Encryptions within the Original 1611 King James Version of the Bible

[RC Christian]

The following is an introductory discussion on the, somewhat well-known, encryption (or code...puzzle...call it what you will) of the word "Shake-spear", being placed in Psalm 46.

I own a photographic facsimile edition of the Original 1611 King James Bible, purchased from the following website:

http://www.greatsite.com/facsimile-reproductions/kingjames-1611.html

To understand how the encryptions, that I will be referring to, work, one will need to be utilizing a similar type of reproduction, unless of course, you're fortunate enough to own or have access to, one of the 'actual' original 1611 copies, which sell for $50K-$400K.

The claims that many have made, vary from Shakespeare being one of the 40-55 compilers/editors utilized in creating the 1611 King James Bible, to Francis Bacon (which some give claim to writing part, if not all, of Shakespeare's works) and several other theories are floating around as to who all had their hands in putting together this most beautiful work. For references on Francis Bacon being the alleged writer of the Shakespearean pieces and his development and usage of various ciphers, one can refer to the following links:

(Please note that I'm not attempting to yield credibility to any of these websites or the claims that they make. I'm only linking them for those who are unaware of the theories (true or false) about the Bacon/Shakespeare theories.)

http://www.sirbacon.org/Mather_KJV/Bacon_KJV.html

http://www.sirbacon.org/links/evidence.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon's_cipher

http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/essay-ciphers.html

http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/secret_teachings_of_all_ages/bacon_shakspere_and_the_roscrucians.html

http://www.ziplink.net/users/entropy/kj1.pdf (I found this one to be rather interesting, with an attempt given to perform some rudimentary probabilistic calculations included)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv7qJHE0TlU (...and for those who would prefer to see and have explained the "shake-speare" occurrence) [follow link to part 2 on same face-page]

So, again, just some basic information for those not familiar with the ideologies about the 46th Psalm and "Shake-speare". I think it is important to note that we historically do not have an accepted birthday for William Shakespeare. Some of the links above give various birth dates, however, they are mistaking his recorded Christian Baptismal date of April 26, 1564 for that date (A quick reference, among many, on that would be in Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare ) . Interesting enough, that would lend 47 years from baptism until 1611, with most scholars agreeing that the final version of the 1611 King James was completed and delivered to King James in 1610, and then "published" within the year...giving 46 years between the first known date of Shakespeare's life (his Christian Baptism) and the completion of the KJV.

Now for what I consider to be of more interest. The following "finds" were done by others and are available on the internet, but I would encourage anyone who is interested in this, to do the proof for themselves, just as I did. A very nice and inexpensive copy of the Original 1611 KJV by Zondervan Bibles can be found on Amazon for $7.30 + shipping at http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Bible-1611-James-Version/dp/0310440297/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321458467&sr=1-4. This is an actual page by page facsimile of the original from The Bible Museum in Goodyear, AZ (where I received my larger version). Interesting enough, Zondervan Bibles cut the Apocrypha out of this version...for heaven's sake! The Apocrypha is still in the versions you can order directly from www.greatsite.com.

Here they are:

1) Starting at the last chapter in the Bible, Revelation, chp. 22, count this chapter as "chapter #1" and begin counting backwards until you come to Psalm 46 (as your last 'chapter' count). Please note that this method involves counting each Psalm as a chapter, and books like Jude, which are not broken down as chapters, are counted as 1 chapter...not a far stretch of the imagination). You will find that Psalm 46 is the 666th chapter from the end of the KJV...interesting. (The Apocrypha is not utilized in this count...for possible various reasons that could be discussed later.)

2) What I find even more interesting is, that if you count every page of printed text (again, this only works in the original version...where it was intentionally created, I strongly believe), starting with the first page on the inside right side of the original, which is the beautiful Title Page (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/KJV-King-James-Version-Bible-first-edition-title-page-1611.jpg). The back side of the Title Page is blank...no text. We then go through the genealogies, the almanacs, etc. and then eventually come to Genesis, Chapter 1. There is only one other blank page in the entire Original KJV...found right before Psalm 1...no where else in the Original KJV was there placed another, free-standing blank page, not even to divide the Old Testament from the Apocrypha, or the Apocrypha from the New Testament. Now, as we count the pages of printed text, starting with the Title Page as page #1 and omitting the 2 blank pages just mentioned, and eventually come to the 666th page...low and behold...we land on Psalm 46...EXACTLY!

I encourage everyone who might find this interesting, if they knew it was true, to order a copy off of Amazon and prove it to themselves, just like I did. The cool thing is, the Zondervan version on Amazon has already removed the Apocrypha for you, so the chapter count just became simple... http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/images/icons/icon12.png

Again, everything I just posted here is no original work on my part...it's throughout the internet. But the 3rd and final point that I am about to type, is something that I came across based on a hypothesis which I will explain in my next post, where I will elaborate on the significance of how this encryption was placed in the "Authorized Version".

3) [Continued...see my next post in this thread]

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Now for what I consider to be of more interest. The following "finds" were done by others and are available on the internet, but I would encourage anyone who is interested in this, to do the proof for themselves, just as I did. A very nice and inexpensive copy of the Original 1611 KJV by Zondervan Bibles can be found on Amazon for $7.30 + shipping at http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Bible-1611-James-Version/dp/0310440297/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321458467&sr=1-4. This is an actual page by page facsimile of the original from The Bible Museum in Goodyear, AZ (where I received my larger version). Interesting enough, Zondervan Bibles cut the Apocrypha out of this version...for heaven's sake! The Apocrypha is still in the versions you can order directly from www.greatsite.com (http://www.greatsite.com).

Here they are:

1) Starting at the last chapter in the Bible, Revelation, chp. 22, count this chapter as "chapter #1" and begin counting backwards until you come to Psalm 46 (as your last 'chapter' count). Please note that this method involves counting each Psalm as a chapter, and books like Jude, which are not broken down as chapters, are counted as 1 chapter...not a far stretch of the imagination). You will find that Psalm 46 is the 666th chapter from the end of the KJV...interesting. (The Apocrypha is not utilized in this count...for possible various reasons that could be discussed later.)

2) What I find even more interesting is, that if you count every page of printed text (again, this only works in the original version...where it was intentionally created, I strongly believe), starting with the first page on the inside right side of the original, which is the beautiful Title Page (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/KJV-King-James-Version-Bible-first-edition-title-page-1611.jpg). The back side of the Title Page is blank...no text. We then go through the genealogies, the almanacs, etc. and then eventually come to Genesis, Chapter 1. There is only one other blank page in the entire Original KJV...found right before Psalm 1...no where else in the Original KJV was there placed another, free-standing blank page, not even to divide the Old Testament from the Apocrypha, or the Apocrypha from the New Testament. Now, as we count the pages of printed text, starting with the Title Page as page #1 and omitting the 2 blank pages just mentioned, and eventually come to the 666th page...low and behold...we land on Psalm 46...EXACTLY!

I encourage everyone who might find this interesting, if they knew it was true, to order a copy off of Amazon and prove it to themselves, just like I did. The cool thing is, the Zondervan version on Amazon has already removed the Apocrypha for you, so the chapter count just became simple... http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/images/icons/icon12.png

Again, everything I just posted here is no original work on my part...it's throughout the internet. But the 3rd and final point that I am about to type, is something that I came across based on a hypothesis which I will explain in my next post, where I will elaborate on the significance of how this encryption was placed in the "Authorized Version".

3) [Continued...see my next post in this thread]

1) I can confirm that Psalm 46 is the 666th chapter from the end of the KJV.

2) I can't confirm this because I don't have the text.

But my question is this: If these two facts were intentionally designed into the text, what was their purpose? Anyone can do things like this if they set their mind to it. Why bother? What do you suppose it means?

[RC Christian]

I don't know that I would go as far as saying that anyone could do something like this. On the second point of interest...the 666 page count...this would indeed take a lot of planning. There's roughly 78 pages (counting the Title Page) that lead up to the first page of Genesis. I assume that the encryptor would have the page count of the 588 pages of actual Biblical text that leads up to Psalm 46 in front of him, and then he would have to plan to fill up the additional 78 pages to get his count correct. By no means impossible, but not a simple task. Eleven of those 78 pages are entitled "The Translators to the Readers". I suspect this is the section that was used to 'fill the void' in reaching the proper page count. The other 'extra' pages are filled with a general zodiacal almanac, including informing the reader of how many days are in each month verses how many days 'the moon has' that month, what sign the sun and other planets take up residence and influence in, etc...astrology for the layman. Then we move on to "How to find Easter"...kind of a cool matrix. Next, there's a section on what prayers and Psalms to read on certain day. And finally, we are shown the famous geneology trees, starting with God, Adam, and Eve, and some 34 pages later..."Christ". This is the section that has random Masonic/ Rosicrucian handshakes built into what is otherwise connecting lines...very strange. The handshakes are the same as the most common one found over the internet...with the thumb gripping around the other person's knuckle.

I'll try to locate a website that I found on-line once that was a page-by-page photo gallery of the 1611. If someone is so inclined, and doesn't feel like dropping the $7.30 at Amazon for a copy of the 400th Year Anniversary version, they could, page by page, count the 666 pages. If nothing else, the link will show you the beautiful artwork that went into several pages of this work. I would definitely recommend looking at the astrology section and the Masonic/Rosicrucian handshakes in the geneologies.

I do have my own opinion of "why" someone would painstakenly take the time to encrypt something like this, but I'll need to make my point #3 that was alluded to in my previous post, first...just to make sure I have all the evidence on the table...and I plan on doing so after I help my daughter with her Algebra and me and the wife get the kids to bed. :yo:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I don't know that I would go as far as saying that anyone could do something like this. On the second point of interest...the 666 page count...this would indeed take a lot of planning. There's roughly 78 pages (counting the Title Page) that lead up to the first page of Genesis. I assume that the encryptor would have the page count of the 588 pages of actual Biblical text that leads up to Psalm 46 in front of him, and then he would have to plan to fill up the additional 78 pages to get his count correct. By no means impossible, but not a simple task. Eleven of those 78 pages are entitled "The Translators to the Readers". I suspect this is the section that was used to 'fill the void' in reaching the proper page count. The other 'extra' pages are filled with a general zodiacal almanac, including informing the reader of how many days are in each month verses how many days 'the moon has' that month, what sign the sun and other planets take up residence and influence in, etc...astrology for the layman. Then we move on to "How to find Easter"...kind of a cool matrix. Next, there's a section on what prayers and Psalms to read on certain day. And finally, we are shown the famous geneology trees, starting with God, Adam, and Eve, and some 34 pages later..."Christ". This is the section that has random Masonic/ Rosicrucian handshakes built into what is otherwise connecting lines...very strange. The handshakes are the same as the most common one found over the internet...with the thumb gripping around the other person's knuckle.

I'll try to locate a website that I found on-line once that was a page-by-page photo gallery of the 1611. If someone is so inclined, and doesn't feel like dropping the $7.30 at Amazon for a copy of the 400th Year Anniversary version, they could, page by page, count the 666 pages. If nothing else, the link will show you the beautiful artwork that went into several pages of this work. I would definitely recommend looking at the astrology section and the Masonic/Rosicrucian handshakes in the geneologies.

I do have my own opinion of "why" someone would painstakenly take the time to encrypt something like this, but I'll need to make my point #3 that was alluded to in my previous post, first...just to make sure I have all the evidence on the table...and I plan on doing so after I help my daughter with her Algebra and me and the wife get the kids to bed. :yo:
I'm a little confused on your thesis, since you haven't actually stated it yet. But I thought you had said that these patterns were deliberately designed, and I got the impression that you meant deliberately designed by some humans who knew what they were doing.

The reason I said it could be done was because showed only two "coincidences" without showing any rhyme nor reason for them and there were endless other possibilities. Why 666 pages? Why 666 chapters? Why not 666 letters from some other verse, or 777 chapters? Why Shakespeare? Why not King James? All these things you just present as if their significance should be self-evident. But there is an infinity of possible number/word/person combinations you could have chosen to begin your presentation. So I can't see anything yet that could not be mere coincidence. The Bible is a very big book, how many possible connections could there be? How do we discern between chance and design when confronted with such claims? That's the real question.

I look forward to your next point. Perhaps that will answer some of my questions.

Great chatting!

Richard

[RC Christian]

I'm a little confused on your thesis, since you haven't actually stated it yet. But I thought you had said that these patterns were deliberately designed, and I got the impression that you meant deliberately designed by some humans who knew what they were doing.

The reason I said it could be done was because showed only two "coincidences" without showing any rhyme nor reason for them and there were endless other possibilities. Why 666 pages? Why 666 chapters? Why not 666 letters from some other verse, or 777 chapters? Why Shakespeare? Why not King James? All these things you just present as if their significance should be self-evident. But there is an infinity of possible number/word/person combinations you could have chosen to begin your presentation. So I can't see anything yet that could not be mere coincidence. The Bible is a very big book, how many possible connections could there be? How do we discern between chance and design when confronted with such claims? That's the real question.

I look forward to your next point. Perhaps that will answer some of my questions.

Great chatting!

Richard


My view of the encryptions that I'm discussing, found within the 1611 KJV, is that they were deliberately and well-intentionally placed within the translation by one or possibly more of those who were in charge of the translating...more specifically the one or ones who were in charge of the "final" draft and version, not necessarily all or any of the general translators, whose numbers are estimated to be between 40-55 from all references I have been able to find on the net and in a couple of books. So, yes, "humans" would be an accurate description of the encryptors...not God, gods, spirits, aliens, etc. I, by no means, am attempting to make a point of "inspiration", divine intervention, etc.

My opinion, or I suppose we could call it my thesis statement, is that whoever the 'editor-in-chief' was of the 1611 KJV, be it William Shakespeare, Francis Bacon, or a host of others which have been proposed and speculated over during the years, intentionally encoded, among other things, the "shake-spear" found in Psalm 46. Now the facts that I first presented, about "shake" being the 46th word from the start of Psalm 46 and "spear" being the 46 word from the end of Psalm 46, which I learned about years ago...I think the finding has made it's way into a few History Channel specials...never really impressed much on me. The most intriguing point of the whole thing to me was, "Who in the world found this and what were they looking for in the first place?" ...Why Psalm 46 and all this 46 counting??? What is the significance of it? Then I read where a few people had stated that Shakespeare was 46 years old in 1610, when the final version of the new work was completed...bear in mind it wasn't known in 1611 as the "1611" King James Bible...just as the "Authorized Version". When I learned of this point...Shakespeare being 46 years old when the version was finished...I thought that was 'slightly' interesting. So I did some research on it to verify it. There's no recorded date of Shakespeare's birth to be found. Someone this famous in, somewhat, recent history, with no available date or even year of birth...puzzling. But what we do know and is easily verifiable is Shakespeare's date of Christian Baptism...April 26, 1564. This is the date that lands us 46 years later for the completion of the final version of the new Bible. But still...so what? Could the previous be random chance...absolutely...and I figured it probably was.

Several years later, I heard about the 666 chapter count backward landing you on Psalm 46...I did find that interesting primarily because I had heard of the first 46 stuff...actually saw it on TV...and now the "beastly" number showing up some way linked to it...now a little more interesting...but just interesting...not fascinating. Of course, I quickly and easily verified this fact. It was only a short time later when I read on the internet someone making the 666 page count claim leading up to Psalm 46. This time I was skeptical. The first could have been random coincidences, but we're starting to add additional factors to our probability equation at this point. I had to count the pages for my self. And I must say, I was impressed when I landed on Psalm 46 on the 666th page.

This impressed me for several reasons. First and foremost, to me 666 has nothing to do with the end of the world, or a mark people will get, etc. Why? Because I believe the Bible is a collection of myths, allegories, and stories...on the surface. I believe what was important to most all of those who actually wrote these original texts was what we would simply call astrology...and maybe even magic. I do not believe there ever was an Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Solomon,..., Peter, Andrew, John, or Jesus (Just to be blunt about it.). There may have been an enlightened teacher of the day that inspired the allegorical creation of the Gospel "stories"...who knows. But what we do know, from archaeological digs and discoveries is that astrology was important to the Jews, Christians, Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, Sumerians, Egyptians, etc. And they all created great legends to embody their view of "heaven" and "gods"...the constellations and the 7 'known' planets, to include the sun and moon. With that said, to me...in my opinion...666 was a reference to the sum of the magic square of the sun...nothing more, nothing less. The first 7 magic squares have been linked to the 7 planets since the Babylonian times. I believe whoever the original "Hebrews" were, they had gathered all their knowledge of astrology from the Babylonians and possibly the Egyptians...however, I don't believe, and to my knowledge there is no evidence that the Egyptians ever had hoards of Hebrew slaves or that they ever lost a Pharaoh and thousands upon thousands of soldiers in a mass drowning. So, with that said, and of course there is much more that could be said about the veneration of the zodiac and planets, along with their believed magical influences, that's how I view the much revered and feared number 666.

Secondly, the very reputation that 666 has carried throughout the ages is obvious to pretty much any Christian...and to mostly anyone who has been exposed to Christian theology. I did an experiment in my practice a couple of years ago. Over a 2 week period, I asked 220 different patients a simple question: "From the Bible, what one number stands out the most to you in its significance and importance...good, bad, or indifferently?" Out of 220 responses, I received 18 responses of "7", 13 responses of "12", 8 responses of "3", 8 responses of "144,000" and 173 responses of "666". Granted, I live in the 'Bible Belt' and most everyone in this area is a Southern Baptist or other fundamentalist, and the thought of the rapture and Armageddon are somewhat 'present-minded' with many around here, but I believe that 666 has always carried a lot of mystique to it...at least to those who have heard or read the cryptic passage of Rev. 13:18. So............... if I was a clever and witty 'editor-in-chief'...who had (and obviously this is all assumption on my part) what we might call 'initiated knowledge' ...knowledge that the "secret societies" are said to possess of the real meaning of the Bible...allegorical tales, underlying gematria, astrology, myths, legends, etc. and I wanted to leave a witty, encrypted 'pun' behind, hopefully to be discovered one day...maybe even as a pointer or clue as to what the Bible really is and how those who find my encryption will know not to take all this stuff written in the Bible and enforced on the common man to control his thoughts, actions, and money...too seriously...actually, not seriously, I can't think of a better number to 'play around' with than the horrible, evil, and damning number of 666... which is actually nothing more than the sum of the magic square of the sun.

And finally, when I was doing all the page counting and stuff...pondering the plausibility of this really being an encryption based on the magic square of the sun, I came up with another hypothesis to quickly test out. My assumption was, (and this is point #3 that I have yet to mention) if this is really about the magic square of the sun...a pun on it, or whatever you want to call it, then there should...or at least could be...the magic constant of the magic square of the sun encrypted in the Psalm. For those unfamiliar with magic squares, a simple Google search will give you more than you would ever want to know about them, but in general the order of the matrix is the number of rows or columns, each being equal, hence the "square". All the rows, columns, and diagonals must equal the same number, known as the "Magic Constant" ... when either the rows or columns are added up, they equal the "Magic Sum", which in the case of the magic square of the sun, is equal to 666. The magic constant of the sun square is equal to 111. So, to test my hypothesis that all this could be the editor's 'neat and amusing' pun, playing around with that ominous number 666...all pointing to "Shake-spear"...and why Shakespeare, I really don't know...I began with the word "shake" and counted 111 words..."spear"...each inclusive in the count, just as the 46 word count from top and bottom were inclusive of the words, and the 666 page and chapter counts were inclusive of the page and chapter, respectfully.

Imagine that, the one most single verse in the Bible that tells us to count the number of a man's name..."Here is wisdom. Let he that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man's name: and his number is six hundred, three score and six." ...possibly pointing to the name "Shakespeare"...now that's someone with a sense of humor.

There are several other "likely" encryptions in the 1611 KJV that I can go into at another time. One quick and neat one is as follows: The Hebrew word for "adversary" is Strong's Concordance #7854. This Hebrew word is found in the Bible approximately 23 times. The first 8 times it appears (Num 22:22, 32, I Sam 29:4, II Sam 19:22, I Kings 5:4, 11:4, 23, 25), it is translated as "adversary", except in Num 22:32, where the KJV renders it "to withstand". The 9th time it appears is in I Chronicles 21:1, where it is translated as "Satan"...a fairly notable character in the whole good vs evil story...and it continues to be translated "Satan" from that point forward. I Chronicles 21:1 is the 359th chapter in the "Authorized Version"...the gematria of "Satan"...hummm.

What's important to understand is that none of the previous Bibles leading up to the 1611 KJV had I Chronicles, chp. 21, as the 359th chapter...most included or excluded different books, including the Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, Coverdale, Matthew, etc.

http://www.otherbs.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Picture-2.png

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Fascinating post RC!

But I think there is a "fly in the ointment." As it turns out, Psalm 46 was translated into English in the Geneva Bible about 51 years before the King James. The ordinal positions of the words are not exactly the same, but they are sufficiently close to show that the pattern was almost already in place long before Shakespeare or Bacon or whoever was on the scene in 1610. The Geneva Bible is available online. The King James follows it very closely. So this indicates to me that there was noone who delierately put this "encryptions" in the KJV in 1611. The pieces were already in place. Therefore, it it wasn't God or some other supernatural agent, I would strongly suspect it to be chance.


Geneva (1560)

KJV (1611)



1 God
2 is
3 our
4 hope
5 and
6 strength,
7 and
8 help
9 in
10 troubles,
11 ready
12 to
13 be
14 found.
15 Therefore
16 will
17 not
18 we
19 fear,
20 though
21 the
22 earth
23 be
24 moved,
25 and
26 though
27 the
28 mountains
29 fall
30 into
31 the
32 midst
33 of
34 the
35 sea.
36 Though
37 the
38 waters
39 thereof
40 rage
41 and
42 be
43 troubled,
44 and
45 the
46 mountains
47 shake
48 at
49 the
50 surges
51 of
52 the
53 same.
54 Selah,
55 Yet
56 there
57 is
58 a
59 River,
60 whose
61 streams
62 shall
63 make
64 glad
65 the
66 city
67 of
68 God:
69 even
70 the
71 Sanctuary
72 of
73 the
74 Tabernacles
75 of
76 the
77 most
78 High.
79 God
80 is
81 in
82 the
83 midst
84 of
85 it:
86 therefore
87 shall
88 it
89 not
90 be
91 moved:
92 God
93 shall
94 help
95 it
96 very
97 early.
98 When
99 the
100 nations
101 raged,
102 and
103 the
104 kingdoms
105 were
106 moved,
107 God
108 thundered,
109 and
110 the
111 earth
112 melted.
113 The
114 Lord
115 of
116 hosts
117 is
118 with
119 us:
120 the
121 God
122 of
123 Jacob
124 is
125 our
126 refuge.
127 Selah.
128 Come,
129 and
130 behold
131 the
132 works
133 of
134 the
135 Lord,
136 what
137 desolations
138 he
139 hath
140 made
141 in
142 the
143 earth.
144 He
145 maketh
146 wars
147 to
148 cease
149 unto
150 the
151 ends
152 of
153 the
154 world:
155 he
156 breaketh
157 the
158 bow
159 and
160 cutteth
161 the
162 spear,
163 and
164 burneth
165 the
166 chariots
167 with
168 fire.
169 Be
170 still
171 and
172 know
173 that
174 I
175 am
176 God:
177 I
178 will
179 be
180 exalted
181 among
182 the
183 heathen,
184 and
185 I
186 will
187 be
188 exalted
189 in
190 the
191 earth.
192 The
193 Lord
194 of
195 hosts
196 is
197 with
198 us:
199 the
200 God
201 of
202 Jacob
203 is
204 our
205 refuge.
206 Selah.

1 God
2 is
3 our
4 refuge
5 and
6 strength,
7 a
8 very
9 present
10 help
11 in
12 trouble.
13 Therefore
14 will
15 not
16 we
17 fear,
18 though
19 the
20 earth
21 be
22 removed,
23 and
24 though
25 the
26 mountains
27 be
28 carried
29 into
30 the
31 midst
32 of
33 the
34 sea;
35 Though
36 the
37 waters
38 thereof
39 roar
40 and
41 be
42 troubled,
43 though
44 the
45 mountains
46 shake
47 with
48 the
49 swelling
50 thereof.
51 Selah.
52 There
53 is
54 a
55 river,
56 the
57 streams
58 whereof
59 shall
60 make
61 glad
62 the
63 city
64 of
65 God,
66 the
67 holy
68 place
69 of
70 the
71 tabernacles
72 of
73 the
74 most
75 High.
76 God
77 is
78 in
79 the
80 midst
81 of
82 her;
83 she
84 shall
85 not
86 be
87 moved:
88 God
89 shall
90 help
91 her,
92 and
93 that
94 right
95 early.
96 The
97 heathen
98 raged,
99 the
100 kingdoms
101 were
102 moved:
103 he
104 uttered
105 his
106 voice,
107 the
108 earth
109 melted.
110 The
111 LORD
112 of
113 hosts
114 is
115 with
116 us;
117 the
118 God
119 of
120 Jacob
121 is
122 our
123 refuge.
124 Selah.
125 Come,
126 behold
127 the
128 works
129 of
130 the
131 LORD,
132 what
133 desolations
134 he
135 hath
136 made
137 in
138 the
139 earth.
140 He
141 maketh
142 wars
143 to
144 cease
145 unto
146 the
147 end
148 of
149 the
150 earth;
151 he
152 breaketh
153 the
154 bow,
155 and
156 cutteth
157 the
158 spear
159 in
160 sunder;
161 he
162 burneth
163 the
164 chariot
165 in
166 the
167 fire.
168 Be
169 still,
170 and
171 know
172 that
173 I
174 am
175 God:
176 I
177 will
178 be
179 exalted
180 among
181 the
182 heathen,
183 I
184 will
185 be
186 exalted
187 in
188 the
189 earth.
190 The
191 LORD
192 of
193 hosts
194 is
195 with
196 us;
197 the
198 God
199 of
200 Jacob
201 is
202 our
203 refuge.
204 Selah.



For those of you interested in how to process texts, here is the javascript html page I wrote to list words with their ordinal positions. You can just run it on your destop (save it as html).



<html>
<script type="text/javascript">
function countem(){
var elem = document.getElementById("txt");
var ar = elem.value.split(" ");
var lst = "";
var cnt = 1;
for (i=0;i<ar.length;i++) {
if ( isNaN(ar[i].toString()) ) {
lst += "<br />" + cnt.toString() + " " + ar[i].toString();
cnt++;
}
}

document.getElementById('lulu').innerHTML=lst;
}
</script>
<body>

<input id="txt" name="countbox" type="text">
<Input id="doit" name="doit" type="submit" onclick="countem()">

<div id="lulu">
This is where lst will go
</div>
</body>
</html>

[RC Christian]

Thanks for the time and effort in replying to my post, Richard. And thank you for the excellent insight into how "shake-spear" was present in the Geneva version of Psalm 46, at a similar counting space of 47 words down and 44 words up (note that the count doesn't include the 3 "Selah's" found in the Psalm...for whatever reason, I'm not sure; I didn't 'discover' the Psalm 46 Code). Also, the counting backward from the end of the Geneva Bible to Psalm 46 should achieve the 666 chapter count, the number equal to the Magic Sum of the Magic Square of the Sun. The forward page count from the Title Page of the Geneva Bible will most likely not yield 666 pages upto Psalm 46, but again, this was not my finding, but someone else's. The count between, and inclusive of "shake" and "spear", in the Geneva Bible is 114 words, not the 111 which is the Magic Constant of the Magic Square of the Sun. So...how could Shakespeare even come close to fitting into an encryption in the 1611 KJV...especially, as you pointed out, the same English words were already present in other translations. Honestly, I don't know. I do believe that it would have been the makings of a great opportunity for some clever editor to recognize the "shake" and "spear" in the verse, and to recognize the 666 chapter count backward (if they were into cryptic stuff), and then shuffle a few words around, make the forward page count work, and create something very clever that plays off of the one verse in the Bible that tells us to count the number of a man's name...as a pun/riddle...whatever. While working in the 111 count between words to acknowledge to whoever found the encryption, that the 666 was about the Magic Square of the Sun...not an actual death mark that some people will get one day.

