Return of the Storm God - Appendix IV: Numerology and the Bible - Part 1

Are numerological codes within the Bible proof of God?

Sep 19, 2025

Preface

This appendix examines the enduring claim that the presence of number in scripture is proof of divine authorship. Across centuries, theologians, rabbis, and mystics have argued that biblical texts conceal sacred codes that only God could have inscribed. To trace the full history of such claims would require a vast survey of kabbalistic gematria, Christian numerology, and esoteric speculation. That is not the task here. My aim is narrower yet more revealing: to place two exemplars side by side and show how, despite their differences, they follow the same interpretive logic.

The Bible, when believed and interpreted, has had many consequences. Belief that out-ranks fact is a powerful engine in world affairs. A proven numerology so complex and inherent in the Bible - said to have been written through a small tribe of priests barely out of exile - would be, if true, perhaps the most potent data to convince any rational mind of its divine origin. For that reason it is essential that we examine it.

The conclusion from the available data is unambiguous: the numerology in the Bible was written into it deliberately by its authors, over centuries - by those who understood it, had access to it, and were limited by the specific data of their own time. Crucially, it does not contain knowledge later discovered, which would be compelling if true, yet is revealingly absent. It is not proof of God’s hand in His written work.

The first author, E. W. Bullinger, is the best-known populariser of biblical numerology in the modern West. His Number in Scripture (1921) catalogued sevens, twelves, forties, and other integers as if they were God’s signature upon the Bible. The second, Jeffrey Meiliken, is a far less familiar contemporary writer, whose Creator’s Smoking Gun presents the Hebrew alphabet itself as a mathematical construct designed around the golden ratio. By setting Bullinger and Meiliken together, separated by a century and working in different traditions, we can see the same pattern: real numbers and ratios are identified, but the biblical framework of history is left unquestioned, and so the mathematics is claimed as divine proof.

The argument advanced here is that such readings succeed only when context is removed. If we accept the biblical story of origins - that Hebrews were desert nomads with no advanced science - then the presence of φ, π, or carefully structured integers in scripture can only be explained by God’s intervention. But when we restore the wider record - Egyptian temples, Mesopotamian ziggurats, Sumerian vases, megalithic circles, and the metre-precise yard of Neolithic builders - the same numbers appear millennia earlier, embedded in monuments, myths, and measures. They belong to nature and to Drift cultures that observed and encoded them long before any scripture was penned.

This leads to the axiom that guides the analysis:

Myth + Math = Ma’at. When myth and measure are held together, balance and truth emerge.
Myth + Math – Ma’at = Religion. When the goddess of balance is erased, numbers are hollowed into integers and claimed as exclusive proofs of one god.

What follows demonstrates this in detail: Bullinger’s integers, Meiliken’s ratios, Massey’s recovery of Egyptian cycles, Acharya’s astro-theological parallels, the evidence of pyramids and megaliths, and my own restoration of the continuity of Drift culture - in language, in typology, and in mathematics. This restoration is the thread that binds the appendix to the wider work of this book: demonstrating that sacred number is not the private code of a biblical god but the universal constant of nature, observed, encoded, and transmitted across cultures and time. Massey and Acharya provide useful perspective, but they are partial. The fuller picture emerges only when we restore the deep continuity of the Drift cultures, whose legacy in language and measure exposes how myth and math were once united under Ma’at, before religion stripped them of balance - deliberately removed the ‘goddess’ - and claimed them as the revelation of the solely masculine god of a male dominated religion.

Part I: Bullinger’s Framework - The Numerologist’s Claim

Introduction

In 1921, the Anglican clergyman Ethelbert William Bullinger published what became the most widely circulated treatise on biblical numerology in the English-speaking world: Number in Scripture: Its Supernatural Design and Spiritual Significance. First appearing as a smaller tract in 1894 and subsequently expanded, the book has enjoyed a long afterlife in fundamentalist and evangelical circles. Even today, it is referenced in sermons, online forums, and theological pamphlets as proof that the Bible contains an embedded mathematical structure that could only be of divine origin.

Bullinger’s thesis was simple but sweeping: because God is perfect, His works must also be perfect, and that perfection is expressed in number. Just as the heavens are ruled by cycles and measures, so too the Word of God bears the mark of perfection in its numerical patterns. For Bullinger, repeated numbers in scripture are not incidental but intentional; they constitute the signature of God Himself upon the page. This conviction drives the entire book, which systematically catalogues biblical numbers, assigns to each a fixed ‘spiritual significance,’ and then adduces scriptural examples as evidence.

At the heart of Bullinger’s argument lies a methodological loop. He begins with the assumption that God authored scripture; therefore, scripture must be perfect in its design. Any recurrence of a number within the text is then taken as confirmation of this divine design. Having defined numbers as perfect by fiat, he interprets their repetition as proof of inspiration. In this way, the conclusion is already embedded in the premise, and evidence is marshalled to reinforce what has already been assumed.

Despite these logical shortcomings, Bullinger’s book has been enormously influential. It represents not only a particular strain of Victorian biblical literalism but also a modern expression of a far older tradition: the belief that numbers themselves are sacred, that by discerning numerical codes in texts one might gain access to hidden truths. Gematria in the Hebrew tradition and isopsephy in the Greek both exemplify this practice. Bullinger presented himself as reviving an ancient science, though framed in Protestant theological terms.

To assess Bullinger properly, we must reconstruct his framework in detail: what he claimed for each number, how he justified his interpretations, and where he strained the data. Only then can we place his work against the broader backdrop of ancient mathematical knowledge - Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, and the megalithic world - to show that the patterns he treats as divine fingerprints are in fact the residue of human encoding.

Bullinger’s Premise

The theological foundation of Number in Scripture is set out in the opening chapters. Bullinger declares:

‘There can be neither works nor words without number. We can understand how man can act and speak without design or significance, but we cannot imagine that the great and infinite Creator could either work or speak without both His words and His works being absolutely perfect in every particular.’

This axiom underpins the entire book. God is perfect; therefore, all His works and words must be perfect, therefore all numbers in scripture must be perfect. It is a theological assertion masquerading as empirical observation.

Bullinger then extends this logic beyond scripture to the cosmos. The heavens, he notes, are ordered by twelve signs of the zodiac, each with three decans, yielding 36. Adding the twelve gives 48, which divides the circle of 360 degrees. For him, this proves that the number twelve is divinely ordained as the ‘number of governmental perfection.’ The same number appearing in scripture, then, is confirmation of its divine inspiration.

What he does not acknowledge is that 360 and 12 arise from Mesopotamian sexagesimal mathematics, a human convention rooted in observation of lunar and solar cycles. The Babylonians divided the circle into 360 degrees because it was mathematically convenient, not because God dictated it. Yet for Bullinger, the recurrence of twelve across heavens and scripture is proof of design.

This methodological move recurs throughout his work: assume God authored nature and scripture; note a repeated number; declare it proof of divine intention. The possibility that humans encoded known cycles into text and ritual is never considered.

Catalogue of Sacred Numbers

Bullinger proceeds to assign fixed meanings to a series of numbers. Each is defined once, then reinforced with biblical citations.

One (1): Unity, commencement, God’s sovereignty. As God is one, so the number one represents indivisible primacy.
Two (2): Witness, division, contrast. Male and female, light and darkness.
Three (3): Divine fullness, completion, and the Trinity. Three-fold blessings, resurrections on the third day.
Four (4): The number of the earth: four winds, corners, elements, seasons.
Five (5): Grace. Linked to the five books of the Torah and multiples in cultic offerings.
Six (6): The number of man. Man created on the sixth day; labour before rest. A number of imperfection, leading to 666 as the ‘number of the Beast.’
Seven (7): The key number of the work. Spiritual perfection. Sabbath day, sevenfold festivals, apocalyptic sevens. For Bullinger, seven is the divine seal par excellence.
Eight (8): New beginning. Eight souls saved in the Ark; circumcision on the eighth day.
Nine (9): Finality, judgment. Nine plagues on Egypt before the final blow; nine gifts of the Spirit.
Ten (10): Ordinal perfection. The Ten Commandments, the basis of decimal order.
Eleven (11): Disorder, incompleteness. Twelve minus one.
Twelve (12): Governmental perfection. Twelve tribes, apostles, foundations of New Jerusalem. For Bullinger, this mirrors the twelve signs of the heavens.
Thirteen (13): Rebellion, apostasy. Associated with Judas and with the fall from order.
Forty (40): Testing and probation. Forty days of flood, forty years in wilderness, forty days of Jesus’ fasting.
Seventy (70): Universality. Seventy nations of Genesis 10; seventy elders of Israel.
One hundred and twenty (120): Appointed probation. Genesis 6:3: ‘Man’s days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’
One hundred and fifty-three (153): The number of fish in John 21. For Bullinger, a symbol of fullness, tied to triangular numbers.
Four hundred and ninety (490 = 70×7): A great cycle of divine dealings. Used by him to periodize Israel’s history into blocks.
Six hundred and sixty-six (666): Trinity of imperfection. The ultimate expression of rebellion, the Antichrist.

Each of these is treated not as a product of human culture but as divine fiat. Bullinger’s citations are often extensive, listing every instance of a number in scripture as though mere frequency proves meaning.

Methodological Strain

The weaknesses in Bullinger’s approach are clear:

Circularity: He assumes what he sets out to prove. God is perfect, therefore His Word is perfect, therefore numbers prove perfection. Evidence never challenges the premise.
Selective citation: He highlights numbers that fit his scheme while ignoring counterexamples. Not every occurrence of a number in scripture bears the meaning he assigns, but he filters the data to sustain his pattern.
Forcing significance: In some cases, he admits the number may be incidental but insists it must have meaning. The 153 fish in John 21, for example, are treated as symbolic fullness, ignoring the possibility of a fishing tally or literary flourish.
Historical blindness: He does not acknowledge the known mathematical systems of Babylon, Egypt, or Greece. Where 360 degrees or twelve signs appear, he sees God; where evidence shows Mesopotamian sexagesimal mathematics, he is silent.
Absence of ratio: Most fatally, Bullinger treats integers as absolutes. He does not ask what natural ratio produces the number. Seven is spiritual perfection because it recurs, not because it derives from the quarter of a lunar cycle. Twelve is government because it structures tribes, not because it reflects lunisolar harmonics.

Bullinger’s Legacy

Despite these flaws, Bullinger’s book became a touchstone for later biblical numerologists. His format - define a number, assign meaning, list occurrences, claim divine authorship - remains the template for evangelical treatments today. Websites and pamphlets still circulate his tables of significance. In some circles, 7 and 12 are treated as ‘God’s favourite numbers’ because Bullinger codified them as such.

The endurance of his work is partly due to its comprehensiveness. Earlier writers on biblical numbers had focused on particular figures, such as seven or forty. Bullinger attempted a systematic catalogue, presenting himself as the first to gather the whole field. This gave his work an aura of authority, even though his method was unsound.

It also resonated with a modern sensibility. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, number mysticism had popular appeal. From Pythagoras to Theosophy, the idea that numbers conceal cosmic truths was widespread. Bullinger baptised this tendency in Protestant garb, assuring readers that the Bible itself, rightly read, confirmed their intuitions about sacred number.

Conclusion to Part I

Bullinger’s Number in Scripture stands as a monument to a particular kind of theological numerology: systematic, confident, and circular. It catalogues numbers, assigns each a spiritual essence, and then interprets scripture accordingly. Yet beneath its surface lies a fundamental error: it mistakes human encoding for divine design.

The numbers that Bullinger finds so significant were already known to Babylonian astronomers, Egyptian architects, and Greek philosophers. They were ratios observed in the heavens and the earth, then embedded in myth and ritual. Hebrew scribes inherited these patterns and reframed them as Yahweh’s signature. Bullinger, blind to this history, canonised them as God’s eternal watermark.

To dismantle his claims, we must now turn to the evidence. By examining the numbers he most exalts - seven, twelve, forty, and four hundred and ninety - we can show that they derive not from heaven but from cycles of moon, sun, and planet. In doing so, we will recover what was lost in Bullinger’s integer mysticism: the sacred ratio that the ancients revered, the principle of Ma’at that bound truth and balance together.

Part II: What the Bible Actually Encodes - The Natural Origin of 7, 12, 40, and 490

Introduction

Bullinger elevated certain biblical numbers above all others. For him, the recurrence of 7, 12, 40, and 490 throughout scripture was irrefutable evidence that the text bore God’s supernatural signature. Seven was stamped on creation and ritual; twelve ordered the heavens and Israel; forty marked testing and probation; and 490, as 70×7, was the supreme cycle of divine history.

Yet when examined historically, each of these numbers is revealed not as God’s fiat but as the residue of older astronomical observation and cultural arithmetic. Long before Hebrew scribes put pen to parchment, Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Greek mathematicians had already recognised the ratios and cycles from which these numbers derive. What Bullinger canonised as divine numerology was in fact human encoding of natural rhythms.

Seven: Lunar Quarters and the Invention of the Week

The seven-day week is one of the most enduring cultural structures on earth. Bullinger calls it ‘the number of spiritual perfection,’ seeing its recurrence in sabbath law, sevenfold sacrifices, seven trumpets, seven seals, and the seven spirits before God’s throne. For him, seven is God’s favourite number, the eternal sign of His completeness.

But seven is not arbitrary. It derives directly from the lunar synodic month of 29.53 days. Divided into four quarters, each lasts about 7.38 days. Ancient observers did not require telescopes to notice the moon’s phases: new, first quarter, full, last quarter. These stages defined the earliest calendars.

In Babylonia, the lunar quarters were marked as critical days (shabattu). Ritual abstentions, prohibitions, or festivals were tied to these seven-day intervals. Cuneiform texts from the second millennium BCE already attest to this pattern.
In Egypt, although the civil calendar became solarised, lunar cycles underpinned festival timing. The Osirian and Isis cults reflected the moon’s death-and-rebirth cycle, which naturally quartered itself into sevens.
In Greece, the Pythagoreans treated seven as a ‘virgin’ number - indivisible, standing apart - but their valuation rested on the lunar basis.

By the time the Hebrew scriptures were compiled, the seven-day week was a cultural commonplace. Genesis presents it as the pattern of creation, with Yahweh resting on the seventh day. But this is not revelation; it is codification of the lunar quarter-cycle as divine law.

Bullinger reifies the number, ignoring its origin. Seven is sacred because of the moon, not because of Yahweh.

Twelve: Lunisolar Harmony and the Zodiac

Twelve dominates Bullinger’s system as ‘governmental perfection.’ He notes that the heavens are divided into twelve signs, the circle into 360 degrees, and Israel into twelve tribes. For him, the recurrence proves divine intention.

But again the source is transparent: the solar year divided by lunar months. With 365 days in the year and 29.5 in the lunar month, the ratio is approximately 12.37. To regulate calendars, ancient societies settled on twelve months, with occasional intercalations to adjust drift.

Babylonia perfected this system, embedding twelve in sexagesimal mathematics. The zodiac of twelve signs emerges in Mesopotamia by the late second millennium BCE.
Egypt used twelve daylight and twelve night-time hours, depicted in funerary texts such as the Amduat. Temples encoded twelvefold divisions in architecture and ritual.
Greece adopted the twelvefold zodiac as a framework for cosmology, mirrored in the twelve Olympians.

Israelite tradition mirrors this pattern: twelve tribes align with months, zodiac, and cosmic order. The New Testament continues it: twelve apostles, twelve foundations, twelve gates. This is not unique revelation but adoption of a pan-cultural schema.

Bullinger insists twelve is God’s signature of government. But it is the cosmos itself - the ratio of lunar to solar cycles - that dictates twelve. Hebrew scribes borrowed and sanctified it, but they did not invent it.

