Thursday, February 10, 2011

God Is What You Conceive God to Be


God Is What You Conceive God to Be

by Craig Hamilton on Tuesday, December 28, 2010 at 4:39pm
God Is What You Conceive God to Be
A wise Jew once said to me something like, “God is what you conceive God to be.” To be certain, I don’t see how we can get beyond this definition. Ultimately, our view of God is limited the power of our own mind’s ability to conceive of God.
While I was alone in my bed room at college, and I am not drug user, I heard a voice coming from the walls of my apartment. It was a male voice that said, “I am God and I am punishing you.” I was an atheist turned believer, convinced that the voice was legitimate, so, I shouted back, “Why are you punishing me?” I was so miserable at the time that I conceived that if there was a God, then it could only be that God was punishing me. That is, within a matter of a few seconds I felt like I had realized the Source of my misery, and that it was a result of punishment. I conceived of the idea that I had done something wrong, such that I had done something to deserve of punishment. This was a vastly different idea from the idea of God people had told me about, the God that only goes about doing good things, while everything wrong in the world is blamed on Satan. Instinctively, I knew that story – the goody goody two shoes god and the big bad devil - to be a crock, but I believed in the God that spoke from me through the wall. And, it wasn’t that I believed in the wall either, I thought of it as if creation spoke to me, as G-d spoke to Moses through the burning bush.
Not knowing much of anything about religion, and never having even bothered to read the Bible, Christian or Jewish, hearing this voice caused me to believe in God. I transferred to a Christian college because I wanted to find out more about God. The God I heard about there, Jesus, was incompatible with my own inner feeling as to what God was, and Jesus is still incompatible with my belief. Rather, I found the God I had met, and that likely my own mind had conceived of was the God of the Old Testament. Eventually, I even ripped the New Testament out of my Bible.
I have come to believe that it was not God that I spoke to on that night, as the next day I was hospitalized for being psychotic. Then, I took medication and the hallucinations went away, but twice I went off medication and the hallucinations came back, so I ended up concluding that God was ultimately what my mind had conceived of through hallucination. However, the words of the wise Jew echo true to me, “God is what you conceive God to be.” Though some people might believe that God is a rock or a statue or even a person, the God I believe in is the Jewish God, outside of creation.
· · Share · Delete

  • Craig Hamilton
    Pete, what is yours is yours. However, it should be that we study an older covenant before we study a new one. Why? Chronologically, the "new covenant" should be understood from the light of the old, as historically the people were presented with the new covenant after they were presented with the older covenants. To evaluate the new covenant we must see it through the eyes of the people that were presented with it. That is from the historical point of view, we best understand things in the light of what came in the past first, or else we are without empathy for those whom are in the stories of the "Gospels."

    December 29, 2010 at 12:23pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton What is more interesting is that those whom knew of the older covenants reject the new one, with a few exceptions. These exceptions would be those whom we say the mourners caddish for, as they are dead men walking in the same way that the Torah calls Terah, a wicked patriarch, dead while he was still alive.
    December 29, 2010 at 12:30pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton Others that accepted it - the early followers of Jesus - were generally lay people, illiterate etc., such that they probably did not understand the "old covenant" in the first place. The Hebrew word for such a person is a, "Peti," and the word is defined as a fool whom has not learned enough.
    December 29, 2010 at 12:36pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton One translation for the second level of the soul in Cabbala is that of empathy. Cabbala is a spiritual commentary on the Torah. It is such that, according to the Bible, before we reach a level of being able to empathize, we are merely fumbling about through the world, the first level.
    December 29, 2010 at 12:41pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton In conclusion, the proper place to start is at the beginning, with what came first, not a covenant. That is where I started with Alex, study of things such as day, night, evening, insects, rest, fish and birds. For example, Alex knows that the cow says, "Moo."
    December 29, 2010 at 12:47pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton
    The entire creation week is to be taught to a newborn his/her first week of life. This is why circumcision is to take place on the 8th day. The 8th day is a mystical day indeed. Alex was circumcised on the third day. Imagine my dilemma...See More

