ soup’, ‘red stuff,red stuff’,displaying anger; in the manner of the bloodline (of the unbalanced Nephilim)…

(the hebrew root of ‘dm’ is source name for Adam, as ‘adama’ means ‘field’). This episode is of how Esau gives away his ‘birthright’ (in the typical manner of the negative bloodlines of the ‘sons of the gods’); and gets his nickname of Edom, and became the ‘father’ of the nation/tribe which is a neighbour next to Israel.

As a footnote, the Edomites were called in the New Testament the Idumeans– appropriately, Herod was an Idumean,(or the highly extensive tribe of Herod-related rulers was, originally).Herod the name means ‘heroic’ (, giving indication the Herodian lineage was of the line of the Nephilim/Rephaim, the ‘mighty’ ‘men of renown’; something the accumulated deeds of the Herodian tribe does little to counter. Notably the territory of the Edomites was south-east of Israel, in the Negev desert, which means ‘dry’ or ‘parched’, and provides another linguistic link to nagas or nahash, meaning serpent, etc.

To return to the Ark of Moses, and it’s relations to the Ark of Noah (and the Ark of the Covenant), there are many links to the deity of Sumer who helpes Utnapishtim survive the Deluge. Enki, the serpent /water deity who represents the instinctive/ reptilian consciousness of the stomach (as opposed to the intellectual or emotional centres) likewise is ‘lord of the Ab-zu’, the ‘abyss’ within which the waters are stored which fertilise the earth (of which the Deluge is a surfeit, or imbalance).In the sense of the depths/lands ‘below’, ‘Ap-su’ may be the source for ‘sud’ as in ‘south’, as well as ‘sub’ as in ‘subterranean’, ‘subconscious’ and so on. In fact, the boat Utnapishtim builds is due to it’s design (completely sealed over like a box) comparable to a submarine as much as a boat – as well as a cube in it’s 1 x 1 x 1 dimensions, giving significance to many aspects of religion in antiquity in terms of the geometric proportions of the hexagon and the cube!

Sitchin notes (p.95,Divine Encounters) that the biblical word for the boat made by Noah is used today in Hebrew for submarine; ‘tzolelet’, from ‘tzulili’ the term the Babylonian/Assyrian recensions (versions) use for the boat.

 The ‘Abzu’ could also be used to refer the mines that were the source of metals that enabled civilization (thus representing not ‘abstract’ but ‘instinctive’ or crafts/technology related wisdom – and lastly the depths of space, where Niburu and the Anunnaki came from, ie beyond the  solar system – and possibly from star-systems beyond the galaxy..! Hence the conjunction/occasional conflation of Enki/Ea across time with the deity Abzu only in the later Babylonian culture) – the abyss/ the depths of space. Indeed the Ab- in Abzu can be taken to mean Water(the various mythological serpent-like beings of the Bible; the Leviathan, Tiamat, Rahab,the Tannim/Awe may thus likewise be equated with both the depths of the earth, or the sea, as well as the depths of celestial space; Tiamat (mentioned in Isaiah) was the subject of theEnuma Elish, the Babylonian myth of Marduk and Tiamat,celestial bodies which ‘battled’ in the heavens.Through her theft of the ‘divine tablets of Destiny’ Tiamat represented the aspect of chaos or unbalanced yin energy,and the undermining of celestial harmony -the destabilizing of the solar system’s orbital harmonies – hence the need for her destruction at the hands of the planet Marduk which smashed into her).

This could be applied to the chaotic nature of the Ab-zu, the ‘abyss’, even though it provides the energies mythically which water the Earth, be that literally or figuratively.(It is the Abzu- as the divine waters – which many temples of antiquity were built over; ie beneath the Foundation Stone in the lowestlevels of the Temple of Solomon, as Hebrew texts related; and in fact many sacred sites are located over running water courses, as we have seen in part ii. of this section, including Chartres Cathedral, the Kaaba, and possibly the Great Pyramid in Giza among many others.) The Ark in it’s various guises can be seen to represent a way of surviving a flood of the ‘waters of life’ – an aspect of the Nile which was celebrated for thousands of years in the Inundation, a yearly flood of fertile alluvial waters from the mountains of Upper Egypt (which coincided with the annual appearance of Sirius in the East on the horizon at dawn)… and equally a representation of the laws of heaven in their role of providing a framework for the life-giving energies of the ‘waters’ to flourish in a harmonious manner.