Forty: Generational Cycles and Narrative Idiom

Bullinger frames forty as ‘the number of probation.’ Israel wandered forty years; Moses spent forty days on Sinai; Jesus fasted forty days. Everywhere, forty signifies trial, testing, or judgment.

But forty is not a divine constant. It is a rounded number expressing a medium-term cycle, often associated with generations. The lunar nodal cycle of 18.6 years, doubled, yields ~37.2 - easily rounded to forty. Climatic and hydrological cycles also approximate these spans.

In Mesopotamian literature, ‘forty’ appears as a schematic measure, a conventional span of reigns or trials.
In Egyptian cycles, Nile flood and drought rhythms were often rounded into schematic durations.
In scripture, forty functions as a literary shorthand: long enough to signify completeness of testing, short enough to be memorable.

The flood rains last forty days and nights; Elijah journeys forty days; Nineveh is given forty days to repent. These are not chronometric facts but idiomatic cycles.

Bullinger universalises the idiom as divine fiat. But forty is a narrative convention, a mnemonic interval derived from natural cycles, not a law of heaven.

Four Hundred and Ninety: Apocalyptic Arithmetic

The most elaborate of Bullinger’s cycles is 490, or seventy times seven. He sees in it the supreme pattern of divine dealings: four blocks of 490 years, running from Abraham to Christ. By selective subtraction and addition, he forces Israel’s history to fit the scheme.

But 490 is the invention of apocalyptic writers. Daniel 9 presents seventy ‘weeks of years’ - 490 - as a prophecy of Israel’s destiny. This is schematic theology, not calendar. Jubilees (49-year cycles) and sabbatical patterns (seven-year cycles) provided the arithmetic. By multiplying seventy by seven, Daniel’s author wrapped history into a neat symbolic package.

Matthew 18 recycles the number rhetorically: Jesus tells Peter to forgive not seven times, but seventy times seven. This is hyperbolic forgiveness, not a calculator.

The number derives from Babylonian and Persian calendrical structures, imported into Jewish apocalyptic. Bullinger mistakes the literary device for divine law.

Conclusion to Part II

The four pillars of Bullinger’s system - seven, twelve, forty, and 490 - collapse under scrutiny. Each can be explained by observable cycles and cultural conventions known centuries before Hebrew scripture:

Seven = lunar quarter.
Twelve = lunisolar harmony.
Forty = generational idiom.
Four hundred and ninety = apocalyptic math.

Bullinger’s numerology is not revelation but residue. Hebrew scribes encoded natural ratios into their myths and laws; Bullinger sanctified the integers as proof of God. But the true source is human observation, the mathematics of sky and season.

The Context of Numerology in the Ancient World

To fully expose the origins of these numbers, it is essential to set the biblical evidence within the broader context of ancient numerological traditions. Bullinger’s work imagines the Bible as a closed system, but in reality Israel’s scribes were immersed in the mathematical and mythological currents of their neighbours.

In Mesopotamia, numbers were the grammar of the cosmos. The sexagesimal system allowed easy division of the circle, time, and space. Astronomers at Uruk and Babylon recorded cycles of the moon and planets with great precision. Already in the second millennium BCE they were working with the Saros cycle of eclipses (223 lunar months) and had identified complex relationships between solar years and lunar months. These were not mystical but practical observations, recorded on cuneiform tablets. Yet the very act of quantifying celestial motion lent numbers a sacred aura. Kings and priests treated mathematical cycles as divine decrees.

Egyptian civilisation, too, was structured by number. The annual inundation of the Nile defined time; temples were aligned to solstice or star risings. Egyptian architecture reveals a sophisticated grasp of proportion, long before the Hebrews. Pyramid slopes embody ratios close to φ (the golden ratio), and the 3:4:5 triangle was applied in surveying. The goddess Ma’at personified this principle: truth, justice, and balance were one with measurement.

Greek philosophy systematised these traditions. The Pythagoreans declared that ‘all is number,’ but their focus was not on integers but on proportion. The tetractys symbolised the generative harmony of the cosmos. Later, Plato in the Timaeus spoke of the World Soul as constructed from mathematical means and harmonies. Aristotle described numbers as abstractions but still saw them as essential to understanding nature.

Israel did not develop in a vacuum. During the Babylonian exile (6th century BCE), Jewish scribes encountered the astronomical expertise of their captors. The apocalyptic literature that followed, especially Daniel, bears the imprint of Mesopotamian number-schemes. Later, under Ptolemaic and Seleucid rule, Hellenistic mathematics also left its mark. Numbers like 7, 12, 40, and 490 were not revealed ex nihilo; they were the inheritance of older systems, adapted into Hebrew myth.

Why Bullinger’s Numbers Feel Contrived

Modern readers have often remarked that biblical numbers appear strangely repetitive. The recurrence of 7s, 12s, and 40s in disparate contexts seems artificial, as though stories were bent to fit numbers rather than the reverse. This is precisely what happened.

The flood narrative in Genesis, for example, shows signs of doublets: some verses speak of 40 days of rain, others of 150 days of flood. Redactors stitched traditions together, smoothing them with schematic numbers.
Genealogies are padded with symbolic lifespans: Moses lives 120 years (3×40), Levi 137, Amram 137, Ishmael 137 - lifespans chosen for arithmetic neatness rather than realism.
Daniel’s seventy weeks prophecy is a clear example of history retrofitted into numerical schema. Events are arranged to match the desired total of 490 years.

Bullinger treats these patterns as God’s fingerprints. But their contrived nature is the strongest evidence of human authorship. Myths were engineered to match mathematics, not mathematics discovered in myths.

Evidence from Comparative Religion

The four numbers Bullinger valorises - 7, 12, 40, and 490 - appear across cultures, independent of Israel, which undermines his claim of unique divine origin.

Seven: In Mesopotamian religion, seven gods formed the divine council; seven demons threatened mankind. In Ugaritic texts, Baal feasts for seven days. In Egyptian myth, Isis is protected by seven scorpions. The recurrence of seven is ubiquitous, linked to the lunar cycle, not to Yahweh.
Twelve: The twelve Olympians in Greece; twelve labours of Heracles; twelve months in Babylon and Egypt. In Sumer, the god Anu presided over twelve heavenly houses. Israel’s twelve tribes belong to this wider matrix.
Forty: Sumerian myths speak of floods and reigns lasting 40 days or years. Egyptian texts also use ‘forty’ as a rounded span. The Hebrews simply adopted the idiom.
Four hundred and ninety: The most specific case, 70×7, derives from Mesopotamian arithmetic. The Babylonians prized 7 and 70 as cycle numbers; apocalyptic Judaism multiplied them to construct eschatological timelines.

Thus, every number in Bullinger’s scheme has clear antecedents outside Israel. They are cultural borrowings, not divine revelation.

The Silence of Advanced Mathematics

One of the most damning arguments against Bullinger’s thesis is the absence of advanced mathematical constants from scripture. If the Bible were truly the product of divine perfection, one would expect to find anticipations of π (pi), φ (phi), or even something akin to the fine-structure constant (1/137). Yet they are absent in his examination. Whilst pi and phi can be discerned within Biblical texts, they are not overt. God does not declare them, instead ‘he hides them’. Which we will examine later. But there remain masses of important numbers and ratios and equations now known and discovered since the writing of the Bible that simply do not appear. What has been recovered by authors and commentators remains confined to what was known to men at the time of the writing of the Bible.

The only overt biblical reference to π, in 1 Kings 7:23, describes a bronze basin ten cubits in diameter and thirty in circumference - an approximation of π as 3, crude compared to the Babylonian value of 3.125 known centuries earlier. Egyptian pyramid design encodes φ with far greater precision than any biblical text. Greek mathematicians such as Euclid and Archimedes explored irrationals and geometry long before Christianity, yet no trace appears in scripture.

What we find instead are schematic integers: 7, 12, 40, 490. These reflect the limits of the scribes’ environment. They are drawn from cycles observable without instruments and from arithmetic available to temple schools. They never transcend the mathematical horizon of their time.

Bullinger’s four flagship numbers illustrate the fundamental error of biblical numerology. Seven, twelve, forty, and 490 are not supernatural seals of perfection. They are the residue of natural cycles and cultural arithmetic, inherited from Mesopotamia and Egypt, reframed by Israel’s scribes, and canonised in scripture.

The Bible does not transcend its age; it reflects it. The numerological patterns prove not inspiration but adaptation. They demonstrate that myths were deliberately engineered to match mathematics, and that integers were elevated as sacred only when divorced from their original ratio.

Bullinger’s theology, built on these numbers, collapses once the historical origins are recognised. His divine perfection is nothing more than human calculation, sanctified by repetition.

Part III: Ratio as the Real Sacred

Introduction

Bullinger treated integers as if they carried inherent spiritual essences. To him, 7 was always ‘spiritual perfection,’ 12 ‘governmental perfection,’ 40 ‘probation,’ and 490 ‘the supreme cycle of God’s dealings.’ Yet the ancient world - Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, and the megalithic cultures of Europe - did not venerate integers for their own sake. What was revered were ratios: harmonic relationships observed in the cycles of the moon, sun, and stars; in the proportions of sound and architecture; and in the balance of water and land.

The distinction is fundamental. Integers are abstractions, while ratios are relational truths that reveal coherence across natural systems. Where Bullinger identified repeated integers as divine fingerprints, ancient priests and mathematicians located sacred order in proportion. Recovering this perspective requires abandoning integer mysticism and restoring the primacy of ratio.

Ratios of the Sky

Celestial cycles provided the most obvious source of sacred number:

Lunar month: The synodic month of 29.53 days divides naturally into four phases of about 7.38 days, the origin of the seven-day week. The number seven is thus a shorthand for the quarter ratio of the lunar cycle.
Solar year vs. lunar month: Dividing the solar year of 365 days by the lunar month produces ~12.37, explaining the use of twelve months to approximate lunisolar harmony.
Metonic cycle: Nineteen solar years equal 235 lunar months almost exactly, a relationship recognised in Babylon and codified in Greece by Meton of Athens in the 5th century BCE.
Venus cycle: Venus has a synodic period of 584 days. Five Venus cycles equal eight solar years (2,920 days), producing a 5:8 ratio, a Fibonacci pair resonant with φ (1.618). Inanna/Ishtar was identified with Venus, and her descent myth encodes this cycle.
Jupiter–Saturn conjunctions: These occur roughly every 19.86 years. Three conjunctions form a cycle of about 60 years, used in Babylonian and later medieval astrology as a framework for historical epochs.

These examples illustrate that sacred numbers derive from ratios embedded in astronomical phenomena. Biblical numerology, by contrast, flattens them into integers without context.

Ratios of Geometry and Sound

The same logic of proportion was extended from astronomy to geometry and music:

Tetractys: The Pythagorean tetractys (1+2+3+4=10) encoded musical intervals - octave (2:1), fifth (3:2), and fourth (4:3). It symbolised creation through harmonic proportion.
Geometric ratios: Egyptian surveyors used knotted ropes to form 3:4:5 triangles for right angles. The slope of the Great Pyramid (~51.84°) approximates a 14:11 ratio, expressing φ.
Acoustics: Vibrating strings produce concordant notes when divided in simple ratios. Music was thus an audible manifestation of ratio.
Architecture: Greek temples employed √2 and √3 rectangles; Roman architecture codified proportional symmetry through Vitruvius. In every case, sacred meaning resided in ratio, not in integer repetition.

Egyptian Proportion and Ma’at

Egypt offers the clearest example of ratio sanctified as cosmic law.

Ma’at was both a goddess and a principle: truth, balance, and measure embodied in cosmic proportion. To live in Ma’at was to live in alignment with these harmonies.
Architecture: Temples were aligned to solstice sunrises and star risings. The Great Pyramid’s shafts point to Orion (Osiris) and Sirius (Isis), and its form embodies φ and √2.
Calendrics: The Sothic cycle of 1460 years reconciled the 365-day calendar with the heliacal rising of Sirius, encoding renewal and cosmic order.

For Egyptians, truth was inseparable from proportion. The king designed his measured temple with an aspect of the Goddess - a goddess called Sheshat - in order to preserve the principle of Ma’at. Later scripture, by reducing seven to ‘spiritual perfection’ and twelve to ‘government,’ stripped away this wider context.

Mesopotamian Cycles

Babylonian scribes achieved unmatched precision in recording celestial cycles, facilitated by their sexagesimal system:

The 360° circle arose from base-60 arithmetic, with twelve signs of 30° each. Biblical interpreters later treated this as divine, though it was a practical device.
The Saros cycle of 223 lunar months (~18 years) enabled eclipse prediction and was recorded centuries before the Hebrew exile.
Numerical schemes: Deities were assigned values - Anu (60), Enlil (50), Ea (40), Sin (30), Shamash (20), Ishtar (15) - reflecting calendrical ratios. Hebrew usage of 40 and 70 echoes this milieu.

Here too, sacred number was ratio, later reframed in theological terms.

Megalithic Measures

Prehistoric Europe also preserved ratio in monumental form for example:

Megalithic yard: Alexander Thom proposed a standard unit of 0.829 m recurring in stone circles, clustering around values tied to lunar–solar cycles.
Stonehenge: Alignments mark solstices and lunar standstills. The 56 Aubrey holes approximate the half-saros cycle of eclipses.
Warka Vase (Uruk): Its registers are carved in proportional tiers approximating 1:2 and 2:3, embodying Pythagorean harmonics.

These examples, and many more like them, demonstrate that proportion was embedded in architecture long before biblical texts.

Ratio Preserved in Language

Linguistic evidence shows that the logic of proportion was carried into place-names, particularly hydronyms.

Hydronyms Kar/Kal roots denote ‘stone, rock, height,’ often paired with hydric gar/gal (‘flowing water’), encoding the polarity of hardness and flow - form and field.
Theanonyms god/goddess related words such as lugal have a clear yet simple ratio - male/female natural duality inherent as balance (light/dark, day/night, hot/cold, earth/sky, measure/ratio, wet/dry, hard/soft etc.) - the principle of Ma’at - Truth itself always in proportion with a dualist ratio, an aspect of reciprocity

These examples confirm that proportion was not confined to mathematics but encoded in the very words used to name the world and the forces that shape it.

The Orion Nexus as Axis of Ratio

The constellation Orion, together with Taurus, the Pleiades, and Sirius, formed a nexus of myth and measure across cultures.

In Egypt, Orion was Sah (Osiris), associated with the pyramids of Giza and stellar alignments of shafts to Orion and Sirius.
In Mesopotamia, Orion was linked with Gilgamesh or Ninurta, the hero opposing the bull; the Pleiades marked seasonal transitions.
In Greece, Orion pursued the Pleiades across the sky, reflecting observed stellar motion.

This recurring complex demonstrates that Orion was a shared archetype of the cosmic axis, encoded simultaneously in myth, architecture, and seasonal cycles.

The IXOS Framework and Ratio

Modern physics can restate these ancient principles within a coherent structural model.

SOL, c, φ anchor cosmology: SOL (Structural Origin Light), the refined light constant; c, the conventional constant; and φ, the golden ratio.
The ρ-operator describes the 5/6 contraction that transformed Greek numeral values into Latin, explaining textual variants such as 666 → 616.
Hydronyms preserve proportional polarities of water and stone (gal/kal/kar roots).
The Lightpath follows tetractys logic - line, cross, circle, spiral - echoing ancient formulations of emergence.

Where biblical numerology treated integers as divine fingerprints, IXOS reframes proportion as the true structural constant. Integers are husks; ratios are the living code.

