Code to the Scriptures – Chapter 1

by MJSmith

Chapter 1 – “Genesis”

     Before we dig into the two creation accounts of Genesis I would like to make it clear that the first five books of the Old Testament was masterminded during the Hebrew’s captivity in Babylon.  This was a time of spiritual growth and enlightenment for the Hebrews because they were forced to turn to God for answers as to why they were taken from their “promised land.”  What they wrote, the Priestly document, was based upon three other documents.  (Notice the 100 years between each one!)

850 b.c. the Jahweh document came into existence – its god was Jehovah, JHWH, Lord
     Jahweh was a tribal god, a warrior god, a vengeful god, he saw man’s flaws, and he punished man.  Jahweh was one god among many gods; Jahweh was the god of the Hebrew race.  (Notice I do not capitalize the word god here, this is on purpose because this god is not the one true God.)  This is the same god that today’s Jehovah’s Witnesses follow.
     This document is the source for the creation allegory of Adam.

750 b.c. the Elohistic document came into existence – its God was Elohim, God
     Elohim-Shaddai is actually Father-Mother God, creator of the first creation account in Genesis 1-2:3.

650 b.c. the Deuteronomic document came into existence – its God was Elohim
     Moses would call God Jehoveh [or Jehovah], however, he attempted to translate Jehovah to the God he identified as I am that I am.

550 b.c. the Priestly document came into existence – wrote during the Babylonian captivity[1]
     Ezekiel, probably headed the ordered re-writing of the Jehovistic document’s record of creation.  These Fisher-Kings placed it after the Elohistic Truth record of creation so that error (within the Jehovistic document) – the claim of mortality, the claim of a false God, and the claim of a false man – could be analyzed, uncovered, and annihilated systematically and scientifically.

Extracts from Peake’s Commentary
     “II, 4b-III. 24.  J’s[2]Story of Creation and Paradise Lost, — This story does not belong to P, for it is free from its characteristics in style, vocabulary, and point of view.  It is distinguished from P’s creation story by differences in form and in matter.  The regular and precise arrangement, the oft-repeated formulae, the prosaic style are here absent.  We have, instead, a bright and vivid style, a story rather than a chronicle.  The frank anthropomorphism would have been repugnant to the priestly writer, and a marked difference is to be observed between the two accounts.  P starts from a watery chaos, this narrative from a dry waste.  P represents the development of life as moving in a climax up to the creation of man and woman, while here [with J] man seems to be created first, then plants, and animals, and woman last of all.  The use of Yahweh, the anthropomorphism, and several characteristic expressions combine to show that this section must be assigned to the Yahwist group of narratives.  The use of the double name Yahweh Elohim (rendered Lord God) raises the question whether we should assign the section to J.  Possibly two documents have been combined, one of which used Yahweh from the first while the other used Elohim till the time of Enosh [Enoch].  But a sufficient explanation is that the writer used Yahweh alone, while an editor added Elohim to identify Yahweh with the Elohim of the priestly story.  We may, accordingly, refer this section to J.  Yet it bears the marks of a rather complicated literary history, and elements from different sources seem to be present in it….
     “…The literary beauty of the narrative, the delicacy and truth of its psychology, have long been the object of merited admiration.  And though it has been mishandled by theologians to yield a doctrine of original sin,[3] yet it describes with wonderful insight the inner history of the individual….
     “…The representation of the original condition of things as a dry waste, and of fertility as normally dependent on rain, does not suit Babylonian conditions, nor yet the reference to the fig-tree.  Hence, if the story originated in Babylonia, which is uncertain, it has been much modified to suit Palestinian conditions.  The Hebrews may have received it directly from the Phoenicians and Canaanites, but we may be sure that it has been greatly deepened by the genius of Israel.”[4]
     What I feel could be of importance (and you are probably going to think that I am crazy, and I do not even know that I accept this explanation as 100% correct, I am just putting it forth to you to mull over) is what if the story of Adam is actually based upon ancient stories about the beginning of humanity coming forth from the ape man?  You have probably (or maybe have not) heard ancient astronaut theories.  A modern mode of thinking today is that extraterrestrials came to earth and began playing with the local zoology’s DNA.  They used cloning processes, etc.  Did these intelligent beings mix their own DNA with the local apes?  Is this why there is no missing link?  This would certainly explain things on a physical material level.
     But then, where did the idea of God come from, specifically, the idea of One God who is responsible for the creation of the universe?  Could this idea have also come from the extraterrestrial gods (Jehovah, etc.) that were called “Lord” or “Lords” (like with Stargate SG-1’s System Lords)?  If this did happen, and there is no proof that it did, just as there is no proof that it did not happen, then would not ancient cultures have made stories up about the creation of man?  Would not these stories have had an anthropomorphic Lord God Jehovah (for example) that walked on the ground (earth) with his creation called Adam (a man of red clay)?  And would these Lords have been written about in the Bible as “the sons of God” who “saw the daughters of men that they were fair:  and they took them wives of all which they chose”[5]?  I feel that it is also this idea of extraterrestrial beings that is the bases behind the story 2001:  A Space Odyssey.
     There is physical proof, skeleton heads, that there were red haired giants.[6]  And in Genesis 6:4 it reads:  “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.”  This is before the flood that takes place in Noah’s 600th year.  There was also, after the flood, the man known as Goliath.  Yes, it seems that there were giant men who were on earth.
     Speaking about the Sixth Day of Truth where man and woman are created (in Genesis 1) – woman, being the last on the creation list would then be the higher idea or the highest idea.
     Another interesting thing that John W. Doorly brings out in The Works of John W. Doorly Talks on Science of the Bible Vol. 1  Nos. 1-10 The Truth and False Records of Creation on page 246 is that the Adam story has two aspects (as far as the seven synonymous terms for God[7] are concerned).  It reads:  “I am more and more convinced that if you look carefully at this record of the Adam-man, which runs from the second chapter of Genesis to the end of the fourth chapter in Genesis, you find two distinct things:  you find that it counterfeits the order of the days of creation as Mind, Spirit, Soul, Principle, Life, Truth, and Love, and that it also counterfeits very definitely the reverse of this sequence, — Love, Truth, Life, Principle, Soul, Spirit, and Mind.”  This second counterfeit sequence is rectified in Revelation’s Fifth Vision with the Seven Vials of Wrath (which is really Love).
     Doorly continues, “What do you find in this Adam story?  First of all, you get a false concept of God.  This false concept of God is the counterfeit of Love, for ‘Love imparts the clearest idea of Deity’ (S&H 517:13-14).  Then you get a false sense of man, the counterfeit of Truth.  Then you have the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the false sense of Life.[8]  Then man is supposed to be hypnotized by the Lord God, but is really hypnotized by his own false concept of God, man, and the universe, and instead of interpretation you get obscuration, the opposite of Principle.[9]  Out of that you begin to get a false sense of sex, which is a limited, finite concept of the infinite gender of Soul.  Then out of that you begin to get the opposite of the fruit of Spirit — you get the fruit of hell.  And then the climax of the whole thing is that Cain goes out and dwells in the land of Nod, — that is, oblivion, the opposite of Mind, where all spiritual thinking begins.”  All spiritual thinking begins with Mind.
     Of course, how could Cain go elsewhere if he is of Adam, who is self-hypnotized and still in his deep sleep?  For the land of Nod is equivalent to dreamland.

Genesis and “Genesis”
     The main difference between the book of Genesis and the chapter “Genesis” is that Mary Baker Eddy is not concerned with explaining the whole book of Genesis but with explaining the differences between the two differing accounts of creation.  She is concerned with helping Christianity and/or mankind in distinguishing between the first creation account belonging to Elohim and the second creation allegory belonging to Jehovah, the Lord.  Even today most people cannot distinguish, or spiritually draw a line between, the two accounts of creation!
     The definition of allegory is:  “A figurative sentence or discourse, in which the principal subject is described by another subject resembling it in its properties and circumstances…The distinction in Scripture between a parable and an allegory, is said to be that a parable is a supposed history, and an allegory a figurative description of real facts.”  Figurative descriptions use metaphors and similes.  Even though Mary Baker Eddy calls Adam’s story an allegory she also speaks of it as “legendary.”   Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines legend as, “a story coming down from the past; esp:  one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable.”  To me this definition sums up what the Adam story really is – it is regarded by most clergy, and followers of said clergy, as being historical even though it cannot be proved to be historical.  Let us take a closer look at the definition of allegory – “A figurative sentence or discourse [the story being presented to us as being historical], in which the principle subject [the creation of spiritual man] is described by another subject [the creation of material man] resembling it [is a copy of] in its properties and circumstances [hence, the other subject is a counterfeit of the principle subject].”  Yet how many Christians or Jews or Muslims really understand this fact today?

     Mary Baker Eddy chose the two following BIBLE quotes to head her chapter “Genesis.”

     And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the name of God, Almighty; but by My name Jehovah was I not known to them. – Exodus.

     All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.  In Him was life; and the life was the light of men. – John.