From all these connections and metaphors in the lives of Noah, Moses, and so on, it can be seen that the Hebrew figures in the Bible, such as Noah, were used to incorporate the deepest wisdom which was transmitted down through artworks and myths from the societies of Sumer through to Akkadia and then Babylon – where the Hebrew priest elite were captive (although probably housed, effectively, considering how many took foreign wives to themselves and began families, as the Book of Ezra mentions, etc).- and then initiated into the cosmic wisdom of the Sumerian elites/Anunnaki, considering the multiple Mesopotamian myths incorporated into the structure of the Old Testament.Also encoded into the stories of Abraham,Moses,Isaac and others, was the high/cosmic consciousness present in Egypt, raising the point tangentiallyof it’s complex connections to Sumer…

As a last foot-note related to this, it is curious to think that the wisdom of Sumer that came down to Babylon (thence the Hebrews), was so contributive to the Hebrews’ higher consciousness shown in the Old Testament; while the Bible also includes the ‘divine judgement’ of Babylon with the destruction of the Tower, the death of Nebuchadnezzar in the book of Daniel, and the later association of Babylon with worldly empires in St John’s book of Revelations. 

As the illustration below shows, Babylon in the 6th century Bc under Nebuchadnezzar was a large and developed city at thecentre of the Babylonian Empire, with a civilization derived in large part from the Sumerian /Anunnaki original, betweenc.2000Bc and 300Bc – in its heyday it was the largest city in the world, with upwards of around 200,000 inhabitants, between 612-320Bce.

After it’s peak it’s empire never recovered, effectively losing all regional power after the 5th century Bce defeat to the Persians, and the 331Bce defeat by Alexander the Great – but it was immortalized in the Bible as one of history’s first ’empires’, which in conjunction with the Tower of Babylon and the Babylonian Capture have meant almost universal negative perspectives.

The walls of the city had alternate images of the lion, and the dragon; the latter was the Mushussu, derived from Sumerian mythology and artworks, as indeed was much of the Babylonian religion. The Ishtar Gate in Babylon, where the Sacred Way entered the city was likewise decorated with these symbols, possibly as a symbol of protection, possibly as a symbol of the victories of Marduk and theBabylonian kings.

(left)Seven storey  ziggurat of Babylon illustration, Carus Paul 1887. Wikimedia, Public Domain.

(right) The Lion of Ishtar Palace, Babylon. Berlin MuseumAttribution; Wikimedia, J.Luiz, PD

Research shows little about Babylon that was worse than any other state of the time, the Roman Empire included.(Unlike the ancient Assyrians, who were viewed throughoutthe Near East as extremely cruel and violent (even for the time); so war-like and uncompromising in building the Assyrian empire that it’s downfall was widely celebrated across many of the nations of the Near East – after the death of Ashurbanipalin 631 Bce. the Babylonians rebelled from their Assyrian rulers in 626 Bce, as did the Medeans (ie. Iranians) in 615 Bc – of the maincities of the empire, Assur fell in 614 Bce, and Nineveh in 612 Bce, thereby putting a complete end to the extensive Assyrian empire,meaning that ancient Nineveh, mentioned in some of the oldest books of the Bible never regained it’s role as a major city; indeed it was covered over by sands from the 13th century onwards, until it was rediscovered in the 19th century by the English archeologist Sir Austen Henry Layard.

The Babylonian society meanwhile was well organised, efficient, and had much religious and cultural artwork, derived again, primarily, from the Sumerian).Learning, mathematics, geometry, and astronomy, and scientific research were all esteemed and encouraged by the Babylonians, and their various kings. The first Map of the World belongs to Babylonian history too, written in Akkadian and dated loosely to around the 9th century Bce…and overall reverence for the sovereign was encouraged as much as reverence for the gods.

As to why Babylon was represented so negatively in the Bible, perhaps it symbolized the powers of Man achieved without a living connection to the deity, and thus the dangers of the world separated from Heaven; or possibly the powers of human society guided by the ‘sons of the gods’ as they were represented by various bloodlines from the Sumerian civilization onwards.Yet the Old Testament contains strikingly little information of the seventy years when the elite of Israel were captive in the city from 603-538Bce. Theories exist which propose that this was when the Sumerian cosmic consciousness of the Anuna was passed on to the religious priests and scribes of the Israelites, leading to their understanding of cosmogony as depicted in Genesis – likewise the stories of the Deluge, contained within versions of the Epic of Gilgamesh for more than a thousand years beforehand. What may be posited is a fertile re-working of the ‘wisdom-tradition’ of Sumer by the Hebrews during this period and after. But there are few acknowledgements of this within the Bible – unless perhaps the clues are looked for…

Perhaps the assertion of their identity was necessary for the Hebrews for cultural reasons?