    December 29, 2010 at 1:55pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton
    Lol.. The Jews beat Paul for his sins and Paul gave up on them thinking himself the victor. I know of no intelligent Jews that record Paul's supposed genius. The only evidence of Paul's genius is Paul's own self proclamations. Paul did ...See More

    December 29, 2010 at 8:06pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton I should add that Maimonades book did not include Chinese traditional medicine, which actually seems very promising. Western medicine has really been unaware of Chinese traditional medicine up until the last ten years, and vast amounts of research need to be done on it before its employment at Western doctors' offices. Maimonides book was primarily a summary of Greek medicine.
    December 30, 2010 at 12:11pm via Facebook Mobile ·

  • Craig Hamilton Well Pete thanks for what you do. I figure that if Alex is to be any good at life he will have to be able to sort things out on his own. Bringing him to a Christian church gives him the opportunity to do that, in the same manner that bringing him to hear a priest of Zeus would 2,000 years ago. As I say, "Crawl time is for babies." So Pete, your role is important.
    December 30, 2010 at 12:21pm via Facebook Mobile ·


Number (60) and Names of Books Read/Listened/Watched 2010

Number (60) and Names of Books Read/Listened/Watched 2010

by Craig Hamilton on Sunday, January 2, 2011 at 3:39pm

Number and Names of Books Read/Listened/Watched 2010

  1. The Ancestor’s Tale – Richard Dawkins (did not finish)\
  2. Inferno – Dante
  3. God is Not Great – Christopher Hitchens
  4. Maimonides – Sherwin Nuland
  5. Voodoo Histories - David Aaronovitch
  6. Letter to a Christian Nation - Sam Harris
  7. The Greatest Show on Earth - Richard Dawkins
  8. The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins
  9. Finding Einstein's God - Krista Tippett
  10. Ecological Intelligence - Daniel Goleman
  11. Emotional Intelligence (watched) - Daniel Goleman
  12. Eaarth - Bill McKibben
  13. The Black Swan (listened) - Nassim Nicholas Taleb
  14. Our Choice - Al Gore
  15. The Assault on Reason - Al Gore
  16. An Inconvenient Truth (watched) - Al Gore
  17. The Audacity of Hope - Barack Obama
  18. Nomad - Ayaan Hirsi Ali
  19. The Sociopath Nextdoor - Martha Stout
  20. When Giants Fall - Michael J. Panzner
  21. The Working Poor - David K. Shipler
  22. The History of The Medieval World - Susan Wise Bauer\
  23. Jesus Interrupted - Bart D. Ehrman
  24. Nemesis - Chalmers Johson
  25. Walden - Henry David Thoreau
  26. Alcibiades – Plato
  27. Symposium – Plato
  28. Republic - Plato (reread)
  29. The Apology of Socrates – Plato
  30. €True Compass - Ted Kennedy
  31. Chess for Dummies
  32. A Brief History of British Kings and Queens – Mike Ashley (did not finish)
  33. This Is Your Brain on Music – Daniel J. Levitan
  34. Transforming America’s Israel Lobby – Fleshler
  35. How to Profit from the Coming Rapture – Steve and Evie Levy
  36. Alexander Hamilton: American – Richard Brookhiser
  37. Just How Stupid Are We?– Shenkman
  38. The Hellenistic Age – Peter Green (did not finish)
  39. Biography of John Adams
  40. John Quincy Adams: A Public Life, A Private Life – Nagel
  41. Medieval Britain – Laing
  42. Mythology - Edith Hamilton (did not finish)
  43. Freakonomics - Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner
  44. Super Freakonomics - Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner
  45. Deep Economy - Bill McKibben
  46. The Extended Phenotype – Richard Dawkins (did not finish)
  47. The Greatest Generation – Tom Brocaw
  48. Social Intelligence: The Science of Human Relationships - Daniel Goleman
  49. Aftershock: The Next Economy and The Future of America - Robert. B. Reich
  50. Hundred Dollar Holiday: The Case for a More Joyful Christmas - Bill McKibben
  51. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of The Twenty-First Century: Updated and Expanded 2.0 (2006) – Thomas L. Friedman
  52. Infidel (audio book) – Ayaan Hirsi Ali
  53. Why Orwell Matters – Christopher Hitchens
  54. The World Is Curved: Hidden Dangers to the Global Economy – David M. Smick
  55. Supercapitalism: Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life by Robert B. Reich
  56. The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien (audio book)
  57. Maybe One: A Personal and Environmental Argument for Single-Child Families by Bill McKibben
  58. Churchill by Paul Johnson (audio book)
  59. Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World by Bill Clinton
  60. The Bed of Procrustes: Philosophical and Practical Aphorisms by Nassim Nicholas Taleb