To me, this one type of "coincidence"...actually, I guess this would be called "multiple coincidences"...wouldn't seem as potentially intentional, if I had no reason to believe that other types of encrypting may be going on in the 1611 KJV. For instance, if it wasn't for how "adversary" first becomes "Satan" in I Chron. 21:1...and remains Satan throughout...with this occurring at the 359th chapter, corresponding with the gematria of Satan. Another interesting finding like this occurs in Luke, Chp. 3. To appreciate this one, I think it's important to know that the "extremes" have supposedly been utilized over the ages as 'pointers' for the recognition of those that were 'learned', that a cipher/encryption was present. I was told this by a friend who is a Freemason and he expressed that that was a very important premise to understand. By "extremes", I'm referring to things like: the biggest, the smallest, the youngest, the oldest, the first, the last, etc. Back to Luke, Chapter 3: Here we find one of the 2 different genealogies found in the New Testament on Jesus ancestors. To show an example of an"extreme" pointer being used, we note that in Luke 3:37 we find "Mathusala" listed. I'm sure we all know that the Bible records Mathusala as being the oldest human whoever lived (although, I think that those guys that Jesus was talking to when he said, "there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the Kingdom of God" officially now have Mathusala beat by over 1000 years. The Bible calculates Mathusala's age to be 969 years old. 969 is the 17th tetrahedral number, for anyone interested. Start with Luke Chpt. 3, verse 1, word 1 and "painstakingly" count until you reach the 969th word in the 1611 KJV...Mathusala.

I'll continue to add more to this thread, but I do sincerely thank Richard for what he has pointed out, and I am still turning it in my mind.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The Bible calculates Mathusala's age to be 969 years old. 969 is the 17th tetrahedral number, for anyone interested. Start with Luke Chpt. 3, verse 1, word 1 and "painstakingly" count until you reach the 969th word in the 1611 KJV...Mathusala.

Wasn't "painstaking" at all! I had my micro-munks do it for me. :winking0071:

It is a striking little "coincidence." Who do you supposed first discovered this? I imagine it must have been very painstaking for them if they did it before computers. I present the evidence here so folks can confirm it for themselves. I can also confirm that "Satan" first occurs in chapter 359, corresponding to the value of that word. But these are just two "hits" out of a book consisting of 31,102 verses, so it is a legitimate question to ask how many such "hits" we should expect from random chance. As it stands, I don't see how "cherry picking" a few examples here or there could prove anything. But I have an open mind and I will continue to check out the evidence you provide.

1 Now
2 in
3 the
4 fifteenth
5 year
6 of
7 the
8 reign
9 of
10 Tiberius
11 Caesar,
12 Pontius
13 Pilate
14 being
15 governor
16 of
17 Judaea,
18 and
19 Herod
20 being
21 tetrarch
22 of
23 Galilee,
24 and
25 his
26 brother
27 Philip
28 tetrarch
29 of
30 Ituraea
31 and
32 of
33 the
34 region
35 of
36 Trachonitis,
37 and
38 Lysanias
39 the
40 tetrarch
41 of
42 Abilene,
43 Annas
44 and
45 Caiaphas
46 being
47 the
48 high
49 priests,
50 the
51 word
52 of
53 God
54 came
55 unto
56 John
57 the
58 son
59 of
60 Zacharias
61 in
62 the
63 wilderness.
64 And
65 he
66 came
67 into
68 all
69 the
70 country
71 about
72 Jordan,
73 preaching
74 the
75 baptism
76 of
77 repentance
78 for
79 the
80 remission
81 of
82 sins;
83 As
84 it
85 is
86 written
87 in
88 the
89 book
90 of
91 the
92 words
93 of
94 Esaias
95 the
96 prophet,
97 saying,
98 The
99 voice
100 of
101 one
102 crying
103 in
104 the
105 wilderness,
106 Prepare
107 ye
108 the
109 way
110 of
111 the
112 Lord,
113 make
114 his
115 paths
116 straight.
117 Every
118 valley
119 shall
120 be
121 filled,
122 and
123 every
124 mountain
125 and
126 hill
127 shall
128 be
129 brought
130 low;
131 and
132 the
133 crooked
134 shall
135 be
136 made
137 straight,
138 and
139 the
140 rough
141 ways
142 shall
143 be
144 made
145 smooth;
146 And
147 all
148 flesh
149 shall
150 see
151 the
152 salvation
153 of
154 God.
155 7 Then
156 said
157 he
158 to
159 the
160 multitude
161 that
162 came
163 forth
164 to
165 be
166 baptized
167 of
168 him,
169 O
170 generation
171 of
172 vipers,
173 who
174 hath
175 warned
176 you
177 to
178 flee
179 from
180 the
181 wrath
182 to
183 come?
184 Bring
185 forth
186 therefore
187 fruits
188 worthy
189 of
190 repentance,
191 and
192 begin
193 not
194 to
195 say
196 within
197 yourselves,
198 We
199 have
200 Abraham
201 to
202 our
203 father:
204 for
205 I
206 say
207 unto
208 you,
209 That
210 God
211 is
212 able
213 of
214 these
215 stones
216 to
217 raise
218 up
219 children
220 unto
221 Abraham.
222 And
223 now
224 also
225 the
226 axe
227 is
228 laid
229 unto
230 the
231 root
232 of
233 the
234 trees:
235 every
236 tree
237 therefore
238 which
239 bringeth
240 not
241 forth
242 good
243 fruit
244 is
245 hewn
246 down,
247 and
248 cast
249 into
250 the
251 fire.
252 10 And
253 the
254 people
255 asked
256 him,
257 saying,
258 What
259 shall
260 we
261 do
262 then?
263 He
264 answereth
265 and
266 saith
267 unto
268 them,
269 He
270 that
271 hath
272 two
273 coats,
274 let
275 him
276 impart
277 to
278 him
279 that
280 hath
281 none;
282 and
283 he
284 that
285 hath
286 meat,
287 let
288 him
289 do
290 likewise.
291 Then
292 came
293 also
294 publicans
295 to
296 be
297 baptized,
298 and
299 said
300 unto
301 him,
302 Master,
303 what
304 shall
305 we
306 do?
307 And
308 he
309 said
310 unto
311 them,
312 Exact
313 no
314 more
315 than
316 that
317 which
318 is
319 appointed
320 you.
321 And
322 the
323 soldiers
324 likewise
325 demanded
326 of
327 him,
328 saying,
329 And
330 what
331 shall
332 we
333 do?
334 And
335 he
336 said
337 unto
338 them,
339 Do
340 violence
341 to
342 no
343 man,
344 neither
345 accuse
346 any
347 falsely;
348 and
349 be
350 content
351 with
352 your
353 wages.
354 15 And
355 as
356 the
357 people
358 were
359 in
360 expectation,
361 and
362 all
363 men
364 mused
365 in
366 their
367 hearts
368 of
369 John,
370 whether
371 he
372 were
373 the
374 Christ,
375 or
376 not;
377 John
378 answered,
379 saying
380 unto
381 them
382 all,
383 I
384 indeed
385 baptize
386 you
387 with
388 water;
389 but
390 one
391 mightier
392 than
393 I
394 cometh,
395 the
396 latchet
397 of
398 whose
399 shoes
400 I
401 am
402 not
403 worthy
404 to
405 unloose:
406 he
407 shall
408 baptize
409 you
410 with
411 the
412 Holy
413 Ghost
414 and
415 with
416 fire:
417 Whose
418 fan
419 is
420 in
421 his
422 hand,
423 and
424 he
425 will
426 throughly
427 purge
428 his
429 floor,
430 and
431 will
432 gather
433 the
434 wheat
435 into
436 his
437 garner;
438 but
439 the
440 chaff
441 he
442 will
443 burn
444 with
445 fire
446 unquenchable.
447 18 And
448 many
449 other
450 things
451 in
452 his
453 exhortation
454 preached
455 he
456 unto
457 the
458 people.
459 But
460 Herod
461 the
462 tetrarch,
463 being
464 reproved
465 by
466 him
467 for
468 Herodias
469 his
470 brother
471 Philip's
472 wife,
473 and
474 for
475 all
476 the
477 evils
478 which
479 Herod
480 had
481 done,
482 Added
483 yet
484 this
485 above
486 all,
487 that
488 he
489 shut
490 up
491 John
492 in
493 prison.
494 21 Now
495 when
496 all
497 the
498 people
499 were
500 baptized,
501 it
502 came
503 to
504 pass,
505 that
506 Jesus
507 also
508 being
509 baptized,
510 and
511 praying,
512 the
513 heaven
514 was
515 opened,
516 And
517 the
518 Holy
519 Ghost
520 descended
521 in
522 a
523 bodily
524 shape
525 like
526 a
527 dove
528 upon
529 him,
530 and
531 a
532 voice
533 came
534 from
535 heaven,
536 which
537 said,
538 Thou
539 art
540 my
541 beloved
542 Son;
543 in
544 thee
545 I
546 am
547 well
548 pleased.
549 23 And
550 Jesus
551 himself
552 began
553 to
554 be
555 about
556 thirty
557 years
558 of
559 age,
560 being
561 (as
562 was
563 supposed)
564 the
565 son
566 of
567 Joseph,
568 which
569 was
570 the
571 son
572 of
573 Heli,
574 Which
575 was
576 the
577 son
578 of
579 Matthat,
580 which
581 was
582 the
583 son
584 of
585 Levi,
586 which
587 was
588 the
589 son
590 of
591 Melchi,
592 which
593 was
594 the
595 son
596 of
597 Janna,
598 which
599 was
600 the
601 son
602 of
603 Joseph,
604 Which
605 was
606 the
607 son
608 of
609 Mattathias,
610 which
611 was
612 the
613 son
614 of
615 Amos,
616 which
617 was
618 the
619 son
620 of
621 Naum,
622 which
623 was
624 the
625 son
626 of
627 Esli,
628 which
629 was
630 the
631 son
632 of
633 Nagge,
634 Which
635 was
636 the
637 son
638 of
639 Maath,
640 which
641 was
642 the
643 son
644 of
645 Mattathias,
646 which
647 was
648 the
649 son
650 of
651 Semei,
652 which
653 was
654 the
655 son
656 of
657 Joseph,
658 which
659 was
660 the
661 son
662 of
663 Juda,
664 Which
665 was
666 the
667 son
668 of
669 Joanna,
670 which
671 was
672 the
673 son
674 of
675 Rhesa,
676 which
677 was
678 the
679 son
680 of
681 Zorobabel,
682 which
683 was
684 the
685 son
686 of
687 Salathiel,
688 which
689 was
690 the
691 son
692 of
693 Neri,
694 Which
695 was
696 the
697 son
698 of
699 Melchi,
700 which
701 was
702 the
703 son
704 of
705 Addi,
706 which
707 was
708 the
709 son
710 of
711 Cosam,
712 which
713 was
714 the
715 son
716 of
717 Elmodam,
718 which
719 was
720 the
721 son
722 of
723 Er,
724 Which
725 was
726 the
727 son
728 of
729 Jose,
730 which
731 was
732 the
733 son
734 of
735 Eliezer,
736 which
737 was
738 the
739 son
740 of
741 Jorim,
742 which
743 was
744 the
745 son
746 of
747 Matthat,
748 which
749 was
750 the
751 son
752 of
753 Levi,
754 Which
755 was
756 the
757 son
758 of
759 Simeon,
760 which
761 was
762 the
763 son
764 of
765 Juda,
766 which
767 was
768 the
769 son
770 of
771 Joseph,
772 which
773 was
774 the
775 son
776 of
777 Jonan,
778 which
779 was
780 the
781 son
782 of
783 Eliakim,
784 Which
785 was
786 the
787 son
788 of
789 Melea,
790 which
791 was
792 the
793 son
794 of
795 Menan,
796 which
797 was
798 the
799 son
800 of
801 Mattatha,
802 which
803 was
804 the
805 son
806 of
807 Nathan,
808 which
809 was
810 the
811 son
812 of
813 David,
814 Which
815 was
816 the
817 son
818 of
819 Jesse,
820 which
821 was
822 the
823 son
824 of
825 Obed,
826 which
827 was
828 the
829 son
830 of
831 Booz,
832 which
833 was
834 the
835 son
836 of
837 Salmon,
838 which
839 was
840 the
841 son
842 of
843 Naasson,
844 Which
845 was
846 the
847 son
848 of
849 Aminadab,
850 which
851 was
852 the
853 son
854 of
855 Aram,
856 which
857 was
858 the
859 son
860 of
861 Esrom,
862 which
863 was
864 the
865 son
866 of
867 Phares,
868 which
869 was
870 the
871 son
872 of
873 Juda,
874 Which
875 was
876 the
877 son
878 of
879 Jacob,
880 which
881 was
882 the
883 son
884 of
885 Isaac,
886 which
887 was
888 the
889 son
890 of
891 Abraham,
892 which
893 was
894 the
895 son
896 of
897 Thara,
898 which
899 was
900 the
901 son
902 of
903 Nachor,
904 Which
905 was
906 the
907 son
908 of
909 Saruch,
910 which
911 was
912 the
913 son
914 of
915 Ragau,
916 which
917 was
918 the
919 son
920 of
921 Phalec,
922 which
923 was
924 the
925 son
926 of
927 Heber,
928 which
929 was
930 the
931 son
932 of
933 Sala,
934 Which
935 was
936 the
937 son
938 of
939 Cainan,
940 which
941 was
942 the
943 son
944 of
945 Arphaxad,
946 which
947 was
948 the
949 son
950 of
951 Sem,
952 which
953 was
954 the
955 son
956 of
957 Noe,
958 which
959 was
960 the
961 son
962 of
963 Lamech,
964 Which
965 was
966 the
967 son
968 of
969 Mathusala

[RC Christian]

Wasn't "painstaking" at all! I had my micro-munks do it for me. :winking0071:

It is a striking little "coincidence." Who do you supposed first discovered this? I imagine it must have been very painstaking for them if they did it before computers. I present the evidence here so folks can confirm it for themselves. I can also confirm that "Satan" first occurs in chapter 359, corresponding to the value of that word. But these are just two "hits" out of a book consisting of 31,102 verses, so it is a legitimate question to ask how many such "hits" we should expect from random chance. As it stands, I don't see how "cherry picking" a few examples here or there could prove anything. But I have an open mind and I will continue to check out the evidence you provide.

1 Now
2 in
3 the
4 fifteenth
5 year
6 of
7 the
8 reign
9 of
10 Tiberius
11 Caesar,
12 Pontius
13 Pilate
14 being
15 governor
16 of
17 Judaea,
18 and
19 Herod
20 being
21 tetrarch
22 of
23 Galilee,
24 and
25 his
26 brother
27 Philip
28 tetrarch
29 of
30 Ituraea
31 and
32 of
33 the
34 region
35 of
36 Trachonitis,
37 and
38 Lysanias
39 the
40 tetrarch
41 of
42 Abilene,
43 Annas
44 and
45 Caiaphas
46 being
47 the
48 high
49 priests,
50 the
51 word
52 of
53 God
54 came
55 unto
56 John
57 the
58 son
59 of
60 Zacharias
61 in
62 the
63 wilderness.
64 And
65 he
66 came
67 into
68 all
69 the
70 country
71 about
72 Jordan,
73 preaching
74 the
75 baptism
76 of
77 repentance
78 for
79 the
80 remission
81 of
82 sins;
83 As
84 it
85 is
86 written
87 in
88 the
89 book
90 of
91 the
92 words
93 of
94 Esaias
95 the
96 prophet,
97 saying,
98 The
99 voice
100 of
101 one
102 crying
103 in
104 the
105 wilderness,
106 Prepare
107 ye
108 the
109 way
110 of
111 the
112 Lord,
113 make
114 his
115 paths
116 straight.
117 Every
118 valley
119 shall
120 be
121 filled,
122 and
123 every
124 mountain
125 and
126 hill
127 shall
128 be
129 brought
130 low;
131 and
132 the
133 crooked
134 shall
135 be
136 made
137 straight,
138 and
139 the
140 rough
141 ways
142 shall
143 be
144 made
145 smooth;
146 And
147 all
148 flesh
149 shall
150 see
151 the
152 salvation
153 of
154 God.
155 7 Then
156 said
157 he
158 to
159 the
160 multitude
161 that
162 came
163 forth
164 to
165 be
166 baptized
167 of
168 him,
169 O
170 generation
171 of
172 vipers,
173 who
174 hath
175 warned
176 you
177 to
178 flee
179 from
180 the
181 wrath
182 to
183 come?
184 Bring
185 forth
186 therefore
187 fruits
188 worthy
189 of
190 repentance,
191 and
192 begin
193 not
194 to
195 say
196 within
197 yourselves,
198 We
199 have
200 Abraham
201 to
202 our
203 father:
204 for
205 I
206 say
207 unto
208 you,
209 That
210 God
211 is
212 able
213 of
214 these
215 stones
216 to
217 raise
218 up
219 children
220 unto
221 Abraham.
222 And
223 now
224 also
225 the
226 axe
227 is
228 laid
229 unto
230 the
231 root
232 of
233 the
234 trees:
235 every
236 tree
237 therefore
238 which
239 bringeth
240 not
241 forth
242 good
243 fruit
244 is
245 hewn
246 down,
247 and
248 cast
249 into
250 the
251 fire.
252 10 And
253 the
254 people
255 asked
256 him,
257 saying,
258 What
259 shall
260 we
261 do
262 then?
263 He
264 answereth
265 and
266 saith
267 unto
268 them,
269 He
270 that
271 hath
272 two
273 coats,
274 let
275 him
276 impart
277 to
278 him
279 that
280 hath
281 none;
282 and
283 he
284 that
285 hath
286 meat,
287 let
288 him
289 do
290 likewise.
291 Then
292 came
293 also
294 publicans
295 to
296 be
297 baptized,
298 and
299 said
300 unto
301 him,
302 Master,
303 what
304 shall
305 we
306 do?
307 And
308 he
309 said
310 unto
311 them,
312 Exact
313 no
314 more
315 than
316 that
317 which
318 is
319 appointed
320 you.
321 And
322 the
323 soldiers
324 likewise
325 demanded
326 of
327 him,
328 saying,
329 And
330 what
331 shall
332 we
333 do?
334 And
335 he
336 said
337 unto
338 them,
339 Do
340 violence
341 to
342 no
343 man,
344 neither
345 accuse
346 any
347 falsely;
348 and
349 be
350 content
351 with
352 your
353 wages.
354 15 And
355 as
356 the
357 people
358 were
359 in
360 expectation,
361 and
362 all
363 men
364 mused
365 in
366 their
367 hearts
368 of
369 John,
370 whether
371 he
372 were
373 the
374 Christ,
375 or
376 not;
377 John
378 answered,
379 saying
380 unto
381 them
382 all,
383 I
384 indeed
385 baptize
386 you
387 with
388 water;
389 but
390 one
391 mightier
392 than
393 I
394 cometh,
395 the
396 latchet
397 of
398 whose
399 shoes
400 I
401 am
402 not
403 worthy
404 to
405 unloose:
406 he
407 shall
408 baptize
409 you
410 with
411 the
412 Holy
413 Ghost
414 and
415 with
416 fire:
417 Whose
418 fan
419 is
420 in
421 his
422 hand,
423 and
424 he
425 will
426 throughly
427 purge
428 his
429 floor,
430 and
431 will
432 gather
433 the
434 wheat
435 into
436 his
437 garner;
438 but
439 the
440 chaff
441 he
442 will
443 burn
444 with
445 fire
446 unquenchable.
447 18 And
448 many
449 other
450 things
451 in
452 his
453 exhortation
454 preached
455 he
456 unto
457 the
458 people.
459 But
460 Herod
461 the
462 tetrarch,
463 being
464 reproved
465 by
466 him
467 for
468 Herodias
469 his
470 brother
471 Philip's
472 wife,
473 and
474 for
475 all
476 the
477 evils
478 which
479 Herod
480 had
481 done,
482 Added
483 yet
484 this
485 above
486 all,
487 that
488 he
489 shut
490 up
491 John
492 in
493 prison.
494 21 Now
495 when
496 all
497 the
498 people
499 were
500 baptized,
501 it
502 came
503 to
504 pass,
505 that
506 Jesus
507 also
508 being
509 baptized,
510 and
511 praying,
512 the
513 heaven
514 was
515 opened,
516 And
517 the
518 Holy
519 Ghost
520 descended
521 in
522 a
523 bodily
524 shape
525 like
526 a
527 dove
528 upon
529 him,
530 and
531 a
532 voice
533 came
534 from
535 heaven,
536 which
537 said,
538 Thou
539 art
540 my
541 beloved
542 Son;
543 in
544 thee
545 I
546 am
547 well
548 pleased.
549 23 And
550 Jesus
551 himself
552 began
553 to
554 be
555 about
556 thirty
557 years
558 of
559 age,
560 being
561 (as
562 was
563 supposed)
564 the
565 son
566 of
567 Joseph,
568 which
569 was
570 the
571 son
572 of
573 Heli,
574 Which
575 was
576 the
577 son
578 of
579 Matthat,
580 which
581 was
582 the
583 son
584 of
585 Levi,
586 which
587 was
588 the
589 son
590 of
591 Melchi,
592 which
593 was
594 the
595 son
596 of
597 Janna,
598 which
599 was
600 the
601 son
602 of
603 Joseph,
604 Which
605 was
606 the
607 son
608 of
609 Mattathias,
610 which
611 was
612 the
613 son
614 of
615 Amos,
616 which
617 was
618 the
619 son
620 of
621 Naum,
622 which
623 was
624 the
625 son
626 of
627 Esli,
628 which
629 was
630 the
631 son
632 of
633 Nagge,
634 Which
635 was
636 the
637 son
638 of
639 Maath,
640 which
641 was
642 the
643 son
644 of
645 Mattathias,
646 which
647 was
648 the
649 son
650 of
651 Semei,
652 which
653 was
654 the
655 son
656 of
657 Joseph,
658 which
659 was
660 the
661 son
662 of
663 Juda,
664 Which
665 was
666 the
667 son
668 of
669 Joanna,
670 which
671 was
672 the
673 son
674 of
675 Rhesa,
676 which
677 was
678 the
679 son
680 of
681 Zorobabel,
682 which
683 was
684 the
685 son
686 of
687 Salathiel,
688 which
689 was
690 the
691 son
692 of
693 Neri,
694 Which
695 was
696 the
697 son
698 of
699 Melchi,
700 which
701 was
702 the
703 son
704 of
705 Addi,
706 which
707 was
708 the
709 son
710 of
711 Cosam,
712 which
713 was
714 the
715 son
716 of
717 Elmodam,
718 which
719 was
720 the
721 son
722 of
723 Er,
724 Which
725 was
726 the
727 son
728 of
729 Jose,
730 which
731 was
732 the
733 son
734 of
735 Eliezer,
736 which
737 was
738 the
739 son
740 of
741 Jorim,
742 which
743 was
744 the
745 son
746 of
747 Matthat,
748 which
749 was
750 the
751 son
752 of
753 Levi,
754 Which
755 was
756 the
757 son
758 of
759 Simeon,
760 which
761 was
762 the
763 son
764 of
765 Juda,
766 which
767 was
768 the
769 son
770 of
771 Joseph,
772 which
773 was
774 the
775 son
776 of
777 Jonan,
778 which
779 was
780 the
781 son
782 of
783 Eliakim,
784 Which
785 was
786 the
787 son
788 of
789 Melea,
790 which
791 was
792 the
793 son
794 of
795 Menan,
796 which
797 was
798 the
799 son
800 of
801 Mattatha,
802 which
803 was
804 the
805 son
806 of
807 Nathan,
808 which
809 was
810 the
811 son
812 of
813 David,
814 Which
815 was
816 the
817 son
818 of
819 Jesse,
820 which
821 was
822 the
823 son
824 of
825 Obed,
826 which
827 was
828 the
829 son
830 of
831 Booz,
832 which
833 was
834 the
835 son
836 of
837 Salmon,
838 which
839 was
840 the
841 son
842 of
843 Naasson,
844 Which
845 was
846 the
847 son
848 of
849 Aminadab,
850 which
851 was
852 the
853 son
854 of
855 Aram,
856 which
857 was
858 the
859 son
860 of
861 Esrom,
862 which
863 was
864 the
865 son
866 of
867 Phares,
868 which
869 was
870 the
871 son
872 of
873 Juda,
874 Which
875 was
876 the
877 son
878 of
879 Jacob,
880 which
881 was
882 the
883 son
884 of
885 Isaac,
886 which
887 was
888 the
889 son
890 of
891 Abraham,
892 which
893 was
894 the
895 son
896 of
897 Thara,
898 which
899 was
900 the
901 son
902 of
903 Nachor,
904 Which
905 was
906 the
907 son
908 of
909 Saruch,
910 which
911 was
912 the
913 son
914 of
915 Ragau,
916 which
917 was
918 the
919 son
920 of
921 Phalec,
922 which
923 was
924 the
925 son
926 of
927 Heber,
928 which
929 was
930 the
931 son
932 of
933 Sala,
934 Which
935 was
936 the
937 son
938 of
939 Cainan,
940 which
941 was
942 the
943 son
944 of
945 Arphaxad,
946 which
947 was
948 the
949 son
950 of
951 Sem,
952 which
953 was
954 the
955 son
956 of
957 Noe,
958 which
959 was
960 the
961 son
962 of
963 Lamech,
964 Which
965 was
966 the
967 son
968 of
969 Mathusala


Man I wish I knew how to do the computer stuff I've seen you do! Thank you for the open-mindedness... and thank you for verifing the "Satan" chapter/gematria count of 359. You have to toss in a minuscule of "more coincidence" that this is chapter is also the turning point for "adversary" to "Satan", right...just a little bit?

JACOB(182) + ADVERSARY(359) = ISRAEL(541) Genesis chp. 32 ...first appearance of "ISRAEL" after JACOB wrestled all night with a "man" (or something)...definitely something adversarial...have you ever tried to wrestle with someone all night long...now that's an adversary! :winking0071:

(I just had to slip that one in...just for fun.)

"The open-minded see the Truth in different things: the closed-minded see only the differences."
~ Anonymous

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Man I wish I knew how to do the computer stuff I've seen you do! Thank you for the open-mindedness... and thank you for verifing the "Satan" chapter/gematria count of 359. You have to toss in a minuscule of "more coincidence" that this is chapter is also the turning point for "adversary" to "Satan", right...just a little bit?

JACOB(182) + ADVERSARY(359) = ISRAEL(541) Genesis chp. 32 ...first appearance of "ISRAEL" after JACOB wrestled all night with a "man" (or something)...definitely something adversarial...have you ever tried to wrestle with someone all night long...now that's an adversary! :winking0071:

(I just had to slip that one in...just for fun.)

"The open-minded see the Truth in different things: the closed-minded see only the differences."
~ Anonymous
Good morning RC, :yo:

When I was in the midst of the indepth study that led to the Bible Wheel and this site, I would record every connection I could find in the Bible. I was always on the lookout for correlations between the sequences of book, chapters, and verses and the content they contained. Some of the correlations are very obvious and seem very significant, like the correlation between the 66 chapters of Isaiah and the 66 books of the Bible which I've documented in the section called the Isaiah-Bible Correlation. (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/Isaiah/Isaiah_LinkIndex.asp) There are some truly astounding correlations that look like mathematical projections from a 3D Bible onto a 2D "plane" of Isaiah. For example:

Isaiah Chapter 45, Verse 9
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let
the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him
that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

Bible Book 45, Chapter 9
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against
God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou
made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make
one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Taking the book, chapter, and verse numbers as the coordinates for points in 3D space, we can project from the verse in "3D Bible space" onto the "2D Isaiah space" where I write Romans 9:20 = PBible(45, 9 , 20) and Isaiah 45:9 = PIsaiah(45,9):

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Isa459_Romans9.gif

I found about a dozen "first order projective links" like this. And some are KeyLinks whcih means that they involve words and phrases that occur nowhere else in the Bible, so they are both unique and mathematically related as an object to the shadow it casts. For example, the phrase "that ye may know and believe" occurs in two and only two verses of the KJV:


Isaiah Chapter 43, Verse 10

Bible Book 43, Chapter 10



Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.




Patterns like this convinced me that a supernatural agent - the God of Christian theism - deliberately designed these features into the text. I felt that there was no other possible expanation, especially since the links themselves seemed designed to convince a person to "know and believe" the Bible, and to not argue with the Creator.

And so I have a very open mind to patterns like those you present. But I also am very skeptical of things that look like "mere coincidence." As I hope you will note, I tend to look for sytematic patterns that clearly are not the result of chance. The kinds of patterns that you are showing don't strike me that way. I have not found any systematic correlations between word values and first occurrences like Satan (359) first appearing in Bible chapter 359. What I see looks like a collection of confetti. One kind of coincidence here, a different kind there. This is not convincing at all to a person who knows and understands the meaning of "cherry picking."

Let me explain the problem. There is an effectively unlimited number of possible correlations to look for. Take as an example the list of words and numbers we have from Luke 3:1. There is only one "hit" out of 969 numbers and names in that list. Given the signficance of repdigits like 111, 666, 888 in Bible numerics, one would think there should be some links based on those numbers. But when we look, this is what we see:

111 the
222 And
333 do
444 with
555 about
666 the
777 Jonah
888 the

Well, that looks pretty random. And when I look for any other correlations, I don't see any. So this whole list of 969 words paired with numbers looks like a random list with one coincidence. Should we be impressed with that?

This exemplifies the fundamental problem with an unprincipled approach to "patterns in the Bible." An unprincipled approach easily leads to the illusion that there are significant deliberately designed patterns when there are really only random coincidences. How many such coincidences should we expext to find in any book? If you can't answer that question, then you will have no basis in fact for your intution of the significance of the patterns you have found.

It's like the Shakespeare thing. When first presented it seems like "Wow - that must have been deliberately designed." But then we think about it we recall that the pieces were alreadly almost in place before Shakespeare was born, so if it was designed it must have been designed by a superatural agent who knew the future, or the folks who did design it in 1610 were very lucky to find the pieces almost in place so they could adjust them to fit their patther. But that returns us to "mere coincidence" as the antecedent cause.

This brings me to the mystery that currently holds my attention. The pattern of the Bible Wheel is unlike anything ever seen in any of these "Bible patterns" that folks have been fascinated with for so many years. It really does stand up under close scrutiny as a pattern that demands explanation. But I have none! It is simply impossible to attribute it to the deliberate design of any human or group of humans, and netiher do I believe in the God of traditional Christian theism. So I am confronted with a mystery.

I would be most grateful if anyone has any insight to offer as to what this could all mean.

[RC Christian]

Good morning RC, :yo:

When I was in the midst of the indepth study that led to the Bible Wheel and this site, I would record every connection I could find in the Bible. I was always on the lookout for correlations between the sequences of book, chapters, and verses and the content they contained. Some of the correlations are very obvious and seem very significant, like the correlation between the 66 chapters of Isaiah and the 66 books of the Bible which I've documented in the section called the Isaiah-Bible Correlation. (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/Isaiah/Isaiah_LinkIndex.asp) There are some truly astounding correlations that look like mathematical projections from a 3D Bible onto a 2D "plane" of Isaiah. For example:

Isaiah Chapter 45, Verse 9
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let
the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him
that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

Bible Book 45, Chapter 9
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against
God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou
made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make
one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Taking the book, chapter, and verse numbers as the coordinates for points in 3D space, we can project from the verse in "3D Bible space" onto the "2D Isaiah space" where I write Romans 9:20 = PBible(45, 9 , 20) and Isaiah 45:9 = PIsaiah(45,9):

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Isa459_Romans9.gif

I found about a dozen "first order projective links" like this. And some are KeyLinks whcih means that they involve words and phrases that occur nowhere else in the Bible, so they are both unique and mathematically related as an object to the shadow it casts. For example, the phrase "that ye may know and believe" occurs in two and only two verses of the KJV:


Isaiah Chapter 43, Verse 10

Bible Book 43, Chapter 10



Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.




Patterns like this convinced me that a supernatural agent - the God of Christian theism - deliberately designed these features into the text. I felt that there was no other possible expanation, especially since the links themselves seemed designed to convince a person to "know and believe" the Bible, and to not argue with the Creator.

And so I have a very open mind to patterns like those you present. But I also am very skeptical of things that look like "mere coincidence." As I hope you will note, I tend to look for sytematic patterns that clearly are not the result of chance. The kinds of patterns that you are showing don't strike me that way. I have not found any systematic correlations between word values and first occurrences like Satan (359) first appearing in Bible chapter 359. What I see looks like a collection of confetti. One kind of coincidence here, a different kind there. This is not convincing at all to a person who knows and understands the meaning of "cherry picking."

Let me explain the problem. There is an effectively unlimited number of possible correlations to look for. Take as an example the list of words and numbers we have from Luke 3:1. There is only one "hit" out of 969 numbers and names in that list. Given the signficance of repdigits like 111, 666, 888 in Bible numerics, one would think there should be some links based on those numbers. But when we look, this is what we see:

111 the
222 And
333 do
444 with
555 about
666 the
777 Jonah
888 the

Well, that looks pretty random. And when I look for any other correlations, I don't see any. So this whole list of 969 words paired with numbers looks like a random list with one coincidence. Should we be impressed with that?

This exemplifies the fundamental problem with an unprincipled approach to "patterns in the Bible." An unprincipled approach easily leads to the illusion that there are significant deliberately designed patterns when there are really only random coincidences. How many such coincidences should we expext to find in any book? If you can't answer that question, then you will have no basis in fact for your intution of the significance of the patterns you have found.

It's like the Shakespeare thing. When first presented it seems like "Wow - that must have been deliberately designed." But then we think about it we recall that the pieces were alreadly almost in place before Shakespeare was born, so if it was designed it must have been designed by a superatural agent who knew the future, or the folks who did design it in 1610 were very lucky to find the pieces almost in place so they could adjust them to fit their patther. But that returns us to "mere coincidence" as the antecedent cause.

This brings me to the mystery that currently holds my attention. The pattern of the Bible Wheel is unlike anything ever seen in any of these "Bible patterns" that folks have been fascinated with for so many years. It really does stand up under close scrutiny as a pattern that demands explanation. But I have none! It is simply impossible to attribute it to the deliberate design of any human or group of humans, and netiher do I believe in the God of traditional Christian theism. So I am confronted with a mystery.

I would be most grateful if anyone has any insight to offer as to what this could all mean.


Richard,

What are your current feelings about the various mathematical relationships involving Genesis 1:1? I know you had put a lot of info in the past on the Biblewheel site about it. I am especially interested in your take on the tie in with the ordinal and standard values of the Hebrew word for "Wisdom".

Just as a side note, I found this statement by Israeli physicist Gerald Schroeder interesting,

"The opening word, usually translated as ‘in the beginning,’ is Be’reasheet. Be’reasheet can mean ‘in the beginning of,’ but not ‘in the beginning.’ The difficulty with the preposition ‘of’ is that its object is absent from the sentence; thus the King James translation merely drops it. But the 2100-year-old Jerusalem translation of Genesis into Aramaic takes a different approach, realizing that Be’reasheet is a compound word: the prefix Be’, ‘with,’ and reasheet, a ‘first wisdom.’ The Aramaic translation is thus ‘With wisdom God created the heavens and the earth.’ …Wisdom is the fundamental building block of the universe …In the processes of life it finds its most complex revelation. Wisdom, information, an idea, is the link between the metaphysical Creator and the physical creation. It is the hidden face of God." Gerald Schroeder, 2002, The Hidden Face of God, Free Press, p. 49.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

What are your current feelings about the various mathematical relationships involving Genesis 1:1? I know you had put a lot of info in the past on the Biblewheel site about it. I am especially interested in your take on the tie in with the ordinal and standard values of the Hebrew word for "Wisdom".

Just as a side note, I found this statement by Israeli physicist Gerald Schroeder interesting,

"The opening word, usually translated as ‘in the beginning,’ is Be’reasheet. Be’reasheet can mean ‘in the beginning of,’ but not ‘in the beginning.’ The difficulty with the preposition ‘of’ is that its object is absent from the sentence; thus the King James translation merely drops it. But the 2100-year-old Jerusalem translation of Genesis into Aramaic takes a different approach, realizing that Be’reasheet is a compound word: the prefix Be’, ‘with,’ and reasheet, a ‘first wisdom.’ The Aramaic translation is thus ‘With wisdom God created the heavens and the earth.’ …Wisdom is the fundamental building block of the universe …In the processes of life it finds its most complex revelation. Wisdom, information, an idea, is the link between the metaphysical Creator and the physical creation. It is the hidden face of God." Gerald Schroeder, 2002, The Hidden Face of God, Free Press, p. 49.
Hey there RC, :tea:

I have not seen anything that would cause me to think there are any errors in my alphanumeric analysis of Genesis 1:1. It looks just as amazing as always. It presents a mystery like the Bible Wheel. It is difficult to imagine how such things could have arisen without the deliberate action of an agent. So though I don't believe in the God of traditional Christian theism who goes about "doing things" like any other bit player in the cosmic drama, I'm beginning to think that there are agents that transcend our human limitations. They would be like "angels" perhaps or "aliens" in popular imagination. I don't know, and I am loathe to create any metaphysical entities unless absolutely compelled by the evidence. So I'll let this simmer some more ...

Re: Ordinal and Standar values of Wisdom: That is pretty cool. I talk about it on my page for the Number 73 (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/gr_73.asp) and on my page introducing the Creation Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation.asp). The stucutre of Genesis 1:1 is based on a two hex/star pairs. These are paired numbers made up a Hexagram that fits inside a Star of David. Here are the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th pairs:

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/HexStarPairs.gif
These numbers relate to both the sum and the inner structure of Genesis 1:1:

Sum of Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 37 x 73 = Hex(4) x Star(4)

And the verse divides as follows:

In the beginning God created the heavens = 1998 = 3 x 666 = 3 x Tri(36)
and the earth = 703 = 19 x 37

Thus we can write:

Gen 1:1 = 2701 = Hex(4) x Star(4) = Hex(3) x Star(3) + 3 x Tri(36)

Where Tri(n) = nth triangular number. This structure is utterly astounding. Unfortunately, few people with the brain-power to understand it are willing to even look at it because it contradicts their worldview. It's lonely world sometimes.

Finally, the Aramaic paraphrase of Genesis 1:1 is totally justified, but it should never be passed off as a "translation" since the word "wisdom" does not appear in the text. But the connection is quite plain and abvious.

Great chatting!

Richard

[RC Christian]

Hey there RC, :tea:

I have not seen anything that would cause me to think there are any errors in my alphanumeric analysis of Genesis 1:1. It looks just as amazing as always. It presents a mystery like the Bible Wheel. It is difficult to imagine how such things could have arisen without the deliberate action of an agent. So though I don't believe in the God of traditional Christian theism who goes about "doing things" like any other bit player in the cosmic drama, I'm beginning to think that there are agents that transcend our human limitations. They would be like "angels" perhaps or "aliens" in popular imagination. I don't know, and I am loathe to create any metaphysical entities unless absolutely compelled by the evidence. So I'll let this simmer some more ...

Re: Ordinal and Standar values of Wisdom: That is pretty cool. I talk about it on my page for the Number 73 (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/gr_73.asp) and on my page introducing the Creation Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation.asp). The stucutre of Genesis 1:1 is based on a two hex/star pairs. These are paired numbers made up a Hexagram that fits inside a Star of David. Here are the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th pairs:

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/HexStarPairs.gif
These numbers relate to both the sum and the inner structure of Genesis 1:1:

Sum of Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 37 x 73 = Hex(4) x Star(4)

And the verse divides as follows:

In the beginning God created the heavens = 1998 = 3 x 666 = 3 x Tri(36)
and the earth = 703 = 19 x 37

Thus we can write:

Gen 1:1 = 2701 = Hex(4) x Star(4) = Hex(3) x Star(3) + 3 x Tri(36)

Where Tri(n) = nth triangular number. This structure is utterly astounding. Unfortunately, few people with the brain-power to understand it are willing to even look at it because it contradicts their worldview. It's lonely world sometimes.

Finally, the Aramaic paraphrase of Genesis 1:1 is totally justified, but it should never be passed off as a "translation" since the word "wisdom" does not appear in the text. But the connection is quite plain and abvious.

Great chatting!

Richard

I think the significance of the ordinal and standard value of "wisdom" (37 and 73) is an important point also.


I feel ya' on the "Unfortunately, few people with the brain-power to understand it are willing to even look at it because it contradicts their worldview. It's lonely world sometimes." :p I made an email request to the 55 signatories of the "Mathematicians' Statement on the Bible Codes", initiated by Barry Simon in response to Drosnin's book (which I personally think is mostly bunk). My request was for them to look at the 1820 Code and a couple of other items, one of which was the mathematical relationships of Genesis 1:1, on a cursory basis, to determine if they felt the different points were most likely randomness or non-randomness. I received a number of replies, but all of them saying the same thing, basically: "without take the time to really scrutinize it, I feel it would all most likely be pure randomness" ...damn!

On of the professors from the list, a Wofford College Ph.D mathematician found one little jewel that he took the time to look at, and it was one of the points that I really didn't find all that interesting:

37 x 73 = 2701 --> 2701 + 1072 (reflective anagram) = 3773, the combined prime factors. My challenge on this was for him to attempt to find another number that had this distinctive characteristic. He was "intrigued", and stated that he tried, but couldn't. But beyond that, he said, "this is basically numerology and I'm not interested, but if it somehow helps to strength you're faith, I see merit in it there." Strength my faith???? Numerology??? The patterns are either there or not their not, and if they are there, wouldn't this be a kind of important finding for the world to know about? I'm mean, if hardly anyone had ever heard of this book, called the Holy Bible, yeah, so what, but...

I plan on posting some of the info I've compiled on prime number usage in the Bible tonight or over the weekend, and it ties back to Genesis 1. I think you'll find it interesting. It's what I base my conclusion that "2" and not "1" was considered the first prime number by the ancients, at least the ancient ones who wrote the original Biblical text...OT and NT.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I think the significance of the ordinal and standard value of "wisdom" (37 and 73) is an important point also.

I feel ya' on the "Unfortunately, few people with the brain-power to understand it are willing to even look at it because it contradicts their worldview. It's lonely world sometimes." :p I made an email request to the 55 signatories of the "Mathematicians' Statement on the Bible Codes", initiated by Barry Simon in response to Drosnin's book (which I personally think is mostly bunk). My request was for them to look at the 1820 Code and a couple of other items, one of which was the mathematical relationships of Genesis 1:1, on a cursory basis, to determine if they felt the different points were most likely randomness or non-randomness. I received a number of replies, but all of them saying the same thing, basically: "without take the time to really scrutinize it, I feel it would all most likely be pure randomness" ...damn!

Why do you say "damn?" How would you expect them to react? It is largely pure randomness! And trained mathematicians know this and can see it clearly. You and I agree with them concerning the ELS "Bible Codes" and to speak frankly, the kind of connections you have shown me (Satan 359, Moses' birth date 2368, Methusala 969) seem to be the same sort of collection "cherry picked" from an overwhelming mountain of pure randomness. They seem so significant only because you have lost site of the size of the sample set. For example, I presented a list of 969 number/word pairs from Luke 3 with only one significant hit. What about the other 965 pairs that showed no design? That's only about one in a thousand! And the sample set is really much larger. Why start from the beginning of chapter 3? Why not the beginning of the genealogy? Or the beginning of the book? Or the beginning of the NT? Or the beginning of the whole Bible? Or why not count backwards, like you did with the 666? Or ... or ... or ...! You see, the "sample set" of all possibilities is incomprehensibly HUGE and mathematicians know this full well. That is why they are fully justified to reject the kind of results that you have been sharing with us here. They simply are not, and indeed cannot be, convincing in the way that you present them because you are simply showing a few hits from a sample set of quadrillions of possibilities. And worse, when a skeptic reluctantly takes his time to look and immediately finds obvious evidence of chance, such as the near approximation of "shake-spear" in Psalm 46 of the Geneva Bible, then irritation at wasted time is added to their skepticism and they become very hardened in their position.

This is why it was so hard for me to get a hearing. The world is filled with claims about "amazing discoveries" in the Bible that simply do not hold up under scrutiny, so why should they waste their time refuting yet another analysis that looks superficially just like all the others? And so my world became very lonely indeed. Especially since most of the folks who loved my work could not distinguish it from a meaningless distribution of random numbers if their life depended on it.

But don't get me wrong. Though I remain very skeptical of the results you have shared, I am willing to look since I have reason to believe "something" is going on the design of the Bible. And I also know that there might be patterns that you are seeing only "in part" and so have not found how to present them in a convincing way as yet. So please forgive me if I'm coming across as too much of a "hard head" but hey, what have we got to lose but some false ideas? So let skepticism reign! That way, when you find gold you will know it is real. :winking0071:



On of the professors from the list, a Wofford College Ph.D mathematician found one little jewel that he took the time to look at, and it was one of the points that I really didn't find all that interesting:

37 x 73 = 2701 --> 2701 + 1072 (reflective anagram) = 3773, the combined prime factors. My challenge on this was for him to attempt to find another number that had this distinctive characteristic. He was "intrigued", and stated that he tried, but couldn't. But beyond that, he said, "this is basically numerology and I'm not interested, but if it somehow helps to strength you're faith, I see merit in it there." Strength my faith???? Numerology??? The patterns are either there or not their not, and if they are there, wouldn't this be a kind of important finding for the world to know about? I'm mean, if hardly anyone had ever heard of this book, called the Holy Bible, yeah, so what, but...


Thanks for the interesting challenge. You want me to find eight digits (A,B,C,D,W,X,Y,Z) such that

AB x CD = WXYZ and WXYZ + ZYXW = ABCD

I'll check it out and get back to you.

But let me tell you this - I am convinced that the Holographic Generating Set (27, 37, 73, 137) is a amazing set of numbers with properties that uniquely relate to the united alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5.

Now isn't it rather obvious why folks think these patterns were designed by God to strengthen faith? I mean, that is there central claim - You must believe the Bible is God's Word.

But I agree, even if the patterns are real they don't tell us anything about how we are supposed interpret the Bible! Catholic? Protestant? JW? Mormon? Mystic? Hitch-Hiker's Guide to Salvation? Whatever.



I plan on posting some of the info I've compiled on prime number usage in the Bible tonight or over the weekend, and it ties back to Genesis 1. I think you'll find it interesting. It's what I base my conclusion that "2" and not "1" was considered the first prime number by the ancients, at least the ancient ones who wrote the original Biblical text...OT and NT.

Why are you always talking about what the "ancients" believed? If these patterns are real, they were not put their by Bronze age goat-herders.

[Facterd]

I found the (real or apparent) coincidence concerning 'Mathusala' as word number 969 interesting, but I can’t get it to fit with the editions of the 1611 King James Bible found here:

http://alturl.com/gnawv

Or here:

http://alturl.com/s574m

'Mathusala' comes out as word number 970 in both, and not 969. The reason is that both versions have the word 'and' between word number 500 and word number 501 (found in verse 21).

494 Now
495 when
496 all
497 the
498 people
499 were
500 baptized,

and

501 it
502 came
503 to
504 pass,

On this page - http://www.studylight.org/ - there are 3 versions of KJV, called 'King James Version', 'King James Version with Strong’s numbers' and 'King James Version (1611)'. The two first do not have 'and' in verse 20, while 'King James Version (1611)' does. I have also noticed that the KJV at 'Full Text Hebrew/Greek Bible Gematria Database' on this site does not have 'and' in verse 20.

Question: Are you using a later edition than 1611, or are there 1611-editions with 'Mathusala' as word number 969?

Facterd

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I found the (real or apparent) coincidence concerning 'Mathusala' as word number 969 interesting, but I can’t get it to fit with the editions of the 1611 King James Bible found here:

http://alturl.com/gnawv

Or here:

http://alturl.com/s574m

'Mathusala' comes out as word number 970 in both, and not 969. The reason is that both versions have the word 'and' between word number 500 and word number 501 (found in verse 21).

494 Now
495 when
496 all
497 the
498 people
499 were
500 baptized,

and

501 it
502 came
503 to
504 pass,

On this page - http://www.studylight.org/ - there are 3 versions of KJV, called 'King James Version', 'King James Version with Strong’s numbers' and 'King James Version (1611)'. The two first do not have 'and' in verse 20, while 'King James Version (1611)' does. I have also noticed that the KJV at 'Full Text Hebrew/Greek Bible Gematria Database' on this site does not have 'and' in verse 20.

Question: Are you using a later edition than 1611, or are there 1611-editions with 'Mathusala' as word number 969?

Facterd
Hey there Facterd, :yo:

Welcome to our forum!

:welcome:

Thanks for checking that out. I had forgotten to check those variations. This supports my intuition that the appearance of Malthusala at that position is a mere coincidence.

Your kind of careful research is very much appreciate around here!

Richard

[RC Christian]

Why do you say "damn?" How would you expect them to react? It is largely pure randomness! And trained mathematicians know this and can see it clearly. You and I agree with them concerning the ELS "Bible Codes" and to speak frankly, the kind of connections you have shown me (Satan 359, Moses' birth date 2368, Methusala 969) seem to be the same sort of collection "cherry picked" from an overwhelming mountain of pure randomness. They seem so significant only because you have lost site of the size of the sample set. For example, I presented a list of 969 number/word pairs from Luke 3 with only one significant hit. What about the other 965 pairs that showed no design? That's only about one in a thousand! And the sample set is really much larger. Why start from the beginning of chapter 3? Why not the beginning of the genealogy? Or the beginning of the book? Or the beginning of the NT? Or the beginning of the whole Bible? Or why not count backwards, like you did with the 666? Or ... or ... or ...! You see, the "sample set" of all possibilities is incomprehensibly HUGE and mathematicians know this full well. That is why they are fully justified to reject the kind of results that you have been sharing with us here. They simply are not, and indeed cannot be, convincing in the way that you present them because you are simply showing a few hits from a sample set of quadrillions of possibilities. And worse, when a skeptic reluctantly takes his time to look and immediately finds obvious evidence of chance, such as the near approximation of "shake-spear" in Psalm 46 of the Geneva Bible, then irritation at wasted time is added to their skepticism and they become very hardened in their position.

This is why it was so hard for me to get a hearing. The world is filled with claims about "amazing discoveries" in the Bible that simply do not hold up under scrutiny, so why should they waste their time refuting yet another analysis that looks superficially just like all the others? And so my world became very lonely indeed. Especially since most of the folks who loved my work could not distinguish it from a meaningless distribution of random numbers if their life depended on it.

But don't get me wrong. Though I remain very skeptical of the results you have shared, I am willing to look since I have reason to believe "something" is going on the design of the Bible. And I also know that there might be patterns that you are seeing only "in part" and so have not found how to present them in a convincing way as yet. So please forgive me if I'm coming across as too much of a "hard head" but hey, what have we got to lose but some false ideas? So let skepticism reign! That way, when you find gold you will know it is real. :winking0071:


Thanks for the interesting challenge. You want me to find eight digits (A,B,C,D,W,X,Y,Z) such that

AB x CD = WXYZ and WXYZ + ZYXW = ABCD

I'll check it out and get back to you.

But let me tell you this - I am convinced that the Holographic Generating Set (27, 37, 73, 137) is a amazing set of numbers with properties that uniquely relate to the united alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5.

Now isn't it rather obvious why folks think these patterns were designed by God to strengthen faith? I mean, that is there central claim - You must believe the Bible is God's Word.

But I agree, even if the patterns are real they don't tell us anything about how we are supposed interpret the Bible! Catholic? Protestant? JW? Mormon? Mystic? Hitch-Hiker's Guide to Salvation? Whatever.


Why are you always talking about what the "ancients" believed? If these patterns are real, they were not put their by Bronze age goat-herders.


In regards to the challenge, that would be good...but even more impressive, in keeping with the properties of Genesis 1:1, would be:


AB X BA = WXYZ and WXYZ + ZYXW = ABBA

...or ABC X CBA = UVWXYZ and UVWXYZ + ZYXWVU = ABCCBA (or any higher order computations...or with the first version, ABC X DEF, etc.)

[Richard Amiel McGough]

In regards to the challenge, that would be good...but even more impressive, in keeping with the properties of Genesis 1:1, would be:


AB X BA = WXYZ and WXYZ + ZYXW = ABBA

...or ABC X CBA = UVWXYZ and UVWXYZ + ZYXWVU = ABCCBA (or any higher order computations...or with the first version, ABC X DEF, etc.)
:doh: Doh! Thanks for that correction.

[RC Christian]

I found the (real or apparent) coincidence concerning 'Mathusala' as word number 969 interesting, but I can’t get it to fit with the editions of the 1611 King James Bible found here:

http://alturl.com/gnawv

Or here:

http://alturl.com/s574m

'Mathusala' comes out as word number 970 in both, and not 969. The reason is that both versions have the word 'and' between word number 500 and word number 501 (found in verse 21).

494 Now
495 when
496 all
497 the
498 people
499 were
500 baptized,

and

501 it
502 came
503 to
504 pass,

On this page - http://www.studylight.org/ - there are 3 versions of KJV, called 'King James Version', 'King James Version with Strong’s numbers' and 'King James Version (1611)'. The two first do not have 'and' in verse 20, while 'King James Version (1611)' does. I have also noticed that the KJV at 'Full Text Hebrew/Greek Bible Gematria Database' on this site does not have 'and' in verse 20.

Question: Are you using a later edition than 1611, or are there 1611-editions with 'Mathusala' as word number 969?

Facterd


I just checked the Original 1611 KJV facsimile I have...970! Man, sorry. When I originally checked it after seeing it posted somewhere on the net, I checked it in a "standard" King James Version by hand and then did the count a second time on 'Full Text Hebrew/Greek Bible Gematria Database', also. Sorry to have wasted your and Richard's time with it. I stand (actually, sit) corrected.

All counts that I did about the "shake-spear" posting was 'hand performed' from the facsimile version of the 1611 KJV. Thanks for pointing that out... :signthankspin:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I just checked the Original 1611 KJV facsimile I have...970! Man, sorry. When I originally checked it after seeing it posted somewhere on the net, I checked it in a "standard" King James Version by hand and then did the count a second time on 'Full Text Hebrew/Greek Bible Gematria Database', also. Sorry to have wasted your and Richard's time with it. I stand (actually, sit) corrected.

All counts that I did about the "shake-spear" posting was 'hand performed' from the facsimile version of the 1611 KJV. Thanks for pointing that out... :signthankspin:
Hey there RC,

No worries man. I don't feel like my time was wasted. On the contrary, I feel very good to have been able to help establish the truth of this matter! And I thank Facterd for his help. We all make mistakes. That's why we need each other.

But if I had spent a few hours counting all those words by hand, then yeah, maybe I'd be a little miffed! :lol:

[Facterd]

I just checked the Original 1611 KJV facsimile I have...970! Man, sorry. When I originally checked it after seeing it posted somewhere on the net, I checked it in a "standard" King James Version by hand and then did the count a second time on 'Full Text Hebrew/Greek Bible Gematria Database', also. Sorry to have wasted your and Richard's time with it. I stand (actually, sit) corrected.

All counts that I did about the "shake-spear" posting was 'hand performed' from the facsimile version of the 1611 KJV. Thanks for pointing that out... :signthankspin:

I don't feel like you have wasted my time either. In your first posting you linked to this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv7qJHE0TlU

I made that video, so I think you are correct in your claim that psalm 46 contains a puzzle. Richard has objected that the structure was already in place in the Geneva Bible long before the 1611 KJV. If the structure presented in the two videos were all we had, Richard would be right in claiming that we can’t know if the structure is a product of chance or design. But what we have here is not what Richard calls an "unprincipled approach". On the contrary, what I present in the videos is only the beginning of a structure displaying a highly principled approach.

The creator of the puzzle is Francis Bacon. And the point of the puzzle is to reveal his involvement in producing the literature published under the name 'William Shakespeare'. To solve the puzzle we need to know the principles Bacon used. Bacon presents applications of these principles in Shakespeare’s Sonnets. In the manuscripts found here: http://www.somemanuscripts.org/ I show that two of the sonnets contain an 'introductory course' in the principles Bacon is using in his puzzles (the 35 page 'short version' will give you an idea of this).

Using the Sun-square in a puzzle seems to me like the sort of thing Bacon could have done, but I have not found anything in psalm 46 confirming that idea (besides 666 x 2 and 111). If Bacon had used the Sun-square, psalm 46 would tell us so in a way that left no doubt that he actually did.

Facterd

[RC Christian]

I don't feel like you have wasted my time either. In your first posting you linked to this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv7qJHE0TlU

I made that video, so I think you are correct in your claim that psalm 46 contains a puzzle. Richard has objected that the structure was already in place in the Geneva Bible long before the 1611 KJV. If the structure presented in the two videos were all we had, Richard would be right in claiming that we can’t know if the structure is a product of chance or design. But what we have here is not what Richard calls an "unprincipled approach". On the contrary, what I present in the videos is only the beginning of a structure displaying a highly principled approach.

