Simen, Nietzche would've been glad to see a Judaic discussion of the 10 commandments. He talked about Chr*stianity of having "Thrown overboard the ballast of Judaism", and repeatedly talked about Chr*stians as being [well I won't repeat his phrase] "failed" Jews. His last coherent writing was to his lifelong friend F.Overbeck promising to have all anti-semites shot as a token of his good faith. He saw well in advance where Germany was heading and repeatedly warned the World. He even wished he'd written "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" in English, such was his disgust at it's use by German anti-semites.
ATM: As someone who is not a Nietzchian, I still thank you for pointing out that Nietzche was not the Anti-Semite that many of his admirers think he is. His sister was the Anti-Semite, from my understanding, along with Wagner. European N*zis get their inspiration from them, not truly from Nietzche. Nietzche did, however, tend to oppose Monotheism itself, and there he and I part company.
As for Christianity and Islam, I will forward a post I wrote on the Seven Laws of Noah that emphasizes bringing the three Abrahamic Faiths to a greater understanding:
http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthre...?tid=11662
Far from wanting to alienate the other Abrahamic Faiths, I would like them to learn about their Hebrew Roots.
All the best.
ATM, Did anyone PM you with interesting ideas?
I did not realize this was a christian thing.
So much tradition was absorbed and renamed by the political power calling themselves "christians" that I had always assumed it was part of the lost culture.
Thats why the 13 diners does not ring true for the horror #13 can hold for some people (by the way, I became a mother on the 13 minute of the 13th hour of the 13th day of september, 1980)
I've read through your post A True Monotheist, and I'd like to point out a significant error. 10 is not a Sphenic number. While it is true, as you say, that 1*2*5=10, that does not make it a Sphenic number because 1 is not considered to be a prime number. The definition of a prime number is as follows: "A natural number greater than 1 with exactly two distinct natural number divisors, 1 and itself." Therefore 1 cannot be a prime number because it fails the distinctiveness test for being a prime number as it only has one factor. This exclusion of 1 as a prime number is also supported by the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic which states that "every natural number greater than 1 can be written as a unique product of prime numbers." Thus 12 can be written as 2*2*3 and no other way. If 1 were to be included as a prime number, then there would be no uniqueness for the prime factorization e.g. 12 would have the prime factorizations of 1*2*2*3, 1*1*2*2*3, 1*1*1*2*2*3, ..., a1*2*2*3. Therefore 1 cannot be a prime number.
The actual set of Sphenic numbers is [30, 42, 66, 70, 78, 102, 105, 110, 114, 130, 138, 154, 165, ...].
I've read through your post A True Monotheist, and I'd like to point out a significant error. 10 is not a Sphenic number. While it is true, as you say, that 1*2*5=10, that does not make it a Sphenic number because 1 is not considered to be a prime number. The definition of a prime number is as follows: "A natural number greater than 1 with exactly two distinct natural number divisors, 1 and itself." Therefore 1 cannot be a prime number because it fails the distinctiveness test for being a prime number as it only has one factor. This exclusion of 1 as a prime number is also supported by the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic which states that "every natural number greater than 1 can be written as a unique product of prime numbers." Thus 12 can be written as 2*2*3 and no other way. If 1 were to be included as a prime number, then there would be no uniqueness for the prime factorization e.g. 12 would have the prime factorizations of 1*2*2*3, 1*1*2*2*3, 1*1*1*2*2*3, ..., a1*2*2*3. Therefore 1 cannot be a prime number.
The actual set of Sphenic numbers is [30, 42, 66, 70, 78, 102, 105, 110, 114, 130, 138, 154, 165, ...].
Strike that. I just reread your post A True Monotheist and I realize that you did not say that 10 was Sphenic. I read the P in the first few lines as a 1. My apologies. The lack of an edit button is frustrating to say the least.
I've read through your post A True Monotheist, and I'd like to point out a significant error. 10 is not a Sphenic number. While it is true, as you say, that 1*2*5=10, that does not make it a Sphenic number because 1 is not considered to be a prime number. The definition of a prime number is as follows: "A natural number greater than 1 with exactly two distinct natural number divisors, 1 and itself." Therefore 1 cannot be a prime number because it fails the distinctiveness test for being a prime number as it only has one factor. This exclusion of 1 as a prime number is also supported by the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic which states that "every natural number greater than 1 can be written as a unique product of prime numbers." Thus 12 can be written as 2*2*3 and no other way. If 1 were to be included as a prime number, then there would be no uniqueness for the prime factorization e.g. 12 would have the prime factorizations of 1*2*2*3, 1*1*2*2*3, 1*1*1*2*2*3, ..., a1*2*2*3. Therefore 1 cannot be a prime number.
The actual set of Sphenic numbers is [30, 42, 66, 70, 78, 102, 105, 110, 114, 130, 138, 154, 165, ...].
Strike that. I just reread your post A True Monotheist and I realize that you did not say that 10 was Sphenic. I read the P in the first few lines as a 1. My apologies. The lack of an edit button is frustrating to say the least.
ATM: No problem. Thank you for keeping me on my toes! If I had been wrong, I certainly would need to correct it.
All the best,
B"H
Interesting thought on number symbolism here. Goldbach's unproven hypothesis states that all even numbers are sums of two primes. Odd numbers are the sums of three primes. In the case of 10, it can be the sum of either 5+5 or 7+3.
However, a thought occurred to me. What if we divided the Ten Commandments according to prime numbers? Now, the Ten Commandments are traditionally divided in to the Two Tablets of 5 and 5. What if we can posit a 7 and 3 division, one that is organically rooted in the Commandments themselves? Let me explain. The first Seven Commandments are Commandments that are easily accepted by most cultures. Most people believe in G-d. Most of the higher religions eschew idolatry. Even Hinduism claims that it is not actually an idol worshiping religion. Most people agree on false witness, a day off from work, honoring parents, hating murder, and being faithful to one's spouse.
Stealing, however, is generally subject to creative interpretation. The Enron crooks did not think that they were stealing. Or, at least they did not have too many qualms about stealing. Many cultures rationalize blatant theft. Bearing false witness is also a matter of
"interpretation," as is covetousness. It seems as though the last three Commandments are subjected to debate, since they demand a lot of us *internally*. We try to get out of them through equivocation.
The last three Commandments demand the most of us because they demand that we have a conscience. We try to get out of them by creative reinterpretations. However, we cannot get out of what they demand of us. Stealing is stealing. False witness is false witness. Covetousness and greed are what they are. Man may try to interpret these according to his own cultural frameworks, but his conscience knows. That is a thought.
I cannot say that the 7+3=10 significance is valid or not. I can say that it is an interesting thought, to me anyhow.
Happy Passover.
All the best.
PS. 3+7=10 may also have significance. The first three Commandments,
1) One G-d
2) No Idol Worship
3) Do not say the Name in Vain
are in some sense purely Vertical. The other Seven have some degree of horizontality. All testify to the Divine, of course.
Again, this is interpretation and symbolism. However, prime numbers are very powerful symbols, in my opinion.
Enough said.
All the best.