· · Share · Delete
    • Craig Hamilton No Apology: The Case for American Greatness by Mitt Romney
      January 7 at 7:15pm ·

Day – Age Creation: Five apparent problems with the 1917 JPS translation resolved.

Day – Age Creation: Five apparent problems with the 1917 JPS translation resolved.

by Craig Hamilton on Sunday, December 12, 2010 at 7:17pm

Day – Age Creation: Five apparent problems with the 1917 JPS translation resolved.

Introduction

I first wrote on this subject in an essay at my Gordon College, a Christian college. As a part of the ecology and evolution class, students were expected to pick one of the four standard theories of creation and write an essay about it. Before attending the class, I already believed in the Day – Age theory, so I chose to write on it. My Professor asked me for the references for what I wrote of in my essay, stating that they, the references, in fact already do exist, but I could not find them. I still have not found them. As far as I can tell, the only reference I need to give is the Bible, basic biology textbooks, and the fossil record.

Problem and resolution 1 – Is It Days or Ages?

In Genesis chapter 1, there are 6 ages where G-d creates the earth. There are other passages in the Bible and ancient writing that support that the word “Yom” is sometimes rendered as the word “age,” exclusive of the concept of the 24 hour day of which the translators of the 1917 JPS translation used. Day occurs in this translation in verses 5, 8 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 23, 31. The verse numbering system for Christian Bibles is sometimes different from that of Jewish Bibles. For this essay I used a Jewish translation though I am unaware of any complete modern translation Jewish or Christian that renders the Hebrew word, “Yom,” as age in the creation story. Sometimes it must be rendered day and sometimes it must be rendered age. I will prove that much. I believe that each “day” of creation lasted millions or billions of years in duration, such that the word for “day” in this translation of Genesis is improperly rendered, and should be rendered as “age,” such that there are 6 ages of creation in Genesis chapter 1.

Problem and Resolution 2 – If Day Is Translated as Age, then Wouldn’t The Plants Have Died?

From Genesis chapter 1:

(11) And God said: 'Let the earth put forth grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit-tree bearing fruit after its kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth.' And it was so. (12) And the earth brought forth grass, herb yielding seed after its kind, and tree bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (13) And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.

From Genesis chapter 1:

(17) And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, (18) and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. (19) And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

Plants came about during the 3rd age, while the sun came about on the 4th age: How can this be so? That is, plants require the sun in order to live because they undergo photosynthesis. That is, if the plants had no sunlight, then it seems likely that they would all die over the course of millions of years. However, And, no I am not suggesting something silly such as all the plants died for lack of sunlight. I suggest that this translation given by JPS lacks the elegance that it needs in order to have proper meaning. Thus, it is such that I believe in modern science’s given date for the age of planet earth, which to theologians is called, “Old earth.” There is ample evidence to support the claim that earth is old, and I need not reference it here.

Given the Day-Age theory of creation, where the Hebrew word “Yom” is translated as “Age” instead of a 24 hour day, if plants and light were separated by an age, then it follows that the Bible apparently does not make sense, such that only a single 24 hour day could have passed between the creation of plants and the creation of the sun, but not an age. There is a solution for this. It is not a problem to Day-Age Theorists. The solution to the first problem is as follows: that the plants that were created during the 3rd age where actually the ancestors of modern plants, cyanobacteria (blue–green algae), such that the ability to use light for metabolism evolved before the sun was available to create light for the cyanobacteria to use. Thus, it is such that I believe in evolution, especially in this instance where it is essential that a form of bacteria evolved over millions of years until it became more complex, such as the form of a tree. The fossil record supports that much as history.