The creator of the puzzle is Francis Bacon. And the point of the puzzle is to reveal his involvement in producing the literature published under the name 'William Shakespeare'. To solve the puzzle we need to know the principles Bacon used. Bacon presents applications of these principles in Shakespeare’s Sonnets. In the manuscripts found here: http://www.somemanuscripts.org/ I show that two of the sonnets contain an 'introductory course' in the principles Bacon is using in his puzzles (the 35 page 'short version' will give you an idea of this).

Using the Sun-square in a puzzle seems to me like the sort of thing Bacon could have done, but I have not found anything in psalm 46 confirming that idea (besides 666 x 2 and 111). If Bacon had used the Sun-square, psalm 46 would tell us so in a way that left no doubt that he actually did.

Facterd


I'm about to read through the PDF file that you linked. Thanks for chiming in and thanks for the videos you created. We will talk more. :yo:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I don't feel like you have wasted my time either. In your first posting you linked to this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv7qJHE0TlU

I made that video, so I think you are correct in your claim that psalm 46 contains a puzzle. Richard has objected that the structure was already in place in the Geneva Bible long before the 1611 KJV. If the structure presented in the two videos were all we had, Richard would be right in claiming that we can’t know if the structure is a product of chance or design. But what we have here is not what Richard calls an "unprincipled approach". On the contrary, what I present in the videos is only the beginning of a structure displaying a highly principled approach.

The creator of the puzzle is Francis Bacon. And the point of the puzzle is to reveal his involvement in producing the literature published under the name 'William Shakespeare'. To solve the puzzle we need to know the principles Bacon used. Bacon presents applications of these principles in Shakespeare’s Sonnets. In the manuscripts found here: http://www.somemanuscripts.org/ I show that two of the sonnets contain an 'introductory course' in the principles Bacon is using in his puzzles (the 35 page 'short version' will give you an idea of this).

Using the Sun-square in a puzzle seems to me like the sort of thing Bacon could have done, but I have not found anything in psalm 46 confirming that idea (besides 666 x 2 and 111). If Bacon had used the Sun-square, psalm 46 would tell us so in a way that left no doubt that he actually did.

Facterd
Hey there Facterd, :yo:

I watched your two videos. And I produced a new table without the Selahs. I didn't know they had to be ignored to find the pattern. And I added a colum with the count going backwards. Counts "from the end" are marked with "fte." Here are my observations:

1) Concerning your choice to ignore the Selahs:
There are two issues. First, it is an arbitrary choice that doubles your chances of finding a pattern since you can look for patterns with or without the Selahs. This does not invalidate your observations, but it does strengthen the skeptics case that what you have found is due to chance rather than design.

Second, your choice to ignore the Selahs brings up an apparent contradiction. In you attempt to show that your choice was not "as arbitrary as it seems" you appealed to the Bishop's Bible which was supposed to be the model for the KJV and which did not have the Selahs. Why then did Francis Bacon insert them if he designed the Psalm to proclaim his identity as William Shakespere? Was he trying to further obscure an already complicated and obscure pattern? That doesn't sound like something he would do if his motives were to proclaim his secret identity as "William Shakespeare."

2) Concerning the four elements:
I can confirm that earth, water, and fire occure at positions 20, 37, and 37fte. But your argument attempting to link "will" (at position 20fte) to air looks arbitrary to me. Sure, air "rises" and that is the root meaning of "exalted" but it feels like you are just trying to force a pattern that is not there. So we now have two things you have done in your analysis that feel "arbitrary." And when working with patterns like this, that gives strong reasons to doubt the results are anything but chance.

3) Concerning the Geneva Bible:
You will need to answer this in more detail. The pattern was already almost in place before Shakespeare (or Bacon) were born. How do you explain this? Mere coincidence? If mere coincidence could almost produce the pattern then why not believe that mere coincidence could produce it entirely? Especially given that you have to make an "adjustment" by ignoring the Selahs?

I'll take a look at your pdf file and comment more.

All the best,

Richard



201

1

GOD



200

2

is



199

3

our



198

4

refuge



197

5

and



196

6

strength,



195

7

a



194

8

very



193

9

present



192

10

help



191

11

in



190

12

trouble.



189

13

Therefore



188

14

will



187

15

not



186

16

we



185

17

fear,



184

18

though



183

19

the



182

20

earth



181

21

be



180

22

removed,



179

23

and



178

24

though



177

25

the



176

26

mountains



175

27

be



174

28

carried



173

29

into



172

30

the



171

31

midst



170

32

of



169

33

the



168

34

sea;



167

35

Though



166

36

the



165

37

waters



164

38

thereof



163

39

roar



162

40

and



161

41

be



160

42

troubled,



159

43

though



158

44

the



157

45

mountains



156

46

shake



155

47

with



154

48

the



153

49

swelling



152

50

thereof.



151

51

There



150

52

is



149

53

a



148

54

river,



147

55

the



146

56

streams



145

57

whereof



144

58

shall



143

59

make



142

60

glad



141

61

the



140

62

city



139

63

of



138

64

God,



137

65

the



136

66

holy



135

67

place



134

68

of



133

69

the



132

70

tabernacles



131

71

of



130

72

the



129

73

most



128

74

High.



127

75

God



126

76

is



125

77

in



124

78

the



123

79

midst



122

80

of



121

81

her;



120

82

she



119

83

shall



118

84

not



117

85

be



116

86

moved:



115

87

God



114

88

shall



113

89

help



112

90

her,



111

91

and



110

92

that



109

93

right



108

94

early.



107

95

The



106

96

heathen



105

97

raged,



104

98

the



103

99

kingdoms



102

100

were



101

101

moved:



100

102

he



99

103

uttered



98

104

his



97

105

voice,



96

106

the



95

107

earth



94

108

melted.



93

109

The



92

110

Lord



91

111

of



90

112

hosts



89

113

is



88

114

with



87

115

us;



86

116

the



85

117

God



84

118

of



83

119

Jacob



82

120

is



81

121

our



80

122

refuge.



79

123

Come,



78

124

behold



77

125

the



76

126

works



75

127

of



74

128

the



73

129

Lord,



72

130

what



71

131

desolations



70

132

he



69

133

hath



68

134

made



67

135

in



66

136

the



65

137

earth.



64

138

He



63

139

maketh



62

140

wars



61

141

to



60

142

cease



59

143

unto



58

144

the



57

145

end



56

146

of



55

147

the



54

148

earth;



53

149

he



52

150

breaketh



51

151

the



50

152

bow,



49

153

and



48

154

cutteth



47

155

the



46

156

spear



45

157

in



44

158

sunder;



43

159

he



42

160

burneth



41

161

the



40

162

chariot



39

163

in



38

164

the



37

165

fire.



36

166

Be



35

167

still,



34

168

and



33

169

know



32

170

that



31

171

I



30

172

am



29

173

God:



28

174

I



27

175

will



26

176

be



25

177

exalted



24

178

among



23

179

the



22

180

heathen,



21

181

I



20

182

will



19

183

be



18

184

exalted



17

185

in



16

186

the



15

187

earth.



14

188

The



13

189

Lord



12

190

of



11

191

hosts



10

192

is



9

193

with



8

194

us;



7

195

the



6

196

God



5

197

of



4

198

Jacob



3

199

is



2

200

our



1

201

refuge.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

When we remove the Selahs from Pslam 46, the pattern changes slightly. The word shake is #46 in both cases, but it is #47fte (from the end) if we count the final Selah. And there are two Selahs between shake and spear. So this is the difference:

With Selahs
#46 shake
#158 spear
Difference = 112

Without Selahs
#46 shake
#156 spear
Difference = 110

Now RC mistakenly said that the inclusive count of all words from shake to spear was 111 and felt that this was strong evidence of design since that is the "Magic Constant" associated with the 36th Magic Square in which all the elements sum to 666. If my table is correct, then there are 111 words between shake and spear, not counting those words. If we include both shake and spear we get 113.

But if we go with Facterd's rule and omit the Selahs, then we find that there are 109 words between shake and spear, and 111 words if we include them both.

Now consider how much "wiggle room" we have here. We can include or exclude the Selahs. We can include or exclude shake, spear, or both. Therefore, we have five different possible values - 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 - for the number of words between shake and spear! This is a LOT of wiggle room! And you don't need much wiggle room to make patterns "fit." The more I look at the claims relating to Psalm 46, the more evidence I find that suggests they are the result of random chance.

Now I hope everyone sees how much I enjoy puting these kinds of claims to the test. I enjoy this because I have made many claims that superficially look like all the other unfounded claims that have been made throughout history. Therefore, it is in my self-interest to sharpen my ability to discern between chance and design, and this business with Psalm 46 is perfect grist for such a mill as mine.

Richard

[RC Christian]

When we remove the Selahs from Pslam 46, the pattern changes slightly. The word shake is #46 in both cases, but it is #47fte (from the end) if we count the final Selah. And there are two Selahs between shake and spear. So this is the difference:

With Selahs
#46 shake
#158 spear
Difference = 112

Without Selahs
#46 shake
#156 spear
Difference = 110

Now RC mistakenly said that the inclusive count of all words from shake to spear was 111 and felt that this was strong evidence of design since that is the "Magic Constant" associated with the 36th Magic Square in which all the elements sum to 666. If my table is correct, then there are 111 words between shake and spear, not counting those words. If we include both shake and spear we get 113.

But if we go with Facterd's rule and omit the Selahs, then we find that there are 109 words between shake and spear, and 111 words if we include them both.

Now consider how much "wiggle room" we have here. We can include or exclude the Selahs. We can include or exclude shake, spear, or both. Therefore, we have five different possible values - 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 - for the number of words between shake and spear! This is a LOT of wiggle room! And you don't need much wiggle room to make patterns "fit." The more I look at the claims relating to Psalm 46, the more evidence I find that suggests they are the result of random chance.

Now I hope everyone sees how much I enjoy puting these kinds of claims to the test. I enjoy this because I have made many claims that superficially look like all the other unfounded claims that have been made throughout history. Therefore, it is in my self-interest to sharpen my ability to discern between chance and design, and this business with Psalm 46 is perfect grist for such a mill as mine.

Richard

Richard, am I missing something here? "Shake" is at index 46 and "Speare" is at index 156...that's inclusively 111 words. Right?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard, am I missing something here? "Shake" is at index 46 and "Speare" is at index 156...that's inclusively 111 words. Right?
Yep. We get 111 for the inclusive count if we exclude the selahs.

If we include the selahs, shake is #46 and spear is #158, so the inclusive count is 158 - 146 + 1 = 113.

[Facterd]

Hey there Facterd, :yo:

I watched your two videos. And I produced a new table without the Selahs. I didn't know they had to be ignored to find the pattern. And I added a colum with the count going backwards. Counts "from the end" are marked with "fte." Here are my observations:

1) Concerning your choice to ignore the Selahs:
There are two issues. First, it is an arbitrary choice that doubles your chances of finding a pattern since you can look for patterns with or without the Selahs. This does not invalidate your observations, but it does strengthen the skeptics case that what you have found is due to chance rather than design.

Second, your choice to ignore the Selahs brings up an apparent contradiction. In you attempt to show that your choice was not "as arbitrary as it seems" you appealed to the Bishop's Bible which was supposed to be the model for the KJV and which did not have the Selahs. Why then did Francis Bacon insert them if he designed the Psalm to proclaim his identity as William Shakespere? Was he trying to further obscure an already complicated and obscure pattern? That doesn't sound like something he would do if his motives were to proclaim his secret identity as "William Shakespeare."

2) Concerning the four elements:
I can confirm that earth, water, and fire occure at positions 20, 37, and 37fte. But your argument attempting to link "will" (at position 20fte) to air looks arbitrary to me. Sure, air "rises" and that is the root meaning of "exalted" but it feels like you are just trying to force a pattern that is not there. So we now have two things you have done in your analysis that feel "arbitrary." And when working with patterns like this, that gives strong reasons to doubt the results are anything but chance.

3) Concerning the Geneva Bible:
You will need to answer this in more detail. The pattern was already almost in place before Shakespeare (or Bacon) were born. How do you explain this? Mere coincidence? If mere coincidence could almost produce the pattern then why not believe that mere coincidence could produce it entirely? Especially given that you have to make an "adjustment" by ignoring the Selahs?

I'll take a look at your pdf file and comment more.

All the best,

Richard



1) Concerning my choice to ignore the Selahs:
I don't (of course) know why three occurrences of 'selah' are found in the psalm when these have to be ignored to make the puzzle work. Here are two possible explanations:

a) If we assume that Bacon was involved in writing Shakespeare’s works, it follows that he did not want this to be known in his lifetime. If he made puzzles which should reveal this, he was caught in a dilemma. On the one hand the puzzles had to be solvable. On the other hand they could not be too easily solvable. The point that they could not be too easily solvable pertains especially to the puzzle in psalm 46. It would be very dangerous for Bacon if it this was exposed. (People were sentenced to death for blasphemy in England both before and after 1611). We also have to take in to account that this is one of the most popular psalms (read publicly by Barack Obama just recently, and paraphrased by Marin Luther in his best known hymn 'Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott' (1529), and that people had a much stronger attachment to, and familiarity with the Bible when Bacon was doing this. Bacon can therefore have felt the need to give the puzzle extra concealment.

b) Explanation a) is my preferred explanation, but here is another one. If Bacon made a puzzle in psalm 46, we do not know what his role was concerning the KJV. He knew Lancelot Andrewes well, who had a pivotal role in the work, and he knew King James. It has been speculated that Bacon served as an overseer of the project, but this is not confirmed by any historical documents. It is therefore possible that Bacon’s only contribution to the KJV was his translation of psalm 46 (assuming that it contains a puzzle). If that is the case, he would have reason to believe that the psalms in KJV would not include instances of 'Selah', because the translators were instructed to follow the 1602 version of the Bishop’s Bible as close as possible, and this version has omitted instances of 'Selah'. Bacon could therefore have made his translation without 'Selah', while the three occurrences of 'Selah' were inserted by others to make psalm 46 accord with the use of 'Selah' in the other psalms.

2) Concerning the four elements:
I admit that 'will be exalted in the earth' demands a fair amount of interpretation to function as a description of the element air. We should notice that 'will be' is superfluous in this context. The reference to ‘air’ would be a little bit more straight forward if word number 20 was 'exalted', and we could read 'exalted in the earth' by starting to read on word number 20 instead of 'will be exalted in the earth'. But I think a very specific point is being made here, which is supposed to guide us to the real puzzle. By starting to read on word number 20 we can read 'will be exalted', while the puzzle starts with 'exalted be will'. When we take into account that Shakespeare’s 136th sonnet ends with 'my name is will', 'will be exalted' found where we should like to have 'air' functions as a clue to the beginning of the puzzle, in addition to work as a (rather strained) reference to air when we read 'will be exalted in the earth'.

3) Concerning the Geneva Bible:
'Shake' and 'speare' found almost equidistant from the beginning and end of psalm 46 in the Geneva Bible (and also in other editions of the Bible published before 1611) is a coincidence. If 'Shake' and 'speare' found as word number 46 from the beginning and end of KJV was all we had to explain, the probability of this happening by chance is relatively high. But this is only a tiny part of the pattern found in the psalm. For the puzzle to work, we need 'the mountains be carried into' placed symmetrically to 'exalted be William'. We need 'be carried into the midst' placed symmetrically to 'William I am'. For reasons not explained in the video, we need 'mooved' in the middle of the psalm, and we need 100 words on each side of 'mooved'. We need 'the Tabernacles' as words 69 and 70, and 'hath' as word 69 fte. We need 'her' as word number 81 and 'our' as word number 81 fte. This is only a small part of the pattern needed for the puzzle to work, and none of it is found in any other translation of psalm 46 that I have seen. I therefore think that Bacon, who was very familiar with the Bible, found the coincidence in the Geneva Bible (or more probably in 'The Book of Common Prayer'), and decided to form a puzzle around this.

[RC Christian]

Yep. We get 111 for the inclusive count if we exclude the selahs.

If we include the selahs, shake is #46 and spear is #158, so the inclusive count is 158 - 146 + 1 = 113.


The exclusion of the 3 Selahs is the unique "cherry-picking" in what I presented. Bearing in mind, I was conveying what persons like Facterd had indicated was the case...and I don't feel too "cherry-picking" when those words are excluded, since they are the unique words that have no known translation or accurate meaning...they're rather unique.

The 666 chapter count backward is "inclusive" and lands on Psalm 46, the 666 page count forward (omitting the 2 blank pages...the 2 "unique" pages in the original 1611...the one on the back of the beautiful Title Page and the one before The Psalms...kind of like omitting the "unique" untranslated words of Selah) is inclusive and lands on Psalm 46, the counting 46 words down is inclusive and lands on "shake", the counting the 46 words up (again, omitting the Selah) is inclusive and lands on "speare", and the 111 count between "shake" and "speare" is, also, inclusive.

Why or how Shake-speare...I don't know...

W I L L I A M S H A K E S P E A R E (anagram) --> A P S A L M I L I K E W A S H E R E

Kind of cool...and I'm not making any claim about it...just kind of cool.

But why the only blank page in the 1611 original, other than the one on the back of the Title Page, is exactly before the Psalms start...and not even found b/t the OT and Apocrypha, or the Apocrypha and the NT????

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The exclusion of the 3 Selahs is the unique "cherry-picking" in what I presented. Bearing in mind, I was conveying what persons like Facterd had indicated was the case...and I don't feel too "cherry-picking" when those words are excluded, since they are the unique words that have no known translation or accurate meaning...they're rather unique.

I wouldn't call that an example of "cherry picking" because there were only two possibiities - include or exclude the Selahs. Cherry picking refers to taking a huge collection of data (like a tree full of cherries) and picking only the ones you like and disregarding the rest. This is the case when you count the number of words from Luke 3:1 to the occurrence of Methusala. You could have counted any number of things, and if you made a lits of all the counts, you would see the "cherry" you picked does not stand out from the list. For example, there are 77 names in that list, and only one of them was thought (mistakenly) to correspond to the age of the person. Now granted, that person was an "extreme" which would give added weight to the "coincidence" (if it had been valid) but still, it would just be one coincidence (nice cherry) picked from a veritable mountain of squished, squashed, sour, rotten and otherwise deformed cherries! This is the bane of all "code seekers" and "pattern finders." They lose sight of the size of the sample set and get unduly impressed by a very few cherries picked and presented in a "sspectacularly unlikely" pattern.



The 666 chapter count backward is "inclusive" and lands on Psalm 46, the 666 page count forward (omitting the 2 blank pages...the 2 "unique" pages in the original 1611...the one on the back of the beautiful Title Page and the one before The Psalms...kind of like omitting the "unique" untranslated words of Selah) is inclusive and lands on Psalm 46, the counting 46 words down is inclusive and lands on "shake", the counting the 46 words up (again, omitting the Selah) is inclusive and lands on "speare", and the 111 count between "shake" and "speare" is, also, inclusive.

Yes, you were consistent with your "inclusive" counts. Consistency is always a plus when trying to discern between chance and design.



Why or how Shake-speare...I don't know...

W I L L I A M S H A K E S P E A R E (anagram) --> A P S A L M I L I K E W A S H E R E

Kind of cool...and I'm not making any claim about it...just kind of cool.

My full name Richard Amiel McGough is an anagram of I'm glad I'm a church goer! :hysterical: I used to think that was cool when I was a church goer, but not so much anymore. It's now it's false on two counts: I'm not a church goer and I wouldn't be glad if I were! I guess it's time to go look through that long list of anagrams again.



But why the only blank page in the 1611 original, other than the one on the back of the Title Page, is exactly before the Psalms start...and not even found b/t the OT and Apocrypha, or the Apocrypha and the NT????
I don't know why, but neither do I believe it was designed to make the word count come to 666. The world is filled with things I can't explain. In cases like this I need positive evidence, not unanswered questions, to convince me of design. But I certainly am enjoying working on this with you and Facterd.

:signthankspin:

[RC Christian]

When we remove the Selahs from Pslam 46, the pattern changes slightly. The word shake is #46 in both cases, but it is #47fte (from the end) if we count the final Selah. And there are two Selahs between shake and spear. So this is the difference:

With Selahs
#46 shake
#158 spear
Difference = 112

Without Selahs
#46 shake
#156 spear
Difference = 110

Now RC mistakenly said that the inclusive count of all words from shake to spear was 111 and felt that this was strong evidence of design since that is the "Magic Constant" associated with the 36th Magic Square in which all the elements sum to 666. If my table is correct, then there are 111 words between shake and spear, not counting those words. If we include both shake and spear we get 113.

But if we go with Facterd's rule and omit the Selahs, then we find that there are 109 words between shake and spear, and 111 words if we include them both.

Now consider how much "wiggle room" we have here. We can include or exclude the Selahs. We can include or exclude shake, spear, or both. Therefore, we have five different possible values - 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 - for the number of words between shake and spear! This is a LOT of wiggle room! And you don't need much wiggle room to make patterns "fit." The more I look at the claims relating to Psalm 46, the more evidence I find that suggests they are the result of random chance.

Now I hope everyone sees how much I enjoy puting these kinds of claims to the test. I enjoy this because I have made many claims that superficially look like all the other unfounded claims that have been made throughout history. Therefore, it is in my self-interest to sharpen my ability to discern between chance and design, and this business with Psalm 46 is perfect grist for such a mill as mine.

Richard


In regards to me "mistakenly" saying "that the inclusive count of all words"...just for the record, in post #7, in did indicate that the Selahs were left out of the word count of Psalm 46...and I indicated that I didn't know why...it wasn't my discovery...just passing on info. So, the 111 word inclusive count followed the same "pattern" of omitting the Selahs as did the 46 up/down count did.

I've been out all day and haven't had an opportunity to read Facterd's paper yet, but plan to tonight. I still have plans on doing the post I mentioned on prime #'s, also...man...where does the time go???!!!!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

In regards to me "mistakenly" saying "that the inclusive count of all words"...just for the record, in post #7, in did indicate that the Selahs were left out of the word count of Psalm 46...and I indicated that I didn't know why...it wasn't my discovery...just passing on info. So, the 111 word inclusive count followed the same "pattern" of omitting the Selahs as did the 46 up/down count did.

I've been out all day and haven't had an opportunity to read Facterd's paper yet, but plan to tonight. I still have plans on doing the post I mentioned on prime #'s, also...man...where does the time go???!!!!
Oops - it looks like I was the one who mistakenly said you mistakenly said ... well, you know what I mean. Glad we got that cleared up! :yo:

As for where the time goes ... maybe we should start a thread on that topic. Oh wait ... that probably won't help since that's where a lot of the time seems to be going!

Catch 22. Again. It got me big time!

[Facterd]

I'll take a look at your pdf file and comment more.

I've been out all day and haven't had an opportunity to read Facterd's paper yet, but plan to tonight.

Great. I would love to hear what you two have to say about it.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Great. I would love to hear what you two have to say about it.
Hey there Facterd,

I finished your smaller pdf. It was well presented. The fact that the 9th and 18th sonnets are the only sonnets to begin with the letter corresponding to the sonnet number, coupled with the fact that those are the only two sonnets with periods after the numbers is good evidence supporting your case.

And some of the 3-4-5 triangles are pretty striking. But I find myself feelling that I am looking at the results of countelss hours of trial and error as you overlaid your 3-4-5 triangle on the text looking for connections. It is this that makes me suspicious of the results. What would I find if I put forth a similar effort with some other triangle? Now granted, there is no triangle like the 3-4-5, so if the pattern is real, it makes sense that Bacon would have used that triangle. But what if the pattern is not real? Could you find similar results using some other triangle of arbitrary dimensions? This is my fundamental reservation. I know you spent endless hours overlaying 3-4-5 triangles of various sizes till you finally found some results that seemed pretty convincing.

Bottom line: How am I supposed to discern if your results are the prduct of cherry picking or not? The only way seems to go through an elaborate effort to produce similar results with a different triangle. That's how the ELS Bible codes were debunked. But it wasn't so hard for them because they could use computers. Your work is a laborious hand analysis and I don't have time to test it right now.

I look forward to your response.

Great chatting,

Richard

[RC Christian]

Hey there Facterd,

I finished your smaller pdf. It was well presented. The fact that the 9th and 18th sonnets are the only sonnets to begin with the letter corresponding to the sonnet number, coupled with the fact that those are the only two sonnets with periods after the numbers is good evidence supporting your case.

And some of the 3-4-5 triangles are pretty striking. But I find myself feelling that I am looking at the results of countelss hours of trial and error as you overlaid your 3-4-5 triangle on the text looking for connections. It is this that makes me suspicious of the results. What would I find if I put forth a similar effort with some other triangle? Now granted, there is no triangle like the 3-4-5, so if the pattern is real, it makes sense that Bacon would have used that triangle. But what if the pattern is not real? Could you find similar results using some other triangle of arbitrary dimensions? This is my fundamental reservation. I know you spent endless hours overlaying 3-4-5 triangles of various sizes till you finally found some results that seemed pretty convincing.

Bottom line: How am I supposed to discern if your results are the prduct of cherry picking or not? The only way seems to go through an elaborate effort to produce similar results with a different triangle. That's how the ELS Bible codes were debunked. But it wasn't so hard for them because they could use computers. Your work is a laborious hand analysis and I don't have time to test it right now.

I look forward to your response.

Great chatting,

Richard

This post should probably be in the "Mystery Religions" section, but I wanted to introduce it here, since the discussion was focusing on the relevance of Euclid's 47th Proposition. Here's a couple of posts to demonstrate the importance of the 3-4-5 triangle within the esoteric societies (trying to avoid the word...secret). Also, of immense importance to these same societies is the equilateral triangle, but more on that later.

http://burningtaper.blogspot.com/2006/04/new-masonic-interpretation-of-euclids.html

http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/aqc/1901/euclid.html


http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/captmorgansfreemasonry6.htm


I've still not finished Facterd's paper yet...been on the go all day.

[Facterd]

This post should probably be in the "Mystery Religions" section, but I wanted to introduce it here, since the discussion was focusing on the relevance of Euclid's 47th Proposition. Here's a couple of posts to demonstrate the importance of the 3-4-5 triangle within the esoteric societies (trying to avoid the word...secret). Also, of immense importance to these same societies is the equilateral triangle, but more on that later.

http://burningtaper.blogspot.com/2006/04/new-masonic-interpretation-of-euclids.html

http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/aqc/1901/euclid.html


http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/captmorgansfreemasonry6.htm


I've still not finished Facterd's paper yet...been on the go all day.

Great links. I mention in my paper that Petter Amundsen, the guy who discovered Bacon's use of the 3-4-5 triangle, claim that it was important within the esoteric societies. He is a freemason himself, and says that is the reason he was able to see the pattern. I have avoided the connection in my paper because a) I don't know much about esoteric societies, and (being esoteric) most of the information out there is unreliable, b) Reader's generally take you less seriously if you refer to secret societies.

I have found many references to Euclid I,47 in Bacon's puzzles.

[Facterd]

Hey there Facterd,

I finished your smaller pdf. It was well presented. The fact that the 9th and 18th sonnets are the only sonnets to begin with the letter corresponding to the sonnet number, coupled with the fact that those are the only two sonnets with periods after the numbers is good evidence supporting your case.

And some of the 3-4-5 triangles are pretty striking. But I find myself feelling that I am looking at the results of countelss hours of trial and error as you overlaid your 3-4-5 triangle on the text looking for connections. It is this that makes me suspicious of the results. What would I find if I put forth a similar effort with some other triangle? Now granted, there is no triangle like the 3-4-5, so if the pattern is real, it makes sense that Bacon would have used that triangle. But what if the pattern is not real? Could you find similar results using some other triangle of arbitrary dimensions? This is my fundamental reservation. I know you spent endless hours overlaying 3-4-5 triangles of various sizes till you finally found some results that seemed pretty convincing.

Bottom line: How am I supposed to discern if your results are the prduct of cherry picking or not? The only way seems to go through an elaborate effort to produce similar results with a different triangle. That's how the ELS Bible codes were debunked. But it wasn't so hard for them because they could use computers. Your work is a laborious hand analysis and I don't have time to test it right now.

I look forward to your response.
Great chatting,
Richard

I think your objections are very much to the point, and I don’t have a knock-down argument against them. Let me first list a couple of points which strengthens the hypothesis that what I have presented is a product of design and not chance

1) What I have presented is not just a haphazard collection of 3-4-5 triangles. There is a tight connection between them, where my view is that the connections between them express intentionality, and arguments.