Bullinger’s Blindness to Ratio

Consider how Bullinger might have handled the examples above:

He would note that Orion is mentioned in Job 9:9 and Amos 5:8, then declare its recurrence proves divine design. He would ignore the pyramid alignments, Mesopotamian myths, and linguistic continuities that show Orion as a universal nexus of ratio.
He would point to the recurrence of ‘rock’ and ‘river’ names in scripture, declare them God’s fingerprints, and miss the hydronymic structure that connects Europe, Sumer, and Egypt.
He would see 360 degrees of the circle as divine government, not as Babylonian sexagesimal ratio.

Bullinger’s numerology is a flat reading: integer → repetition → God. What he misses is the dimension of relation: cycle → ratio → myth → encoding.

Why Ratios Were Veiled

If ratio was so central to ancient cosmology, why did it vanish into integers in scripture? The answer lies in the divide between esoteric and exoteric knowledge.

Among the Pythagoreans, disclosure of irrational numbers such as √2 or φ was forbidden to the uninitiated. According to tradition, Hippasus was drowned for revealing √2. Egyptian architects encoded φ in monuments but never named it directly. Babylonian scribes embedded ratios in calendrical cycles but expressed them through myths of gods and demons.

When Hebrew scriptures were canonised, the exoteric surface was retained - integers and simple cycles - while the esoteric knowledge of proportion was omitted. Seven became sabbath law, twelve became tribes, forty became the span of trial. The principle embodied in Ma’at, the goddess of balance and measure, was erased. Ratio survived only in veiled form.

When the Romans had completed their Bible, they had erased the Goddess and her ratios from any meaningful visibility. Ratio was the initiate knowledge of elder cultures, now appropriate by the Roman elites. To retain it and use the myths to control an empire in their new form, evidence that it was a reformulation of older cultures could not be allowed to remain within it.

Bullinger inherited this exoteric and manipulated husk and mistook it for the entire truth.

Conclusion to Part III

Ratio is the true sacred. From lunar quarters to the Metonic cycle, from the tetractys to the proportional use of the megalithic yard, from Orion to Ma’at, cultures observed proportion and clothed it in story.

The integers that appear in scripture are echoes of these ratios, stripped of context and converted into divine commands. Bullinger sanctified the echoes while remaining blind to their source.

Restoring sacred number requires restoring ratio. Restoring ratio requires reinstating Ma’at - both as the principle of truth and as the personification of balance. Without this restoration, numerology remains a sterile catalogue of integers; with it, mathematics regains its role as myth and cosmology in harmony with nature.

Part IV: Myth, Math, and Ma’at

Introduction

If Part III established that ancient cultures revered ratio, Part IV considers what occurred when those ratios were translated into myth and later hardened into religion. Myth was not arbitrary storytelling; it functioned as symbolic technology, clothing mathematics in narrative, ritual, and personification. A lunar quarter became seven days of creation, a 5:8 Venus cycle became the descent and ascent of Inanna, and the balance of river and desert became the scales of Ma’at.

When myth ossified into religion, its function changed. Ratios were preserved but hidden within integers. Stories were reshaped to fit numerical patterns. Most significantly, the goddess - once the embodiment of ratio as balance and vessel - was diminished, demonised, or erased.

This was the hinge where myth became religion:

Myth + Math = Ma’at.
Religion = Myth + Math – Ma’at.

Myth as Math in Story
The myths of the ancient world are saturated with numbers, yet these numbers were never arbitrary. They encoded ratios.

Mesopotamia: The flood of Atrahasis lasts seven days and nights; Inanna descends through seven gates; the divine council numbers seven. These are not simply ‘sevens for perfection’ but reflections of lunar quarters and cosmic divisions.
Egypt: Osiris is dismembered into fourteen parts, reassembled by Isis; Ra travels through twelve hours of night. Fourteen encodes the fortnight, twelve the division of the year.
Greece: The twelve Olympians mirror the zodiac, while the labours of Heracles correspond to cyclical struggles of the sun across the ecliptic.

In each case, myth functioned as a mnemonic for ratios, cycles, and proportions.

Ma’at: Principle and Goddess

In Egypt, the unity of myth and mathematics was personified in Ma’at. She was both a cosmic principle - truth, justice, proportion - and a goddess represented with the feather of balance. Pharaohs swore to uphold her; judges, architects, and priests invoked her as guarantor of measure.

Mathematics in this context was never abstract. A pyramid was not merely an engineering feat but an act of Ma’at, aligning stone with sky. A judgment was not simply legal procedure but the weighing of the heart against the feather of Ma’at.

Later traditions removed the goddess. Hebrew scripture preserved the principle of measure - law, justice, sabbath cycles - but stripped away the figure who embodied it. Balance survived, but its feminine vessel was erased.

Religion as Distortion

When myth was transformed into religion, three processes took place:

Numbers were retained, but as integers severed from ratio. Seven, twelve, forty, and 490 endured in this form.
Myths were redacted or reshaped to match numerical frameworks.
The goddess was eliminated. Ma’at, Isis, Inanna, Asherah, Sophia - all were suppressed, diminished, or demonised.

Thus the axiom applies:

Myth + Math = Ma’at.
Religion = Myth + Math – Ma’at.

Examples of Distortion

Lugal: Originally lu (‘light-being’) + gal (‘great water’), meaning ‘the radiant one in the sea of creation.’ Reduced in later usage to ‘great man’ or ‘king,’ the cosmic polarity of light and water was recast as masculine hierarchy.
Shem: Originally depicted as a plant in a pot, symbolising the established axis of rootedness and permanence. In Hebrew, reduced to ‘name,’ the symbolic richness flattened into a mere eponym.
Garden (Gar-Dan): Originally gar (‘stream, flow’) + dan (‘settled place’), meaning ‘watered ground.’ In scripture, reduced to ‘enclosure,’ Eden became fenced rather than flowing.
Marduk and Tiamat: Tiamat, the primordial sea and womb of creation, was slain and dismembered by Marduk to form heaven and earth. Cosmic order was reframed as conquest of the mother rather than harmony with her.
Isis to Mary: Isis, who reassembled Osiris and embodied φ as recursive harmony, became Mary, the virgin mother, stripped of agency and reduced to passive vessel.

In each example, ratio and cosmic balance remained at the root, but myth was reshaped to fit religious dogma, and the feminine principle was suppressed.

Why Myths Feel Contrived

Biblical stories often appear artificial in their numerical structures. Floods of forty days, genealogies with symbolic lifespans, Daniel’s 490-year prophecy - these are signs of reverse engineering. Stories were bent to fit numbers.

Bullinger interpreted this as divine design. In reality, it was human editing: numbers first, narrative second.

The Erasure of the Feminine

The suppression of the goddess was not peripheral but central to the transition from myth to religion. The feminine principle was consistently diminished or inverted.

Inanna/Ishtar: Once goddess of fertility, war, and Venus, encoding the 5:8 ratio of Venus synods to solar years. Her descent through seven gates reflected lunar and planetary harmonics. In later Jewish and Christian memory she survived only as Ashtoreth, vilified as pagan whore.
Asherah: Widely venerated in Israel and Judah, often paired with Yahweh in inscriptions. She was the tree of life, vertical axis of fertility. Biblical redactors branded her cult idolatry, suppressing her role.
Sophia: Personification of Wisdom in Hellenistic Judaism and early Christianity, echoing Ma’at as balance and truth. By the second century CE, Sophia was marginalised, her figure absorbed or condemned by orthodox theology.
Mary: Retained in Christianity but only as passive vessel. Where Isis actively restored Osiris, Mary received without agency. She was venerated as virgin, not as embodiment of cosmic proportion.

At every stage, feminine figures representing balance and fertility were either demonised, written out, or reduced to passivity. Religion thus became structurally misogynistic - numerology without Ma’at.

Consequences for Theology

The removal of the goddess had lasting consequences:

Law replaced balance: In Egypt, justice was proportion; in Israel, it became obedience to decree.
Integer replaced ratio: Seven shifted from lunar quarter to sabbath law; twelve from lunisolar harmony to tribal organisation; forty from generational span to probation.
Dualism replaced polarity: Natural polarities of light/dark, male/female, water/stone hardened into moral absolutes of good/evil, God/Satan, with the feminine cast as negative.
Misogyny codified: Women became temptress, whore, or passive mother - echoes of Ma’at, Isis, and Inanna inverted.

These were not incidental developments but instruments of control. By stripping proportion of its feminine embodiment, priestly elites transformed balance into law and enforced it as divine command.

Why Religion Required Erasure

The goddess was threatening because she represented continuity with nature. Ma’at, Isis, and Inanna linked cosmic order to fertility, water, proportion, and recurrence. To acknowledge them was to admit that sacred truth lay in natural cycles and balance.

Religion required monopoly. It imposed an external, masculine lawgiver. Myth could survive only in forms reshaped into dogma. Numbers endured, but their ratios and feminine vessels were destroyed. Bullinger’s later work exemplified this inheritance: integers detached from proportion, treated as divine watermark.

The Axiom as Key

The axiom clarifies the process:

Myth = Ratio in story. Numbers embedded in narrative expressed cosmic harmonies.
Ma’at = Myth + Math. In Egypt, balance and proportion were personified as goddess.
Religion = Myth + Math – Ma’at. Hebrew and Christian redactors preserved integers but erased the goddess.

This explains:

why numbers recur yet feel contrived,
why myths persist but appear distorted,
why the feminine is missing or demonised,
why numerology survives in hollow form.

Bullinger’s numerology is the culmination of this process: myth plus math, minus Ma’at.

Myth Engineered to Match Math

Biblical examples illustrate how narratives were designed around numbers:

Daniel’s ‘seventy weeks’ prophecy retrofitted history into a 490-year schema.
Genealogies assigned symbolic lifespans: 120 (3×40), 137 (a Pythagorean curiosity), 930 (sum of cycles).
The flood narrative combined 40 days of rain, 150 days of flood, and 7 days of waiting, producing symbolic cycles.
Gospel miracles emphasised integers: loaves (5 and 7), baskets (12), fish (153).

These are not historical accounts but numerical scaffolds. Bullinger regarded them as divine confirmation; their contrived character demonstrates human editing.

Conclusion to Part IV

Myth clothed ratio in narrative. Religion preserved myth and number but erased Ma’at, the goddess of balance. What remained were hollow integers sanctified as divine law, stories bent to fit numbers, and the suppression of the feminine.

Bullinger’s Number in Scripture stands as the endpoint of this trajectory. It catalogues husks and mistakes them for divine signatures. The sacred lies deeper: in ratio, in lunar and Venusian cycles, in the tetractys, in Ma’at.

To dismantle Bullinger’s thesis, it is necessary to restore what religion erased - the mathematics of proportion and the goddess of balance. Only then can numbers recover their true sacred meaning.

Part V: The Evidence of Encoding

If Bullinger’s integers are husks, what then are the kernels? What counts as genuine evidence of sacred mathematics? The answer lies in the durable traces left by cultures long before the Hebrew scribes: in language, in proto-writing, in architecture, and in the sky itself. These traces reveal a consistent pattern: sacred numbers are not free-floating integers but ratios encoded in form, function and story.

This part assembles the evidence under four domains: language, proto-writing, architecture and stellar grammar. Together, they demonstrate that humans observed ratio, preserved it and transmitted it across millennia. The Bible’s integers are derivative echoes of this encoding.

Language: Hydronyms and Toponyms as Fossilised Ratios
One of the most conservative carriers of meaning is the river name. Hydronyms persist for thousands of years, often surviving complete language replacement. This makes them crucial evidence of early symbolic thought.

• Brittonic āβonā (‘moving water’) has survived as Avon, Afon and related forms across Britain. This root connects to Indo-European ap- and Sanskrit āp, establishing a deep continuity in the designation of rivers as flowing life. The survival of āβonā demonstrates how water was consistently conceptualised as movement, not as enclosure.
• Kar/Kal roots: The pre-Indo-European and Indo-European kar-/kal- denoted ‘stone, rock, height’. In Ligurian and Illyrian toponymy, these appear in names of mountains and fortresses. They are often paired with gar/gal roots for flowing water. The polarity is striking: hard vs soft, stone vs water. This polarity encodes the fundamental ratio of field and form.
• Spanish place-names: Orueta’s Dictionary of Spanish Place Names highlights how many Iberian names remain ‘obscure’ because they belong to hydric or lithic strata older than Latin or Arabic. These names resist later overlays, preserving archaic semantics of water and rock.

Language therefore preserves categories of ratio. The polarity of water and stone, field and form, is embedded in toponyms across Eurasia. This is evidence of sacred mathematics in linguistic memory - mathematics not of integers but of relations.

Proto-Writing: The Vinča Script and the Drift of Symbols
Before alphabets, there were signs. The Vinča culture of the Danube basin (5500–4500 BCE) left a corpus of more than 700 artefacts inscribed with non-random symbols. These include crosses, ladders, chevrons and spirals, incised on pottery, figurines and tablets.

The Vinča script is not decoration. Its repetition, positional regularity and combinatorial patterns suggest a symbolic system. Though undeciphered, it functions as proto-writing. Its signs are abstract, geometric and relational.

The significance is twofold:

Chronology: The Vinča signs predate Sumerian cuneiform by a millennium. This demonstrates that symbolic systems encoding ratio emerged in south-eastern Europe, not only in Mesopotamia.
Drift: Symbolic repertoires travelled. From the Danube basin, through Anatolia, into Mesopotamia, motifs such as ladders and chevrons reappear. Waddell’s problematic racial theories can be set aside, but his intuition of north-to-south drift of symbolic knowledge can be critically rescued.

Proto-writing shows that encoding ratio is older than scripture. Where Bullinger treats Hebrew integers as origin, the evidence points to a deep prehistory of signs marking relation and proportion.

Architecture: Ratio Embodied in Stone
The clearest evidence of encoding comes from architecture.

• Egyptian pyramids: The Great Pyramid of Khufu embodies ratios close to φ (golden ratio) and √2. Its slope of ~51.84° corresponds to 14:11, approximating φ. Shafts align with Orion (Osiris) and Sirius (Isis). These are not coincidences but deliberate embodiments of cosmic proportion.
• Temples: Egyptian temples align to solstice sunrises or star risings. The Temple of Karnak, for example, channels the winter solstice sun. These alignments translate celestial ratios into ritual space.
• Ma’at as principle: Architecture was not mere utility. It was an act of Ma’at, embodying balance and truth through proportion. Pharaohs were judged by their ability to build in Ma’at.
• Megalithic circles: Stonehenge aligns with solstices and lunar standstills. The Aubrey holes (56) correspond to eclipse cycles. Thom’s hypothesis of the Megalithic Yard (0.829 m) suggests standardisation of measure based on lunar–solar harmonics. Even if debated, the clustering of measurements indicates intentional proportion.
• Sumerian ziggurats: Stepped mountains mirrored the cosmic mountain, divided in ratios corresponding to heavens and underworlds. The ziggurat was a geometric cosmogram.

Architecture demonstrates that ratio was not abstract. It was embodied in stone, wood and earth. These monuments are the true scriptures of sacred mathematics, standing millennia before Bullinger’s Bible codes.

Stellar Grammar: Orion, Taurus, and the Pleiades
The sky itself was the first text. The nexus of Orion, Taurus, the Pleiades and Sirius appears across cultures.

