[geocentrism] Re: Ancient calendars-Velikovsky
- From: "Gary Shelton" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:33:42 -0600
Hello Carl, and welcome.
I might be one of the few people who can say he totally fell into love with
Velikovsky's writings. I read every one of his books, I believe, and found
him thoroughly fascinating. That was about 10 years ago. I have learned
much since then, and, for one, no longer fall into the devoted Velikovsky
camp. For example, I no longer believe the Queen of Sheba was the same
person as the pharoah Hatshepsut. David Rohl in his book Pharaohs and Kings
pretty much knocked this out with his identification of Saul being Lebayu in
the Egyptian writings, though this doesn't discount V's thesis being a heck
of a read, in my opinion. That he didn't get all the details right has got
him a lot of bad press over the years. This is true. But its hardly fair.
Velikovsky was a free thinker who saw that the King Had No Clothes. He saw
that the standard Eyptian timeline was enormously out of whack. And it had
been that way since the decoding of the Rosetta Stone. Even to this day,
the truth of the screwed up Egyptian timeline still serves to anchor down
the truth with its wrong-headed thinking.
So, the main benefit of Velikovsky's work, in my humble opinion, and one
that was never properly credited in my view, was his bringing back to the
Bible back some of its long lost credence. V showed how some of the stories
could have been true, timewise, and possibly were in reality, actually true.
For instance, where did the manna come from that fed the Children of Israel
in the desert? Velikovsky postulated that Venus' cometary tail (Venus had
been previously claimed to have been a comet expelled from the Great Red
Spot of Jupiter) near flyby could have accounted for that occurring at that
precise time.
And even more intriguingly, Velikovsky identified Egyptian monument writing
discussing a pharaoh who died in a mysterious "whirlpool" at a place called
Pi-ha-Khiroth...the same exact place the Israelites encamped on the Red Sea
in the book of Exodus. The pharaoh identified was not Ramses II.
Nonetheless, the secular school of thought couldn't accept any of this.
They had to use an alternative to the Bible, so they chose the Egyptian
timeline, right or wrong, and have stuck with it despite all of the dogged
evidence of things like the fact that Ramses III (conventionally lived 1200
BC or so) had Greek inscriptions on his mortuary monument in the Nile delta
dating from the days of Plato, or 400 BC, not 1200 BC.
Carl, Cheryl here gave us a website to a Gordon Bane's site where he talks
about Fibonacci numbers. (That site is
http://www.geocentricbible.com/id25.htm if you care to check it out.) One
of the intriguing things is how they skip the earth and how the only
discrepancies of any note apply to Venus and Mars. The author, one Fred
Wilson, attributes this to the cataclysm at the time of the Biblical Flood.
Velikovsky, of course as you know, discussed Venus and Mars extensively in
his writings, and how they approached the earth, especially Venus in Worlds
in Collision. For those who haven't read it, V makes a good case for the
period of Venus in those days being the cause for the 50 year Jubilee (still
observed today) asking, of course, why it wasn't 49 years...a more Biblical
number. Also, the time of Hezekiah's extended life on earth was reputed, by
Velikovsky, to correspond the the 15 year period of Mars' close approach to
the earth. V claimed that this is what caused the Biblical shadow to move
backward and then forward the ten degrees.
Despite his shortcomings, I always felt V's identification of the Greek's
"Oedipus" with the Egyptian "Akhnaton" to be powerfully compelling. His
side by side comparison of the family trees between the two characters, one
fictitious, one real, is nothing short of astounding. They are exact
copies. V's connection as to how Aknaton obliterated references to his
father throughout Egypt and how Queen Tuy, Akhnaton's mother, was always
around....fascinating. Read Oedipus and Akhnaton for the story.
Velikovsky's third book, Earth in Upheaval, was an eye-opening look at
catastrophism, written in the mid 50's. With the notable and non-sequitur
exception of his advocacy of punctuated evolution in that book, he made a
superb case for creationism's young earth. The La Brea Tar Pits, the
mammoths in Siberia, the islands of the arctic ocean loaded with flood
debris, the cattle still frozen to this day in a Tibetan river as they
attempted to swim across it in the remote past...you all know the stories.
Velikovsky was where I first read about all of this.
Was Velikovsky good or bad? He was, after all, a heliocentrist. Indeed, he
claimed that the earth had sometime in its past "flipped over", possibly
even turning into a drunk sailor with the Venuvian encounters. But though
he didn't hold to the Bible he equally disavowed convential sciences. So
the thing about Velikovsky one can indisputedly say was that he was a
fence-sitter. He made no friends on either side while doing a fabulous job
of raising the ire of all who despised, as Velikovsky (self-praising himself
in 'Worlds In Collision') described as his "turning a page in the book of
knowledge".
Having been in this geocentric argument now for three years, I can
understand both the indifference of the Christians and the intolerance of
the scientists. Velikovsky was a genius. But geniuses aren't patronized in
either world, especially ones who are a little cantankerous.
Was Velikovsky good or bad then? On balance, very good, I say.
Sincerely,
Gary Shelton
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Felland" <cfelland@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 2:48 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Ancient calendars
> Neville, Steven, and group,
> By way of introduction, I am trained as an Entomologist (Ph.D.
> Mississippi State University, 1989) and was employed by Pennsylvania
> State University for ten years before opting for a more Biblical
> lifestyle in Arkansas. I have espoused most of the viewpoints of
> Institute of Creation Research through graduate school and beyond. I
> feel that my contribution to creation understanding is a demonstration
> that the Hebrew alphabet is formed around the words 'Israel' and 'Zion.'
> 'Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal' rejected the paper, but I have
> put it online (http://yahuah.org/IZCentral.html).
>
> My family and I began to observe a solar/lunar "Creation calendar" (Gen.
> 1: 14) about a year ago in which the 6 working days, weekly Sabbaths,
> and New Moon Days are mutually exclusive (Eze. 46: 1, 3). Through
> others who are observing this calendar I was introduced to the geostatic
> world view. I have perused your web site, look forward to your new CD,
> and have been following the discussions on this list.
>
> I recently read Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision and noted his ancient
> calendar study pointing to a 360 day year in the past. This, plus the
> prophetic 360 day year of the Scriptures, leads me to wonder if the
> current length of the year is different from that at creation or whether
> the 360 day calendar is based on something else. Velikovsky argued that
> the Plagues and Joshua's long day were a result of brushes with comets
> and that the hail that fell in both was likely meteors. He argued that
> it was the earth's rotation that was altered. Does the geostatic
> position allow for "natural" explanations for the cataclysmic events in
> earth history? Does the geostatic position allow for a change in the
> length of the solar year?
>
> C. M. Felland
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.4.0 - Release Date: 2/22/05
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.4.0 - Release Date: 2/22/05
Other related posts:
