Re: [GTh] Lunar Cycles and Lines in the GThomas Text
- Frank McCoy writes:
> ... the basic premise that, in the GThomas text, 1 line is male and 2OK, no problem. I appreciate your going to the trouble to delve into this
> are female appears to be inconsistent with the evidence of both the
> Clementine Homilies and Philonic thought. Should it not, then, be
> as invalid?
subject, and I apologize to the list for erroneously stating that the Jewish
lunar calendar had 28 days per month (it has six 29-day months and six
30-day months - a total of 354 days to which is added an extra month seven
of each 19 years to keep it consistent with the solar calendar). In any
case, I'm happy to regard the Monad (i.e., the number 1) as a kind of
hermaphroditic "Father", rather than as a properly male one. This has to be,
since the Monad was regarded as progenitor of all the numbers, both male and
female. So what have we got in the combination of line 280 with lines 69-70?
Apparently, a doubly-perfect Monad (because of its line number 280 and its
block number 6) joining with a "female" (2 lines containing the imperfection
of that extra 10-letter word 'until it lights up'), to produce a "heavenly"
male child of three lines containing 70 letters. Would you agree with that?