• Egypt: Orion (Sah/Osiris) and Sirius (Sothis/Isis) structured funerary myth. The Giza pyramids replicate Orion’s belt; shafts point to Osiris and Isis.
• Mesopotamia: Orion appears as Gilgamesh or Ninurta, locked in combat with the bull. The Pleiades were ‘the seven gods’, seasonal markers.
• Greece: Orion pursues the Pleiades across the sky, mirroring the stellar chase.
• Hittites and Anatolia: Reliefs depict the storm-god atop mountains with celestial emblems behind - echoing the Orion nexus.

Jupiter becomes the all-seeing eye, the original Chronic observer above the main stage of the Primary Nexus of constellations across cultures and into cultic organisations. As the essence of many gods across the Drift culture, such as Marduk and Ptah, Jupiter’s journey above the main stage of the play becomes an observant pendulum, always aloof, never interfering, but always the apex and Great Architect. This, the Master Craftsman that built the stage in the first age before the symbolic ‘flood’ in which the goddess birthed the lights as gods in the seas of the heavens. It is from her being that the Great Architect was birthed (as Marduk from Tiamat) from which all was formed, in which all dwell, and to which all return. As Above, so below.

This stellar grammar is ratio expressed in myth. The arrangement of stars, their rising and setting cycles, and their relation to seasons are harmonics of the cosmos, clothed in story.

Transmission and Codification

The evidence of genuine encoding is overwhelming:
• Language preserves hydric and lithic polarities.
• Proto-writing encodes relations in geometric signs.
• Architecture embodies ratios in stone and alignment.
• The sky provides the original grammar of proportion.

Compared with this, Bullinger’s numerology is a hollow after-image. His integers float without context; the ancients’ ratios stand in stone and stars.

This is the essence of ancient myth. The mathematics is inherent, but ratio was the dominant part. Once the essence of nature as a duality of field and form was redacted into the Bible, number was encoded in a way that altered the original mythos of the Drift Culture. The initiatic nature of knowledge, withheld from the masses, shifted from living myth to a numerological system. With the feminine basis removed, what remained was a contrived distortion designed to overwrite, obscure, and serve as a tool of control for the elites of empire.

It took centuries for this transformation from myth to ‘history’ to take hold. The Ptolemaic era was pivotal, when Greek and Coptic traditions began the fusion that later merged with Aramaic and Hebrew into the Vulgate. Once the knowledge of the Drift cultures - particularly Babylonian and Egyptian - was committed to writing rather than preserved through mystery schools and guilds, the static text became the focus of devotion. It functioned on two levels: one interpretation for elites and another for the masses. No censorship was needed, for the populace could not discern the advanced systems encoded within.

Presumably, the intelligentsia and initiates would have felt a great sense of superiority and entitlement in flaunting their initiatic knowledge so flagrantly before the masses. They appeared to have had little intention of explaining their systems to the commoners. Such ego, hubris and entitlement were integral to the Roman identity. Pride in superiority, combined with high intelligence, easily turned to self-justification as the fittest to rule.

This mentality is visible throughout Roman elite culture: the Senate preserved as a hereditary body of privilege; emperors elevated to the status of gods through the imperial cult; Julius Caesar declared divus Iulius by senatorial decree; Augustus styling himself Pontifex Maximus; Caligula demanding worship in life. Roman law codified these hierarchies in every sphere - patrician over plebeian, citizen over non-citizen, free over slave - enshrining dominance as natural order. Historians such as Livy and Tacitus described Rome’s expansion as destiny, proof that the gods favoured their rule. In this framework, success itself was justification: survival and conquest proved superiority, and superiority confirmed divine sanction. As seen in Paul’s letter to the Romans, and across the record of the ruling classes, inherited knowledge and symbolic systems were reshaped into a mechanism of control - a theology of empire disguised as sacred truth.

Introduction to Isopsephy

The history of alphabets is usually told in fragmented chapters: Egypt in one volume, Mesopotamia in another, Greece in a third, and Rome as the end point. Yet the evidence points to a single pan-Eurasian drift of language and script, in which root phonemes and symbolic forms were carried across millennia from the Danube basin and Sumer into Egypt, Phoenicia, Greece, and Latin Europe. The Egyptian and Sumerian contributions are central, not peripheral. Phoenician, far from being an invention of Semitic traders, is the hinge that preserves the older Gothic Script – the hydronymic, riverine basis of language – and passes it intact into Greek and Latin.

Isopsephy is the practice of assigning numbers to letters and treating words, names, and phrases as having calculable numerical values. It is the Greek equivalent of what later became known in Hebrew as gematria. The principle is simple: once an alphabet doubles as a numeral series, every word carries a sum. That sum can then be compared, equated, or interpreted as meaningful in itself.

The system appears to have been a natural outgrowth of alphabetic numeration. Where the Greeks used letters alpha to omega as numerals 1 through 900, any written word automatically bore a numeric value. From this came the idea that names could be ‘decoded,’ that phrases might conceal hidden numbers, and that scripture itself had been composed with deliberate sums embedded in its language.

This is fundamental to any examination of myth and religion! Because isopsephy was never a trivial amusement. From the Hellenistic period onwards it became a tool of scholars, poets, and theologians. In the walls of Pompeii we find graffiti in which lovers compare the sums of their names; in Christian texts we find numbers such as 666 and 616 presented as veiled identities; in Alexandrian Jewish exegesis we find names equated through their totals. By late antiquity, isopsephy was not only a pastime but a mode of scriptural commentary, a way of claiming that texts carried hidden, divine authority in their very letters.

E. W. Bullinger, writing in the early twentieth century, took the presence of recurring numbers in scripture as proof of God’s hand. To him, the integers 7, 12, 40, or 666 were supernatural fingerprints of authorship. But this approach is misleading. Isopsephy shows that the numbers are there not because God imposed them but because human editors, working in Alexandria and later Rome, consciously embedded them. Scripture was written and redacted at a time when isopsephy was already established. To recognise this is to reverse Bullinger’s conclusion: what he thought proved divine inspiration is in fact evidence of deliberate human design.

In this sense, isopsephy opens an entirely new perspective. It shows us that the Bible evolved hand in hand with numerology. The sums of names, the variants between 666 and 616, the values of chi and rho in the imperial Christogram - all belong to the same culture of letter-number calculation. This was not accident, but a systematic practice. Once understood, it allows us to see how myth, mathematics, and scripture were woven together as instruments of empire.

Origins: From Phoenicia, Egypt, and Mesopotamia to the Milesians

The Greek term isopsephy conceals a much longer story. Alphabetic numeration did not begin in Greece, but in the corridor that joined Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Phoenicia. Even the consensus histories concede that the Greek alphabet was adopted from Phoenician models, and that letters already carried both sound and number in that system. Gerald Massey and L. A. Waddell went further, showing that what scholars have called ‘Phoenician’ is best understood as a late expression of a much older Sumerian–Egyptian continuum.

The Phoenicians themselves were described by the Hebrews not as Semites but as ‘sons of Ham,’ placing them outside the Semitic line. Their script shows continuity with Egyptian hieroglyphs and early Mesopotamian pictograms, which had long included both syllabic and numeric values. Flinders Petrie’s discoveries at Abydos revealed proto-Phoenician letters cut on Early Dynastic pottery, ‘fully formed’ yet millennia earlier than Cadmean Greek. In other words, the practice of using letters as numbers was already latent within the symbolic systems of the Nile.

By the late second millennium BCE, Phoenician merchants and administrators were using the abjad both as script and as cipher, with numeric assignments such as Qoph = 100 and Resh = 200. These values, carried westward into the Aegean, provided the packet out of which the Ionian Greeks formed their own alphabetic numeral series. The Milesians in particular retained obsolete letters – stigma/digamma, koppa, sampi – not for phonetic use but to preserve a continuous sequence of numbers 1–9, 10–90, 100–900. This technical innovation created the formal structure of isopsephy.

Waddell connected this crystallisation in Ionia with a far older ‘Drift Culture’ transmission. He argued that the same Sumer–Phoenician packet provided the roots of European alphabets, with early inscriptions in Britain and Ireland showing retrograde Phoenician characters dated before 1000 BCE. While some of his claims are debated, the broad consensus now admits what he asserted a century ago: that the so-called Phoenician alphabet was neither purely Semitic nor local, but a convergence of Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Levantine forms.

Thus, when the Milesian philosophers of Anatolia spoke of number as the essence of things, they were drawing on a system already centuries old. Their ‘Greek’ numerology was the visible bloom of roots that reached deep into the Levant and beyond. What we call isopsephy must therefore be set within this long arc – a continuum that begins not in Athens but in Byblos, Ugarit, Abydos, and Sumer.

The Milesian Crystallisation in Anatolia

The decisive step from alphabet-as-script to alphabet-as-number-system occurred in Ionia. The ‘Milesian’ system, named for Miletus but spread across the Greek world, was the first to provide a complete and orderly scheme of alphabetic numeration:

The nine initial letters, alpha to theta, were assigned values 1 through 9.
The next nine, iota to koppa, carried 10 through 90.
The final nine, rho to sampi, filled out 100 through 900.

To achieve this, the Ionians retained three archaic characters - stigma or digamma (ϛ) for 6, koppa (ϙ) for 90, and sampi (ϡ) for 900 - which had dropped from the spoken alphabet but were preserved solely for their numeric function. This innovation produced the first fully integrated ‘decimal-alphabetic’ system known in the Mediterranean. Every letter now doubled as a number, and every word could be added, compared, or transformed into an equation.

This was more than bookkeeping. The Milesian philosophers were the first to speak of number as the underlying substance of reality. Thales and Anaximander proposed cosmic principles - water, apeiron - but Pythagoras, drawing on the Milesian climate of thought, made proportion itself the essence of all things. Within this context, the use of letters as numbers was not a technical quirk: it was an intellectual bridge between language and mathematics. The same symbols that spelled words also revealed ratios.

By the 5th century BCE, inscriptions show the system in daily use for accounts, taxes, and civic records. Ostraka and dedications testify that citizens were already accustomed to reading letters as numbers. Yet the deeper potential of the system - its capacity to encode meaning in names and texts - would only unfold in the following centuries, especially at Alexandria, where Jewish, Greek, and Egyptian traditions converged.

In retrospect, the Milesian scheme appears as a crystallisation point rather than a beginning. It formalised practices that had already existed in Phoenicia, Egypt, and Mesopotamia, but it gave them a regularised, universal form. Once established, this structure endured for more than a millennium, underpinning both Greek isopsephy and Hebrew gematria. The Greek alphabet had become more than a script: it was a cipher.

Pergamon and the Method of Origin-Inversion

The region of Pergamon is singled out in the Book of Revelation as ‘where Satan dwells’ (Rev. 2:13). To a casual reader this appears a passing polemic, but the charge is revealing. Pergamon was not a nest of devils. It was one of the most advanced centres of learning in Asia Minor, home to the Asclepieion healing cult (the origin of Imhotep, the Atumic Jesus and Adam and Father God.), the great library, and the intellectual legacy of the Milesian philosophers. It is here we find fundamental data to challenge the verity of the Bible, so is clearly one of the obvious targets for denigration. It was also a hub of isopsephy and number philosophy. By branding Pergamon as Satan’s throne, the biblical authors displaced suspicion onto the very wellspring of the knowledge that underpinned their own scripture.

This is a textbook instance of what may be called origin-inversion: the systematic demonisation of the source from which ideas were drawn. The method is simple. First, appropriate the myths, measures, and sacred forms of a culture. Then, once absorbed and re-coded, declare the original source corrupt, demonic, or ‘other.’ This not only conceals dependence but actively deters the curious from returning to the source. It is the same tactic seen in the vilification of Egypt and Babylon, cultures from which the Hebrew and Christian texts drew deeply.

The list of peoples and places condemned in the Old and New Testaments is almost identical to the list of cultures whose mathematics, myths, and measures became the backbone of the Bible. Egypt is reduced to bondage, though its temple ritual and proportion systems are everywhere in scripture. Babylon is cast as the harlot, though its flood myths, astronomy, and numerology structure prophecy. The Hittites and Assyrians are called savage foes, though their storm-god archetypes and kingship models shape Israelite theology. The Philistines and Peleset are accused of child-sacrifice, though their seafaring and alphabet transmitted the very letters in which scripture was written. Pergamon, likewise, is denounced as Satanic precisely because it was a seat of healing, number-philosophy, and wisdom that later re-emerged as Christian doctrine.

To recognise this pattern is to see through the mask. Wherever the Bible points the finger of accusation, there lies a source of its own content. The louder the denunciation, the clearer the dependence. This is not coincidence but tactic: projection and scapegoating, what modern psychology calls DARVO (deny-attack-reverse victim and offender). Rome and its ecclesiastical heirs perfected this long before such terms existed.

Thus the denunciation of Pergamon is not a marginal note but a signature of the method. By labelling the city ‘Satan’s throne,’ the text casts a pall over the entire Milesian and Anatolian intellectual tradition - mathematics, geometry, isopsephy, and healing cults alike - while silently harvesting their fruits. What had been philosophy became theology, what had been ratio became miracle, and what had been goddess and field was recast as whore or demon.

The lesson is consistent. The demonised origin is the true origin. The finger points always back to the thief. By this logic the historian must look precisely where scripture says not to look: Egypt, Babylon, Phoenicia, Anatolia, Pergamon. These are not the haunts of devils, but the repositories of the very wisdom later hidden beneath biblical dogma.

A shining example of this origin-inversion which ties together many of the above themes, and acts as a legitimisation sequence for Paul’s authority as a Christian mouthpiece (for that read Roman propagandist) is the case of Stephen, whose sacrifice and martyrdom renders him truly pious and saintly in the minds of later Christians.

The propaganda tactic is visible in the speech attributed to Stephen (Acts 7). Here the old star-watching traditions are caricatured as rebellion against God: ‘Ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Rephan.’ The name is variously given in manuscripts and translations as Rephan, Remphan, Ramphan, or Rhamphan – all corruptions of the older Hebrew Kiyyun, a title for Saturn that passed into the Greek Septuagint version of Amos 5:26. What had been the scientific practice of observation – reading the heavens to mark cycles of time, seed and harvest – is turned into idolatry. The ‘Rephan star’ is thus a misremembered echo of the Saturn cults and astral calendars of Egypt and Babylon, but in the Roman redaction it becomes proof of Israel’s unfaithfulness. This is not innocent error. It is deliberate inversion – erasing the memory of the natural astronomers and recoding them as devil-worshippers. The very astronomy from which biblical cycles were drawn is demonised so the source cannot be honoured.

A popular train of thought amongst Christians who often quote the Jews to be Satanists, primarily because Jesus denounced them as ‘of the Devil’ before they ‘murdered’ him, is often supported by the allegation that they chose the ‘star of Remphan’ as their emblem, which was a sign of Pergamum, and a symbol of Saturn – which sounds a bit like Satan. Saturn has ‘negative’ aspects in mythology but is not an archetype of the Dark Lord. Yet by joining Jesus’s words to the later adoption of the hexagram, anti-Jewish polemic gained a ready-made weapon: the Jews could be branded satanic by creed and by symbol, their emblem made proof of their supposed allegiance to the Devil. The association is largely false, but its effectiveness lay precisely in its inversion of meaning.

The confusion has been compounded by retrospective symbolism. The hexagram, later called the ‘Seal of Solomon,’ is not biblical at all but a medieval and kabbalistic adoption. Its two interlocked triangles encode the archetype of ‘as above, so below,’ the balancing of opposites, the joining of heaven and earth. In Egyptian thought this is nothing less than the principle of Ma’at. The same six-fold structure recurs naturally in crystalline geometry - snowflakes, the benzene ring, and above all carbon, the elemental lattice of life, whose six protons, six neutrons and six electrons have made ‘666’ into a numerical shorthand for biology itself. Far from being diabolic, the hexagram embodies natural balance. Its later demonization was a product of Christian polemic, and only once Jews adopted it as a communal emblem centuries later was it retrospectively tied to the ‘star of Rephan’ and branded satanic.