2) An important part of the structure is that the first set of 3-4-5 triangles I present is meant to confirm the use of 3-4-5 triangles. They do that by connecting 3-4-5 triangles with a number that clearly can be associated with such 3-4-5 triangles (1609), and the historically most well known description of 3-4-5 triangles (by Plutarch). The two 3-4-5 triangles found on the title page are especially noteworthy, since they connect all the 6 periods found on the lower half of the title page. In the long version of the manuscript I show that these two 3-4-5 triangles form part of another very important puzzle in the sonnets.

3) The use of 3-4-5 triangles does not stand alone, but is backed up by counting of words and letters, and by a particular kind of Gematria which is taught in the puzzles. Many instances of this combination of principles are presented in the long version of my paper.

These three points don’t really address your objections do they? You are right that you are looking at the results of countless hours of trial and error. But a very interesting development has taken place in my research. It took me three years to identify the rules Bacon is playing by. This process involved countless hours of trial and error. But after the rules were identified, the character of my work changed dramatically. The last year I have several times noticed a couple of words or expressions in a Sonnet that has caught my interest, and it has only taken me an hour or so to uncover a complex structure of 3-4-5 triangles in that sonnet, since I now know the rules of this game.

Given two letters in a sonnet, these two letters can theoretically combine with 12 other letters to make 12 different 3-4-5 triangles. I say 'theoretically', because given two letters, most of the 12 points that combined with the two letters make up a 3-4-5 triangle don’t hit any letters (they lie outside the margins, between lines or between words). On average it is possible, given two letters, to construct two or three 3-4-5 triangles where the third vertex hits a third letter. Each page of Shakespeare’s sonnets contains about 1200 letters. Given two letters, say the first letter in 'sire' and 'mother' above sonnet 9, only a few of the remaining letters will point out words which constitute a meaningful message when combined with 'sire' and 'mother'. The combinations 'sire', 'mother' and 'eye' or 'sire', mother' and 'eare' for instance, will not make much sense. Therefore, given two letters (like the first letters in 'sire' and 'mother') only two or three other letters (of about 1200) will make a 3-4-5 triangle when combined with these, and only a limited set of the about 1200 letters will will point out words which constitute a meaningful message when combined with 'sire' and 'mother'. In the long version of my paper I present 80 triangles (3-4-5) found on the page where we find sonnet 9. All of them point out words or expressions which make a meaningful contribution to the arguments that are being expressed.

It is important to note that the 80 triangles are not made up of 240 different vertices. Most of the letters form part of several different 3-4-5 triangles. The numeral '9', for instance, is a vertex in 12 different 3-4-5 triangles. I think it is particularly telling when two letters are pointed out by different 3-4-5 triangles, and it afterwards turns out that these two letters can combine with other letters to form 3-4-5 triangles which are important for the argument.

Thanks for reading my paper, and for your thoughtful criticism.

Facterd

[Facterd]

In my last posting I said that I find it telling when the construction of a 3-4-5 triangle is determined by other 3-4-5 triangles. I have attached a short pdf-document giving one example of this.

Facterd

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I think your objections are very much to the point, and I don’t have a knock-down argument against them. Let me first list a couple of points which strengthens the hypothesis that what I have presented is a product of design and not chance

1) What I have presented is not just a haphazard collection of 3-4-5 triangles. There is a tight connection between them, where my view is that the connections between them express intentionality, and arguments.

2) An important part of the structure is that the first set of 3-4-5 triangles I present is meant to confirm the use of 3-4-5 triangles. They do that by connecting 3-4-5 triangles with a number that clearly can be associated with such 3-4-5 triangles (1609), and the historically most well known description of 3-4-5 triangles (by Plutarch). The two 3-4-5 triangles found on the title page are especially noteworthy, since they connect all the 6 periods found on the lower half of the title page. In the long version of the manuscript I show that these two 3-4-5 triangles form part of another very important puzzle in the sonnets.

3) The use of 3-4-5 triangles does not stand alone, but is backed up by counting of words and letters, and by a particular kind of Gematria which is taught in the puzzles. Many instances of this combination of principles are presented in the long version of my paper.

These three points don’t really address your objections do they? You are right that you are looking at the results of countless hours of trial and error. But a very interesting development has taken place in my research. It took me three years to identify the rules Bacon is playing by. This process involved countless hours of trial and error. But after the rules were identified, the character of my work changed dramatically. The last year I have several times noticed a couple of words or expressions in a Sonnet that has caught my interest, and it has only taken me an hour or so to uncover a complex structure of 3-4-5 triangles in that sonnet, since I now know the rules of this game.

Hey there Facterd,

That's a good review of the salient points from your article. And it must have felt like a strong confirmation when you were able to discover patterns more quickly after learning the "rules." But you are correct, your response didn't really answer my objections, but our straightforward response is admirable and it shows you are a reasonable man.

And there is one other objection I did not mention. So much of what you wrote seems like your own "private interpretation" without any means of confirmation. Suppose I gave 100 people the rules, the sonnets, and resizable 3-4-5 triangles to find patterns and locked them in separate rooms for a solid year. How much agreement would we find if we compared their intepretations? I have good reason to think "very little." This exemplifies how the results seem to me to be subjective and unconfirmable and therefore .... unbelievable. There are just too many ways the words and letters can be connected (remember how quickly factorials grow) and on top of that there is the wide variations of inerpretation that each person could give to each connection! It seems an insuperable task to establish any objective validity to the results you have presented. But hey! I could be wrong. I've only read you paper once and I could have missed some salient points. But I am giving you my honest opinion.

So I don't think anything is going to "settle" this for me. It's just another mystery in this mysterious universe. So perhaps we should move past the "evidential" stage and you could tell me what you think it all means? Were all these codes devised by Francis Bacon merely to "astound" future generations when they finally were discovered? I would think a smart man like Bacon would have recognized the futility of such a tedious and unrewarding labour.

It would be very interesting to know what you think it all means.

Great chatting,

Richard

[RC Christian]

I am finally about to have time to read your paper...sorry for the delay. I just read Richard's last post and I was curious also as to what your thoughts are of...if Bacon really did write the Shakespearean works (omitting what we both assume about his involvement in the 1611 KJV)...why did he do it under another person's name...and why was he encrypting things into the writings. I've heard of the theories of him being the bastard son of Queen Elizabeth, but that's about all I know that could contribute to potential motives.

In regards to his involvement in the 1611 KJV, there are a few ideas (Richard, read "conspiracy theories" here) that I have been pondering, that I'd like to discuss with you further, because, I agree with Richard, and appreciate him pointing this out, that "shake" and "speare" had been sitting in Psalm 46 since at least 1560 (I haven't checked any earlier versions than the Geneva, but plan to for various reasons). But I do have an idea that makes a lot of sense and explains both points; our findings and Richard's objection...it's forming in my Illuminated mind as I type...

[Richard Amiel McGough]

... (Richard, read "conspiracy theories" here) ...
:hysterical:

Dude! You got me pegged!

[heb13-13]

Fascinating post RC!
For those of you interested in how to process texts, here is the javascript html page I wrote to list words with their ordinal positions. You can just run it on your destop (save it as html).



< html>
< script type="text/javascript">
function countem(){
var elem = document.getElementById("txt");
var ar = elem.value.split(" ");
var lst = "";
var cnt = 1;
for (i=0;i<ar.length;i++) {
if ( isNaN(ar[i].toString()) ) {
lst += "<br />" + cnt.toString() + " " + ar[i].toString();
cnt++;
}
}

document.getElementById('lulu').innerHTML=lst;
}
< /script>
< body>

< input id="txt" name="countbox" type="text">
< Input id="doit" name="doit" type="submit" onclick="countem()">

< div id="lulu">
This is where lst will go
< /div>
< /body>
< /html>


Simple, elegant script. Thanks!!
Rick

[heb13-13]

Man I wish I knew how to do the computer stuff I've seen you do! Thank you for the open-mindedness... and thank you for verifing the "Satan" chapter/gematria count of 359. You have to toss in a minuscule of "more coincidence" that this is chapter is also the turning point for "adversary" to "Satan", right...just a little bit?

JACOB(182) + ADVERSARY(359) = ISRAEL(541) Genesis chp. 32 ...first appearance of "ISRAEL" after JACOB wrestled all night with a "man" (or something)...definitely something adversarial...have you ever tried to wrestle with someone all night long...now that's an adversary! :winking0071:

(I just had to slip that one in...just for fun.)

"The open-minded see the Truth in different things: the closed-minded see only the differences."
~ Anonymous

That bit about Methusaleh is cool, RC. And I do agree with your quote "The open-minded see the Truth in different things: the closed-minded see only the differences."

It is the "different things" we sometimes need to pay a bit of attention to also, wouldn't you say?

I see all these false prophets and preachers today, and they float their lies amidst some truth and that is why so many buy their lies as truth.

Rick

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Simple, elegant script. Thanks!!
Rick
My pleasure! Glad you appreciate it. Most folks don't know that they can easily program tasks like that in a few lines and run it in their browser. It's a very handy tool.

[heb13-13]

My pleasure! Glad you appreciate it. Most folks don't know that they can easily program tasks like that in a few lines and run it in their browser. It's a very handy tool.

What browser are you using? Chrome limits me to 32 characters and IE 9 adds characters to prevent "Cross-site scripting".

Rick

[Richard Amiel McGough]

That bit about Methusaleh is cool, RC.

Unfortunately, that "Methusala" thing only works in later versions of the KJV. The 1611 version had an extra "and" in the list and that pushed Methusala to position #970. I think this should help folks understand the power of coincidence. How many names in that list? Seventy seven. How many correlations between word position and lifespan of said person? One in the modern KJV, zero in the 1611 KJV. It's rather difficult to get too excited about stats like that.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

What browser are you using? Chrome limits me to 32 characters and IE 9 adds characters to prevent "Cross-site scripting".

Rick
I ran it in IE 9. You need to change your settings. Go to Tools > Internet Options > Advanced and select "Allow active content to run in files on My Computer."

[RC Christian]

:hysterical:

Dude! You got me pegged!

You damn skippy I do! :thumb:

[RC Christian]

That bit about Methusaleh is cool, RC. And I do agree with your quote "The open-minded see the Truth in different things: the closed-minded see only the differences."

It is the "different things" we sometimes need to pay a bit of attention to also, wouldn't you say?

I see all these false prophets and preachers today, and they float their lies amidst some truth and that is why so many buy their lies as truth.

Rick


I think I agree with you...give me a couple of examples, if you would.

[Facterd]

Hey there Facterd,

That's a good review of the salient points from your article. And it must have felt like a strong confirmation when you were able to discover patterns more quickly after learning the "rules." But you are correct, your response didn't really answer my objections, but our straightforward response is admirable and it shows you are a reasonable man.

There is another personal experience which also convinces me that what I have discovered is designed. In most of the texts I have investigated I find nothing at all, while in the texts where I find something, it always turns out that I find the same kind of patterns in abundance (like in sonnet 9).



And there is one other objection I did not mention. So much of what you wrote seems like your own "private interpretation" without any means of confirmation. Suppose I gave 100 people the rules, the sonnets, and resizable 3-4-5 triangles to find patterns and locked them in separate rooms for a solid year. How much agreement would we find if we compared their intepretations? I have good reason to think "very little." This exemplifies how the results seem to me to be subjective and unconfirmable and therefore .... unbelievable. There are just too many ways the words and letters can be connected (remember how quickly factorials grow) and on top of that there is the wide variations of inerpretation that each person could give to each connection! It seems an insuperable task to establish any objective validity to the results you have presented. But hey! I could be wrong. I've only read you paper once and I could have missed some salient points. But I am giving you my honest opinion.

An honest opinion is good. I am not sure you are right about the expected outcome of your hypothetical experiment. There are two main points conveyed in the puzzles:

1)The last five letters of WILLIAM should be read as LL I AM, where the two Ls should be read as the Roman numerals signifying 50. In a passage in Love’s Labour’s Lost Shakespeare tells us straight forwardly that two Ls in a row can be read as signifying 100.


'If Sore be sore, than ell to Sore,
makes fiftie sores O sorell:
Of one sore I an hundred make
by adding but one more L.'

So, LL I AM should be read as 100 I AM, and 100 is the gematrical sum of Francis Bacon, using his own system of Gematria.

2) Inside WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE we find I AM SHA. We know that Francis Bacon wrote English using Greek letters when he wanted to keep private matters secret. In the puzzles in the sonnets we are told countless times that the H in SHAKESPEARE should be read as a Greek H, that is, as the Greek eta, and should play the role of an E. This makes I AM SHA into I AM SEA, with the same pronunciation as I AM C = I AM 100 when SEA = C is read as the Roman numeral signifying 100. (BTW, changing SHAKESPEARE to SEAKESPEARE, changes the gematrical sum from 103 to 100).

These two ideas are found again and again spread all over the sonnets. So here is my hypothetical experiment: Let 50 people search through the sonnets for confirmations of these two ideas, using the rules I have presented, and let 50 other people search through random texts for the same kind of confirmations. If these are 100 bright men or women, I would predict that one group would find a lot of confirmation, while the other group would find next to nothing (something looking like confirmations could turn up by chance).

This relates to your ideas on how to prove that the structure is design. One way to prove that it is not design, but only a product of chance, would be to search through other texts, using the same rules, and show that similar structures can be found there. But if I do that, and I don't find anything, I am sure that wouldn't convince anybody. Actually, that is exactly what I have done. I have searched through a lot of texts where there just is nothing to find, while Shakespeare's Sonnets contains these kind of structures on every page.



So I don't think anything is going to "settle" this for me. It's just another mystery in this mysterious universe. So perhaps we should move past the "evidential" stage and you could tell me what you think it all means? Were all these codes devised by Francis Bacon merely to "astound" future generations when they finally were discovered? I would think a smart man like Bacon would have recognized the futility of such a tedious and unrewarding labour.

It would be very interesting to know what you think it all means.

Great chatting,

Richard

Sorry. I am not comfortable moving 'past the evidential stage'. That would just be speculations.

Facterd



"The age to come would say this Poet lies,
Such heauenly touches nere toucht earthly faces."

Sonnet 17

[Facterd]

I am finally about to have time to read your paper...sorry for the delay. I just read Richard's last post and I was curious also as to what your thoughts are of...if Bacon really did write the Shakespearean works (omitting what we both assume about his involvement in the 1611 KJV)...why did he do it under another person's name...and why was he encrypting things into the writings.

As I said in my previous post, I don't like to speculate, but I can let William T. Smedley do some speculation for me. This is from his The Mystery of Francis Bacon (1912):


'It is noteworthy that Bacon had a quaint conceit of the Divine Being which he was never tired of repeating, In the preface to the 'Advancement of Learning (1640), the following passage occurs:

'For of the knowledge which contemplates the works of Nature, the holy Philosopher hath said expressly; that the glory of God is to conceal a thing, but the glory of the King is to find it out: as if the Divine Nature, according to the innocent and sweet play of children, which hide themselves to the end they may be found; took delight to hide his works, to the end they might be found out; and of his indulgence and goodness to mankind, had chosen the Soule of man to be his Play-fellow in this game.'

Again on page 45 of the work itself he says:
'For so he (King Solomon) hath saith expressly, The Glory of God is to conceale a thing, but the Glory of a King is to find it out. As if according to that innocent and affectionate play of children, the Divine Majesty took delight to hide his works, to the end to have them found out, and as if Kings could not obtain a greater Honour, then to be God’s play-fellowes in that game, especially considering the great command they have of wits and means, whereby the investigation of all things may be perfected.'

Another phrase of the same idea is to be found on page 136.
In the author’s preface to the 'Novum Organum' the following passage occurs:
'Whereas of the sciences which regard nature the Holy Philosopher declares that ‘it is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but it is the glory of the King to find it out.’. Even as though the Divine Nature took pleasure in the innocent and kindly sport of children playing at hide and seek, and vouchedsafe of his kindness and goodness to admit the human spirit for his play fellow in that game.'

In almost identical words Bacon suggests the same conception in 'In Valerius Terminus' and in 'Filum Labyrinthi'.

In the Epistle Dedicatorie of 'The French Academie' and elsewhere the author is insisting on the same idea that 'He (God) cannot be seene of any mortal creature but is notwithstanding known by his works.'

[…]

From the Baconian point of view Peacham’s 'Minerva Britannia' is by far the most interesting. […] It is the frontispiece which bears specially on the present contention. The design is now reproduced (Fig. IV). A curtain is drawn to hide a figure, the hand only of which is protruding. It has just written the words 'MENTE VIDEBOR' – 'By the mind I shall be seen'. Around the scroll are the words 'Vivitur ingenio cetera mortis erunt' – 'one lives in one’s genius, other things shall be (or pass away) in death.'

That emblem represents the secret of Francis Bacon’s life. At a very early age, probably before he was twelve, he had conceived the idea that he would imitate God, that he would hide his works in order that they might be found out – that he would be seen only by his mind and that his image should be concealed. There was no haphazard work about it. It was not simply that having written poems or plays, and desiring not to be known as the author on publishing them, he put someone else’s name on the title-page. There was first the conception of the idea, and then the carefully elaborated scheme for carrying it out.' (page 104-106)

[RC Christian]

Good Morning Facterd,

I confirmed the gematria of 'Francis Bacon' to be 100 from several websites (using Bacon's gematria system). That's very interesting. I'm no buff at Shakespeare's history (childhood, education, etc.), but something tells me you are. I was wondering, if you had the opportunity sometime, if you would be willing to give us some general points of contention that surrounds the Shakespearean controversies, in regards to his unknown birth date, his last will and testament, educational background, or what you see to be relevant. It's hard to sort out facts from fiction when reading on the net about the various mysteries and enigmas surrounding this most famous man.

PS - Have you seen "Anonymous" yet...I can't find a theater showing it.

[Facterd]

There is no doubt that WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE (or WILLIAM SHAKE-SPEARE) on the title pages of Shakespeare’s plays was meant to give the impression that William Shakespeare from Stratford (a player and shareowner in the theatre where Shakespeare’s plays were played) was the author of the plays. But several points cast doubt on whether he truly was the author. The most important are questions pertaining to how he gained the knowledge necessary to write the plays, the lack of letters (or other documents) from Shakespeare’s hand, and his will, which doesn’t seem to be the will of a cultivated man.

I think there is every reason to believe that Shakespeare from Stratford was a playwright, but the question is what did he write? It is common to categorize the publications attributed to William Shakespeare in one of three categories: 1) Genuine Shakespeare, 2) Bad Quartos and 3) The apocrypha. According to orthodox Shakespeare scholars, The Bad Quartos are inferior versions of plays known or assumed to be written by Shakespeare, while the apocrypha consists of plays attributed to Shakespeare, but not written by him.

This means that both the Stratfordians (those claiming that Shakespeare from Stratford wrote the plays belonging to the category 'genuine Shakespeare' above) and Anti-Stratfordians (those claiming that those plays were written by somebody else) claim that a set of publications were falsely attributed to Shakespeare. The Stratfordians say (or at least, it is a consequence of what they say) that the Bad Quartos and the apocrypha were falsely attributed to Shakespeare from Stratford, while the main point of the Anti-Stratfordians is that 'genuine Shakespeare' was falsely attributed to Shakespeare from Stratford.

Recently, two books have been published, which independently of each other come to the conclusion that Shakespeare from Stratford was responsible for the Bad Quartos and the Apocrypha, while someone else produced the 'genuine Shakespeare'. The two books are 'North of Shakespeare' by Dennis McCarthy and 'The Apocryphal William Shakespeare' by Sabrina Feldman.

McCarthy says this about the assumed false attribution of the bad Quartos and the apocrypha:
"Why did these printers and publishers all chose Shakespeare - rather than any other popular writer of the time - to victimize with so many schemes of piracy and false-attribution? And why did Shakespeare or members of his company continue to work with these dastards even after they allegedly stole from them and took liberties with Shakespeare's name? Why was no one ever punished or openly challenged? Why did no one ever mention any of their fraudulent deeds? Why is there no evidence for any of this?"

McCarty's answer to these rhetorical questions is that the Bad Quartos and apocrypha were correctly, not falsely, attributed to Shakespeare from Stratford.

Sabrina Feldman shares many of Dennis McCarthy's beliefs about Shakespeare. But she also claims to have found "stylistic threads" linking the apocryphal plays, suggesting that they "shared a common author or co-author": "Because scholars have never viewed the Shakespeare Apocrypha as a coherent group of plays, they haven’t looked for evidence that the works were mainly authored by a single playwright, who might also have played a role in creating the Bad Quartos. Stylistic threads linking these plays suggest they shared a common author or co-author who left the following sorts of fingerprints in his writings: wholesale pilferings (especially from the works of Christopher Marlowe and Robert Greene during the late 1580s and early 1590s), bombast, a breezy style, clumsy blank verse, a salty sense of humor, food jokes, crude physical slapstick, inventive slang, very funny clown scenes, a penchant for placing characters in disguise, jingoism, bungled Latin tags and inept classical allusions, unsophisticated but sweet romances, shrewish and outspoken women, camaraderie among men, an emphasis on who is or isn’t a gentleman, and a complete lack of interest in political nuance and philosophical digressions. The overall sense is of a brash and confident writer with little more than a grammar-school education, seeking to create works of maximum popular appeal by whatever means necessary, with little regard for posterity."

Here you find a summary of reason’s to doubt that Shakespeare from Stratford wrote Shakespeare’s works: http://www.doubtaboutwill.com/declaration

The article 'How we know that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare' presents the most important reasons to believe that Shakespeare from Stratford wrote Shakespeare’s works. You find it here: http://shakespeareauthorship.com/howdowe.html

(I haven't seen Anonymous)

[RC Christian]

There is no doubt that WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE (or WILLIAM SHAKE-SPEARE) on the title pages of Shakespeare’s plays was meant to give the impression that William Shakespeare from Stratford (a player and shareowner in the theatre where Shakespeare’s plays were played) was the author of the plays. But several points cast doubt on whether he truly was the author. The most important are questions pertaining to how he gained the knowledge necessary to write the plays, the lack of letters (or other documents) from Shakespeare’s hand, and his will, which doesn’t seem to be the will of a cultivated man.


Thanks for providing the info and especially thanks for giving links to support each side of the question at hand...fair and balanced. I plan to read through those tonight. I have read your short-version paper. Now I want to read through the longer version over the next couple of days before I give my opinion on it. It is very interesting...and the use of 'eye' and 'ear' ties in with some of the esoteric teachings about 'pointers' for initiated ones to notice.


My question for you is do you have any knowledge of whether or not it was common place, in the late 1500's/early 1600's and in the region in question, for play writers and authors to hyphenate their last, or first names, if those names were possible compound names...names structured similar to "Shakespeare". I find that point rather interesting... (Richard...again...read 'conspiracy theory' here, buddy :winking0071: ).

[Facterd]

Thanks for providing the info and especially thanks for giving links to support each side of the question at hand...fair and balanced. I plan to read through those tonight. I have read your short-version paper. Now I want to read through the longer version over the next couple of days before I give my opinion on it. It is very interesting...and the use of 'eye' and 'ear' ties in with some of the esoteric teachings about 'pointers' for initiated ones to notice.

I would be great if you read the long version. The short version is only a teaser. Looking forward to hear your ideas about "ear" and "eye". In the long version you will see that this is connected to "see" (C = 100).



My question for you is do you have any knowledge of whether or not it was common place, in the late 1500's/early 1600's and in the region in question, for play writers and authors to hyphenate their last, or first names, if those names were possible compound names...names structured similar to "Shakespeare". I find that point rather interesting... (Richard...again...read 'conspiracy theory' here, buddy :winking0071: ).

It has been argued that the hyphen in "Shake-speare" indicates that it was a pseudonym, but according to the article "The Spelling and Pronunciation of Shakespeare's Name" found here: http://shakespeareauthorship.com/name1.html, hyphenating names was not that unusual. I believe that the separation of "shake" from "speare" with a hyphen refers to the separation of "shake" and "speare" in psalm 46.

Facterd

[RC Christian]

...but according to the article "The Spelling and Pronunciation of Shakespeare's Name" found here: http://shakespeareauthorship.com/name1.html, hyphenating names was not that unusual. I believe that the separation of "shake" from "speare" with a hyphen refers to the separation of "shake" and "speare" in psalm 46.

Facterd


I'll read the info from that link after dinner and the kids' homework. Thanks for posting it. I think it's rather obvious, that I agree with your last sentence. I'll, also, start doing some research on other noted literary works of the time and region, to see what I can discover about how often the hyphenating occurred. Do you know of any examples? (Sorry if that's already given in the link, I just briefly looked over the website.)

[RC Christian]

Please note from Facterd's postings that the word "Shake-speare" (or similar spelling) is hyphenated. Why? One of the questions on the table now is, how common was it for an author, poet, or playwright, living in the late 16th century/early 17th century, in England, to hyphenate his last name on the cover of his work?

Below is a paragraph from Wikipedia about the hyphenation issue. The article gives a basic background on the pros and cons for the generally publicized controversies.

"Shakespeare's surname was hyphenated as "Shake-speare" or "Shak-spear" on the title pages of 15 of the 48 individual quarto (or Q) editions of Shakespeare's plays (16 were published with the author unnamed) and in two of the five editions of poetry published before the First Folio. Of those 15 title pages with Shakespeare's name hyphenated, 13 are on the title pages of just three plays, Richard II (Q2 1598, Q3 1598, Q4 1608, and Q5 1615), Richard III (Q2 1598, Q3 1602, Q4 1605, Q5 1612, and Q6 1622), and Henry IV, Part 1 (Q2 1599, Q3 1604, Q4 1608, and Q5 1613).[48] The hyphen is also present in one cast list and in six literary allusions published between 1594 and 1623. This hyphen use is construed to indicate a pseudonym by anti-Stratfordians,[49] who argue that fictional descriptive names (such as "Master Shoe-tie" and "Sir Luckless Woo-all") were often hyphenated in plays, and pseudonyms such as "Tom Tell-truth" were also sometimes hyphenated.[50]" Wikipedia excerpt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_authorship_question

The point of asking the question about the hyphenation is simple enough: If we seldom find such hyphenation present in other works of the time and region, this would be another 'pointer' to the Psalm 46 riddle.

Any input from anyone is welcome.

Below is a link to some basic information on the Baconian Ciphers. This page will allow you to see where FRANCIS BACON equals 100 through one of the ciphers, a point that Facterd presents in his post and paper.

http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/essay-ciphers.html

[RC Christian]

To understand the Psalm 46 encryption, it is important to realize that "BACON" equals 111, using the Kay Cipher that Francis Bacon created, and 111 is the inclusive count between the 2 words "shake" and "speare", in the Original 1611 King James Version, uniting the words BACON and SHAKE-SPEARE, by the number 111...the Magic Constant of the Magic Square of the Sun. I've include the link to the page, again, that demonstrates Bacon's Cipher system, which he named the Bilateral Cipher system:

http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/rose/rose-cipher.html


Facing the East,
Frater Rosae Crucis

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here is a table of Psalm 46 from Young's Literal Translation. It has no dependance upon the word order of the KJV. Young went straight to the Hebrew and translated it to the best of his ability. The result? The word shake appears exactly 44 words from the beginning, and the word spear appears exactly 44 words from the end. And that's "as written" without having to omit the "selahs." This shows that the "coincidence" in the KJV of shake and spear being symmetrically place 46 words from beginning and end is almost certainly based on the structure of the underlying Hebrew text, not on the machinations of Francis Bacon masquerading as William Shakespeare.


192

1

God



191

2

is



190

3

to



189

4

us



188

5

a



187

6

refuge



186

7

and



185

8

strength,



184

9

A



183

10

help



182

11

in



181

12

adversities



180

13

found



179

14

most



178

15

surely.



177

16

Therefore



176

17

we



175

18

fear



174

19

not



173

20

in



172

21

the



171

22

changing



170

23

of



169

24

earth,



168

25

And



167

26

in



166

27

the



165

28

slipping



164

29

of



163

30

mountains



162

31

Into



161

32

the



160

33

heart



159

34

of



158

35

the



157

36

seas.



156

37

Roar



155

38

troubled



154

39

are



153

40

its



152

41

waters,



151

42

Mountains



150

43

they



149

44

shake



148

45

in



147

46

its



146

47

pride.



145

48

A



144

49

river



143

50

its



142

51

rivulets



141

52

rejoice



140

53

the



139

54

city



138

55

of



137

56

God,



136

57

Thy



135

58

holy



134

59

place



133

60

of



132

61

the



131

62

tabernacles



130

63

of



129

64

the



128

65

Most



127

66

High.



