Thursday, March 19, 2026

Seven: A Psalm for the Uncreated

 

The Plethora of Numbers (Fair Use)


Seven

A Psalm for the Uncreated

By Scout

I have to handle this topic gingerly.  Armstrongism has some odd ideas about numbers.  In particular, the numbers 7, 12, 19 and 40 can arouse glassy-eyed excitement.  I think it started, maybe, with Herbert W. Armstrong’s excursus into pyramidology long ago.  He “discovered” that the Egyptian pyramids were full of numerological significance.  Some of the measurements, he believed, created a timeline for this Age.   Or something like that. I did not research it and never will.  So, if you don’t have a ready Palantir in order to read the future, you can peer into the Great Pyramid. 

Numbers play a significant role in Armstrongist theology.  I have always found the idea that Armstrongists have about the numbers 2 and 3 to be puzzling.  The number 2 to them is an “open” number.  It is susceptible to expansion in some way.  There are 2 members of the God family but the number 2 permits there to be many more.  Whereas the number 3 is a “closed” number.  Then, Armstrongists deduce, the Trinitarian idea of three persons in the Godhead means that the God family cannot be expanded, and becoming God-as-God-is-God cannot happen.  This is meant to be anti-trinitarian and supportive of bitheism.  But 2 and 3 are just numbers.  Go figure. 

This odd religious arithmetic aside, I do believe there is something profound to be learned from numbers. I would like to view numbers from a theological angle in this small essay.  First, let me say that I know that some people are irritated by theology.  To them, theology is a senseless barnacle on the resolute hull of common sense. This view renders them ineducable, but we must try anyway.  Let me hasten to say that I am not a theologian or a philosopher.  I am just a guy with a laptop and some books, including several translations of the Bible. The disputability of my views is undeniable. I don’t teach others so much as learn with them. 

After that self-reflective prologue, I would like to proceed to examine a few theological ideas with some aplomb. These ideas cause a few people some heartburn.  In past articles, I have stated that God is “timeless” and “uncreated.”  For Armstrongists in particular, these are not commonly used terms.  You can search some of the online archives of Armstrongist literature and you will not find these terms.  This suggests that these terms might be illicit in some way.  To some Armstrongists out in Splinterland, these are terms that are bandied about by those blowing theological smoke.   But let me assure you that we all encounter these concepts all the time without mental collapse.  So, let me start this contemplation with the number 7.  It could be any number. 

The Uncreated Number 7

First, the idea of being uncreated.  I believe God is uncreated.  He has always existed.  Nobody made him. He is the uncaused, first cause.  I believe that because he creates reality (not just the Cosmos, a real object, but unqualified existential reality itself), he is absolute.  He himself is existence.  He “donates” existence to all that is created. And his existence is rational.  The term Logos means not only words but reasoned words.  And John tells us that the Logos created all things.  And the eternal Logos was not created (in spite of what the Arianists in the Millerite Movement assert).

One might conclude that being “uncreated” is an odd idea, but that is because we live in a realm where we never create; we only fabricate out of existing materials.  But the number 7 that is commonly and frequently used by all of us is uncreated.  I don’t mean your awareness of 7 is uncreated.  Nor do I mean that at one point there were seven countable objects in the Cosmos, so then the number seven came into existence.  Seven existed even without anything to count.  I mean the pure numerical concept of 7.  It exists without creation.  It had no beginning.  That brings us to timelessness. 

The Timeless Number 7

Further, the number 7 is timeless.  It had no beginning, and it will have no ending.  While it can exist in a succession of moments like we do, it is not contingent on a succession of moments. If the succession suddenly stops, 7 will continue. Verb tenses do not really fit the number 7 (or any number). You can’t say yesterday there was 7, but tomorrow there will be no 7.  While tensed grammar can be expressed, it doesn’t mean anything.  Tenses are superfluous because seven is eternal.  Past, present, and future, the number 7 is always there. 

Numbers and Beings

The term philosophers use to describe the uncreated, timeless features of 7 is “a priori.” It means that 7 exists as a matter of reason rather than creation.  It is not based on experience but is, rather, self-evident.  