The pentagram shows the same inversion. In Egypt it was a glyph of the Duat, the star-world of the other side, and encoded both the cycle of Venus - whose synodic periods map a perfect five-pointed star in the heavens every eight years - and the golden ratio, phi, the measure of living proportion. As a sacred emblem it embodied regeneration, harmony and the goddess principle. Yet the Church declared it a mark of the Devil. Thus both the hexagram and the pentagram became casualties of origin-inversion: natural symbols of cosmic order and balance recoded as diabolic signs, their true meaning hidden behind centuries of accusation.

The Historiographic Lacuna: Why Isopsephy Appears ‘Late’

One of the puzzles of isopsephy is the apparent delay in its visible record. Alphabetic numeration in Greece is well attested by the 5th century BCE, but explicit isopsephic word-sums - calculations of names and phrases - are not found until the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Between the early use of letters as numerals and the flourishing of isopsephic practice there lies a gap of several centuries.

This gap is more apparent than real. Inscriptions and accounts from the Classical period show alphabetic numeration in full use, yet the cultural habit of publicly displaying word-sums may have been restricted. Early evidence survives mainly in perishable contexts - wax tablets, papyrus, graffiti - rather than stone. By the time we encounter isopsephy in Pompeian graffiti (‘I love her whose number is 545’), the practice is presented casually, as if already long familiar.

Several factors may explain the delay:

Elite secrecy – The manipulation of names by numeric value was a tool of poets, philosophers, and priests. Its presence in Orphic and Pythagorean circles suggests restricted circulation before wider adoption.
Material loss – Papyrus texts from Athens, Miletus, and other centres are largely gone. Surviving stone inscriptions rarely preserve the play of names and sums, which were not considered formal epigraphy.
Alexandrian crystallisation – In the 3rd–2nd centuries BCE, the great libraries and scholarly schools of Alexandria systematised exegesis of Homer, scripture, and philosophy. It is here that we first find sustained examples of isopsephy used for interpretation, especially among Jewish commentators blending Hebrew and Greek traditions.

By the 1st century BCE, isopsephy had become a cultural commonplace. Graffiti in Delos, acrostic epigrams, and gem inscriptions show names and mottos reduced to numbers and compared. By the 1st–2nd centuries CE, it was fully integrated into religious literature. The Book of Revelation’s famous 666/616 exemplifies how editorial choices in spelling were guided by numeric calculation.

Thus the ‘silence’ of earlier centuries is less a real absence than a problem of survival and access. The Milesian system created the possibility of isopsephy in the 5th century; the Alexandrian milieu made it a dominant hermeneutic tool in the 3rd–1st centuries. Between these points lies the hidden development of a practice that would transform scripture, myth, and imperial symbols into ciphers of number.

Semitic Precedents and the Resh → Rho Shift

Behind the Greek Milesian system stood the older Semitic abjad. In Phoenician and Hebrew practice, each letter carried both a phonetic sound and a standard numeric value. By the first millennium BCE, values such as Qoph = 100 and Resh = 200 were conventional. When the alphabet crossed into the Aegean, however, these assignments were reshaped. In the Greek series, Rho (Ρ) was fixed at 100 - half the Semitic value of Resh.

This reduction was not accidental. It demonstrates the hand of deliberate editorial recalibration. The contraction of 200 → 100 is a key example of how alphabetic numeration was tuned to fit a new decimal order. Where the Phoenician scheme had grown organically out of the abjad, the Greek Milesian series was consciously regularised to complete the triadic cycle of 1–9, 10–90, 100–900.

The implications are twofold:

Textual consequences – The ‘Nero Caesar’ calculation in Revelation depends precisely on whether the name is spelled in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. In Hebrew, NRWN QSR totals 666; in Latinised form (Nero Caesar), it reduces to 616. This flexibility reflects exactly the kind of letter-value adjustments seen in the resh → rho contraction. Variants between manuscripts are not random slips, but conscious recalibrations by scribes aware of isopsephic effect.
Symbolic continuity – The contraction of resh to rho embodies the wider principle later expressed in the ρ-operator: a systematic scaling-down, a ratio applied between Greek and Latin, sexagesimal and metric, Semitic and Hellenistic. In other words, the resh → rho shift is the first clear mark of this operator at work, long before its formalisation in Roman numerals.

Thus the Greek alphabet was not simply borrowed; it was re-weighted. Its numbers were not received passively, but actively reshaped to fit a new structure. When the Alexandrian editors applied isopsephy to Jewish scriptures in translation, they were already inheritors of this recalibration. The sums of words, the embedding of numeric codes in texts, and the editorial licence to adjust spelling for effect all depended on the precedent set by the resh → rho shift.

What Bullinger saw as proof of divine imprint is here revealed as evidence of human intervention. The numbers are not miraculous: they are the results of careful adjustment of alphabetic values to suit cultural and imperial needs.

The ρ-Operator: Formal Statement of the 5/6 Contraction

The resh → rho reduction (200 → 100) was not an isolated adjustment but the clearest early sign of a deeper principle. This can be expressed as the ρ-operator: a systematic contraction of values by the factor 5/6.

Formally:
ρ(x) = (5/6)·x

In practice this meant:

Greek 6 (ϛ) → Roman V (5)
Greek 60 (Ξ) → Roman L (50)
Greek 600 (Χ) → Roman D (500)

The same ratio applies across the scale: the sexagesimal unit in Greek reduces by one-sixth when expressed in Roman terms. The Latin numerals are not random inventions but contracted Greek values. This explains why the Roman system appears clumsy beside the Greek - it is not a fresh design but a deliberate reduction.

The ρ-operator carried consequences in several domains:

Alphabetic transfer – By the time the Romans adopted their letters from the Etruscans (who had themselves adapted the Greek script), the numbers were already scaled down. The entire Latin system can be seen as a ‘compressed’ shadow of the Greek.

Metrology – The same 5/6 ratio appears in the translation of ancient sexagesimal measures into later metric approximations. A circle of 600 megalithic yards (a common Neolithic henge diameter) contracts by ρ to ~500 metres - a unit defined 4–5 millennia later by earth-based calculation. The ‘metre’ thus retrospectively coincides with structures laid out long before its invention.

Textual numerics – The famous 666/616 variant in Revelation shows how spelling alone could alter values. Neron Qesar (נרון קסר), transliterated into Greek, totals 666; the shorter Latinised form Nero Qesar (נרו קסר) drops the final nun (נ = 50), yielding 616. This was not the ρ-operator at work, but simple editorial choice in orthography.

Speculative aside – a Sherlockian curiosity. Yet it remains striking that the dropped value was 50 - precisely the Roman L and the product of applying the ρ-contraction to 60 (ξ × 5/6 = 50). This coincidence may be nothing more than a quirk of arithmetic. But it could also have been an intentional pun or in-joke for numerate scribes, playing with the same proportional habits elsewhere visible in Greek → Roman contraction. We cannot prove this. It is no more than an interesting lead, a curiosity that may one day bear fruit if other evidence emerges. For now, it should be recorded as speculation, neither affirmed nor dismissed, so that later discovery may decide.

The importance of the ρ-operator cannot be overstated. It shows that what appear as ‘miraculous coincidences’ - the metre in prehistoric monuments, the elegance of Roman numerals, even the way biblical numbers sit within variant spellings - are not coincidences at all. They are the results of a continuous proportional logic, deliberately applied.

The ρ-operator demonstrates that ancient scholars, scribes, and architects worked consciously with ratio, not arbitrary integers. Far from being a late discovery, this proportional contraction was already embedded in Neolithic monument planning, alphabetic redaction at Alexandria, and Roman imperial symbolism.

The Metrology Bridge: From Megalithic Yards to the Metre

The ρ-operator is not confined to letters and numbers. Its presence is also visible in the stones of the Neolithic. Across Britain and Europe, surveys by Alexander Thom revealed a standard of measure - the megalithic yard (MY), averaging ~0.829 m - used consistently from the 4th millennium BCE. This standard underlies circles, henges, and alignments from Orkney to Brittany, and beyond into a wider global tradition of proportion.

Among the clearest cases are the 60-MY diameter circles, such as those at Tynemouth and in Cumbria. Their recurrence shows that Neolithic builders were not laying out sites at random but working with fixed, transferable units of measure. Other monuments cluster around multiples of this yard - 30, 60, 120 - producing consistent diameters that cannot be explained away as coincidence.

When the ρ-operator is applied, the logic becomes clear:

60 MY ≈ 49.7 m → ~50 m (ρ-contracted)
600 MY ≈ 497 m → ~500 m (ρ-contracted)

The same contraction that later turns Greek 60 (Ξ) into Roman 50 (L), or Greek 600 (Χ) into Roman 500 (D), is already visible in prehistoric monument design. Long before Alexandria or Rome, the principle of 5/6 proportional scaling was being enacted in stone.

This metrological evidence links directly to the wider argument of Return of the Storm God. The Neolithic yard-based culture was not isolated or provincial. It was part of a widespread pattern of ratio-conscious construction stretching across Europe and into other parts of the world by the late 4th millennium. The fact that these circles can be read both in their own units (MY) and, by contraction, as neat metric equivalents (50 m, 500 m) shows that the ρ-operator is not a scholarly abstraction but a lived principle embedded in practice.

Thus, when Roman numerals later appear with L = 50 and D = 500, we are not seeing invention but translation. The same ratio-logic that turned Semitic resh into Greek rho, and Greek values into Latin numerals, had already been applied in Neolithic metrology. The metre itself - supposedly a rational Enlightenment construct - is revealed as a rediscovery of a principle in use millennia earlier.

The metrology bridge therefore grounds the ρ-operator in deep time. It shows that what later becomes textual manipulation and imperial ciphering was rooted in a prehistoric tradition of ratio and measure. The henges of Tynemouth and Cumbria speak the same language as the numerals of Rome: contraction by 5/6, the logic of translation between systems.

Isopsephy Meets Scripture: Editorial Manipulation in Practice

The transition from stone to script is where the numeric logic of the ρ-operator became a tool of textual power. Once the alphabet doubled as a numeral system, every name and phrase carried a sum. This meant that editors could, by choosing a spelling, control the number. The Bible as we know it was written in this environment, and the evidence shows deliberate manipulation of letter-values to embed numbers of symbolic weight.

The best-known case is the number of the beast in Revelation 13:18. Some manuscripts give 666, others 616. The difference is not accident or error, but the result of a scribal decision.

In Hebrew/Aramaic transliteration, the name Neron Qesar (נרון קסר) sums to 666.
In Latinised form Nero Qesar (נרו קסר), the final nun (נ = 50) is omitted, leaving 616.

Here is the mechanism in its simplest form: alter the spelling, alter the number. Both readings existed side by side in antiquity, showing that early Christian editors consciously selected values that aligned with their intended audience. Greek-speaking Jews favoured 666; Latinised Romans recognised 616.

Speculative aside – a possible cipher. The subtraction of 50 may not be innocent. The nun dropped in the Latinised form equals 50, which is exactly the Roman numeral L, and the result of contracting Greek ξ = 60 by the ρ-operator (60 × 5/6 = 50). This could be coincidence. But in a culture already attuned to numerical punning, it may have been an intentional joke or cryptic signal for insiders. We cannot prove this, yet the symmetry is compelling enough to record. It is the sort of numerical playfulness we would expect from Alexandrian editors steeped in isopsephy.

Other examples confirm that such manipulation was common practice. The gematria of names shows repeated editorial tuning:

In the Sibylline Oracles, ‘Jesus’ (ΙΗΣΟΥΣ) is given as 888, a deliberate counterpoint to the 666 of the beast.
The Greek spelling of ‘Caesar’ could be adjusted to yield different totals depending on context.
Variants of biblical names across manuscripts often reflect not phonetic change but numeric recalibration.

The pattern is unmistakable. Numbers in scripture are not fingerprints of divine intervention, as Bullinger assumed, but the fingerprints of editors who knew how to use isopsephy.

This is why numerology appears throughout scripture - not because it was imposed from outside after the fact, but because it was designed into the text at the point of composition. The sums of names, the repetition of favoured totals, and the variants between manuscripts all testify to conscious human design.

The link back to the Neolithic is this: just as stone circles encoded ratios through measure, scripture encoded ratios through letters. In both cases, the same principle of proportional manipulation applied. Ratio was the hidden continuity, expressed now in geometry, now in language.

Constantine’s Labarum bearing the Chi Rho monogram.

Eusebius, Constantine and the deliberate encoding hypothesis

Eusebius’ account of Constantine’s vision cannot be read as simple reportage. Its rhetorical shape, its late composition and its evident function as courtly propaganda mean that it should be treated as a crafted narrative rather than an unmediated eyewitness record. Lactantius, who wrote closer to the event, gives a simpler report of a dream and a sign to be placed on shields; Eusebius, decades later, expands this into a cosmic vision and the famous formula commonly rendered in Latin as in hoc signo vinces. That expansion is purposeful: it retrojects sacred sanction onto an imperial act and secures a public theology of victory.

Read against the arithmetic affordances of the Milesian alphabet, the choice of the Chi-Rho for a standard is unlikely to be accidental. The graphemes in question carry exact numeric values (Χ = 600; Ρ = 100) that resolve in two single-step identities: Χ + Ρ = 700 = Ψ, and Χ − Ρ = 500 = Φ - equivalently Χ × 5/6 = 500. Those identities are arithmetically exact and therefore readable by anyone schooled in the alphabetic-numeral habit. The labarum therefore functions as a public sign and as an initiatic token at the same time: one audience sees a Christogram; another sees a compact cipher encoding psyche and proportion.

On this basis it is argued here as the most plausible historical interpretation that the adoption and promulgation of ΧΡ operated as deliberate encoding. Constantine’s emblem - whether produced by his officers or celebrated later by court historians - was purposefully useful as a double-reading device: a publicly acceptable Christian symbol that simultaneously carried initiatic content intelligible to an elite conversant in isopsephy. That elite use was not mystical accident but a technique of governance. The arithmetic is not fanciful; it is the mechanism.

The broader cultural pattern supports this interpretation. Rome habitually rebranded older goddess emblems into masculine, state-friendly insignia - labrys into labarum, serpent and djed motifs into fasces and standards - while allowing the initiated to recognise older meanings encoded by letters and ratios. That process is visible across late-antique iconography and in literary redaction where older local cult-symbols are overwritten by imperial legend. Placing ΧΡ on the labarum fits this pattern: the empire harnessed an ancient symbolic grammar and reframed it as Christian-state ideology, while keeping the old proportional know-how in restricted circulation.

This paper therefore treats the encoding hypothesis as the working conclusion. It is the most coherent reading of the arithmetic, the iconography and the documentary trajectory: 1) the technical capacity for a double reading exists in the letters themselves; 2) the late-antique narrative apparatus (Eusebius et al.) supplies a public cover-story; 3) material and iconographic practice shows repeated Roman rebranding of goddess signs into state emblems. Read together, these strands make intentional encoding the most probable historical explanation.

Caveat and evidence desiderata:

That conclusion must be held alongside a clear methodological caveat. No extant inscription or private manual definitively confesses an initiatic programme or sets out an explicit ‘decryption key’ written by Roman officers. The claim is therefore inferential rather than documentary. The arithmetic identities and the narrative machinery make the deliberate-encoding reading the best explanation of the available data, but confirmation would require further primary evidence - for example, administrative records, a sequence of inscriptions that explicitly read ΧΡ as Φ/Ψ, or a cache of isopsephic explanatory glosses. Until such evidence appears, the interpretation stands as the most coherent, evidence-anchored hypothesis rather than as a provable fact.