126

67

God



125

68

is



124

69

in



123

70

her



122

71

midst



121

72

she



120

73

is



119

74

not



118

75

moved,



117

76

God



116

77

doth



115

78

help



114

79

her



113

80

at



112

81

the



111

82

turn



110

83

of



109

84

the



108

85

morn!



107

86

Troubled



106

87

have



105

88

been



104

89

nations,



103

90

Moved



102

91

have



101

92

been



100

93

kingdoms,



99

94

He



98

95

hath



97

96

given



96

97

forth



95

98

with



94

99

His



93

100

voice,



92

101

earth



91

102

melteth.



90

103

Jehovah



89

104

of



88

105

Hosts



87

106

is



86

107

with



85

108

us,



84

109

A



83

110

tower



82

111

for



81

112

us



80

113

is



79

114

the



78

115

God



77

116

of



76

117

Jacob.



75

118

Come



74

119

ye,



73

120

see



72

121

the



71

122

works



70

123

of



69

124

Jehovah,



68

125

Who



67

126

hath



66

127

done



65

128

astonishing



64

129

things



63

130

in



62

131

the



61

132

earth,



60

133

Causing



59

134

wars



58

135

to



57

136

cease,



56

137

Unto



55

138

the



54

139

end



53

140

of



52

141

the



51

142

earth,



50

143

the



49

144

bow



48

145

he



47

146

shivereth,



46

147

And



45

148

the



44

149

spear



43

150

He



42

151

hath



41

152

cut



40

153

asunder,



39

154

Chariots



38

155

he



37

156

doth



36

157

burn



35

158

with



34

159

fire.



33

160

Desist,



32

161

and



31

162

know



30

163

that



29

164

I



28

165

am



27

166

God,



26

167

I



25

168

am



24

169

exalted



23

170

among



22

171

nations,



21

172

I



20

173

am



19

174

exalted



18

175

in



17

176

the



16

177

earth.



15

178

Jehovah



14

179

of



13

180

hosts



12

181

is



11

182

with



10

183

us,



9

184

A



8

185

tower



7

186

for



6

187

us



5

188

is



4

189

the



3

190

God



2

191

of



1

192

Jacob!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

And here's the Jewish Publishing Societies translation of Psalm 46. The words shake and spear appear at positions 45 and 47fte.


198

1

God



197

2

is



196

3

our



195

4

refuge



194

5

and



193

6

strength,



192

7

a



191

8

very



190

9

present



189

10

help



188

11

in



187

12

trouble.



186

13

Therefore



185

14

will



184

15

we



183

16

not



182

17

fear,



181

18

though



180

19

the



179

20

earth



178

21

do



177

22

change,



176

23

and



175

24

though



174

25

the



173

26

mountains



172

27

be



171

28

moved



170

29

into



169

30

the



168

31

heart



167

32

of



166

33

the



165

34

seas;



164

35

Though



163

36

the



162

37

waters



161

38

thereof



160

39

roar



159

40

and



158

41

foam,



157

42

though



156

43

the



155

44

mountains



154

45

shake



153

46

at



152

47

the



151

48

swelling



150

49

thereof.



149

50

There



148

51

is



147

52

a



146

53

river,



145

54

the



144

55

streams



143

56

whereof



142

57

make



141

58

glad



140

59

the



139

60

city



138

61

of



137

62

God,



136

63

the



135

64

holiest



134

65

dwelling-place



133

66

of



132

67

the



131

68

Most



130

69

High.



129

70

God



128

71

is



127

72

in



126

73

the



125

74

midst



124

75

of



123

76

her,



122

77

she



121

78

shall



120

79

not



119

80

be



118

81

moved;



117

82

God



116

83

shall



115

84

help



114

85

her,



113

86

at



112

87

the



111

88

approach



110

89

of



109

90

morning.



108

91

Nations



107

92

were



106

93

in



105

94

tumult,



104

95

kingdoms



103

96

were



102

97

moved;



101

98

He



100

99

uttered



99

100

His



98

101

voice,



97

102

the



96

103

earth



95

104

melted.



94

105

The



93

106

LORD



92

107

of



91

108

hosts



90

109

is



89

110

with



88

111

us;



87

112

the



86

113

God



85

114

of



84

115

Jacob



83

116

is



82

117

our



81

118

high



80

119

tower.



79

120

Come,



78

121

behold



77

122

the



76

123

works



75

124

of



74

125

the



73

126

LORD,



72

127

who



71

128

hath



70

129

made



69

130

desolations



68

131

in



67

132

the



66

133

earth.



65

134

He



64

135

maketh



63

136

wars



62

137

to



61

138

cease



60

139

unto



59

140

the



58

141

end



57

142

of



56

143

the



55

144

earth;



54

145

He



53

146

breaketh



52

147

the



51

148

bow,



50

149

and



49

150

cutteth



48

151

the



47

152

spear



46

153

in



45

154

sunder;



44

155

He



43

156

burneth



42

157

the



41

158

chariots



40

159

in



39

160

the



38

161

fire.



37

162

'Let



36

163

be,



35

164

and



34

165

know



33

166

that



32

167

I



31

168

am



30

169

God;



29

170

I



28

171

will



27

172

be



26

173

exalted



25

174

among



24

175

the



23

176

nations,



22

177

I



21

178

will



20

179

be



19

180

exalted



18

181

in



17

182

the



16

183

earth.'



15

184

The



14

185

LORD



13

186

of



12

187

hosts



11

188

is



10

189

with



9

190

us;



8

191

the



7

192

God



6

193

of



5

194

Jacob



4

195

is



3

196

our



2

197

high



1

198

tower.

[RC Christian]

Here is a table of Psalm 46 from Young's Literal Translation. It has no dependance upon the word order of the KJV. Young went straight to the Hebrew and translated it to the best of his ability. The result? The word shake appears exactly 44 words from the beginning, and the word spear appears exactly 44 words from the end. And that's "as written" without having to omit the "selahs." This shows that the "coincidence" in the KJV of shake and spear being symmetrically place 46 words from beginning and end is almost certainly based on the structure of the underlying Hebrew text, not on the machinations of Francis Bacon masquerading as William Shakespeare.


WOW! That would be cool...if we were in Psalm 44...:confused2:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

WOW! That would be cool...if we were in Psalm 44...:confused2:
Add two for the two words, silly! Haven't your read any of the professional level gematria? They do stuff like that all the time (which is one reason most published gematria is meaningless drivel).

My point was to demonstrate the power of chance. I see no signs of design in the placement of shake and spear in Psalm 46.

[Facterd]

My point was to demonstrate the power of chance. I see no signs of design in the placement of shake and spear in Psalm 46.

I see no signs of design in the placement of shake and speare in Psalm 46, by itself, either. But I think you are jumping to conclusions, Richard. Here is what I wrote in post #27:


'Shake' and 'speare' found almost equidistant from the beginning and end of psalm 46 in the Geneva Bible (and also in other editions of the Bible published before 1611) is a coincidence. If 'Shake' and 'speare' found as word number 46 from the beginning and end of KJV was all we had to explain, the probability of this happening by chance is relatively high. But this is only a tiny part of the pattern found in the psalm. For the puzzle to work, we need 'the mountains be carried into' placed symmetrically to 'exalted be William'. We need 'be carried into the midst' placed symmetrically to 'William I am'. For reasons not explained in the video, we need 'mooved' in the middle of the psalm, and we need 100 words on each side of 'mooved'. We need 'the Tabernacles' as words 69 and 70, and 'hath' as word 69 fte. We need 'her' as word number 81 and 'our' as word number 81 fte. This is only a small part of the pattern needed for the puzzle to work, and none of it is found in any other translation of psalm 46 that I have seen. I therefore think that Bacon, who was very familiar with the Bible, found the coincidence in the Geneva Bible (or more probably in 'The Book of Common Prayer'), and decided to form a puzzle around this.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

My point was to demonstrate the power of chance. I see no signs of design in the placement of shake and spear in Psalm 46.

I see no signs of design in the placement of shake and speare in Psalm 46, by itself, either. But I think you are jumping to conclusions, Richard. Here is what I wrote in post #27:


'Shake' and 'speare' found almost equidistant from the beginning and end of psalm 46 in the Geneva Bible (and also in other editions of the Bible published before 1611) is a coincidence. If 'Shake' and 'speare' found as word number 46 from the beginning and end of KJV was all we had to explain, the probability of this happening by chance is relatively high. But this is only a tiny part of the pattern found in the psalm. For the puzzle to work, we need 'the mountains be carried into' placed symmetrically to 'exalted be William'. We need 'be carried into the midst' placed symmetrically to 'William I am'. For reasons not explained in the video, we need 'mooved' in the middle of the psalm, and we need 100 words on each side of 'mooved'. We need 'the Tabernacles' as words 69 and 70, and 'hath' as word 69 fte. We need 'her' as word number 81 and 'our' as word number 81 fte. This is only a small part of the pattern needed for the puzzle to work, and none of it is found in any other translation of psalm 46 that I have seen. I therefore think that Bacon, who was very familiar with the Bible, found the coincidence in the Geneva Bible (or more probably in 'The Book of Common Prayer'), and decided to form a puzzle around this.
Hey there Facterd,

I wasn't refering to the rest of your work, just the placement of shake and spear since that is the primary fact that is usually used to suggest that "something" is going in in that Psalm relating to William Shakespeare. But the facts appear to suggest that it was a mere coincidence.

Now as for those various things that are say are "needed" to arrive at your conclusion, many of them are such that if the words were changed you could simply invent a different interpretation. That's the challenge here. There was no "need" for anything in particular so there is no standard by which to judge your work. For example, if the pattern worked better with the selahs, then you would "need' them too. But as it is, you "needed" them to be missing, so you removed them. You didn't start with any particular hypothesis that could be tested so there is no way to discern if the things you have found are the product of chance or design. And the problem is that we have lots of evidence that chance has played a major role, and the rest of it seems like chance to me too. It's like the appears of three out of the four elements. You had to make up a new rule for Air because it was missing. Yes, in the Aristotelian cosmos, air would naturally rise, but so would fire. So I see no reason to think that the placement of Earth, Water, Fire was by design.

I think the most important thing for the future of your project would be to meditate upon how to discern between chance and design. Most of your results have the appearance of chance. How many ways are there to connect a page of 200 words made of 500 letters with a 3-4-5 triangle of arbitrary size? I don't know off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure the answer will involve factorials. And you know how fast factorials grow, right? Here are the first hundred:


0
1



1

1



2

2



3

6



4

24



5

120



6

720



7

5040



8

40320



9

362880



10

3628800



15

1307674368000



20

2432902008176640000



25

1.5511210043×1025



50

3.0414093202×1064



70

1.1978571670×10100



100

9.3326215444 x 10157




That last entry is 10 followed by 157 zeros. Dude, that's larger than the number of particles in the entire universe! I hope you understand that I'm just doing my best to explain what mathematicians would say if if they carefully analysed your work. I could be worng. I haven't done a detailed mathematical analysis, but my intuition tells me that the results are probably chance, and this is confirmed by many factors, not least of which is the initial coincidence that led people to Psalm 46 in the first place.

I appreciate all the work you put into this and your efforts to explain things to me.

All the best,

Richard

[Facterd]

I hope you understand that I'm just doing my best to explain what mathematicians would say if if they carefully analysed your work. I could be worng. I haven't done a detailed mathematical analysis, but my intuition tells me that the results are probably chance, and this is confirmed by many factors, not least of which is the initial coincidence that led people to Psalm 46 in the first place.


I can understand your reluctance here, but as I see it there is one major problem with your criticism, and that is that you have only seen a tiny part of what is found in the psalm, and you have not seen the solution to the puzzle. You are right that interpretations are involved, and Bacon knew that very well. He has therefore constructed a system of reciprocally confirming principles, which makes it possible, as I see it, to know with a high degree of certainty whether an interpretation is intended by the puzzle-maker or not. The principles he is using are


- Counting of words
- Counting of letters
- Three different rules for Gematria, which all have to match simultaneously (found in the essay RC Christian linked to)
- 3-4-5 triangles

In addition to this, one page in Shakespeare's first folio is dedicated to confirm the interpretations made in solving the puzzle.



I appreciate all the work you put into this and your efforts to explain things to me.

All the best,

Richard


Thanks. The same to you.

Facterd

[RC Christian]

Add two for the two words, silly! Haven't your read any of the professional level gematria? They do stuff like that all the time (which is one reason most published gematria is meaningless drivel).

My point was to demonstrate the power of chance. I see no signs of design in the placement of shake and spear in Psalm 46.


...and neither do I, by itself, just as I posted in the initial thread or two. It's when you add the other points that I have made involving:


1- Psalm 46 is the 666th chapter from the last page of the Original 1611 King James Version.

2- Psalm 46 is the 666th printed page from the front of the Original 1611 King James Version.

3- "Shake" and "speare" are located at a count of 111 words apart (inclusively, minus the "Selah")

4- Bacon's self-created Bilateral Cipher has a cipher Kay value of 111 for "BACON".

5- The Magic Constant of the Magic Square of the Sun is 111.

6- The Magic Sum of the Magic Square of the Sun is 666.

7- The only omission made in any counting of chapters, pages, or words are each unique (Richard, read "pointers"), by their very nature, namely the only 3 untranslated words in Psalm 46, the word "Selah" and the only 2 blank pages of text in the entire 1611 Bible (again, Richard, read "pointers" here).

8- The fact that one of the only 2 blank pages in the entire 1611 Bible is on the back of the Title Page is normal, logical, sensible, etc., but the other (and only other) blank page is placed immediately before the Psalms start (pointer).

9- The fact that with there being a completely blank page placed anywhere throughout the text of the 1611 King James, one would reasonably ask, "Why not a blank page dividing the Old Testament from the Apocrypha, or a blank page dividing the Apocrypha from the New Testament?"

10- The fact that the only...only verse in the Bible that tells us to count the number of a man's name, tells us that the number of his name is 666. And for anyone with understanding or knowledge of directives and pointers recognized by the Rosicrucians or Freemason, the words 'Wisdom' and 'Knowledge' are to key pointers to have an encryption pointed at...especially...when there is a number associated with a statement that implies 'Wisdom' or 'Knowledge'.

This doesn't even go into the great controversies that have surrounded the authenticity Shake-speare having the education and knowledge to write all the great works with his name attached to them. These controversies have been around for a long time.

...Oh, and by the way, on about half of his works, his name is printed or handwritten as "Shake-speare"...hyphenated as another pointer...very possibly so. And this doesn't even scratch the surface on all the information that surrounds Francis Bacon himself, with his great allegiance with King James I, etc. And there's still the right angle ciphers that Facterd and many others have presented to the public.

...and there's still more yet to come, my friend. :winking0071:

Facing the East,
Frater Rosae Crucis

[Richard Amiel McGough]

...and neither do I, by itself, just as I posted in the initial thread or two. It's when you add the other points that I have made involving:


1- Psalm 46 is the 666th chapter from the last page of the Original 1611 King James Version.

2- Psalm 46 is the 666th printed page from the front of the Original 1611 King James Version.

3- "Shake" and "speare" are located at a count of 111 words apart (inclusively, minus the "Selah")

4- Bacon's self-created Bilateral Cipher has a cipher Kay value of 111 for "BACON".

5- The Magic Constant of the Magic Square of the Sun is 111.

6- The Magic Sum of the Magic Square of the Sun is 666.

7- The only omission made in any counting of chapters, pages, or words are each unique (Richard, read "pointers"), by their very nature, namely the only 3 untranslated words in Psalm 46, the word "Selah" and the only 2 blank pages of text in the entire 1611 Bible (again, Richard, read "pointers" here).

8- The fact that one of the only 2 blank pages in the entire 1611 Bible is on the back of the Title Page is normal, logical, sensible, etc., but the other (and only other) blank page is placed immediately before the Psalms start (pointer).

9- The fact that with there being a completely blank page placed anywhere throughout the text of the 1611 King James, one would reasonably ask, "Why not a blank page dividing the Old Testament from the Apocrypha, or a blank page dividing the Apocrypha from the New Testament?"

10- The fact that the only...only verse in the Bible that tells us to count the number of a man's name, tells us that the number of his name is 666. And for anyone with understanding or knowledge of directives and pointers recognized by the Rosicrucians or Freemason, the words 'Wisdom' and 'Knowledge' are to key pointers to have an encryption pointed at...especially...when there is a number associated with a statement that implies 'Wisdom' or 'Knowledge'.

This doesn't even go into the great controversies that have surrounded the authenticity Shake-speare having the education and knowledge to write all the great works with his name attached to them. These controversies have been around for a long time.

...Oh, and by the way, on about half of his works, his name is printed or handwritten as "Shake-speare"...hyphenated as another pointer...very possibly so. And this doesn't even scratch the surface on all the information that surrounds Francis Bacon himself, with his great allegiance with King James I, etc. And there's still the right angle ciphers that Facterd and many others have presented to the public.

...and there's still more yet to come, my friend. :winking0071:

Facing the East,
Frater Rosae Crucis
That's a good summary of the data you have presented so far, mein freund.

Your reference to selah as a normally "untranslated" word is a good way to eliminate it.

Unfortunately, I don't have anyway to confirm the 666 printed pages, or that number of blank pages.

Re Point #10 - I don't follow you logic here. That verse was written in the first century. How could it have anything to do with patterns that Francis Bacon devised in the 17th century? And desides, his name didn't sum to 666 did it?

tout le meilleur, mon ami,

Richard

[RC Christian]

That's a good summary of the data you have presented so far, mein freund.

Your reference to selah as a normally "untranslated" word is a good way to eliminate it.

Unfortunately, I don't have anyway to confirm the 666 printed pages, or that number of blank pages.

Re Point #10 - I don't follow you logic here. That verse was written in the first century. How could it have anything to do with patterns that Francis Bacon devised in the 17th century? And desides, his name didn't sum to 666 did it?

tout le meilleur, mon ami,

Richard


What is that French? Only had a year of Latin and don't remember any of it.

I actually didn't make reference to selah as a "normally" untranslated word. The point was, it is the "only" untranslated word in Psalm 46...and pointers such as this have historically been used within the Brotherhoods.

You email or PM me your mailing address and I'll order you a copy off of Amazon tonight, brother-man.:thumb:

Re Point #10 - Wow. I'm sorry. I'm definitely not making my point clear here. I believe Francis Bacon played off of Revelation 13:18 and realized the chapter count from the end of the Bible landed him on Psalm 46 (because, to my knowledge, the chapter count didn't change from the Geneva to the KJV) and from that point he found the words that would give him the 46 count up and down and that he could work with to create "a new name", and get the 111 count in place, easy enough. Of course, if he was the editor-in-chief of the new Bible, he could, with his great mind, get the page count up to 666 (he only needed 78 more pages of extra).

So, one is left with 2 options, that I can think of, if this is what happened: 1) We get lucky and find someone already named Shakespeare, and buy him off to serve as a puppet. 2) We find someone and buy him off and change his name to Shakespeare.

If either of the above scenarios were true, we'd could expect to find, if we looked, a few 'bread crumbs or inconsistencies' along the way, in the life of William Shakespeare. So as long as most everything about his life lined up as normal, randomly expected facts, there would be a good reason to question such a hypothesis of this encryption in the 1611 KJV. Agreed?

So as long as, say, his birth date wasn't questionable, educational background somewhat matched his writing levels of knowledge, any remaining signatures or hand-writings appeared as "experienced, crisp" as one would expect to find from a man who had written so, so much, any last will and testament left behind would include the types of belongings (unpublished works to be published, the stately library 'expected' from someone who wrote what he wrote, etc) that we would expect to find from such an accomplished individual, and so forth.

...BUT WE DON'T!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

What is that French? Only had a year of Latin and don't remember any of it.

Yeah, French for "all the best, my friend." I got it using Google translate. I was hoping they'd have a link so you could click it and get an instant translation. Have you ever used Google translate? Very handy.



I actually didn't make reference to selah as a "normally" untranslated word. The point was, it is the "only" untranslated word in Psalm 46...and pointers such as this have historically been used within the Brotherhoods.

How do you know that "pointers" like that are actually used? Can you give me an uneuquivocal example that even an inveterate skeptic like me would be forced to accept?



Re Point #10 - Wow. I'm sorry. I'm definitely not making my point clear here. I believe Francis Bacon played off of Revelation 13:18 and realized the chapter count from the end of the Bible landed him on Psalm 46 (because, to my knowledge, the chapter count didn't change from the Geneva to the KJV) and from that point he found the words that would give him the 46 count up and down and that he could work with to create "a new name", and get the 111 count in place, easy enough. Of course, if he was the editor-in-chief of the new Bible, he could, with his great mind, get the page count up to 666 (he only needed 78 more pages of extra).

OK, so now we are getting a conspiracy of coincidences that had to be in place for Bacon to work his design. First, we had to be lucky enough to have a first century apocalyptic visionary write "Here is wisdom" and give the number of the beast's (???) name to be 666 so that many centuries later, Francis Bacon could use that fact and count backwards from the end of Revelation (why not from the Rev 13 where the 666 was found?) and arrive at Psalm 46 which just happened to contain the words "shake" and "spear" in nearly the correct position for him to redesign the Psalm to fit the patterns you have described?

Whew! I need to take a breath after all that.

Now could you remind me what the purpose of all that work was? Why would a smart person go through all that bother? I'm sorry if you told me already, but I forget.



So, one is left with 2 options, that I can think of, if this is what happened: 1) We get lucky and find someone already named Shakespeare, and buy him off to serve as a puppet. 2) We find someone and buy him off and change his name to Shakespeare.

If either of the above scenarios were true, we'd could expect to find, if we looked, a few 'bread crumbs or inconsistencies' along the way, in the life of William Shakespeare. So as long as most everything about his life lined up as normal, randomly expected facts, there would be a good reason to question such a hypothesis of this encryption in the 1611 KJV. Agreed?

So as long as, say, his birth date wasn't questionable, educational background somewhat matched his writing levels of knowledge, any remaining signatures or hand-writings appeared as "experienced, crisp" as one would expect to find from a man who had written so, so much, any last will and testament left behind would include the types of belongings (unpublished works to be published, the stately library 'expected' from someone who wrote what he wrote, etc) that we would expect to find from such an accomplished individual, and so forth.

...BUT WE DON'T!

Wait a minute! I missed a step in your logic. Why do we only have those two options? What happened to the possibility that there really was a Shakespeare who wrote his own plays? I understand that you say there are problems with his history, but those problems have not been sufficient to convince the mainstream that he did no exist or was a mere puppet of the real author.

And besides all this, I haven't see any compelling reasons why someone would need a puppet. Was "Shakespear's" life threatend because of the plays "he" wrote? If not, then why all the subterfuge?

Man - I had no idea that this topic runs this deep. Is this something the Roscicrucians are into, or is it your personal thing?

[RC Christian]

[QUOTE=RAM;37554]Yeah, French for "all the best, my friend." I got it using Google translate. I was hoping they'd have a link so you could click it and get an instant translation. Have you ever used Google translate? Very handy.

Have used it a little. I actually tried on the 1820 Code info that I sent you. I had it in an HTML format, but the translation from Hebrew wasn't much easier to read than the original. :(



How do you know that "pointers" like that are actually used? Can you give me an uneuquivocal example that even an inveterate skeptic like me would be forced to accept?

Sure. I can and will give you that information that is public.



OK, so now we are getting a conspiracy of coincidences that had to be in place for Bacon to work his design. First, we had to be lucky enough to have a first century apocalyptic visionary write "Here is wisdom" and give the number of the beast's (???) name to be 666 so that many centuries later, Francis Bacon could use that fact and count backwards from the end of Revelation (why not from the Rev 13 where the 666 was found?) and arrive at Psalm 46 which just happened to contain the words "shake" and "spear" in nearly the correct position for him to redesign the Psalm to fit the patterns you have described?

Actually, nothing specific had to be in place. Bacon could have worked off of any "most outstanding" verse or passage, that conveyed a pointer within itself, like 'count', 'figure', 'notice', etc, whether or not coupled with adepts' key words of Wisdom and Knowledge. It would just need to be a verse or passage that drew people in, because that's where initiates knew to look. Have you looked at the Kay version of Bacon's Bilateral Cipher? Notice how he structured it. That design could have easily been constructed to "make" his own name (BACON) equal 111, if that was his intentions...since it was his own, personally created cipher.

And why not Rev. 13, instead of the end of the Bible? Possibly the same reason he started with the front of the Bible on his page count...a type of symmetry or pattern, if you will. And "inclusive", at that.



Now could you remind me what the purpose of all that work was? Why would a smart person go through all that bother? I'm sorry if you told me already, but I forget.

Now you're asking me to create a conspiracy theory within what you have already called a conspiracy theory?:dizzy:

I honestly don't know. I have some hypotheses, based on what I know about his life, interests, and relationships, from mostly all public sources. He was the type of man that would do something ...large undertakings...just to prove to himself and others that he could. It's not difficult to figure out that he was a Rosicrucian and very likely the founder of the Brotherhood. Many say he was a Freemason also, which is truly another branch off of Rosicrucianism. This is the type of "marking" that the Brotherhoods do. It kind of says, "We've been here and are proud of it". Kind of like the French Freemasons who gifted the American Freemason's and our country with the Statue of Liberty. It was a symbolic gesture that is recognized within all the modern-day Brotherhoods. Any Freemason will gladly tell you that it was gifted by the French Freemasons. It is public, yet not well known information (read, "not another conspiracy theory" here). It's true. Things like that make a statement that most people never learn of. Like a wink :winking0071:, if you will.

Sidebar: Do you realize that was a conspiracy theory within a conspiracy theory within a conspiracy theory...like a 4-dimensional tetrahedral number...or the movie "Inception".:rofl:



Wait a minute! I missed a step in your logic. Why do we only have those two options? What happened to the possibility that there really was a Shakespeare who wrote his own plays? I understand that you say there are problems with his history, but those problems have not been sufficient to convince the mainstream that he did no exist or was a mere puppet of the real author.

The step you missed was when I said "ifthis is what happened" which was in reference to the paragraph above it where I stated that " I believe Francis Bacon played off of Revelation 13:18 and...". Just giving you my hypothesis and 2 conclusions I drew from it.


And besides all this, I haven't see any compelling reasons why someone would need a puppet. Was "Shakespear's" life threatend because of the plays "he" wrote? If not, then why all the subterfuge?

I'm not sure that I get the gist of this question. Sorry


Man - I had no idea that this topic runs this deep. Is this something the Roscicrucians are into, or is it your personal thing? I won"t speak for, only about, the Societies. But, no, it's not my personal thing. :winking0071:

Facing the East,
Frater Rosae Crucis

"Omnia ab uno"

[Facterd]

I actually didn't make reference to selah as a "normally" untranslated word. The point was, it is the "only" untranslated word in Psalm 46...

In OED the meaning of Selah is given as

'A Hebrew word, occurring frequently at the end of a verse in the Psalter and thrice in Hab. iii, by the LXX rendered διάψαλμα; supposed to be a musical or liturgical direction of some kind, perhaps indicating pause or rest. Hence in various allusive uses'

This means that 'Selah' is not part of the content of the psalm. This is why they could omit 'Selah' from the 1602 Bishop’s Bible, and why 'Selah' is often placed in the margin or otherwise separated from the body of the text, like here from The New American Bible (2005)

95



He was the type of man that would do something ...large undertakings...just to prove to himself and others that he could.

I think you are right. We know from biographical sources that Bacon was an extremely ambitious man with a grandiose conception of himself. And as he said in his will:


'I have held up a light in the obscurity of Philosophy, which will be seen centuries after I am dead. It will be seen amidst the erection of Tombs, Theatres, Foundations, Temples, of Orders and Fraternities for nobility and obedience—the establishment of good laws as an example to the World. For I am not raising a Capitol or Pyramid to the Pride of men, but laying a foundation in the human understanding for a holy Temple after the model of the World. For my memory I leave it to Men's charitable speeches, to foreign Nations and the next Ages, and to my own Country after some Time has elapsed.'



I believe Francis Bacon played off of Revelation 13:18

I think so too. He wanted, for the fun of it, to give the impression that he was the beast (or beasts) from Revelation 13 (salted and smoaked). The main solution to the puzzle in Psalm 46 is found inside the two words 'the Tabernacles'. We have already seen how Bacon misused God’s holy name 'I am' to state 'William I am'. In Revelation 13.6 we can read about one of the beasts:


'And he opened his mouth in blasphemie against God, to blaspheme his Name, and his Tabernacle'

Facterd

[RC Christian]

Hello Facterd!