Researchers believe that the early earth’s atmosphere was much different than the current one, making the idea of an earth unknown to the sun possible. It is true that cyanobacteria do not necessarily require light. However, they are able to use it for energy. The end meaning of the quoted passages from Genesis above therefore must mean that first the ancestors of trees where created with the ability to use energy from the sun, then millions of years later the sun appeared and that then the cyanobacteria were able to take advantage of the sunlight and in later ages continued in their evolution to what we call trees, etc,.

This is not a problem for someone who observes that Adam was the first men, while some people are black and some people are white. That is mutations caused some humans evolve to have white skin that enable humans discovering Northern Europe to be better able to survive due to the climate.

The 3rd age ended complete with the bacteria having evolved to the point where the possibilities of creating the more complex and recent photosynthesizing species could evolve. Thus, the creation that occurred during the 3rd age was sufficient to give rise to what is known in the present. G-d needed no additional creation day for trees when cyanobacteria had already been created.

In fact, most scientists will list cyanobacteria among the top 5 most important species on the planet even if it means excluding humans from the top 5. They, cyanobacteria, might be small, but they are very important indeed.

Problem and Resolution 3 – But there were no microscopes back when Genesis was first penned, how could the author have possibly known of cyanobacteria?

An anticipated objection might be that bacteria where not discovered since the invention of the microscope, such that the author of Genesis would not have had knowledge of their existence. But, that is not true. In fact, the possibility of creating a microscope and then having the knowledge of how to create it getting lost is possible. Discovery of a 70,000 year old microscope seems unlikely given the transience of modern microscope; they don’t last forever. Thus, there may have been knowledge of cyanobacteria prior to our knowledge of the creation of the modern microscope. Thus, it is such that the Torah may have had an author, such that it was not dictated by G-d. The argument of divine inspiration of the Torah is thus null and void in that it is unnecessary. However, the fact is that there is a text which carries relevant meaning, and is worthy of inspection. However, nonetheless, the Torah may have been divinely inspired by G-d such the meanings of its words would unfold to mankind. Thus, the currently known date for the creation of the microscope that could discover cyanobacteria may have been the correct one, such that the Torah is truly an inspired text that is very mystical indeed.

Problem and resolution 4 – Don’t Insects Predate Fowl in the Fossil Record?

(20) And God said: 'Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let fowl fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.' (21) And God created the great sea-monsters, and every living creature that creepeth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after its kind, and every winged fowl after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (22) And God blessed them, saying: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.' (23) And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.

From Genesis chapter 1:

(24) And God said: 'Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind.' And it was so. (25) And God made the beast of the earth after its kind, and the cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (26) And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.' (27) And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. (28) And God blessed them; and God said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.' (29) And God said: 'Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed -- to you it shall be for food; (30) and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, I have given every green herb for food.' And it was so. (31) And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Another apparent problem arises with the two most recent passages posted above. Something that creeps might be thought of as an insect created on the 6th age, while fowl were supposedly created on the 5th age. The fossil record however is clear that insects predate birds, an apparent problem. However, the Hebrew word translated here as “Fowl,” should be translated as “Flying insects” in verses 20 and 21. The Hebrew word in question may be transliterated as “Owph,” and elsewhere it loosely means “Flying things.” Thus, it is such that owph in the sentences above must be rendered as flying insects, where flying insects predate fowl. Additionally, the things created that “creepeth” in the 5th age are non-flying insects.

Problem 5 – The 1917 JPS Translation Is From the Department of Redundancy Department.

The fossil record shows that the descendents of insects are not fowl. Fowl descend from reptiles according to the fossil record. It thus follows that the things that “creepeth” on the 6th age are reptiles (verse 34) and actual fowl are not mentioned in the creation story. Consequently, for the traditional literalist there is a major problem when it is considered that G-d created things that creepeth twice – verses 21 and 24 – when everything else that God creates is so vastly different. That is there is no need to create things or more things that creepeth on the 6th age (verse 24) for they were already created on the 5th age (verse 21) unless it is that the things created that creepeth on the 5th and 6th ages are vastly different, and it is true that both reptiles that creepeth, such as amphibians and turtles, are vastly different from insects. So it must be concluded that the Bible, if it is true tells that insects were created during the 5th age that the things created in the 6th age were in fact reptiles.