Without a doubt, the difference between God, an infinite being, and 7, a simple number, is infinite.  But being uncreated and timeless are a couple of points of similarity between God and 7.  In another way, 7 is like us.  We are finite beings, and 7 has a finite value. 

This next point is harder to explain.  The idea that there is an uncreated great spirit being that created the Cosmos is difficult for the human mind to grasp.  How can God always have been?  Who made him?  The answer, of course, is that nobody made him.  He has always been.  And I admit that this begs the question.  It is just that we are talking outside our usual created-world boundaries.  

The concept of God is a part of the rational existential order just as the concept of the number 7 is.  Anyone who believes that there is an uncaused, first cause is comfortable with this idea.  On the other hand, when atheists argue against the existence of god, they almost always include the proposition that the Universe has always been. They accept the eternity of a non-being and deny eternity as it relates to God.   So, Dawkins and Hitchens use the same arithmetic of eternity that Theists use but the atheist version is less convincing because it pertains to things that we know can, unlike God, undergo entropy.  The rational existential order in which God and the number 7 are reflected makes them both seem intuitive to many people. 

The Last Analysis

Words like “timeless” and “uncreated” are not just pseudo-intellectual jargon.  They are descriptors for something that we use all the time, like the number 7.  The number 7 is timeless and uncreated yet feels natural.  We are comfortable with it.  It does not challenge our belief systems.   To many people, the existence of God feels natural.  This is a part of what some theologians call General Revelation.  I would hasten to add that a “feeling” is not a “proof.”  Providing an incontrovertible proof of his existence for us today does not seem to be God’s critical path.  But the number 7 or any number is a little aperture through which a glimmer of some great and glorious light now passes.  

                        

5 comments:

NO2HWA said...

The Pasadena AC library had several books on pyramidology and the pyramids. The two prominent ones were:

Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid (1864) Charles Piazzi Smyth
The Great Pyramid: Its Secrets and Mysteries Revealed (1880) Charles Piazzi Smyth

These first two went into depth about the numerology and the 6,000-year plan of God found in the measurements.

Several others were also there, including:

The Divine Plan for the Ages by Charles T Russell (Jehovah's Witnesses)
Pyramidology by Adam Rutherford

Anonymous said...

The most important number is 42. The second most important is 3.14.

Anonymous said...

In Armstrongism 3 (Ex 23:14) = 7.

Anonymous said...

Below is from a collection of information that I entitled “Ezekiel's Temple in the Plan of God — Order out of Chaos - from Genesis to Revelation”

Time and the Number 7

“On day one, God created time. This is the first of the functions God will use to bring order to the chaos of the cosmos: the orderly and regular sequence of time” (John H. Walton, Genesis, NIVAC, p.79).

“1:1 - 2:3 form the first section of Genesis... 2:1-3 echoes 1:1 by introducing the same phrases but in reverse order: “he created,” “God,” “heaven and earth” reappears as “heaven and earth” (2:1) “God” (2:2), “created” (2:3). This chiastic pattern brings the section to a neat close which is reinforced by the inclusion “God created” linking 1:1 and 2:3.

“The correspondence of the first paragraph, 1:1-2, with 2:1-3 is underlined by the Hebrew words being multiples of 7. 1:1 consists of seven words, 1:2 of 14 (7x2) words, 2:1-3 of 35 (7x5) words. The number seven dominates this opening chapter in a strange way, not only the number of words in a particular section but in the number of times a specific word or phrase recurs. For example, “God” is mentioned 35 times, “earth” 21 times, “heaven/firmament” 21 times, while the phrases “and it was so” and “God saw that it was good” occurs 7 times.

“Gen 1 is characterized by a number of recurrent formulae: (1) announcement of the commandment, “And God said” (10 times; vv 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28, 29); (2) order, e.g. “Let there be ...” (8 times; vv 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26); (3) fulfillment formula, e.g. “And it was so” (7 times; vv 3, 7, 8, 11, 15, 24, 30); (4) execution formula or description of act, e.g. “And God made” (7 times; vv.4, 7, 12, 16, 21, 25, 27; (5) approval formula “God saw that it was very good” (7 times; vv 4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31); (6) subsequent divine word, either of naming or blessing (7 times; vv 5 [2 times], 8, 10 [2 times], 22, 28); (7) mentioning of days (6/7 times; vv 5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31 [2:2]). It is worth noting that although there are ten announcements of the divine words and eight commands actually sighted, all the formula are grouped in sevens...” (Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1:15, WBC, pp.5-6).