     The quote from Exodus is of most importance.  It actually is telling us that the Patriarchs did not know God as Jehovah, a tribal god, but as Elohim our Father-Mother God.  They knew only the God of the first creation account, which is about the revelation of spiritual ideas!  Jehovah’s Witnesses should take stalk in this point.
     The second quote is assuring us, the readers, that everything that was made was by Elohim and not Jehovah.  Without God, and this is Truth, nothing, and I mean nothing, could exist or have life (which is the light of men).  So the counterfeit has no existence in reality (Truth).
     Mary Baker Eddy’s first paragraph is titled “Spiritual interpretation” and begins with:  “Scientific interpretation of the Scriptures properly starts with the beginning of the Old Testament, chiefly because the spiritual import of the Word, in its earliest articulations [to form or fit into a systematic whole; so we could read it as: “in its earliest articulations of God’s Science”], often seems so smothered by the immediate context [weaving together of words] as to require explication;[10] whereas the New Testament narratives are clearer and come nearer the heart.  Jesus illumines them, showing the poverty of mortal existence, but richly recompensing human want and woe with spiritual gain.  The incarnation of Truth, that amplification of wonder and glory which angels could only whisper and which God illustrated by light and harmony, is consonant with ever-present Love.  So-called mystery and miracle, which subserve the end of natural good, are explained by that Love for whose rest the weary ones sigh when needing something more native to their immortal cravings than the history of perpetual evil.”[11]
Spiritual overture           
     “A second necessity for beginning with Genesis is that the living and real prelude [Genesis 1-2:3] of the older Scriptures is so brief that it would almost seem, from the preponderance of unreality in the entire narrative, as if reality did not predominate over unreality [Adam], the light over the dark, the straight line of Spirit[12] over the mortal deviations and inverted images of the creator and His creation.” (S&H 502:1)

     It is of most importance that we understand that this “spiritual overture,” of Genesis 1-2:3, provides us with the most important matrix structure for much of the BIBLE (as seen above).   The Key to Apocalyptic writing was given to us by Moses’ symbol of the Golden Candlestick, based upon the Seven Days of Genesis’ Elohistic creation (or revelation).  Moses saw the structure within the pattern of the pyramid mountain, which he translated into the Golden Candlestick (seen below).

     (Since writing this post I have learned that the tones for the seven visions in Revelation are much more complicated than the matrix for the Golden Candlestick is.  See my later posts from 2016 on this topic.  The above Candlestick matrix is by John W. Doorly and his students.)

“Deflection of Being
     “Spiritually followed, the book of Genesis is the history of the untrue image of God, named a sinful mortal [Adam].  This deflection of being, rightly viewed, serves to suggest the proper reflection of God and the spiritual actuality of man, as given in the first chapter of Genesis.[13]  Even thus the crude forms of human thought take on higher symbols and significations, when scientifically Christian views of the universe appear, illuminating time with the glory of eternity.” (S&H 502:9)
     Mary Baker Eddy finishes up this portion of “Genesis” with:  “In the following exegesis, each text is followed by its spiritual interpretation according to the teachings of Christian Science.” (S&H 502:18)

[1] What is interesting about this is that it seems that it only took the Hebrews one hundred years before they lost the freedom that Moses had acquired for them.  It seems that it has only taken one hundred years for Christian Scientists before they lost the freedom that Mary Baker Eddy had acquired for them.  Both happened because of the corruption of the Letter of the Law, for those in charge forgot the Spirit of the Law (how to love the spiritual idea sent by God).

[2] J stands for the Jehovistic document and P stands for the Priestly document.

[3] I like what this man says here, it is so true!

[4] The Works of John W. Doorly  Talks on Science of the Bible, Vol. 1  Nos. 104 The True and False Records of Creation; p. 222-223

[5] Genesis 6:2

[6] This “red hair” could have been used to describe Esau, Jacob’s animalistic twin brother.  In the BIBLE the color red is always pointing to mortal mind and error [Adam].

[7] These seven synonymous terms for God are Mind, Spirit, Soul, Principle, Life, Truth, and Love.

[8] The tree of life gives us the true sense of Life.

[9] What Doorly tells us in this particular sentence makes complete sense to me, as I have realized for a very long time that the “deep sleep” that Adam is put under is really a self-hypnotic spell.  And Adam never wakes up from it (according to the Scripture).

[10]explication:  a method of literary criticism involving a detailed analysis of each part of a work” (Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary)

[11] SCIENCE AND HEALTH WITH KEY TO THE SCRIPTURES; by Mary Baker Eddy; p. 501:1.  I will be quoting heavily from Mary Baker Eddy’s Textbook.  I am not breaking any copyright laws in doing so.  There no longer is any copyright on her book thanks to David Nolan.

[12] In Geometry we learn that a line is of infinite measure.

[13] Infuses given