Thread by @HMEnglund

THE SEMANTICS OF "GOD"

[Semantics (from Ancient Greek: sēmantikós, "significant") is the study of meaning, reference, or truth]

G O D
7+15+4 = 26

"The language we use influences the thoughts we think much more than the thoughts we think influence the language we use."

p.127

"No modern Christian, Jew or Moslem seriously believes in the corporeality of 'God.' Jehovah walking around the Garden of Eden in the afternoon was recognized as an allegory, a parable, even by St. Augustine fitfteen centuries ago.

[J E H O V A H
1+5+8+6+4+1+8 = 33]

[P A R A B L E S
16+1+18+1+2+12+5+19 = 74 -> 11]

A spirit does not have a beard like elderly gent in Grandma's illustrated Bible. Nor does a spirit have any of the other gross morphological traits of masculinity.

(...)

The Believer had better face himself and ask squarely: Do I literally believe 'God' has a penis? If the answer is no, then it seems only logical to drop the rediculous practice of referring to 'God' as 'He.'

It is this 'He,' after all, which has given Judaism, Christianity and Islam that anthropomorphic cast which makes them so unattractive to the scientific mind. Dr. Gerald Wald wrote once in Scientific American, 'I try to avoid making sentences with the word God in them.'

What he is objecting to is clearly the dualistic anthropomorphic image of Bid Daddy separate from the universe, for later he adds that when somebody else says 'God' he mentally translates this as 'the order of nature.'
Which brings to mind a recent interview I had with

Bucky Fuller.

WILSON: Why do you always write 'Universe' instead of 'the Universe'?
FULLER: 'The' comes from theos, God, and 'God God' seems rather redundant.
WILSON: Then 'God' and 'Universe' mean the same to you?
FULLER: 'God' seems like a rather small concept to contain the

exquisitely interaccommodative coherencies of the Universe.

So, then: suppose the Believer begins referring to 'God' as it. He will soon find that his statements about IT will grow more abstract and impersonal. If he implies purpose to IT, he will be more cautious about

attributing such human (or sub-human) purposes as jealousy, authoritarianism, intolerance, vengeance or a paranoid obsession with sexual behavior of the people doen the street.

Dr. Wald will find it easier to translate the Believer's statements, since the 'order of nature' is more an IT than a He."

p.129-130

Fuller says that "The" equals "Universe". Let us check this in the kabbalah dimension:

T H E
20+8+5 = 33

U N I V E R S E
21+14+9+22+5+18+19+5 = 113

Thus: Yes, since 113 kabbalistically (like 311) can be read "three eleven", or "eleven three's", i.e. 11x3, this implies that "THE" and "UNIVERSE" are equivalents.

Moreover:

I T
9+2 = 11

But it's getting even better in the end of the chapter.

IT = INFORMATION SYSTEM

"Thus, IT can metaphorically be considered as an Intelligence and even as possessed by 'personality' (or the cosmic analog of 'personality'), in the manner of the traditional theist;

or IT can be considered as a giant machine, as the traditional materialist prefers; IT can be seen as a mesh of energy or four-dimensional grid of energy or a 'dance' of energy, which are metaphors from early 20th century physics;

or IT may be visualized as an Information System, which is the current model I happen to like (...)"

p.132

Robert Anton Wilson
Right Where You Are Sitting Now
Further Tales of the Illuminati

1982, 2nd Ed. 1992

I T [11] SYSTEM [101]

"Information technology (IT) is the use of computers to create, process, store, and exchange all kinds of electronic data and information. IT is typically used within the context of business operations as opposed to personal or entertainment technologies.

IT is considered to be a subset of information and communications technology (ICT). An INFORMATION technology SYSTEM (IT system) is generally an information system, a communications system, or, more specifically speaking, a computer system (...)"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informati…