Similarly, it is clear, that if Moses was the author of the first five books of the Bible – the Pentateuch – he gained his grounding in cosmic consciousness from the Egypt he was born and educated in circa 1400 Bce; meaning that the Christian and Hebrew religions owe much of their theology, world-view,and liturgies, to the practices and wisdom of Egypt – a fact noted by Gurdjieff,then Ouspensky.And of course, the central tenet of the Old Testament – that Moses and the Israelites were protected by, and given their identity and wisdom by the divinity YHVH, or God – is by no means undermined by these related factors.

The aspects of Moses’ story, the ‘horns’/serpents/face ‘glowing like the Sun’ and so on, as well as semantic meanings of names,  and events which are described, relate closely (among other things) to the sub-text contained within the role and life of Simon Peter (considered in section iv. as a devil’/satan/Seraphim/Nagas/serpent of ‘wisdom’). Especially when considering that Seraphim is derived from the Hebrew root ‘sarap‘ to ‘burn’, or to be ‘scorched’* or ‘parched’…thus meaning ‘fiery serpent’ in effect, which punish the ungodly – while also worshipping God in the highest heaven.Few observers have managed to adequately reconcile these traits of the Seraphim.(Moses himself is so ‘fiery’ or ‘zealous’ for the Lord that he kills many of neighbouring tribes ‘non-believers’, as well as those within his own tribe too!And at times he does so with fire, which is ‘sent down from the heavens’… similarly the rebellious followers of Korah, the cousin of Moses are swallowed up into the earth itself, at Numbers16.1-32).

*perhaps why the 8th angel/Seraphim freezes the face of Enoch when he is to go before the ‘mountain of the Lord’ toward the end of 2Enoch.

Note too Simon Peter’s actions to/ effect on the couple who cheat the nascent Christian church of it’s money in the first yearsafter Christ – (Ananias and Sapphira, in Acts 5.3-10); first Ananias falls dead at the words of Peter who asks why he withheld from the church monies from the sale of some land;  then 3 hours later the wife of Ananias, Sapphira enters, unaware of events; when Peter asks her the same question she then falls down dead..!

Pointing to either Simon Peter’s cosmic role as ‘satan’/judge/’accuser’ – or ‘seraphim’ /’destroyer’/’servant of the Lord’s will’,such as destroyed the cities of the plain with the powers of the Sun – or as being representative of the negative Herod-like aspects of some of the bloodlines of the Nagas/serpent; showing as such immaturity, incompleteness, a lack of understanding of Christ’s message, and an unforgiving and zealous nature in the assumption of primacy/ authority Jesus gives him…

or perhaps the story shows all three aspects… A difficult question to answer. (And of course, the section in Acts does not say Peter wished any ill, or attempted to cause any injury to them – so in effect it may have been not Peter’s will or doing, but that of the Holy Spirit)! The meanings of Ananias (Yahweh has been gracious) and Sapphira (to be calmly and harmoniously composed) do indicate a definite sanctity to their natures…and observers have noted the gradual loss of authority of Simon Peter as theearly Church evolved.

These strong characteristics and actions exhibited by  Moses,and Simon Peter,Noah and Solomon closely identify them in so many ways with the energies of the Sun, and stars, and their manifestations on Earth; as well as the ‘guardian deities’ of the Sumerian related and Egyptian religions,Enki/Ea,Shamash,Ningishzida,Thoth,Ptahand so on.

– there are, as well, the myriad connections between serpents and devils, and wisdom and the ‘Fall of Man’ – and the ‘Way of Blame’ perhaps, to ensure the picture is complex and many-layered.

Both Simon Peter and Moses suffered divine punishment at the end of their life, indicating their incomplete or non-human, or rather, cosmicnature, given in service of the Lord.(for descriptions of the Seraphim, see Numbers 21.6,Isaiah 6.2/14.29 and Revelations 4.8) At the end of their lives, Peter was crucified by Nero in Rome (at his own request upside down), while Moses was not allowed by Jehovah to cross the river Jordan with his people, the tribe of Israel, as they ended their forty years of wandering in the wilderness and entered the lands destined to become Israel.

There is a final link of semantic nature in this ‘punishment’ by Jehovah of Moses. This is that the mountain in Canaan besides the river Jordan which Moses ascends in order to look upon the ‘Promised Land’ he is forbidden to enter, is called Pisgah. At various points in the Old Testament this name is juxtaposed with another name, in confusing manner; so at Deuteronomy 34.1 it states;

“And Moses went up from the plains of Moab unto the mountain of Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, that is over against Jericho; and the LORD showed him all the land of Gilead, unto Dan (Israel)”.

(left) Late Assyrian seal, showing the two Anuna Marduk and Nabu standing on their ‘servant’ dragon Mushussu; another example of the symbolic representation of‘subterranean/ subconscious energies in all the civilizations stemming from the Sumerian in Mesopotamia. The objects stood on the ground include the Tree of Life, as represented here by a date-palm with fruit attached. The winged sky disc is Niburu, the celestial planet ruled by Anu, the father of the Anunnaki, and of Enlil and Enki. (from Ancient Seals of the Near East, R.A.Martin, 1940).

We have already noted that where Moses rested was a pagan hill-top site, overlooking the ‘field of the Watchers’, while the salient point here is that Nebo, or Nabo, was the Babylonian god who was the son of Marduk (the son of Enki and Ninhursag) in the labyrinthine bloodlines of the Anunnaki, and his name is related to the planet which was home to the tribe of deities, Niburu.He was portrayed c.550Bc in Babylon exactly as earlier deities were, with the horned head-wear. The name of Pisgah means ‘cleft’ or division – an excellent metaphor for the conflicts inherent within the hybrid celestial-human bloodlines rather than the unities of the highest dimensions.

So the biblical narrative is effectively linking Moses to the lineages of the Anunnaki, as many of the details of his life-story appear to support. . . and the ‘imperfect’ nature of these genetic bloodlines is potentially the reason why Moses, as David, and Solomon, and Simon Peter are all denied outright blessing by YHVH towards the ends of their lives, unlike Enoch, and Elijah. It may serve to link Moses to the ‘punishing’ aspects of the seraphim and ‘angels of the Lord’ who cause suffering to both pagan peoples and the Israelites.Nevertheless the indicated patriarchs of Israel are all the recipients of many divine blessings and experiences showing the dualistic character of their lives and selves…so though the aspects related to the bloodlines of Sumer are central to our understanding their characters –they maynot perhaps be crucial to questions of the spirit.

A final point to raise concerns the narratives contained within the Old Testament of various women named Naamah. This is the name of the daughter of Lamech and Zillah, and sister of Tubal-Cain (Gen4.22), and also the Ammonitess who was married to Solomon and the mother of his son Rehoboam (1Kings14.21). In 2Samuel10.1-4 king David shows mercy to the Ammonites and their king Hanun, ‘the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto me’. Moses had previously been warned by YHVH not to make war upon the Ammonites, as Deuteronomy2.19 refers to the history of the Ammonites, saying he will not give Israel of the land of the children of Ammon, ‘because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession’… It then goes on to mention the giants who lived there previously, the Zamzummins, a ‘people as tall as the Anakim’; and similar to the children of Esau which dwelt in Seir, and the Avims which dwelt in Hazerim. Possibly the latter named people were directly related to Ava, the sister of Cain whose name links to the sun, and the city of Awa/An/On/Heliopolis in Egypt. So every single reference to women named Naamah relates to the celestial bloodlines of Sumer, in various ways – and yet the daughter of king Nahash is praised for her righteousness in Talmudic literature, such as Babba Kamma 38b, whose account states Moses is told by YHVH to not take the land of the Ammonites as Naamah was to descend from them. ( Talmudic texts (Abba b.Kahana) state that Naamah was the wife of Noah, and was so named because her conduct was ‘pleasing’ to YHVH; an interpretation which other rabbis reject, saying she ‘sang pleasant songs to her pagan gods’ (!), thus highlighting the dualities often found at the heart of nearly all ‘bloodline’ narratives and persons…

There is also in the (highly meaningful) Book of Job Zophar the Naamathite, one of his three friends; his name is related to ‘sippor’/zippor, which as we have seen is the name of Moses’ wife (Zipporah), and means bird, or chirping/shrieking, or insolence, or doom; all relevant to aspects of the negative lines as exemplified by Lilith, who has bird’s/ owl’s talons, representing the dark, feminine, celestial nature of her being. And the (field of) Zophim, as we have seen, was next to where Moses was buried, and means ‘of the Watchers’ – the archetypal name of the Anunnaki throughout antiquity…

These various relationships likewise link the bloodlines of Moses, and David and Solomon in various ways to both the negative and positive aspects of the celestial lines of Sumer it may be said; if so it is possible that the underlying source or stem of her name, and that of king Nahash, links to that of the Nagas – who we have seen are more closely related to the Seraphim than to the lines of Cain, and who play a central role in the religious and esoteric mythologies of virtually all the major religions of the Near East, in one way or another.

In conclusion then, it ispossible to say that Moses was the ‘rock’ upon which the Old Testament / Hebrew church was founded; while standing among many great patriarchs and prophets, the fact that the first five books of the Bible are ascribed to Moses indicates the essential role he played in the events of the biblical development of the nation of Israel.

More researches and writings on thesesubjects in the next few months.

Please feel free to post comments on the notice-board, or if you have any

news, information, opinions or feedback, please email us at;