Conclusion

The creation story in both cases fits the fossil record. Thus, it is such that the Day – Age theory is in fact the correct literal translation of Genesis chapter 1. Thus, it is such that the 24 hour day theory, which has been determined by many theologians to mean literal is in fact not correct. The current, “Literal” translation of Genesis is thus a misnomer. It is not the Literal Theory of Creation, but the errant translation of the Genesis chapter 1. Thus, it is such that the creation of the universe is not only reasonable – harmonious with the history known to scientists - but is also poetical; first there was something that was created, but it was incomplete, such that another parallel age became necessary to fill the need.


· · Share · Delete
    • Craig Hamilton Perhaps, compare this with my more recent note: Genesis 1:1-2:3 commentaries JPS 2004 – The Jewish Study Bible (JPS) (Tanakh)

      I change at least one thing.
      January 2 at 3:44pm ·

Genesis 1:1-2:3 commentaries JPS 2004 – The Jewish Study Bible (JPS) (Tanakh)

Genesis 1:1-2:3 commentaries JPS 2004 – The Jewish Study Bible (JPS) (Tanakh)

by Craig Hamilton on Sunday, January 2, 2011 at 3:42pm

Genesis 1:1-2:3 commentaries JPS 2004 – The Jewish Study Bible (JPS) (Tanakh)

Pre:

“The correlations between things created on the various days exhibit a high degree of symmetry” …

“First three” … “generalities or domains” …

“Next three” … “specifics”

“FISH/BIRDS (DAY 5)” “SKY (DAY 2)” – Conclusively, fish swim in the sky.

“Seven signifies completeness” – menorah has 7 candles, week has 7 days etc.,

“Was good or very good occurs seven times, but not on every day of the primordial week. Missing on the second and the seventh it appears twice on the third and sixth days” – Stealing has a ratio of 2:1 or 1:2. Not everything is good.

“God does function here in ways reminiscent of a Kohen” – Science is a discipline for priests.

1:1 the first word of the translation is, “when.”

1:1 the second word of the translation is, “God.”

This suggests that time and creation existed before G-d created them.

1:2 “Darkness” – A 24 hour day begins with darkness. The primordial darkness is a black hole.

“In the midrash, Bar Kappara upholds the troubling notion that God created the world out of preexistent material.”

Compare with Gen. Rab. 1:5

“In the ancient Near East, however, to say that a deity had subdued chaos is the highest praise.”

1:3 “The Big Bang” (Zohar shows medieval Cabbalists had already conceived of this idea out of their interpretation of Genesis 1.)

3-5: “Since the sun is not created until the fourth day (1:14-1:19), the light of the first three days is of a different order from what we know”

1:4 we begin to see a pattern in that G-d is powerful: that from His utterances, we are the residue of His spit.

1:5 “Day” “Night” “evening” “morning” – These were all a part of the first age (Yom). Evening and morning are a part of each age.

1:6 “Separate water” – There are layers of atmosphere, as well as layers of the ocean.

1:7 by the authority of G-d there is density, and buoyancy.

1:8 “Sky” – Liquid (water, oil, or air)

1:9 “Land” – Solids

1:10 “Earth” – Pangaea, the land is completely connected.

1:10 “Seas” but “the” – Indicates that all the Seas were connected.

1:11 “Vegetation” – This is cyanobacteria that could live without the sun. Or the ancestors of chloroplasts, an organelle within a eukaryote plant that was once a separate bacterial cell.

1:12 “Two great lights” – The sun and the moon “Stars” – Ours is not the first sun.

1:20 First there were fish. Then, there were insects, including those that are winged. These insects are, “Owph,” meaning flying things, not inclusive of birds.

1:21 “creep,” amphibians

1:24 “cattle,” mammals, then “creep” dinosaurs [Probably not “cattle,” but mammals (hairy creatures not “cattle”), such as the first monotremes (egg laying mammals, such as platypuses)] [Mammals existed in the fossil record at the same time dinosaurs supposedly walked the earth.]

26-28: “Some have seen in that commission a license for ecological irresponsibility. The fact is, however, that the Tanakh presents humanity as not the owner of nature but as its steward,”

“Be fertile and increase. In Jewish law, this is a positive commandment, although it is obligatory only on Jewish men, not women (b. Yebam. 65b)” The Lubavitcher Rebbe disagrees, and professed belief that Jews are to encourage gentile men to procreate. There is no context suggesting that this only implies Jewish males, and not all males of humankind.

