Carl Jung’s book [flying saucers](https://www.amazon.com/Flying-Saucers-Modern-Things-Collected/dp/0691018227) will provide information on what is happening… Although ofc your flying saucer is a dragon…there are many tales of similar things being said to what the dragon says to you (ie. the bit on page 112 detailing Orfeo Angelucci’s experience)…it is basically the unconscious/infinite side of the psyche breaking through and communicating with your conscious mind.
PS. just on the number being the language of the divine..here is a bit from flying saucers where Jung speaks regarding that:
>The role that numbers play in mythology and in the unconscious gives food for thought. They are an aspect of the physically real as well as of the psychically imaginary. They do not only count and measure, and are not merely quantitative; they also make qualitative statements and are therefore a mysterious something midway between myth and reality, partly discovered and partly invented. Equations, for instance, that were invented as pure mathematical formulae have subsequently proved to be formulations of the quantitative behaviour of physical things. Conversely, owing to their individual qualities, numbers can be vehicles for psychic processes in the unconscious. The structure of the mandala, for instance, is intrinsically mathematical. We may exclaim with the mathematician Jacobi: “In the Olympian host Number eternally reigns.”
>These hints are merely intended to point out to the reader that the opposition between the human world and the higher world is not absolute; the two are only relatively incommensurable, for the bridge between them is not entirely lacking. Between them stands the great mediator, Number, whose reality is valid in both worlds, as an archetype in its very essence. Deviation into theosophical speculation does not help us to under stand the splitting of the world picture indicated in our examples, for this is simply a matter of names and words which do not point the way to the unus mundus (unitary world).
>Number, however, belongs to both worlds, the real and the imaginary; it is visible as well as invisible, quantitative as well as qualitative. Thus it is a fact of singular importance that number also characterizes the “personal” nature of the mediating figure, that it appears as a mediator. From the psychological standpoint, and having regard to the limits set to all scientific knowledge, I have called the mediating or “uniting” symbol which necessarily proceeds from a sufficiently great tension of opposites the “self.” I chose this term in order to make clear that I am concerned primarily with the formulation of empirical facts and not with dubious incursions into metaphysics. There I would trespass upon all manner of religious convictions. Living in the West, I would have to say Christ instead of “self,” in the Near East it would be Khidr, in the Far East atman or Tao or the Buddha, in the Far West maybe a hare or Mondamin, and in cabalism it would be Tifereth. Our world has shrunk, and it is dawning on us that humanity is one, with one psyche.