By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done (Genesis 2:2-3, NIV).

“... 2:1-3, the account of the seventh day, stands apart from the standard framework of each of the other six days” (Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1:15, WBC, p.7).

“The paragraph devoted to the seventh day consists of thirty-five words, twenty-one of which form three sentences of seven words, each of which includes the expression “the seventh day”... Aryeh Toeg [“Genesis 1 and the Sabbath”, (Hebrew), Beth Miqra’ 50 (1972):291] notes that the first sentence of the paragraph includes five words, that is two fewer than we expect, but the last sentence, which follows the three heptads, consists of nine words and thus compensates for the deficiency of the incipit, leaving five sentences that average seven words apiece for a total of thirty-five” (Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil, p.67).

“The threefold mention of the seventh day ... draws attention to the special character of the seventh day. In this way form and content emphasize the distinctiveness of the seventh day” (Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1:15, WBC, p.7).

Anonymous said...

Part 2

Holy Time and Space

And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done (Genesis 2:3, NIV).

“Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground” (Exodus 2:3, NIV).

“God’s first creation is time (vv.3-5). His second creation is space (vv.6-10). Can it be without significance that this Creation story commences in the context of time and concludes (2:1-3) with a return to that category, a day of rest? A civilization whose concept of time is essentially cyclical will ... not sanctify the category of time. Its exclusive obsession will be with sanctification of space. The Genesis concept of time (compare the root qds in Ge. 2:3) receives more prominence than does the concept of the sanctification of space; in fact, not until Exod. 3:5, which is incidentally the next occurrence of the root qds (“sanctify”), does one encounter the concept of the sanctification of space - “for the ground on which you are standing is holy ground” (Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis 1-17, NICOT, pp.120).

Ye shall keep my sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the LORD (Leviticus 26:2, AV).
“The Temple is to space what the Sabbath is to time...” (Jon D. Levenson, The Temple and the World, The Journal Of Religion 64, No.3 (July, 1984), p.298).

Ge 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Isa 65:17a Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth.

“In Hebrew this sentence [Genesis 1:1] consists of seven words, mirroring the seven days of creation" (John E. Hartley, Genesis, NIBC, p.42).

"The great promise, with its introductory call to special attention - "Behold, I will create a new heavens and a new earth" ([Isaiah 65] v.17; cf. Rev 21:1 - consists of only seven words in Hebrew; yet is implications are staggering. The whole created order is to be renewed..." (Geoffrey W. Grogan, Isaiah, EBC, Vol.6, p.351).

“A central feature of the Priestly world view is the belief that the world order is a created order, brought into being by Yahweh. Indeed, at the heart of Priestly theology is the belief that Yahweh brought into being an ordered world and that at the heart of that created order is a ritual order...

“The Priestly [read Mosaic] creation account in Gen. 1:1-2:4a gives clear expression to this concern for order. It can be characterized as a process in which God brings into existence or constructs the order of creation. The Priests present the creative work of God as the establishing of order and they contrast the order of creation with the ever present threat of chaos. Von Rad characterizes the Priestly creation account as a movement from chaos to cosmos and argues that the true concern of the account is ‘to give prominence, form, and order to the creation out of chaos’. The very nature of this account, with its seven day temporal framework and its formulaic way of expressing the various acts, points to a concern for order.

“... the order of creation was brought about through the separation and classifications of the basic elements of creation. Order is brought about through divisions, separations, and distinctions between one element and another. It is only as these lines of demarcation, or boundaries, are established that order is realized. If true, it means that divisions must be recognized and maintained if the created order is to continue and exist and not collapse into confusion and chaos...

“In the priestly writings the two most significant threats to order are sin and defilement. It thus becomes necessary for a means to be established by which the created order may be maintained and, when necessary, restored...” (Frank H. Gorman, Jr. Ideology of Ritual: Space, Time and Status in the Priestly Theology, pp.39-42).