That was a beautiful quote of Bacon that you posted, and quite to the point. Thanks for posting it. Your point about Selah being left in the margins and even omitted in some versions of the Bible was important to note also. Selah was not part of the spoken or song word of the Psalm or any Psalm, when the Psalms were and still are sung by Jewish people in worship and praise, just as the introduction to Psalm 46 "[To the chiefe Musician for the sonnes of Korah, a song vpon Alamoth.]" is not part of the Psalm.

My friend, hopefully tonight I will be starting on the full version of your paper. Sorry it's taken me so long. Have you applied much of Bacon's ciphers, the Baconian Cipher or the Bilateral Cipher to any of his work, or the Shakespearean sonnets?

Facing the East,
Frater Rosae Crucis

[Richard Amiel McGough]

In OED the meaning of Selah is given as
'A Hebrew word, occurring frequently at the end of a verse in the Psalter and thrice in Hab. iii, by the LXX rendered διάψαλμα; supposed to be a musical or liturgical direction of some kind, perhaps indicating pause or rest. Hence in various allusive uses'

This means that 'Selah' is not part of the content of the psalm. This is why they could omit 'Selah' from the 1602 Bishop’s Bible, and why 'Selah' is often placed in the margin or otherwise separated from the body of the text, like here from The New American Bible (2005)

Here there Facterd,

I agree that they could legitmately omit "selah" if they wanted to. But why then would Bacon insert it? To further obscure an already obscure design? This is particularly baffling because it was missing from the Bishop's Bible which he was supposed to be following.




He was the type of man that would do something ...large undertakings...just to prove to himself and others that he could.
I think you are right. We know from biographical sources that Bacon was an extremely ambitious man with a grandiose conception of himself. And as he said in his will:
'I have held up a light in the obscurity of Philosophy, which will be seen centuries after I am dead. It will be seen amidst the erection of Tombs, Theatres, Foundations, Temples, of Orders and Fraternities for nobility and obedience—the establishment of good laws as an example to the World. For I am not raising a Capitol or Pyramid to the Pride of men, but laying a foundation in the human understanding for a holy Temple after the model of the World. For my memory I leave it to Men's charitable speeches, to foreign Nations and the next Ages, and to my own Country after some Time has elapsed.'


And that's my point. Why would a man so driven to destroy obscurity with clarity and lucidity - a man committed to "holding up a light in the obscurity of Philosophy" - choose to spend endless hours composing deliberately obscured patterns in the Bible and Shakespearian sonnets? It seems contrary to his character. What did he have to gain for all that effort? What serious scientist or philosopher is going to see anything but obscurity in these patterns?

Being an intelligent man, I would think Bacon would have recognized the futilitiy of such a plan of action. The world is filled with obscure patterns of of dubious validity. Few serious thinkers would want to waste endless hours trying to sort through all the apparent "coincidences" to discern between chance and design.




I believe Francis Bacon played off of Revelation 13:18
I think so too. He wanted, for the fun of it, to give the impression that he was the beast (or beasts) from Revelation 13 (salted and smoaked). The main solution to the puzzle in Psalm 46 is found inside the two words 'the Tabernacles'. We have already seen how Bacon misused God’s holy name 'I am' to state 'William I am'. In Revelation 13.6 we can read about one of the beasts:
'And he opened his mouth in blasphemie against God, to blaspheme his Name, and his Tabernacle'

Facterd
This is what I mean by a "conspiracy of coincidences." The 666 verse had to be there for Bacon to "play off of it." The right words had to be in Psalm 46 for Bacon to play off of them. Psalm 46 had to be in the right position (666 chapters from the end) long before Bacon was born. Obvioulsy, all these facts happened by random chance long before Bacon was born. If random chance had not prepared these facts, Bacon could have done nothing. This is why it is so very hard to believe that any of the patterns presented are anything but random chance. If the very foundation of the patterns was established by random chance, why would we think that the other more obscure patterns are not?

[Facterd]

Here there Facterd

Here, there and everywhere, Richard


Being an intelligent man, I would think Bacon would have recognized the futilitiy of such a plan of action.

Is it futile because he wouldn't live to receive the fame, because the ciphers are to obscure to ever be accepted or both?

Facterd

[RC Christian]

Here's a challenge to anyone who feels up to the task:


Attempt any "bilateral" (as in, Francis Bacon's Bilateral Cipher...pun) comparison of letter, word, sentence, verse, chapter, book, or page count that would satisfy the following scenario (and I'm sure Richard could state this better than I'm about to):

Choose any two variables, (A, B), where A and B equal the set of letters, words, sentences, verses, chapters, books, or pages of the 1611 King James Bible, such that, when counting forward from the beginning (Title Page or Genesis 1) and counting backward from the end of the Bible, you arrive at (inclusively) the same page, from both counts.

Note, this challenge does not allow for A=B, since 50% of all letter, word, verse, and chapter counts would obviously place us on the same page. However, I find it most beautiful to realize that the center verse states:

Psalm 103:1 "Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is with in me, bless his holy name"



Hint: There's only one solution to the challenge

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Is it futile because he wouldn't live to receive the fame, because the ciphers are to obscure to ever be accepted or both?

Not because he wouldn't see it himself, since he saw future generations recognizing the glory of his other works.

I think it was futile because the patterns are far too obscure to be believed by the kind of people he would have been hoping to reach, namely, the intelligent and skeptical Philosophers and Scientists. From the quote you gave, it appears he hated obscurity and exulted in shining light on it. Why would he induldge in such an obscure activity as coding things on top of things that everyone can see are mere concoincidecnes? That would confuse people, not make for more clarity. I simply do not see the motivation. What is the essence of the message that could only be communicated through all these hidden patterns? And why didn't he encode something that was incontrovertibly real? For example, a complete sentence like "I made this code to show that I invented William Shakespeare?"

[Facterd]

Here's a challenge to anyone who feels up to the task:


Attempt any "bilateral" (as in, Francis Bacon's Bilateral Cipher...pun) comparison of letter, word, sentence, verse, chapter, book, or page count that would satisfy the following scenario (and I'm sure Richard could state this better than I'm about to):

Choose any two variables, (A, B), where A and B equal the set of letters, words, sentences, verses, chapters, books, or pages of the 1611 King James Bible, such that, when counting forward from the beginning (Title Page or Genesis 1) and counting backward from the end of the Bible, you arrive at (inclusively) the same page, from both counts.

Note, this challenge does not allow for A=B, since 50% of all letter, word, verse, and chapter counts would obviously place us on the same page. However, I find it most beautiful to realize that the center verse states:

Psalm 103:1 "Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is with in me, bless his holy name"



Hint: There's only one solution to the challenge

I'm not sure I understood the challenge, but I'm curious as to what you have found.

Facterd

[RC Christian]

I'm not sure I understood the challenge, but I'm curious as to what you have found.

Facterd

A better way of wording an aspect of the design and 'pointer' of Psalm 46's placement in the 1611 KJV. Someone could try to count pages backward and chapters forward, etc. and would never inclusively land on the same page. I don't have a reliable word count within the 1611 KJV, but I've seen 788,258 on several sites (excluding some of the intro phrases, like in the Psalms, etc) and really don't think anyone, including Bacon, would have considered expecting someone to count all the words...let alone letters...to uncover a riddle, based on the fact that it would simply be too challenging.

[Facterd]

XXXXXXXXXX

[RC Christian]

Not because he wouldn't see it himself, since he saw future generations recognizing the glory of his other works.

I think it was futile because the patterns are far too obscure to be believed by the kind of people he would have been hoping to reach, namely, the intelligent and skeptical Philosophers and Scientists.


You're making assumptions that he did want such people to 'figure it out'. I think you are missing the point here. I'm not sure about Facterd's view on this, but my view is that I don't necessarily think he ever intended for such people to figure it out...especially if they had no idea of how to look for it. So, if my view is true, who was it meant for? Maybe for those trained in figuring out encrypted things of this nature...I wonder who that would be??? :winking0071:

And maybe...possibly...there's more to the story that hasn't been discussed yet.

The founding of the Rosicrucians, the most accurate and non-legendary/allegorical time, was the time that the 1611 King James Bible was being created. "The Fame of the Brotherhood of RC" and "The Confession of the Brotherhood of RC", were anonymously published in 1607 and 1616, respectively, which led the the 'Enlightenment of Rosicrucianism," that which was stated would bring people out of darkness and into the Light...one catch though, you had to become a Rosicrucian to learn of the teachings...and take many oaths that you would not disclose them.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Not because he wouldn't see it himself, since he saw future generations recognizing the glory of his other works.

I think it was futile because the patterns are far too obscure to be believed by the kind of people he would have been hoping to reach, namely, the intelligent and skeptical Philosophers and Scientists.
You're making assumptions that he did want such people to 'figure it out'. I think you are missing the point here. I'm not sure about Facterd's view on this, but my view is that I don't necessarily think he ever intended for such people to figure it out...especially if they had no idea of how to look for it. So, if my view is true, who was it meant for? Maybe for those trained in figuring out encrypted things of this nature...I wonder who that would be??? :winking0071:

Well, that seems pretty speculative. He gloried in bringing light to Philosophy, and spent the rest of his time secretly encoding hidden messages for other folks? To what end? What is the message that he encoded?



And maybe...possibly...there's more to the story that hasn't been discussed yet.

The founding of the Rosicrucians, the most accurate and non-legendary/allegorical time, was the time that the 1611 King James Bible was being created. "The Fame of the Brotherhood of RC" and "The Confession of the Brotherhood of RC", were anonymously published in 1607 and 1616, respectively, which led the the 'Enlightenment of Rosicrucianism," that which was stated would bring people out of darkness and into the Light...one catch though, you had to become a Rosicrucian to learn of the teachings...and take many oaths that you would not disclose them.
I can understand the need for secrecy in those dark days when Europe was governed by a vile Church and the people were subject to many superstitions. But why today? I know that Mormon's buy up and hide as much of the documentation about Joseph Smith as possible to coverup his lies, and Scientology keeps their upper levels secret cuz anyone sane person who reads them would immediately see that L. Ron Hubbard was a raving loon going on about spaceships that looked "exactly like a DC-7" and the space alien Xenu who trapped souls with atom bombs in volcanoes.

I've never seen a legitimate reason for keeping religious or spiritual or historical secrets. And as you know, this boy don't abide no "secrets" cuz he don't like no people holdin' back on 'im. Why thay keepin secrets? There's something rotten in Denmark, it seems to me (to quote Francis Bacon!). :lol:

Don't get me wrong bro. I'm just telling you how I see it. I could be wrong, and I will continue to meditate upon everything you are sharing with me. The last thing I want is to have a closed mind. But I can't turn off my skepticism, and I really don't think I should!

[RC Christian]

You have misunderstood what the bilateral cipher is. It works in the same way as series of 0’s and 1’s can represent letters in a computer. Anything can play the role of 0’s and 1’s, but in Bacon’s example (he was very into codes, also in his published works) the 0’s are letters in one font, while the 1’s are letters in a slightly different font. I have not found him using this code in Shakespeare’s works.

Hello Facterd!

I actually have studied the bilateral cipher and understand it; I was actually trying to make a pun in my post...but apparently not a very effective one. Sorry. :sEm_ImSorry:


In the essay by Peter Dawkins you have linked to, he claims that Bacon used three different kinds of gematria; the Simple cipher, the Reverse cipher and what is commonly called the Kay cipher. I feel sure that Bacon used all these three kinds of gematria, with a very definite purpose, but while his use of the Simple cipher is proven by counting and 3-4-5 triangles in the sonnets, I have not found a corresponding 'course' where he is teaching his use of the Reverse cipher or the Kay cipher.

When I nonetheless think that he used all three kinds, it is because he is using them in a very specific manner. As Richard has demonstrated (for instance here: http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?686-English-Gematria) gematria like the Simple cipher gives the same sum for an awful lot of words or names. Bacon was of course aware of this, and the point of the Reverse cipher and the Kay cipher is that they should be applied simultaneously with the Simple cipher. Here are two examples illustrating how unlikely it is that randomly chosen words or phrases share all the three kinds of gematria.

The Simple cipher, Reverse cipher and Kay cipher for 'Shakespeare is 103, 172 and 259.

97

On the website http://www.census.gov/genealogy/names we find statistics for the frequency of names in USA in 1990. The name 'Shakespeare' was one of the 20 000 most popular family names in USA in 1990. I have calculated the Simple cipher, Reverse cipher and Kay cipher for all these 20 000 names. It turns out that 112 of the 20 000 names have the Simple cipher 103. Of these 112 names, only 'Shakespeare' and 'Longnecker' also have the Reverse cipher 172. And of these two names only Shakespeare has the reverse cipher 259. This means that 'Shakespeare' is the only name among the 20 000 names which has Simple cipher 103, reverse cipher 172 and Kay cipher 259.



If we look at the total number of words used in Shakespeare’s works, we find that 1 654 of the 884 429 words Shakespeare used (according to http://www.opensourceshakespeare.com ) have Simple cipher 103. Out of these, 48 words also have Reverse cipher 172. Only 29 of these 48 words also have the same Kay cipher as 'Shakespeare'. This implies that the probability that a word picked at random from Shakespeare’s works has the same ciphers as 'Shakespeare' is 29/884 429 = 1/30 498.

Wow...good job for testing the hypothesis out. You sound like a man on a mission!


The Simple cipher, Reverse cipher and Kay cipher for 'William Shakespeare is 177, 273 and 411.

I have some further information on the above that you will find interesting, but we are not at that step yet.




Page 136 from the First Folio is filled with this kind of cipher matches, coupled with counting of words and numbers, and 3-4-5 triangles. Bacon has not managed to also make the page readable (Shakespeare scholars think the page consists of a lot of jokes that they don’t understand, coupled with a frequency of misspellings not found elsewhere in the FF).

I'm aware of this fact and can confirm it. Glad you posted that.


I have not found a similar consistent use of all the three ciphers in the Sonnets (except for one particular sonnet), but I don’t think it is by coincidence that the phrase 'will making addition' found in sonnet 136 (that number again) has the same ciphers as 'William Shakespeare'. Sonnet 136 is one of the two 'will'-sonnets where Shakespeare is using the word 'will' 18 times playing with his forename, and which ends with the statement 'my name is Will'. In the long version of my manuscript I show that the real point of these two sonnets is to point out I LL = I 100 at the end of 'Will'.

Still trying to find the time to read the long version, but we have some time off coming up so hopefully things will sync.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here's a challenge to anyone who feels up to the task:


Attempt any "bilateral" (as in, Francis Bacon's Bilateral Cipher...pun) comparison of letter, word, sentence, verse, chapter, book, or page count that would satisfy the following scenario (and I'm sure Richard could state this better than I'm about to):

Choose any two variables, (A, B), where A and B equal the set of letters, words, sentences, verses, chapters, books, or pages of the 1611 King James Bible, such that, when counting forward from the beginning (Title Page or Genesis 1) and counting backward from the end of the Bible, you arrive at (inclusively) the same page, from both counts.

Note, this challenge does not allow for A=B, since 50% of all letter, word, verse, and chapter counts would obviously place us on the same page. However, I find it most beautiful to realize that the center verse states:

Psalm 103:1 "Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is with in me, bless his holy name"



Hint: There's only one solution to the challenge

OK - is this what you mean?

Find n such that Page n from beginning = Chapter n from the end (inclusive)

There is obviously only one solution because there can be only one intersection of two linear monotonic sequences. You claim it is Psalm 46. That's fine. What would it be if you started counting from the first page of Genesis 1?

[RC Christian]

OK - is this what you mean?

Find n such that Page n from beginning = Chapter n from the end (inclusive)

There is obviously only one solution because there can be only one intersection of two linear monotonic sequences. You claim it is Psalm 46. That's fine. What would it be if you started counting from the first page of Genesis 1?

Thank you for the 'clean up job' on my rambling...although, I did allow for other variables in either direction of counting. But I think you're missing the essence of my point. You wouldn't find anything...there is not a Page n from Genesis 1 that will equal a Chapter n from the beginning (or vice versa)...I've checked those scenarios also.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Thank you for the 'clean up job' on my rambling...although, I did allow for other variables in either direction of counting. But I think you're missing the essence of my point. You wouldn't find anything...there is not a Page n from Genesis 1 that will equal a Chapter n from the beginning (or vice versa)...I've checked those scenarios also.
Are you sure about that? Every page is in a chapter (define chapter 0 as all pages prior to Gen 1). So there are two numbers associated with each page. A page number p (from the beginning) and a chapter number c (from the end). The page number begins at p = 1 and the chapter number begins at c = 1190 (if we include chapter 0).

So as we look at the two numbers for each page, we see that the page number constantly increases (+1 for each page) and the c number constantly decreases or stays the same (since a chapter often spans multiple pages). These are called monotonic sequences. There must be a time when they cross through each other. At the beginning, we have p < c. Then somewhere in the midst of the book we have p > c. So the question is simply this: Is there always a time when p = c? The answer is "yes" except in one relatively rare case. In every case, p will increase until p = c (and we are done) or p = c - 1 and then on the next page c changes to c -1 and p changes to c so the two sequences will "pass through" each other without "touching." But that seems like a rather rare occurrence. So there are probably plenty of solutions to your condition for different starting points and different editions of the Bible.

[Facterd]

Not because he wouldn't see it himself, since he saw future generations recognizing the glory of his other works.

I think it was futile because the patterns are far too obscure to be believed by the kind of people he would have been hoping to reach, namely, the intelligent and skeptical Philosophers and Scientists. From the quote you gave, it appears he hated obscurity and exulted in shining light on it. Why would he induldge in such an obscure activity as coding things on top of things that everyone can see are mere concoincidecnes? That would confuse people, not make for more clarity. I simply do not see the motivation. What is the essence of the message that could only be communicated through all these hidden patterns? And why didn't he encode something that was incontrovertibly real? For example, a complete sentence like "I made this code to show that I invented William Shakespeare?"

My main reply is that what looks like obscurity from the outside might not be obscure when seen from the inside. I am sure there are those who would call your work on the Biblewheel both obscure and incomprehensible, especially if they don't take the time to look into it. As I like to remind you, you are talking about something you have not investigated.

My impression, after working with this for some time, is indeed that this is made by a man who dislikes obscurity (not secrecy), and a man who is surprisingly scientifically minded (given that this was done around 1600), with an almost unending need for giving extra evidence for even the most insignificant points in his puzzles. He reminds me most of all of a mathematician painstakingly making sure that there are no holes in his argument (and I am a mathematician). At the same time he is extremly playful and humorous. I think I can guarantee that something like "I made this code to show that I invented William Shakespeare?" will never show up in any of his puzzles.

Bacon hated the obscure philosophy of his time. And (I think) he hated obscurity in the sense of being dim or indistinct. But he was not an enemy of secrecy. In his "New Atlantis", where he seems to be describing an ideal society, we can read:


"And this we also do: we have consultations, which of the inventions and experiences which we have discovered shall be published, and which not: and take all an oath of secrecy, for the concealing of those which we think fit to keep secret: though some of those we do reveal sometimes to the state, and some not."

In the essay "Of Simulation and Dissimulation" he writes


"Therefore set it down, that an habit of secrecy, is both political and moral."

and ends the essay with


"The best composition and temperature, is to have openness in fame and opinion; secrecy in habit; dissimulation in seasonable use; and a power to feign, if there be no remedy."

Facterd

[RC Christian]

Are you sure about that? Every page is in a chapter (define chapter 0 as all pages prior to Gen 1). So there are two numbers associated with each page. A page number p (from the beginning) and a chapter number c (from the end). The page number begins at p = 1 and the chapter number begins at c = 1190 (if we include chapter 0).

So as we look at the two numbers for each page, we see that the page number constantly increases (+1 for each page) and the c number constantly decreases or stays the same (since a chapter often spans multiple pages). These are called monotonic sequences. There must be a time when they cross through each other. At the beginning, we have p < c. Then somewhere in the midst of the book we have p > c. So the question is simply this: Is there always a time when p = c? The answer is "yes" except in one relatively rare case. In every case, p will increase until p = c (and we are done) or p = c - 1 and then on the next page c changes to c -1 and p changes to c so the two sequences will "pass through" each other without "touching." But that seems like a rather rare occurrence. So there are probably plenty of solutions to your condition for different starting points and different editions of the Bible.


My challenge was counting books as individual units, chapters as individual units, verses as individual units, or words as individual units...obviously, we know what the conclusion would be from the stated facts that I've already posted, regarding the counts.

The point is not that the scenario I presented can only have one intersection; the point is there doesn't have to be any intersection of the two counts. Had there not been exactly 78 pages of 'fluff' (and I meant that in no disrespectful way) added after the Title Page and before Genesis, there would not be an intersection at all.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

My challenge was counting books as individual units, chapters as individual units, verses as individual units, or words as individual units...obviously, we know what the conclusion would be from the stated facts that I've already posted, regarding the counts.

The point is not that the scenario I presented can only have one intersection; the point is there doesn't have to be any intersection of the two counts. Had there not been exactly 78 pages of 'fluff' (and I meant that in no disrespectful way) added after the Title Page and before Genesis, there would not be an intersection at all.

You are correct that there would not have been an intersection at p = c = 666, but there almost certainly would have been an intersection somewhere else where p = c = 643 or whatever. I thought you were asking about the general case.

[RC Christian]

Well, that seems pretty speculative. He gloried in bringing light to Philosophy, and spent the rest of his time secretly encoding hidden messages for other folks? To what end? What is the message that he encoded?


Richard,

I can understand the need for secrecy in those dark days when Europe was governed by a vile Church and the people were subject to many superstitions. But why today? I know that Mormon's buy up and hide as much of the documentation about Joseph Smith as possible to coverup his lies, and Scientology keeps their upper levels secret cuz anyone sane person who reads them would immediately see that L. Ron Hubbard was a raving loon going on about spaceships that looked "exactly like a DC-7" and the space alien Xenu who trapped souls with atom bombs in volcanoes.

I've never seen a legitimate reason for keeping religious or spiritual or historical secrets. And as you know, this boy don't abide no "secrets" cuz he don't like no people holdin' back on 'im. Why thay keepin secrets? There's something rotten in Denmark, it seems to me (to quote Francis Bacon!). :lol:

Don't get me wrong bro. I'm just telling you how I see it. I could be wrong, and I will continue to meditate upon everything you are sharing with me. The last thing I want is to have a closed mind. But I can't turn off my skepticism, and I really don't think I should!


I actually just now saw this post...missed it somehow earlier. In regards to the secrets, I do have one 'authentic' answer for you... although it may not be a good enough reason to you, but it is the reason for many. I don't really know what type of background knowledge you have on the Brotherhoods, so I don't really know where to start, but I'll assume you know some basic information from the internet and so forth, because I remember you telling me you had never spoken in any length with a Freemason or Rosicrucian. I'm sure you're aware of the legendary oaths that an initiate takes at different degree levels. Have you ever heard any of these oaths? They're called 'blood' oaths, and for a good reason.

This is the Entered Apprentice Oath, the 'initial' oath...that of the 1st Degree (this is all in the public domain and easily Googled):

""I do most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, without the least equivocation, mental reservation, or self evasion of mind in me whatever; binding myself under no less penalty than to have my throat cut across, my tongue torn out by the roots, and my body buried in the rough sands of the sea at low watermark, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours; so help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due performance of the same."

And then, you are revealed some allegorical and symbolic knowledge...and at the next full moon, one can go on through the 2nd Degree initiation...and the 'blood' oaths continue.

By the time, and if, someone is fortunate enough to attain unto the 33rd Degree, they have taken, well let's just say a lot of oaths...binding oaths. One can only become a 33rd Degree Freemason by invitation of 3 other 33rd Degree Freemasons. It's an honorary degree. The final veil of the symbols and allegories that one has learned up unto that point is finally removed. Now, not to speculate on what that something is, and if one can follow all the pointers leading up to it, it's not a big 'leap in faith' to conclude what the great mystery is (and I'm not talking about Shake-speare or anything else we've discussed). But, back to the point...when one in the Brotherhood finally learns the 'grand secret(s)' they've taken a list of 'binding' death oaths the length of your arm. Even if they wanted to tell everyone what they now know, under binding oaths, they can not. And guess what, all those that have lead them to that point, have taken the same oaths. This is one of the 'main' reasons, beyond loyalty to the Brotherhood, that prevents the disclosure of trusted knowledge.

I hope that shed some slight Light on the whole secrecy issue. It's not the only reason, but it is one of the important ones. Bear in mind that every living or dead 33rd Degree Freemason has taken the same oaths, with only slight modifications for 400 years...just as the Rosicrucians have.

[Facterd]

Here is a question for you, RC Christian: What is your impression (or documentet information) about the connection between esoteric societies and the Egyptian Sun God, Ra?

Facterd

[RC Christian]

Here is a question for you, RC Christian: What is your impression (or documentet information) about the connection between esoteric societies and the Egyptian Sun God, Ra?

Facterd

Hello Facterd,

That's an excellent question to bring up, and if you will allow me, I need to leave now for a Thanksgiving lunch (it's 11:30am, my time), but I'll address that this afternoon. Hope all is having a great day.

[RC Christian]

Hello Facterd!

Sorry it's taken me so long to get moving with some commentary on Ra and the esoteric mystery schools. I've got just a couple of other things to do, and I'll start right on it. I have started on the full version of your paper and I'm enjoying it. I think you'll find some of the info that I'm about to post in a bit interesting and relevant to your paper.

[Facterd]

That's fine. Just take your time.

Facterd

[RC Christian]

In response to Facterd's request for me to discuss what associations I know of between Ra (the Egyptian Sun God), and the esoteric mystery schools, I'll first define a couple of terms that some, on the board, may be unfamiliar with. When discussing spiritual matters, the term 'exoteric' refers to the outer, publicly known information about or held by a certain sect, in this case mystery schools and also what we commonly call 'secret societies', but we will combine those as mystery schools since they're actually one and the same thing. The exoteric information may be true, false, or allegorical, in representation. It is the 'outer layer' of the teachings and public representation of such mystery schools. 'Esoteric' is the deeper or true knowledge held by such mystery schools. It is the meaning behind all the symbols and ceremonies, that are known, somewhat, by the public, but never truly understood.

A good example of exoteric vs esoteric, from the Gospel stories, would be when Jesus would speak in parables to the 'masses' and then take the 'disciples' aside and tell them what the allegorical representations within the parable actually represented. This is how all mystery schools conduct themselves, and most likely, always have.

In reference to Ra, this is the name of the ancient Egyptian sun god. Ra was considered to be the creator of all things, and ruled the earth and sky, as the sun. Ra eventually was merged with another Egyptian deity, known as Horus. There are various version of how the myths were told and understood, but, most commonly, Horus (god of the sky) was the son of Osiris (god of the dead and the afterlife) and Isis (goddess of fertility and magic). Horus, was also understood as not only the ruler of the sky, but that he was the sky. His right eye was the sun and his left eye was the moon. Hence, the origin of the 'eye of Horus', aka, the 'all-seeing-eye", aka the "eye of Ra". There is much to the mythological tales surrounding these three characters, and Set (the god of the desert and Osiris' brother) who killed Osiris and fought with Horus. Pharaohs were considered to be sons of Ra, and incarnations of Horus and Osiris, in life and in death, respectively.

I've only included enough information here to catch-up anyone unfamiliar with the Egyptian religions to a point that the rest of this post will make more sense. What I would like to do now is jump forward in time to the modern day mystery schools. The Rosicrucians and Freemasons are two examples of such.

Facterd had ask about associations of the mystery schools with Ra. I will post two direct associations which are within the public domain. I hope to fill in the gaps of this information over the next week, but there is a lot of important information that I am leaving out at this time to shorten the length of this post. Also, I will not be offering information as to 'why' these associations are present, at least not at this time.

The following information is from Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, vol. 1 & 2, 1873 & 1878, respectively.

"The right-angled triangle is another form of this figure which is deserving of attention. Among the Egyptians, it was the symbol of universal nature; the base representing Osiris, or the male principle; the perpendicular, Isis, or the female principle; and the hypotenuse, Horus, their son, or the product of the male and female principle.

This symbol was received by Pythagoras from the Egyptians during his long sojourn in that country, and with it he also learned the peculiar property it possessed, namely, that the sum of the squares of the two shorter sides is equal to the square of the longest side-symbolically expressed by the formula, that the product of Osiris and Isis is Horus. This figure has been adopted in the Third Degree of Freemasonry, and will be there recognized as the Forty-seventh Problem of Euclid."

103

In my next post, in this series, I will include further information on the usage and significance of the Right Angle Triangle in Freemasonry ceremonies and rituals. All information is within the public domain.