Authorial translation and intent

‘in this sign we conquer you.’ That is the true instruction encoded in the labarum. Χ and Ρ are chosen because they do double work. Publicly they read as a Christogram. Privately they resolve arithmetically to Ψ and Φ:

Χ + Ρ = 700 = Ψ
Χ − Ρ = 500 = Φ
equivalently ρ(Χ) = (5/6)·600 = Φ

This yields the whole imperial programme in one mark:

Ψ - use psyche - mass psychology - to seize minds
Φ - hide the goddess-ratio - phi - remove her presence from public sight

The emblem is therefore not piety but policy. It fuses method (psy-ops), means (double-coded isopsephy), motivation (erase phi and the goddess from the people), and rationale (conquer minds and rewrite memory) in a single visible sign. This is the moment the empire was Huxwelled for the first time - a managed fusion of Huxley’s sedation and Orwell’s coercion long before either name existed - achieved by a banner that tells the crowd ‘Christ’ while telling the initiated ‘Φ and Ψ’.

The missing element - the pictorial significance

What is too often omitted in examinations of letters, words and numerology is the shape of the glyphs themselves. Letters are not merely phonemes; originally they were pictures. The Phoenician development proceeded from natural shapes - the sign rēš represented a head, a formalised head-figure that later inverted into Greek Ρ (rho) and then became Latin R. Once this genealogy is recognised, a very different argument opens: letters carried pictorial, geometric and cosmological information long before they were abstracted into mere signs for sound. That pictorial heritage is the element the Roman initiatic editors exploited.

We accept that modern orthography treats letters as codified phonic fragments of words. That codification obscures a prior layer in which graphemes were visual archetypes - geometrical forms that enacted ratio and cosmology. Initiatic cults were fascinated by geometry as well as ratio; for those cults a letter was also an archetype of form. The Roman genius was not merely rhetorical: it was graphic. The imperial redactors did not only assert new meanings; they drew them into existence by choosing letters whose shapes and numeric values carried proportional and pictorial affordances.

Phi, Resh, and the Broken Goddess

A black background with a black square

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

The Phoenician rēš sign – the original R presented as P, later inverted into Greek Ρ (Rho) – meant ‘head.’ Its transformation into Rho is itself a telling inversion.

Φ (phi) is the goddess ratio – Isis veiled within proportion.

When Φ is bisected vertically, it yields two halves:

On the left, Hebrew Resh ר – the proto-Phoenician rēš, the q-form head glyph, the original ‘head’ of wisdom. The Phoenician head sign echoes the centrality of the head in Egyptian thought as the seat of mind and crown: the apex where the goddess Wadjet is enthroned, embodying seership, Sia (knowing), and protecting the Hu (utterance) with the cobra Uraeus.
On the right, D – the Roman numeral for 500, the half-circle of dominion.

Thus p + d = Φ. Recombining the p with the d – or the Ρ (Rho) with the D – restores the completed form. This is the X-figure, carrying the value 600 in Greek isopsephy, and functioning as a multipurpose code of the decad.

The Romans deliberately exalted the D while discarding the q. This simple manoeuvre allowed them to overwrite the goddess ratio wherever it appeared. All that was required was:

to add a D to the central line of any six-rayed goddess star, or
to add a Ρ to any X-star representing Isis, Seba, or other star-goddess archetypes.

With this device, every pagan star-cross could be rebranded as a Christian cross. The XP (Chi-Rho) form, once a cipher of numerical transformation, was subsumed into formal crucifixes. Even the ancient Cuthbert solar cross – an equal-armed cosmological emblem – went out of fashion under the Christianised form. The multilevel Celtic Pythagorean crosses, with their spirals, ratios, and serpent interlace, were likewise claimed and absorbed as ‘Christian’ symbols.

In this way the Romans quite literally ‘messed with our heads’: they weaponised letter-forms loaded with cosmological and mathematical significance, and held them up before us as signs to imprint new meanings. To cast out our ‘devils’ and demons, they installed their own.

Thus every time we encounter Q.E.D. or the Chi-Rho, we are seeing the same Roman cipher of conquest: the split goddess, the broken Phi.

Christianity began with inversion and deletion, then sold to the masses as ‘truth’ with a capital Tau.

The full arc from ancient Egypt runs as follows: Ptah as Atum – the void who became the dyadic Father and Mother, symbolised by the dingir star-cross – was stripped down to a male-only God and His Son. To strip the goddess was to strip out the mathematics: the cross, once dual, was inverted by removing the Resh from the D, and superimposing this broken form upon the X-cross.

From there the Romans gave us their own version of the son of the craftsman Ptah the pater potter of the petrophic rock in Jesus son of the craftsman, and the founder of the church as Peter the rock. They formalised the cross as a crucifix, then inverted it again to produce Peter’s cross – a sign later equated with Satan, demons, and all things evil.

They took the pentagon and pentagram of Phi – once Isis-Seba’s star, a cosmological symbol of proportion – and rebranded it as the sign of witchcraft and satanic magic. They transformed the goddess Iu-sa-as (the other half of Atum, his feminine complement) into the sinner Eve, while her serpent-wisdom became the Devil himself.

They did this everywhere the goddess emerged in word or symbol. Each time the pattern repeats: the original cosmological archetype is retained in secret, while its public face is inverted into something demonic.

From labrys to labarum, from fasces to pontifex, from Milvian Bridge to Heavenfield, the same pattern recurs. The goddess sign - double axe, serpent-cross, solar wheel - is rebranded as Christian insignia. The bridge, once the axis of proportion, becomes the stage of conquest. And the redactors - Eusebius and Bede - retell these tales as holy history, when in truth they are Roman lies.

Every Chi-Rho, every cross of victory, is thus a cipher of theft: the goddess sign inverted, the bridge of life repurposed as the bridge of empire.

This is the context Bullinger never saw. In examining numerological sequences only as an internal exercise - searching for patterns within the Bible itself - he ignored the wider field of evidence. The ratios and sums do not exist in isolation. They were written in because the redactors already lived in a culture of ratio, myth, and cipher. To treat them as divine fingerprints, as Bullinger did, is to mistake deliberate editorial craft for God’s hand.

When everything that is not endorsed by the Bible, or appears contrary to it, the religious see Satan’s hand.

For example, the alchemical Baphomet of Eliphas Levi – depicted as the horned god – is not originally satanic. His form derives from Khnum, the ram-headed creator god of Egypt (albeit later conflated with goat form), himself a manifestation of Ptah-Atum. Khnum shaped humanity from clay on his potter’s wheel, while the breath of life (Hu) – the utterance and creative spirit – was instilled through the goddess, acting via Atum. Khnum is thus a horned god of nature and genesis, a symbol of fertility and balance, not of evil.

A drawing of a goat with a snake and a glass ball

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Baphomet as alchemical Atumic dualistic god/goddess archetypes in Khnum-derived form.

Yet in the later Christian imagination this archetype was rebranded. The horned god, once a sign of creation, became conflated with Satan, and Baphomet - an icon of the original Drift Culture’s god/goddess duality - was cast as a satanic idol. What had been the emblem of natural order and divine proportion was inverted into a demonic caricature.

Q.E.D. and the Roman Sneer

Egyptian: ‘I have proved it myself’ (ir.n.i mnt im.i) = proof as enactment. The distinction is crucial. Poiein means ‘to make, to do.’

When Greek scholars worked in Alexandria, this constructive ethos was preserved in their terminology. Euclid closes many propositions not with Q.E.D. (ὅπερ ἔδει δεῖξαι – ‘what was to be proved’), but with Q.E.F. (ὅπερ ἔδει ποιῆσαι) – ‘what was to be done.’

Q.E.F. marks the completion of a construction, not the conclusion of a syllogism. It carries the older Egyptian sense that proof is an act of proportion, a visible manifestation. It is the logic of Isis – Phi as ratio, the serpent of wisdom, the act of enclosing and bringing forth.

Greek: Q.E.F. (ὅπερ ἔδει ποιῆσαι) = ‘what was to be done’ = constructive proof.
Roman: Q.E.D. (Quod Erat Demonstrandum) = ‘what was to be proved’ = authoritative closure.

The shift is from doing to proving, from feminine constructive ratio to masculine authority.

Thus:

· Every Q.E.D. is the Roman sneer: ’We split your goddess. We kept the number. We proved it ourselves – and now you believe it was us.’
Chi-Rho is the visual cipher: ’By this sign we conquered you.’
Every time a Jew erects a menorah of a tor with 7 lights they are erecting a facsimile of the Storm God as Orion over the mountain, a symbol of Osiris.
Every time a rabbi unfurls the Torah scroll, he is unwinding the Isis goddess from the djed, the serpent coiled around the Tor, unwinding the torus of Phi, which is the ratio that belies the form - the Word HU breath and seed of Atum in the Creation.
Every time a Christian bows before a cross, they are venerating the sign of Roman overlord’s elite conquest of the mass psyche, like the masses venerating Big Brother in Orwell’s 1984.
When Kabbalists explore and discover a sacred pattern in the gematria, and perhaps discover Phi, they are not discovering the divine hand, but the hands of the men who wrote the texts deliberately in Alexandria as a veiled system of divine maths in the first place. A maths that stretches way further back than the existence of the self-identified Hebrew tribe. A maths that is inherent in Nature, whether or not any ‘man’ existed to witness it.
Thus every time we read Q.E.D., each time we exalt Chi-Rho as the sign of Christ, we are unwittingly worshipping their conquest of ourselves. This is mass formation hypnosis, a collective Stockholm Syndrome under empire. The cipher is not neutral: it is the Roman sneer, broadcast through symbol and scripture alike.

Are the Romans stating in their Chi Rho sign: ‘We split your goddess. We kept the number. We proved it ourselves – and now you believe it was us. Now all roads lead to Rome. All the indigenous wealth you now give us freely, where once we had to fund armies to take it by force.’?

The Coptic Phi-sign - bridging evidence

A black letter with a curved tail

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

The intermediate form of phi that survives in Coptic graphic traditions is telling. Rather than the later, symmetric bisected circle, the Coptic phi appears as a central column or pillar pierced by a stroke and traversed by a curling spiral. Visually it is a djed-like pillar with a tripartite motif and a serpent-curve wrapped about it; formally it reads as a rod-and-serpent, a Min-column, a threefold staff and, at the same time, a capital-Xi type element. The glyph thus carries a composite of Egyptian religious imagery - the djed pillar of stability, the Min rod of generative power, and the serpent-uraeus of seership and utterance. The image is not a mere letter-form; it is a condensed cosmogram. (See figure: Coptic phi above.)

That pictorial residue matters. It shows that phi began as a pictorial archetype of proportion and goddess-presence, then underwent a twofold process: first formalisation into alphabetic use, then deliberate graphical and numerical reduction by later editorial hands. Read this way, the later bisected circle (Φ) is not simply a graphic convenience but the outcome of a programme of suppression: the elegant, living pictogram is flattened into an abstract sign whose primary function becomes numeric rather than mythic. In other words, the goddess is split and the ratio survives as an encoded number.

This is consistent with the broader thesis: initiatic redactors in Alexandria and in the later Roman world did not merely transliterate or transliterate and translate; they selected and reshaped glyphs so that pictorial meanings that might recall goddess-ratio could be marginalised while their numeric residues were retained in restricted, elite circulation. The Coptic phi image is archaeological corroboration of that process. It testifies that the glyph once carried layered iconography and that its later abstracted form can be read as the product of conscious graphical editing rather than neutral palaeographic evolution.

Methodological note - evidence and limits

The pictorial-argument is strong but inferential. The Coptic form is a surviving witness to an older visual grammar; its semantic links to djed, Min and uraeus are archaeologically and iconographically coherent. However, proving intentional policy at Alexandria requires documentary proof or a sequence of explicit graphic prescriptions. The image therefore functions as structural corroboration for the deliberate-reshaping thesis rather than as a standalone smoking-gun. Still, it is a powerful piece of the cumulative case: form, number and myth meet in a single glyph that later editors had the means and motive to re-engineer.

The Destruction of Proof as Part of the Method

The absence of a ‘decryption manual’ or a bishop’s confession is not neutral. It is the result of a deliberate programme of erasure. Early Christian editors admitted to falsification: Eusebius himself wrote that it was ‘lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medicine’. The Church Fathers who followed him relied on interpolation, fabrication, and selective quotation to build their canon.

What could not be overwritten was destroyed. From Constantine onward, violence was directed not only at pagans but at their writings. Foote and Wheeler record how libraries were burned, temples stripped, and entire traditions condemned, so that nothing remained to contradict the new imperial religion. What survived did so because it could be repurposed. Vast swathes of mythic material were cannibalised into scripture, their goddess-ratio stripped out and their cosmological significance inverted, exactly as Massey observed.

In this way the Church curated the archive of the past. What we are left with is a carefully managed survival - texts that all serve the same narrative, while the dissenting evidence has been either obliterated or hidden. That is why suspicion has long fallen on the Vatican archives: not because of fanciful conspiracy, but because Rome had every motive to confiscate originals while destroying public access.

The method was simple: preserve copies for the elite, remove or destroy the rest. The result is that absence itself becomes evidence - the missing proof is part of the crime. Just as the Great Library of Alexandria was put to the torch, so too was the collective memory of ratio and goddess deliberately cut away. What remains are fragments. Yet those fragments are enough. A jigsaw with missing corners can still reveal its picture. The cumulative pattern - the broken phi, the cipher of ΧΡ, the systematic redactions - is recognisable even without the lost ‘blueprint.’

How the broken-phi programme works - method, means, motivation, rationale

The broken-phi programme is compact:

method - conceal phi by fragmenting its pictorial and numeric anchors;
means - choose letters (Χ and Ρ) whose arithmetic resolves to ψ and φ and whose graphic forms admit the insertion or removal of a dominant D or Ρ;
motivation - erase goddess-ratio from common knowledge while preserving it for initiates;
rationale - conquer minds by rewriting public memory and presenting rebranded symbols as religious truth.

Thus every time the Roman state erected an emblem or promulgated a festival, it both masked and preserved older cosmological structures. The double reading of ΧΡ does the work in one mark: to the crowd it reads as ‘Christ’; to the initiated it signals Φ (proportion) and Ψ (psyche) and therefore how the state intends to govern memory, form and mind.

Rebranding and demonisation

The rebranding was systematic and ruthless. The pentagon, pentagram and serpent-spiral of proportional iconographies - once markers of Isis-Seba and other goddess patterns - were recoded as signs of witchcraft, superstition and ultimately demonic evil. Khnum, Ptah, and other creator-figures that once signified birth, craft and balance were remodelled into devils or marginalised as pagan curiosities. The effect was to transform cosmologies into heresies, and to render the mathematics of proportion an esoteric residue recoverable only by initiates.

Closing claim and a methodological note

This is the claim advanced here: the Chi-Rho and the broader Roman programme are not merely religious conversion devices - they are a system of cultural engineering. The empire weaponised letter-forms loaded with pictorial and numerical significance so that public religion would perform the function of erasure while the arithmetic and geometry of the old order passed intact into restricted circulation. The broken Phi is the cipher of that theft: every public cross that displaces a goddess-star is also a public act of mnemonic displacement.

Methodological caveat

This reconstruction is presented as the best-fit historical interpretation of arithmetic, glyphic genealogy and iconographic redaction. It is inferential: no extant inscription or manual has yet been found in which a Roman officer or bishop writes down the policy in plain terms. The case rests on structural identities in letters and forms, on documentary patterns of late-antique redaction, and on the material record of symbolic overwrite. Those combined strands make the deliberate-encoding and rebranding reading the most coherent hypothesis available; confirmation would require explicit administrative or initiatic documentation.