1:26 “Us” – G-d is a collective singular. This possibly explains how G-d may appear both merciful and punitive. “Man” – Meaning humankind. The first creation story of Genesis 1 is exactly according to the fossil record. “Image” – That of creation in that creation is visible.

1:28 the first command of the Torah. It is for men only, and it does not imply make a baby every chance that you get. This command has been accomplished (Bill McKibben). The world population has an estimated 6 billion humans. We now need for our charity to extend to animals, such that human’s don’t crowd out the beautiful biodiversity of our planet. That is that we need to be careful not to make earth the above mentioned vast waste dump upon which G-d sits as king.

2:2 “Rested” – This is Shabbat or in other pronunciations “Shabbos.” The 7th day is never mentioned as having ended even up to the time of King David (Psalm 95:11.) The next part of the text of Genesis is another creation story with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. It is my opinion, that mankind originated in the Garden of Eden on the 6th day before G-d entered His rest. There are laws of Shabbat that require transgressing Shabbat, such as saving a life, such that it is correct to use medicine to save a life on Shabbat. Thus, it is such that if we are still in a period of the 7th age, then there is a certain degree of deism relative to G-d’s interactions with the world. Additionally, it is such that G-d might take a break to rest even if the Lord’s Sabbath has ended, which also suggests a certain degree of deism. But, deism when taken as a maxim fails to explain the world, as it is, for example, impossible to derive this creation week simply from observe of what was known about the world at the time it was first written.

Eleanor de Castilla, My Connection to Spanish Nobility

Eleanor de Castilla, My Connection to Spanish Nobility

by Craig Hamilton on Sunday, January 2, 2011 at 4:45pm

Edward I 'Longshanks', King of England was born on 17 June 1239 at Westminster Palace, Westminster, London, England.3 He was the son of Henry III, King of England and Eleanor of Provence. He was baptised on 21 June 1239 by Eudes, the Pope's legate.4 He married, firstly, Eleanor de Castilla, Comtesse de Ponthieu, daughter of Fernando III, Rey de Castilla y León and Jeanne d'Aumale, Comtesse de Ponthieu, on 18 October 1254 at Abbey of Las Huelgas, Burgos, Castile, Spain.5 He married, secondly, Marguerite de France, daughter of Philippe III, Roi de France and Marie de Brabant

The following shows my direct descent from Edward I and Eleanor of Provence

Edward I

Edward II

Edward III

Lionel duke of Clarence and Elizabeth de Burgh

Philippa Edmund Mortimer 3rd Earl of March

Roger Mortimer 4th Earl of March and Eleanor Holland

Anne Mortimer and Richard Earl of Cambridge

Richard duke of York and Cecilia Neville

Edward IV

Henry VII and Elizabeth of York

James IV

Catherine Stewart and James Douglas,3rd Earl of Morton

Lady Margaret Douglas

Claud Hamilton 1st Lord Paisley

James Hamilton, 1st Earl of Abercorn

Sir George Hamilton 1st Baronet, of Donalong

James Hamilton Groom of the Chamber to Charles II

Sir James Hamilton 6th Earl of Abercorn

James the seventh Earl of Abercorn, Lord Paisley

Hon. John Hamilton/Sgt. John O Hamilton Sr. in American Revolution

David/Jacob Hamilton

Levi Weirick Hamilton

William Newton Hamilton

Harry Hamilton

Howard Hamilton

Craig Hamilton

This is the first time I have written a note/blogged on my connection to Spanish nobility. However, it is not that I only have Spanish nobility, but also, England, France, Ireland, Scotland, Norway, Persian, etc. It is more that Spain and Spanish nobility seemed to be strangely missing from my family tree. The point of this blog is the suggestion that all nobility is related, and is the tribe of Judah. So, this presents a huge amount of work for me, as now I should tie this ancestry in with a Biblical ancestry, no easy task.

· · Share · Delete
    • Craig Hamilton In fact, through inbreeding I know that I am of direct descent from her in three lineages.
      January 2 at 4:51pm ·