The Bridge of Conquest: From Labrys to Labarum

The Roman rebranding of sacred symbols reached its climax in the Chi-Rho - the XP monogram Constantine is said to have carried before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 CE. Outwardly, it was the sign of Christ, the ‘labarum’ or imperial standard of victory. Inwardly, it was another redaction of the most ancient goddess symbols. Later, almost all crosses of varying cultures would be rebranded as ‘Christian’ and become further visible psychological reinforcement of Christ and God as omniscient.

Pontifex and Fasces

The office of pontifex - ‘bridge-builder’ (pons facere) - derives not from Christian innovation but from earlier cosmology. The bridge was originally the goddess axis itself: the rainbow arch, the djed pillar bound with the serpent, the span that united heaven and earth. Its cognate, the fasces, was a bundle of rods bound around an axe. This is nothing other than a djed pillar, strapped with X-crosses, with a serpent-bound staff concealed in imperial insignia. What had been goddess-signs of proportion and life were re-presented as tokens of Roman authority.

Labarum and Labrys

The labarum, the military standard that bore the Chi-Rho, is directly linked in name to the labrys, the double-headed axe. The labrys is universally a goddess sign: in Crete, Anatolia, Caria, and beyond it was wielded by priestesses of the mother goddess, not patriarchal gods. It signified the balance of life, the double axis of proportion. Zeus Labrandeus - depicted with labrys in one hand, staff in the other - is in fact Orion, wielding a goddess emblem reframed as a masculine weapon.

The structure is clear: Resh and Rho together form the labrys - the head glyph and the staff becoming the twin axes. The labarum was thus a masculinised redaction of the goddess double-axe, repurposed as Constantine’s battle standard.

The Milvian Bridge

The perfect symbolic stage was chosen for the great unveiling: the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Constantine is said to have seen the Chi-Rho in the heavens, accompanied by the words in hoc signo vinces - ‘by this sign you shall conquer.’ But this tale is not contemporary; it comes from Eusebius, the notorious court historian and fabricator of pious fictions.

Lactantius, writing nearer to the event, merely reports that Constantine was told in a dream to mark his shields with a sign.

Eusebius, decades later, expands this into a cosmic vision, complete with shining cross of light and divine mandate.

Eusebius admits he only heard it from Constantine himself, years after the fact.

This is not history but redaction: a myth crafted to declare that Rome’s conquest had divine sanction. The goddess bridge (djed, labrys, serpent-cross) was overwritten at the actual bridge of battle. The ‘vision’ is propaganda - a Roman lie sanctified as scripture.

The Repeated Tactic: Bede and King Oswald

The same formula was repeated in Britain three centuries later. In his Ecclesiastical History, Bede tells how King Oswald raised a great cross before the Battle of Heavenfield (c. 634 CE), prayed with his army, and won a miraculous victory. The cross became the token of divine favour, the sign of conquest by Christ.

But the structure of the tale is identical to Constantine at the Milvian Bridge:

A ruler sees or erects a Christian sign before battle.
Victory follows.
The story is written decades later by a church historian.
The indigenous goddess symbols - Celtic solar and serpent crosses - are absorbed and rebranded as Christian emblems.

Just as Eusebius fabricated Constantine’s vision, so Bede fabricated Oswald’s. Both men were Roman propagandists, not historians. Their tales were retrojections, redactions designed to overwrite local traditions and enthrone empire through sacred fiction.

Constantine’s coin showing the slaying of the serpent by the Labarum bearing XP. The caption reads SPES PVBLICA - or Hope for the People. Spes was a goddess of hope based on Elpis, the last ray of hope in Pandora’s jar, hidden under the lid. This reads like a statement - ‘we give you hope but have opened Pandora’s Box. We slay the wisdom of the serpent and give you hope in your ignorance of the CHIRHO.’ Isn’t that a succinct summary of how the mass psyche was manipulated into taking a genetic vaccine that may heave opened up a Pandora’s Box of harms, offered in the opened vial, as the only hope for the public?

The Rho Operator and Chi-Rho Cipher Turns The Devil into Christ the Saviour

Rho = 100.
Acts as operator between Greek and Roman alphanumerical systems.
6/5 and 5/6 ratios bridge sexagesimal to decimal.
Stigma becomes V, Xi becomes L, X (Chi) becomes D.

But uniquely in Chi-Rho:

Χ = 600, Ρ = 100.
Χ – Ρ = 500 = Roman D.
This is the only case where subtraction directly yields the Roman numeral.

Thus Chi-Rho is the cipher key. Constantine’s ‘sign by which we conquer’ was the mathematical harmonisation in plain sight. Here was Constantine the Orionic conqueror in the mould of David (DWD - Duat) conquering the Taurian beast as Orion of the Duat.

In Greek, the number 666, associated with the ‘number of the beast’ in the Book of Revelation, is written as χξϛ (or χξς). This is the numerical representation using Greek letters, where χ (chi) represents 600, ξ (xi) represents 60, and ϛ (stigma, or sometimes ς, sigma) represents 6. It can also be written out as ἑξακόσιοι ἑξήκοντα ἕξ (hexakosioi hexekonta hex), meaning ‘six hundred sixty-six’.

Interestingly Greek 666, using the Rho conversion becomes 555. Heh Heh Heh - or Hu Hu Hu in the Egyptian. This value is central to the Fibonacci series as it is the tetractic 5 - the axis between 1 and 10, at 55 locks into Phi with precision, but by the 55th step is exact to Phi within 9 decimal places. 555 is the number of the name CHRIST in the Greek!

The ‘Devil’s number’ becomes ‘Christs number’ using the Roman Rho!

If we assume the twin serpents to be the Fibonacci steps winding around the Lucas series, that locks at Phi at its 40th step, much is revealed.

Drift-culture continuity: proto-writing, stars and proportion

Alphabetic numeration did not emerge in a vacuum. It was the late crystallisation of a habit already visible in proto-signs, monuments, and stellar grammar thousands of years earlier. Ratio was encoded in form long before letters doubled as numbers.

Proto-writing in the Danube basin
The Vinča script of 5500–4500 BCE stands as the earliest sustained system of symbolic signs yet found in Europe. Its corpus includes X-shapes, ladders, spirals, meanders, and crosses incised on ceramics, spindle whorls, and figurines. These are not random decorations: their repetition across sites hundreds of kilometres apart, and their consistent placement on shoulders, rims, and torsos, points to rule-based usage. In other words, the glyphs already encoded proportion and crossing, long before alphabets. The spiral, ladder, and cross forms are the same archetypes that later reappear in isopsephy, only now stripped of myth and reduced to letters and numbers.

Ratio in stone
By the 4th millennium BCE, ratio is seen in the megalithic circles of Europe. Alexander Thom’s surveys revealed the megalithic yard as a standard measure (~0.829 m), with circles clustering at 30, 60, and 120 MY diameters. These values are not arbitrary. They form sexagesimal harmonics that, when contracted by the ρ-operator, translate seamlessly into later metric values (30 → 25 m, 60 → 50 m, 120 → 100 m). The builders were enacting proportional logic, even if they had no alphabetic numerals. Their monuments speak in ratio.

The Giza grammar
Egypt carried this ratio into stone with unparalleled precision. Lehner’s surveys of the Great Pyramid confirm that its slope encodes the golden ratio, while its dimensions (base ~440 cubits, height ~280 cubits) resolve into harmonic 7:11 and 14:22 relations. Bauval’s work on Orion correlations shows that the Giza layout itself mirrors the three stars of Orion’s Belt, with offset ratios precisely matched to celestial spacing. Here proportion is both architectural and astronomical: the ground plan is a stellar grammar.

Orion as axis
Orion was the global template of axis and proportion. In Egypt, Sahu-Orion embodied Osiris; Sirius (Isis) rose in conjunction as consort. In Europe, the same belt-stars oriented monuments and myth. Orion provided the cosmic cross against which measure was fixed. It is this ‘Orion grammar’ - axis, triad, ratio - that underlies the later numerological codes of scripture. The redactors did not invent proportion; they inherited it. Their contribution was to encrypt it into letters and use it as a tool of control.

Continuity, not coincidence
The line runs clear:

Vinča signs (X, spiral, ladder, cross) encode ratio pictorially.
Megalithic henges encode ratio metrically.
Giza pyramids encode ratio architecturally and astronomically.
Orion encodes ratio cosmologically.
Isopsephy encodes ratio alphabetically.

At each stage, the same grammar of proportion recurs, adapted to the medium - clay, stone, star, or letter. By the time alphabetic numeration appears in Ionia, it is simply the latest vessel for an older system. Ratio precedes the alphabet. Isopsephy is not the origin but the culmination of a long continuum - the drift-culture inheritance stretching from Danube proto-writing and Neolithic circles to Egypt’s pyramids and Rome’s ciphered crosses.

Bullinger’s blind spot and methodological contrast

E. W. Bullinger’s Number in Scripture (1921) is one of the most widely circulated works of biblical numerology. His aim was to demonstrate that the recurrence of numbers in the Bible could only be explained by divine authorship. For Bullinger, the integers were everything:

7 was always ‘spiritual perfection.’
12 was ‘governmental perfection.’
40 was ‘probation or testing.’
666 was the supreme number of evil.

Bullinger catalogued these instances with enormous diligence, producing tables and concordances that remain impressive in their scale. Yet his method was bounded entirely within the biblical text. He treated the Bible as a closed code-book, searching for internal repetition and consistency, while ignoring every external context in which those numbers had meaning.

The problem is clear. Bullinger’s data are real - the numbers do recur - but his interpretation is wrong. He assumed recurrence proved divine insertion, when the historical evidence shows deliberate human editorial practice.

Resh → rho contraction: the reduction of 200 to 100 in alphabetic numeration is a clear editorial act, not divine design.
ρ-operator contraction: Greek 60 → Roman 50, Greek 600 → Roman 500 - again, a proportional rule applied by human hands, later absorbed into Roman numerals.
666/616 variants: demonstrably produced by alternate spellings of ‘Nero Caesar,’ with scribes dropping or adding a single letter to shift the sum, not by heavenly decree.
888 for Jesus: an isopsephic construction, consciously chosen as a counterpoint to 666, designed to signify ‘perfection beyond perfection,’ not a miracle.

Bullinger mistook evidence of scribal manipulation for fingerprints of God. The editors who worked in Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome were literate in isopsephy. They knew the codes, and they used them. Numbers were not supernaturally ‘placed’ in the text; they were designed into it.

Once the wider context is restored - Vinča proto-writing, megalithic measures, Giza ratios, Orion grammar - the situation becomes clear. The biblical numbers that Bullinger catalogued were not unique at all. They belonged to a continuum of ratio-conscious culture, stretching back millennia, which the redactors repurposed for their own ends.

Bullinger’s blind spot was to look inward only. By refusing to consider external evidence - archaeology, astronomy, metrology, or proto-writing - he saw only integers and missed the ratios behind them. His conclusion was therefore exactly backwards. Far from proving God, the numbers prove the hand of scholars and empire.

He assumed the Bible grew out of an historical timeline and culminated naturally in its documented form. He did not know that much of the Bible was written much later as an invention - a fictionalised version of history crafted to explain away the past. Its redaction took place after Titus had seized Judea and crushed the Jewish rebellion. Bullinger therefore assumed that the Chi-Rho of Constantine’s age grew out of an already-complete biblical past which Constantine recognised and embraced. In reality, the cipher preceded the final compilation of the Bible, and the Bible itself was designed as a manual of social control to fit the imperial programme.

Had Bullinger recognised this perspective, his work and his conclusions would have been radically different. He would have seen the recurrence of numbers not as divine signatures but as editorial choices within a much larger, empire-driven project of ratio-redaction and cultural engineering.

The Warka Vase: Pythagorean Ratio in Sumer

The Warka Vase (c. 3200 BCE), excavated from Uruk, is one of the earliest narrative reliefs in history. Its tiered bands depict a procession of offerings to the goddess Inanna. Scholars often describe it as ritual representation, but the proportions reveal Pythagorean ratios long before Pythagoras.

The registers are unequal but proportional, approximating 1:2 and 2:3 - the same intervals that define the musical scale (c. 9:18:27 cm).
The procession is structured: grain, water, animals, humans - ascending levels of fertility and complexity that mirror the tetractys (1, 2, 3, 4).
At the top stands Inanna, vessel of abundance.

The vase is not a ‘story in stone’ but a mathematical liturgy. It encodes the same harmonics Bullinger finds in scripture, but without divine authorship. Ratios were embodied in material culture two millennia before the Hebrew Bible.

Henges and megalithic circles across Britain, Ireland, and Europe - many from the 4th millennium BCE - show the same Drift Culture habit of ratio-encoding. Thom’s surveys identified the Megalithic Yard (0.829 m) recurring with precision in circle diameters and lunar–solar alignments. In Egypt, Karnak’s axis was aligned with the winter solstice sunrise, embedding cosmic proportion in ritual space. Ratio knowledge was global, carried in stone.

By the Christian era, this knowledge was withdrawn from the public. The Church preserved it in cathedrals, woven into nave and choir, but denied the masses its meaning. The kernel was hidden; the husk remained.

Encoding vs Numerology

Encoding is:

Rooted in observation (lunar cycles, Venus harmonics, solstice alignments).
Embodied in durable media (language, monuments, vessels).
Relational (ratios, proportions, harmonics).
Open-ended (refined, recalibrated).

Numerology is:

Rooted in repetition (counting integers in texts).
Embodied only in scripture (sevens, twelves, forties).
Integer-fixated (absolutes, not ratios).
Closed (any recurrence is proof of divine design).

Encoding evidences human intelligence and sacred imagination. Numerology evidences theological reduction.

The Living Kernel and the Hollow Husk

The Storm God framework shows how kernels were hollowed into husks.

Hydronyms preserve polarities of water and stone. Bullinger sees ‘rock’ and ‘river’ in scripture and declares divine metaphor. Husk: scripture. Kernel: linguistic polarity.
Orion nexus embodies cosmic axis. Bullinger notes Orion’s name in Job and Amos but misses pyramid alignments and cross-cultural myths. Husk: biblical reference. Kernel: stellar ratio.
The ρ-operator preserves proportional scaling. Bullinger treats 666 as metaphysical. Kernel: a 5/6 adjustment between alphabets. Husk: apocalyptic speculation.

Lesson: ratio is the kernel; integer repetition the husk.

Why Encoding Persists

Cultures encoded ratio in language, sign, and monument because ratio endures. Myths fade, kings fall, temples crumble - but ratios of sky and stone remain. Encoding ensured continuity of memory.

A river name (Avon) survives conquest.
A pyramid’s alignment survives dynastic collapse.
A star’s cycle survives theology.

Henges and monuments of the 4th millennium BCE attest Drift Culture’s intimate grasp of mathematics and ratio. The Church later removed this knowledge from circulation, preserving it only for architects. Hidden in basilicas and cathedrals, geometry survived as secret inheritance; the masses were left only scripture.

Conclusion to Part V

The evidence is decisive. Hydronyms, proto-writing, architecture, stellar grammar, proportional scaling, ritual vessels - all testify to deliberate preservation of ratio. Bullinger’s Number in Scripture catalogues the shadows left when ratio was stripped of context and canonised as integers.

Encoding is relational, embodied, enduring. Numerology is repetitive, abstract, hollow. The true sacred mathematics lies in ratio - the principle of Ma’at - not in integers sanctified by religion.

Part VI: The Persistent Integers - 153, 666, 490

Introduction

Bullinger’s favourite numbers - 7, 12, 40, 490 - are all rooted in observable cycles and ratios. But a few integers in his catalogue, such as 153, 666, and 490, carry a fascination that has endured for centuries. These integers have drawn the attention of mystics, apocalyptic preachers, and esotericists. Bullinger treats them as divine fingerprints. In reality, they are contrived human constructions, drawn from known mathematical or political codes. They are the clearest evidence that myths were engineered to fit mathematics, not the other way round.

The 153 Fish

Biblical text: John 21:11 - the disciples haul in ‘153 large fish.’
Bullinger: 153 is the 17th triangular number (1+2+…+17). Because 17 = 10+7, he interprets it as spiritual perfection, ‘the number of the sons of God.’
Mathematical background: Triangular numbers were well-known in Hellenistic schools. Nicomachus of Gerasa and Theon of Smyrna catalogued them as part of philosophical training. 153 was a standard example because it is both triangular and appears in approximations of √3.
Cultural background: Fish symbolised fertility and abundance - Dagon and Oannes in Mesopotamia, Nile fish rituals in Egypt, ichthys in early Christianity. John’s gospel integrates the symbolism but anchors it in a mathematically memorable number.
Alternative readings:
• Greek isopsephy: ‘Η Μαρία η Μαγδαληνή’ (Mary Magdalene) = 153; some Gnostic sects used this to elevate her role.
• Aristotle catalogued 153 species of fish, though coincidence is likely.
Verdict: The 153 fish were chosen because the number was mathematically neat and culturally resonant. A scribal flourish, not divine authorship.

The Number of the Beast - 666

Biblical text: Revelation 13:18 - ‘calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.’
Bullinger: Six = man (sixth day); triple six = trinity of imperfection. For him, 666 is metaphysical evil.
Historical decoding: The author explains: it is ‘the number of a man.’ That man is Nero Caesar. In Hebrew gematria: נרון קסר = 666. In Latin spelling (‘Nero Caesar’), the value = 616.
Transmission quirks: The manuscript variants (666 vs 616) are devastating for Bullinger’s divine-constant theory. They only make sense as gematria. Your identification of the ρ-operator (5/6 contraction between Greek and Latin values) further explains how such compression arose in transmission.
Cultural resonance: Six had long symbolised incompletion, falling short of 7. Multiplying it by three intensified its effect. Egyptian apocalyptic codes also demonised rulers with hidden numeric ciphers.
Verdict: 666 is political cryptography, not metaphysics. It encodes Nero Caesar - anti-imperial satire disguised as apocalyptic revelation.

Seventy Times Seven - 490

Biblical texts:
• Daniel 9:24 - ‘seventy weeks’ decreed = 70×7 years = 490.
• Matthew 18:22 - forgiveness ‘not seven times, but seventy times seven.’
Bullinger: 490 = supreme divine cycle; he fits Israel’s history into four 490-year blocks.
Apocalyptic arithmetic: Daniel’s seventy weeks are sabbatical cycles × seventy. Matthew’s phrase is hyperbolic - forgiveness without limit.
Cultural parallels: 7 and 70 were schematic cycle numbers across Babylonia and the Levant. Jubilees (49 years) were already part of Jewish tradition; 490 is ten jubilees, a round multiple.
Verdict: 490 is not God’s timetable, but literary arithmetic retrofitted into prophecy.

Synthesis

153: a triangular number chosen for symbolic fullness.
666: gematria for Nero Caesar, political code.
490: jubilee arithmetic, schematic cycle.

All three prove human scribal craftsmanship, not divine authorship. They are contrived integers, part of a cultural repertoire of numeric symbolism already circulating in the Hellenistic and Roman world. Acharya S documents that such numbers were regularly inserted to align Jesus with astrotheological and numerological traditions. Massey shows that Egypt used triangular and square numbers long before Christianity.

Where Bullinger sees God’s hand, the evidence shows scribes weaving myth to fit mathematics.

Acharya S shows that early Christianity thrived on this strategy: Jesus was written into Old Testament prophecy by retroactive numerology, and Rome’s enemies were demonised by arithmetic puzzles. The Beast is not metaphysical; it is Nero Caesar in disguise.

Side note: I have a parallel theory in my scientific work with IXOS physics, which posits that John the Revelator may have glimpsed a true prophecy through a shamanic experience. That 666 may also be the electron, proton, and neutron configuration of Carbon - the ‘beast’ of our time and which threatens our planet as petrochemical pollution, the fuel of empires and the overwhelming ‘beast’ or threat of our day in climate theory. It is such rationales that we are now being urged to accept ‘marks’ such as implants and digital IDs, which echo John’s warning very closely. According to IXOS theory these are not mutually exclusive. However, this is beyond the scope of our historical restoration in Return of the Storm God.

Daniel’s Seventy Weeks and the Fiction of 490

The prophecy of Daniel 9 is often cited by evangelicals as proof of God’s hand in history. Seventy weeks of years (490) supposedly predict the coming of Christ. Bullinger takes this as the apex of biblical numerology - the master cycle of divine dealings.

But Daniel was not doing astronomy; he was doing theology by arithmetic. The author, writing during the Maccabean crisis (2nd century BCE), sought to reassure his community that deliverance was imminent. He took the sabbatical cycle of seven years, multiplied it by seventy (a number already resonant in Jewish tradition), and produced a 490-year schema.

This is not prophecy but retrofit. History was rewritten into symbolic cycles to make theological points. Later, Christian interpreters re-applied the same scheme to Jesus, and Bullinger enshrined it as divine law.

Comparative evidence makes this clear. Mesopotamian king lists rounded reigns into numerological cycles: 36,000 years for antediluvian rulers, 60×60 symbolic spans. Egyptian priests likewise framed dynasties with mythic numbers. The Hebrews were simply doing what their neighbours had always done: using number as narrative scaffold.

The persistence of 490 in Christian theology shows how effective the scheme was. But its origin lies not in heaven but in Babylonian calendrical tradition.

Why These Integers Persist

What unites 153, 666, and 490 is that they are contrived but memorable. They serve as mnemonic anchors for stories.

153 is mathematically elegant (triangular number).
666 is arithmetically pungent (triple six, easy to encode names).
490 is rhetorically neat (seventy sevens).

Each integer was chosen not because God dictated it, but because it already carried symbolic weight in surrounding cultures. Their persistence in scripture proves the opposite of divine inspiration: the Bible is a human anthology of existing numerological tropes.

Bullinger’s Misstep

Bullinger catalogues these numbers as though they were supernatural fingerprints. But they are the most transparent examples of scribal engineering.

The 153 fish show myth bent to math.
The 666 Beast shows political satire encoded numerically.
The 490 weeks show apocalyptic theology engineered through cycles.

In each case, the number came first, the story second. This is the inversion of Bullinger’s logic. He imagines God inspired the stories, producing the numbers. In truth, scribes chose the numbers, then crafted the stories.

Conclusion to Part VI

The integers Bullinger venerates most are the strongest evidence against his thesis. 153, 666, and 490 prove that scripture was engineered by men using known mathematical devices. They are relics of Hellenistic polygonal number theory, Jewish gematria, and Babylonian calendrical arithmetic.

They are not divine fingerprints but cultural fossils. Their persistence hypnotises numerologists, but their contrived character reveals the true process: myth was engineered to match math, and the goddess of proportion was erased.

As Joseph Atwill has shown in his work Caesar’s Messiah, Daniel’s prophecy was deliberately reworked to conform to the coming date of the ‘Son of Man.’ That son was Titus, the Roman commander who fulfilled the prediction that not one stone would be left upon another when the Temple was destroyed.

Atwill also demonstrates that metaphors such as the miraculous catch of fishes were not innocent imagery but deliberate puns - in this case referring to the Jewish rebels whom the Flavians conquered and ‘caught’ in their nets.

Such multi-layered punning, with allegory laid upon parody and number games, shows that the Bible was never a single divine revelation. It was the product of a long and complex editorial operation, begun under Josephus and the Flavian court after the rout of the Jewish revolt in 72 CE. Archetypes of the ancient world were woven into this new political scripture, and the narratives were forced into mathematical alignments to give the appearance of prophecy fulfilled.

It took centuries for the work to be completed. Only under Justinian in the sixth century was the canon finalised and enforced, with rival gospels suppressed and heretics crushed. By then, nothing historical remained in the Bible but allegory, pun, parody, and deception. And where history aligns with the Bible, it is a pseudo-history written to conform with it. Unfortunately, scholars continue to accept that history given by the Romans was true. We fit our evidence into the false frameworks and thereby only scratch the surface, and we remain unaware that our consensus view of history relies on those manipulators who wrote it for their own agenda. What Bullinger mistook for God’s fingerprints were in fact the contrived marks of an intelligentsia and a priestly class - initiates who laboured for generations to overwrite history with theology.

Part VII: Closing Synthesis - From Ratio to Religion

Introduction

We have followed Bullinger’s numbers from their supposed divine perfection back to their human origins. Seven, twelve, forty, and 490 arise from lunar and solar cycles; 153, 666, and 490 are engineered integers borrowed from Hellenistic math, gematria, and Babylonian calendrics. Language, monuments, and myths preserve ratio, while scripture flattens it into integers.

The task now is to draw the threads together. What does this evidence prove about the Bible, about Bullinger’s numerology, and about the deeper structure of sacred number? The answer is stark: biblical numerology is not divine revelation but human encoding. Scripture is not the origin of sacred number but its after-image, stripped of ratio and goddess.

This closing synthesis has three aims:

Summarise the case against biblical numerology as divine.
Restate and reaffirm the axiom:

Myth + Math = Ma’at
Religion = Myth + Math – Ma’at

Reconnect sacred number with its real foundation in ratio, balance, and feminine principle.

The Case Against Bullinger

Bullinger’s Number in Scripture claims to reveal the supernatural design of the Bible. Our analysis shows otherwise:

Circular logic: He assumes divine perfection, finds numbers, and calls them proof.
Historical blindness: He ignores Mesopotamian sexagesimal math, Egyptian proportion, Hellenistic number theory.
Cycles misread: Seven is not spiritual perfection but a lunar quarter; twelve not government but lunisolar ratio; forty not divine testing but a generational idiom.
Contrived integers: 153, 666, 490 are literary devices, not cosmic constants.
Absence of higher math: The Bible contains no trace of π beyond crude 3:1, no φ, no √2, no advanced constants. If divine, it would surpass its age; instead, it reflects only what its scribes knew.
Chronological retrofits: Even his fourfold 490-year ‘master cycle’ is contrived arithmetic, not historical reality.

Conclusion: Bullinger mistook human encoding for divine watermark.

The Axiom of Ma’at

Myth = Ratio in Story: myths clothed ratios in narrative - Osiris mirrored Orion; Inanna mirrored Venus; Sabbath mirrored lunar quarters.
Ma’at = Myth + Math: in Egypt, truth, balance, and proportion were embodied as goddess. To live in Ma’at was to live in ratio.
Religion = Myth + Math – Ma’at: when myth hardened into religion, numbers survived but ratios were flattened into integers; myths were bent to fit numbers; the goddess erased.

Religion preserved the husk and destroyed the kernel.

Ratio as the Real Sacred

Sacred number lies in ratios, not integers.

Sky: lunar week 29.53 ÷ 4 = 7.38; lunisolar year 365 ÷ 29.53 ≈ 12.37; Metonic cycle 19:235; Venus 5:8 (φ resonance).
Sound: octave 2:1, fifth 3:2, fourth 4:3 - harmonies of the tetractys.
Structure: pyramid slope 14:11 ≈ φ; Stonehenge 56 holes ≈ half-saros; Warka Vase tiers 1:2, 2:3.
Language: āβonā (water) and kar/kal (rock) encode polarity of field and form in hydronyms.

These are the true sacred numbers - relational, proportional, enduring.

Consequences of Erasure

The loss of Ma’at reshaped culture:

Law replaced balance: obedience to decrees overtook harmony with cycles.
Misogyny: feminine balance demonised - Eve as temptress, Asherah suppressed, Sophia marginalised, Isis reduced to Mary.
Science severed: φ and √2 vanish from Hebrew texts.
Hypnosis of integers: repetition of 7s and 12s mesmerised believers, masking contrivance as divine design.

This was no accident. It was the mechanism by which elites turned myth into a tool of control.

Returning to Ma’at

Recovery means reinstating Ma’at:

Reading myths as mathematics in story.
Seeing rivers, stones, stars, monuments as ratios in nature.
Restoring the feminine vessel of truth, without which numbers collapse into husks.

Bullinger as the Culmination

Bullinger was not an originator but a culmination of this process.

Egyptians aligned pyramids to φ; Bullinger catalogued sevens.
Mesopotamians tracked Venus; Bullinger tallied forties.
Greeks revered the tetractys; Bullinger reduced it to ‘10 = ordinal perfection.’
Ma’at embodied balance; Bullinger proclaimed Yahweh’s law in numbers.

His book is the perfect expression of myth + math – Ma’at. Data removed from proper context, isolated, refashioned and presented as truth.

Religion as Myth Engineered to Match Math

Pattern across scripture:

Genesis: creation retrofitted to seven days (lunar quarters).
Daniel: seventy weeks cycle = 490 years.
Gospels: miracle integers (12 baskets, 153 fish).
Revelation: Nero encoded as 666.

In every case, scribes engineered myth to match numbers.

Why Numerology Persists

Integers are easy to tally; ratios require calculation and initiation. Religion offers the husk because it is accessible. Repetitive 7s and 12s feel like divine design, hypnotising readers. Institutions sustain this because control is easier with integers than with ratios.

The True Sacred

The authentic fingerprints:

Lunar quarter = 7.38 days.
Lunisolar year ≈ 12.37 months.
Metonic cycle = 19:235.
Venus cycle = 5:8.
Tetractys = 2:1, 3:2, 4:3.
Pyramid slope = φ.
Stonehenge = eclipse cycles.
Language = polarity in hydronyms.

This is Ma’at: relational, proportional, embodied in nature.

Final Judgement

Number in Scripture is not God’s watermark but human misreading. It takes ratios long known to Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks, and megalithic builders, strips them of context, and sanctifies them as integers.

This misreading was not accident but engineered - to evidence a divine hand in the works of men who designed the Bible to psycho-civilise populations into submission. Rome no longer had to fight to take what it wanted; the people gave it willingly, entranced by fictions as ancestral history. Later, even when the math was perceived, the hypnosis continued; integers became self-fulfilling proof that God wrote the Bible through men. And the spell endures more than a millennium later.

The true sacred is older, deeper, still visible: the rhythm of the moon, harmony of sound, slope of the pyramid, alignment of stars, persistence of river names. This is Ma’at - balance as truth, ratio as justice, goddess as vessel.

To reclaim Ma’at is to break the spell of numerology, to restore the kernel behind the husk, and to see scripture not as divine code but as human encoding - myth engineered to match math.

But numerology found within the Bible yields data of further significance which may cause us to entirely revise everything we think we know of myth and etymology within religion. Whilst investigating the data for the current book, I also perceived patterns within the numerology that required the words to be exact, or the maths would fail.

On that basis, we will now take a deep dive into how numerology requirements have given rise to the very words presented as ‘The Word’ of God within the Bible.

Return of the Storm God - Appendix IV: Numerology and the Bible - Part 2

Ivan Fraser

Sep 19

Return of the Storm God - Appendix IV: Numerology and the Bible - Part 2

Introduction

Read full story

Thanks for reading Ivan’s Substack! This post is public so feel free to share it.