[Facterd]

I see.

Facterd

[Facterd]

I simply do not see the motivation. What is the essence of the message that could only be communicated through all these hidden patterns?
The codes found in the Sonnets are most of all training. It is a course in the rules and principles. The main puzzle is found in psalm 46. And what Bacon wanted to achieve (and now I'm speculating) was to contribute his share in the struggle to free ourselves from religious dogma. Bacon was a deeply religious man (see: Stephen A. McKnight: The Religious Foundations of Francis Bacon's Thought) but he had witnessed how literal interpretations of the Bible caused violence and murders in his own time. I think Bacon (a surprisingly modern mind) understood the same thing that you have seen, that the Bible isn't infallible, and that it is dangerous to base our lives on literal, but still subjective, interpretations of it.

And this criticism, of course, he couldn't present openly at the beginning of the 17th century. The point that Bacon was Shakespeare is really not that important, but that disclosure gives the puzzle in psalm 46 a force it otherwise wouldn't have had.


The last thing I want is to have a closed mind. But I can't turn off my skepticism, and I really don't think I should!
Please don’t. Your criticism is most welcome.
Facterd

[RC Christian]

Fama Fraternitatis and Confessio Fraternitatis, published in 1615 and 1616, respectively, are two anonymously published documents which were used to introduce the Fraternity of the Rosie Cross to the public.

The Fama Fraternitatis makes reference to the "37 reasons wherefore we now do make known the Fraternity", which should appear in the Confessio Fraternitatis...but oddly, did not appear in the following work or in any other work, and was reported to be a symbolic reference that initiates would have understood. 37 is the ordinal Hebrew Gematria value of "WISDOM", with it's reflective anagram, 73, being the standard Hebrew Gematria value of "WISDOM". The opening passage of Fama Fraternitatis, entitled "To the Wise and Understanding Reader", reads, "Wisdom (saith Solomon) is to a man an infinite treasure, for she is the Breath of the Power of God, and a pure Influence that floweth from the Glory of the Almighty;

She is the Brightness of Eternal Light, and an undefiled Mirror of the Majesty of God, and an Image of his Goodness; she teacheth
us Soberness and Prudence, Righteousness and Strength; she understands the Subtilty of words, and Solution of dark sentences; she foreknoweth
Signs and Wonders, and what shall happen in time to come; with this Treasure was our first Father Adam fully endued: Hence it doth appear,
that after God had brought before him all the Creatures of the Field, and the Fowls under Heaven, he gave to every one of them their proper names,
according to their nature. Although now through the sorrowful fall into sin this excellent Jewel Wisdom hath been lost, and meer Darkness and Ignorance is come into the World, yet notwithstanding hath the Lord God sometimes hitherto bestowed, and made manifest the same, to some of his Friends: For the wise King Solomon doth testifie of himself, that he upon earnest prayer and desire did get and obtain such Wisdom of God, that thereby he knew how the World was created, thereby he understood the Nature of the Elements, also the time, beginning, middle and end, the increase and decrease, the change of times through the whole Year, the Revolution of the Year, and Ordinance of the Stars; he understood also the properties of tame and wilde Beasts, the cause of the raigning of the Winds, and minds and intents of men, all sorts and natures of Plants, vertues of Roots, and others, was not unknown to him. Now I do not think that there can be found any one who would not wish and desire with all his heart to be a Partaker of this noble Treasure; but seeing the same Felicity can happen to none, except God himself give Wisdom, and send his holy Spirit from above, we have therefore set forth in print this little Treatise, to wit, Famam & Confessionem, of the Laudable Fraternity of the Rosie Cross, to be read by every one, because in them is clearly shewn and discovered, what concerning it the World hath to expect."



The Confessio Fraternitatis purports the birth year of the allegorical founder of the fraternity, Christian Rosenkreuz, to have been born in the year 1378, and to have lived for 106 years. It is public knowledge that years are used by Rosicrucians and Freemasons as cryptic devices, to be understood by the initiates. The year of Christian Rosenkreuz's (referred to as "Our Christian Father) birth and the start date of the Rosicrucian calendar, 1378, was constructed from the Hebrew Gematria of the names of the three main characters from the Freemason's allegories, that being Hiram Abiff, King Solomon, and Hiram, King of Tyre.

273 = Hiram Abiff = Ch V R M + A B I V
465 = King Solomon = M L K + sh L M H
640 = Hiram, King of Tyre = Ch V R M + M L K + Tz V R
1378

The image below is of a kneeling-stool located in a Freemasonry Temple. The letters are Freemason abbreviations for the 3 characters from the allegories: King Solomon (SKI), Hiram, King of Tyre (HKT), and Hiram Abiff (HAB).

108

A point to note is that Francis Bacon's Reverse Bilateral Cipher yields the value of 273 for "WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE" (see below, quoted from Facterd's post #78 of this thread) ...equal to the Hebrew Gematria of "HIRAM ABIFF", the allegorical figure head of the Freemasons.

109

Below is an attached PDF file of the two Rosicrucian Manifestos:

[RC Christian]

The following information is from Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, vol. 1 & 2, 1873 & 1878, respectively.

"The right-angled triangle is another form of this figure which is deserving of attention. Among the Egyptians, it was the symbol of universal nature; the base representing Osiris, or the male principle; the perpendicular, Isis, or the female principle; and the hypotenuse, Horus, their son, or the product of the male and female principle.

This symbol was received by Pythagoras from the Egyptians during his long sojourn in that country, and with it he also learned the peculiar property it possessed, namely, that the sum of the squares of the two shorter sides is equal to the square of the longest side-symbolically expressed by the formula, that the product of Osiris and Isis is Horus. This figure has been adopted in the Third Degree of Freemasonry, and will be there recognized as the Forty-seventh Problem of Euclid."

103

In my next post, in this series, I will include further information on the usage and significance of the Right Angle Triangle in Freemasonry ceremonies and rituals. All information is within the public domain.


As a second part to this topic, I'll focus on part of the Freemason ceremony and ritual for the first 3 Degrees, that I think would be relevant to the topic. First, I'm sure that most everyone reading this thread knows what the universal Freemason emblem (some call it a logo) is:

The Square and Compass
117


All information that I will be discussing in this post is within the public domain. Please take note of the "G" that lies within the center of it. There is much speculation about what the "G" represents. Some say "God", others say "Gematria", others say "Geometry", and still others say "Gnosis". An initiate is told different meanings at different Degrees, so, in a since, all answers can be considered correct. Again, the Degree system is about peeling away different layers of the allegories that have esoteric meaning to them.

Initiates are dressed in clothing and manner as a medieval heretic would have looked, on their way to the Inquisitor, including being cable-towed around the neck (to mimic the rope and nose) and being hood-winked (or blind-folded), and have a sword pressed to their chest during the initiation, just as a heretic would.

121

Toward the culmination of the ceremony, the initiate is led to the altar that is always placed in the center of the Lodge and assisted to his knees. The initiate is then asks a series of questions by the Grand Master of the Lodge. The questions culminate into the most significant question, which is, "After being in darkness for so long, what is truly the greatest desire of your heart?" The scripted response back from the initiate is simply, yet loud and clear, "Light". At which time the initiate's blind-fold is removed and, with face looking downward, the first thing that the initiate sees is: the Square and Compass lying on an open Bible.

122

The Square, Compass, and the Holy Bible (the Volume of the Sacred Law) are known as "the 3 Great Lights of Freemasonry". There are 3 Candles that surround the Altar, either forming the pattern of an Equilateral Triangle, or more often, a Right Angle Triangle (or 3-4-5 Triangle). The 3 Candles are known as "the 3 Lesser Lights of Freemasonry", and symbolize the Sun, the Moon, and the Worshipful Master (the Master of the Lodge).

116

When the Holy Bible is open to the center of the 66 books of the canon, there are 33 books to the front and 33 books to the back. When the Holy Bible is open to the center chapter (Psalm 117), we find (in the 1611 KJV) 33 words. "BACON" has a value of 33 by Francis Bacon's Simple Cipher and the letter "G" has Francis Bacon's Kay cipher value of "33", the Honorary and top level of the Degree system of Freemasonry.

The link below will take you to Bacon's Ciphers:

http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/essay-ciphers.html

(Continued)

[Facterd]

The questions culminate into the most significant question, which is, "After being in darkness for so long, what is truly the greatest desire of your heart?" The scripted response back from the initiate is simply, yet loud and clear, "Light". At which time the initiate's blind-fold is removed and, with face looking downward, the first thing that the initiate sees is: the Square and Compass lying on an open Bible.

The Square, Compass, and the Holy Bible (the Volume of the Sacred Law) are known as "the 3 Great Lights of Freemasonry".

123

It is hard to give a more obvious hint at geometric puzzles in the Bible. An interesting question is therefore: Who created the masonic rituals and symbols?

Facterd

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I'll take a look as time permits. I have a new big article I'm writing today.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

123

It is hard to give a more obvious hint at geometric puzzles in the Bible. An interesting question is therefore: Who created the masonic rituals and symbols?

Facterd
Yeah - I've read that the "G" stands for "Geometry" - that's pretty direct.

[RC Christian]

Just thought I post a few pictures of Freemason artwork that can be found on the internet.

124

(Above) This first piece dates back to the Bible Moralisée, 1250 CE. This is a copy found in the collection in the Vindobonensis Codex 2554, found in the Austrian National Library.

125

(Above) This piece was created by William Blake, in 1794. The title is "The Ancient of Days Measuring Time"

126

(Above) This piece is unknown, in regards to artist and time period created. Jesus with a compass circumscribing the globe.

127

(Above) A stain glass window displaying the symbolism of the hand of God reaching through the clouds with the compass bringing forth rays of Light.

128

(Above) This piece is unites the astrological symbolism of the ancient 7 known planets (which include the Sun and Moon) in correlation with the 12 zodiac signs, each represented by a single star. The pillars of Jachin and Boaz are erected, symbolizing that this art represents the building of God's Temple, which is to be understood from the allegory to represent each person's mind and body as the Temple of God. The Hermetic principal of "As above, so below" is represented within the sketch.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Nice art, RC!

Here are my variations on two of those themes:

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Moralisee_Wheel_500.gif

http://www.biblewheel.com/Art/PantoWheel_1_500.gif

[RC Christian]

Nice art, RC!

Here are my variations on two of those themes:



Hey, I had forgot about those! I remember when I first saw them on your site. Nice!

[RC Christian]

A beautiful piece of history...




129

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The KJV title page is reproduced in my book too.

You'd think Rosicrucians would love my book!

[RC Christian]

The KJV title page is reproduced in my book too.

You'd think Rosicrucians would love my book!

Yes...and I have a copy of your book...:winking0071: page 11...I had forgot about that being in there.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Yes...and I have a copy of your book...:winking0071: page 11...I had forgot about that being in there.
An analysis of the symbols would be very interesting.

Is the Pelican resurrecting her children with her own blood (bottom center) an important symbol in the RC brotherhood?

I wonder who is standing opposite Moses? I would think Aaron because of the priestly breastplate and incense censer but I would have expect Elijah so we would have the symbols of the Law and Prophets as in traditional iconography.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Some are easy to identify. We have YHVH top center in "clouds" with the descending dove of the Holy Spirit. To the left and right are the sun and moon, common elements in iconography. Peter is seated on the left of the Angus Dei (Lamb of God) holding the keys. Who has the sword? Who is that guy holding the big club? who's the guy with the cross made of logs? Simon who helped carry Christ's cross? Who is the guy with the goblet? And where are the women?

And I'd really like to know who is that half-dead looking guy right in the middle under the dove. And what's he holding?


131

[RC Christian]

An analysis of the symbols would be very interesting.

Perhaps I can do a post on that over the next week or so.


Is the Pelican resurrecting her children with her own blood (bottom center) an important symbol in the RC brotherhood?

Yes. It is a very important symbol in both Freemasonry and Rosicrucianim. The 18th Degree of Scottish-Rite Freemasonry is the Rose Croix Degree and is symbolized by this emblem. Below is a photo of it that an 18th Degree may wear:

132

From Phoenix Masonry website, the quote below gives some explanation of its meaning:

"The main symbol featured on this beautiful gold jewel of course is the mother Pelican pecking her breast to feed her babies. The pelican feeding her young with her blood is a prominent symbol of the Eighteenth or Rose Croix Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, and was adopted as such from the fact that the pelican, in ancient Christian art, was considered as the emblem of the Savior. Now this symbolism of the pelican, as a representative of the Savior, is almost universally supposed to be derived from the common belief that the pelican feeds her young with her blood, as the Savior shed his blood for mankind; and hence the bird is always represented as sitting on her nest, and surrounded by her brood of young ones, who are dipping their bills into a wound in their mother's breast. But this is not the exact idea of the symbolism, which really refers to the resurrection, and is, in this point of view, more applicable to Christ, as well as to the Masonic Degree of which the resurrection is a doctrine. In an ancient Bestiarium, or Natural History, in the Royal Library at Brussels, cited by Larwood and Hotten in a recent work on the History of Signboards, this statement is made: "The pelican is very fond of his young ones, and when they are born and begin to grow, they rebel in their nest against their parent, and strike him with their wings flying about him, and beat him so much till they wound him in his eyes. Then the father strikes and kills them. And the mother is of such a nature that she comes back to the nest on the third day, and sits down upon her dead young ones, and opens her side with her bill and pours her blood over them, and so resuscitates them from death; for the young ones, by their instinct, receive the blood as soon as it comes out of the mother, and drink it." Dr. Mackey believed the true theory of the pelican is, that by restoring her young ones to life by her blood, she symbolizes the resurrection. The old symbologists said, that the male pelican, who destroyed his young, represents the serpent, or evil principle, which brought death unto the world; while the mother, who resuscitates them, is the representative of the Son of Man of whom it is declared, "except ye drink of His blood, ye have no life in you." Hence the pelican is very appropriately a symbol of Freemasonry, whose great object it is to teach by symbolism the doctrine of the resurrection, and especially in that sublime Degree of the Scottish Rite wherein, the old Temple being destroyed and the old Word being Lost, a new temple and a new word spring forth -- all of which is but the great allegory of the destruction by death and the resurrection to eternal life.

The 18th Degree

Prince, of Knight Rose Croix Degree

This important Degree, of all the higher Degrees, is said to be the most widely diffused, being found in numerous Rites other than the Scottish. It is said, also, to have been given formerly in some Encampments of Knights Templars. With some, it has been erroneously confounded with the Rosicrucians, which was a Hermetic and mystical Order and wholly without Masonic connection. The Degree is known by various names, such as Sovereign Princes of Rose Croix; Princes of Rose Croix de Heroden; and Knights of the Eagle and Pelican. The name "Rose Croix" is derived from the emblems of the Rose and Cross. Much confusion prevails as to the date and origin of this Degree, and Masonic historians are at great variance on this subject. It seems most probable, however, that it had its beginning during the Crusades, probably about 1188 A.D., and that the Order originally had intimate connection with the early days of Templar Masonry. There can be no question of the intimate Christian character and design of the Degree, even though we have it in the Scottish Rite and not in Knight Templar Masonry.

In the Rites and Ceremonies of this Degree, we have presented a Third Temple, successor to both the Temple of King Solomon and to the Temple of Zerubbabel -- the spiritual Temple, the building of which is the ultimate objective of Freemasonry. The Wisdom, Strength, Beauty which supported the ancient Temple are replaced by the Christian pillars of Faith, Hope and Charity; the great Lights remain, for they are not only the essence of Freemasonry, but also fundamentals in their symbolic truths and in the realities of some in the building of true character; the three lesser lights give way to thirty-three, which to most interpreters represent the thirty-three years of the Messiah's sojourn on the earth. In the teachings of the Degree the dogmas of the "Master of Nazareth" are extended to a universal system of Truth, and adapted to the Masonic dogma of Tolerance. With similar emphasis, efforts of some to place an impassable barrier around Christianity, and the intolerance of those religions which cry, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth" are obliterated. These are the more liberal interpretations of the Prince Rose Croix Rites and Ceremonies. The body conferring this Degree is called a "Chapter"; its principal officers are a Most Wise Master and two Wardens. Maundy Thursday and Easter Sunday are two obligatory days of meeting. The jewel is a golden compass, extended on a arch to the sixteenth part of a circle, or twenty-two and a half degrees. The head of the compass is surmounted by a triple crown, consisting of three series of points arranged by three, five and seven. Between the legs of the compass is a crown resting on the arc; its center is occupied by a full grown rose, whose stem twines around the lower limb of the cross; at the foot of the cross on the same side on which the rose is exhibited, is the figure of a Pelican wounding its breast to feed its young which are in a nest surrounding it, while on the other side of the jewel is the figure of an Eagle with wings displayed. On the arch of the circle, the P:. W:. of the Degree is engraved in the cipher of the Order. The Cross, the Rose, the Pelican, and the Eagle are all important symbols of the Degree; in the explanation of these a full comprehension of the design of the Order is provided. These are treated separately under their respective titles in the glossary section of this website."


I wonder who is standing opposite Moses? I would think Aaron because of the priestly breastplate and incense censer but I would have expect Elijah so we would have the symbols of the Law and Prophets as in traditional iconography.

All sources that I have read from do always indicate Aaron. No Elijah, but we do have the Sun, the Moon, and the four fixed signs of the Zodiac in the corners (starting at top left and working clockwise):

Aquarius - The Cup or Water Bearer
Leo - The Lion
Scorpio - The Eagle (this sign was represented in ancient art and astrology as either an Eagle, a Scorpion, or a Serpent)
Taurus - The Ox (or bull)

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Perhaps I can do a post on that over the next week or so.

That would be great.



Yes. It is a very important symbol in both Freemasonry and Rosicrucianim. The 18th Degree of Scottish-Rite Freemasonry is the Rose Croix Degree and is symbolized by this emblem. Below is a photo of it that an 18th Degree may wear:

132

From Phoenix Masonry website, the quote below gives some explanation of its meaning:

In the Rites and Ceremonies of this Degree, we have presented a Third Temple, successor to both the Temple of King Solomon and to the Temple of Zerubbabel -- the spiritual Temple, the building of which is the ultimate objective of Freemasonry. The Wisdom, Strength, Beauty which supported the ancient Temple are replaced by the Christian pillars of Faith, Hope and Charity; the great Lights remain, for they are not only the essence of Freemasonry, but also fundamentals in their symbolic truths and in the realities of some in the building of true character; the three lesser lights give way to thirty-three, which to most interpreters represent the thirty-three years of the Messiah's sojourn on the earth. In the teachings of the Degree the dogmas of the "Master of Nazareth" are extended to a universal system of Truth, and adapted to the Masonic dogma of Tolerance. With similar emphasis, efforts of some to place an impassable barrier around Christianity, and the intolerance of those religions which cry, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth" are obliterated. These are the more liberal interpretations of the Prince Rose Croix Rites and Ceremonies. The body conferring this Degree is called a "Chapter"; its principal officers are a Most Wise Master and two Wardens. Maundy Thursday and Easter Sunday are two obligatory days of meeting. The jewel is a golden compass, extended on a arch to the sixteenth part of a circle, or twenty-two and a half degrees. The head of the compass is surmounted by a triple crown, consisting of three series of points arranged by three, five and seven. Between the legs of the compass is a crown resting on the arc; its center is occupied by a full grown rose, whose stem twines around the lower limb of the cross; at the foot of the cross on the same side on which the rose is exhibited, is the figure of a Pelican wounding its breast to feed its young which are in a nest surrounding it, while on the other side of the jewel is the figure of an Eagle with wings displayed. On the arch of the circle, the P:. W:. of the Degree is engraved in the cipher of the Order. The Cross, the Rose, the Pelican, and the Eagle are all important symbols of the Degree; in the explanation of these a full comprehension of the design of the Order is provided. These are treated separately under their respective titles in the glossary section of this website."

Thanks for the info. It's funny to think how much opposition there is from certain Christian circles given the extreme emphasis upon traditional Christians doctrines in the stuff you are posting. It's also ironic that Christians often think that the number 33 is evil because of the 33 degrees in Masonry, seemingly forgetting that the number 33 stamps both the Bible of 66 = 33 + 33 books and the life of Christ who lived to be 33 years on this earth. Prejudice and fear are mind killers.



All sources that I have read from do always indicate Aaron. No Elijah, but we do have the Sun, the Moon, and the four fixed signs of the Zodiac in the corners (starting at top left and working clockwise):

Aquarius - The Cup or Water Bearer
Leo - The Lion
Scorpio - The Eagle (this sign was represented in ancient art and astrology as either an Eagle, a Scorpion, or a Serpent)
Taurus - The Ox (or bull)

Those signs "of the Zodiac" are also the traditional cherubs associated with the Four Evangelists who are shown writing with their cherub beside them. They are the Four Writers in the image. I have always thought it curious that the cherubim, which go back to Ezekiel's time, align well with the four cardinal signs of the zodiac. Which came first? The astrological symbols or Ezekiel's vision? Who knows?

[RC Christian]

Some are easy to identify. We have YHVH top center in "clouds" with the descending dove of the Holy Spirit. To the left and right are the sun and moon, common elements in iconography. Peter is seated on the left of the Angus Dei (Lamb of God) holding the keys. Who has the sword? Who is that guy holding the big club? who's the guy with the cross made of logs? Simon who helped carry Christ's cross? Who is the guy with the goblet? And where are the women?

And I'd really like to know who is that half-dead looking guy right in the middle under the dove. And what's he holding?


131

I'll try to post a more complete explanation of the "who's-who" of the Title page, but the 4 Evangelists (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are seated with the fixed Zodiac signs (starting top left and moving clockwise).

"That half-dead looking guy right in the middle" is holding a carpenter's square aka a Right-Angle Ruler.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I'll try to post a more complete explanation of the "who's-who" of the Title page, but the 4 Evangelists (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are seated with the fixed Zodiac signs (starting top left and moving clockwise).

"That half-dead looking guy right in the middle" is holding a carpenter's square aka a Right-Angle Ruler.
Yeah, the Four Evangelists with their cherubim were pretty obvious.

And I was pretty sure it was the "Masonic" carpenters square - but why does the guy look like has half-dead? I wonder who he was? And I wonder if the KJV-Bible-believers like Texe Marrs who make a living off conspiracy theories about the Freemasons have noticed the Masonic symbols on the title page of their beloved book?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Yeah, the Four Evangelists with their cherubim were pretty obvious.

And I was pretty sure it was the "Masonic" carpenters square - but why does the guy look like has half-dead? I wonder who he was? And I wonder if the KJV-Bible-believers like Texe Marrs who make a living off conspiracy theories about the Freemasons have noticed the Masonic symbols on the title page of their beloved book?
Yes, of course they noticed! But they made up excuses to protect their belief in the KJV. Here's a cute example (http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/k1002.cfm)Google puked up:


DEFENDING THE KING JAMES VERSION

Horror of All Horrors!

Original 1611 King James Version Shows Masonic Handshakes All Throughout The Genealogies

Dozens and dozens of perfectly formed Masonic Handshakes adorn the first section of the original 1611 KJV, stamping this original Bible with the unmistakable stamp of Freemasonry - Rosicrucianism. You will not believe your eyes!

Notice what we are NOT saying. We are NOT saying that Bacon wrote the KJV. He and his Knights of the Helmet spent nearly one year fashioning these symbolic pages in front of, and throughout, the text, after the KJV scholars had finished their manuscript.

:blah:

:blah:

:blah:


CONCLUSION

As you continue to understand, these pagan Rosicrucians and Freemasons led by Sir Francis Bacon had their hands all over the original 1611 King James Bible. They took perfectly good text and added page after page after page of Rosicrucian artwork, some of which tells a hidden story, while others are just symbols. These Masonic handshakes are very real and very telling, for they tell the story that Bacon and King James conspired to produce a Rosicrucian masterpiece when they published this Bible.

[RC Christian]

Yeah, the Four Evangelists with their cherubim were pretty obvious.

And I was pretty sure it was the "Masonic" carpenters square - but why does the guy look like has half-dead? I wonder who he was?

I've read...and these are theologians' views, not views of the Fraternities...it was supposed to be 'doubting' Thomas...and some say Judas Iscariot...let me do some digging, because all 12 Apostles are suppose to be identified by some object (like Peter with the Keys).

[RC Christian]

Yes, of course they noticed! But they made up excuses to protect their belief in the KJV. Here's a cute example (http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/k1002.cfm)Google puked up:

Boy, now that's a rational and logical argument on their part! :winking0001:

Gotta make sure you have all bases covered!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I've read...and these are theologians' views, not views of the Fraternities...it was supposed to be 'doubting' Thomas...and some say Judas Iscariot...let me do some digging, because all 12 Apostles are suppose to be identified by some object (like Peter with the Keys).
Yeah, I figured they'd all be identifiable since they all are associated with some object. It will be a fun project to identify everything.

[Facterd]

I've read...and these are theologians' views, not views of the Fraternities...it was supposed to be 'doubting' Thomas...and some say Judas Iscariot...let me do some digging, because all 12 Apostles are suppose to be identified by some object (like Peter with the Keys).

But isn't there one person too many there? Here is a quote from Let it go among our people: an illustrated history of the English Bible from John Wyclif to the King James Version by David Price, Charles Caldwell Ryrie.

'The general title is a fine copperplate engraving by Cornelius Boel. It is a noble image, certainly the most recognisable title page of the entire seventeenth century. [...] The law and the gospel, by now the venerable mainstays of Protestant iconography, are still present in the statues of Moses and Aaron on the entablature niches, as well as in the images of the four evangelists in the four corners. The sequence of evangelists, going clockwise and beginning with the upper left, is Matthew (with the angel), Mark (with the lion), Luke (with the ox) and John (with the eagle). [...] The twelve tents represent the twelve tribes (and patriarchs) of Israel, the history of the Old Testament, whereas the twelve martyrs of the top segment are the Apostles [...] The Apostles appear as martyrs, carrying the symbols of their martyrdoms, [...].'

They count 18 persons, but there are 19. This means there are 13 apostles. According to the quotes below, that is rather unusual:

'We find that when the Apostles are represented together in art, while their number is always twelve, the same persons are not in all cases depicted, selection being made from the extended list.

According to the canon of the Mass, the Apostles are thirteen in number, and stand in order as follows:- St. Peter, St. Paul, St. Andrew, St. James the Great, St. John, St. Thomas, St. James the Less, St. Philip, St. Bartholomew, St. Matthew, St. Simon, St. Jude, and St. Matthias.

When twelve are selected from the above list, St. Jude is commonly left out to admit St. Paul. In cases where the Evangelists are depicted, St. Simon and St. Matthias are omitted.' G. Audsley and W. Audsley’s Handbook of Christian Symbolism (p. 112)

'APOSTLES. In art the apostles represent the Disciples of Christ sent out to preach the Gospel, with the addition of Saint Paul. The number is always twelve even though the Evangelists Mark and John may be included.' Irene Earls Renaissance art: a topical dictionary (1987) (p. 24).

'[...] meantime it must be borne in mind, that although in sacred Art the Apostles are always twelve in number, they are not always the same personages. St. Jude is frequently omitted to make room for St. Paul.' Estelle May Hurll & Anna Jameson: Sacred and legendary art, Volume 1 (1904) (p. 170)

'Sometimes St. Paul, St. Mark, and St. Luke are represented with the Apostles, and some others are left out, as the number is always twelve. In such cases St. Paul bears either one or two swords.' Clara Erskine Clement: A Handbook of Legendary and Mythological Art (2004) (p. 21)

'Although in sacred art the apostles are always twelve in number, they are not always the same. St. Paul is often substituted for St. Jude and frequently the evangelists St. Mark and St. Luke appear instead of St, Simon and St. Matthias.' (p. 148). Elizabeth E. Goldsmith: Sacred Symbols in Art (2003).

Facterd

[Facterd]

And I'd really like to know who is that half-dead looking guy right in the middle under the dove. And what's he holding?

I think the guy in the middle under the dove, holding a carpenter square is placed 'Under the shadow of thy wings, Jehovah' ('Sub umbra alarum tuarum, Jehova')

134

I also think we are supposed to notice that he has a mark on his forehead, and four dots forming a the shape of the Square & Compass on his right hand.

136

137

[RC Christian]

I think the guy in the middle under the dove, holding a carpenter square is placed 'Under the shadow of thy wings, Jehovah' ('Sub umbra alarum tuarum, Jehova')

134

I also think we are supposed to notice that he has a mark on his forehead, and four dots forming a the shape of the Square & Compass on his right hand.

136

137

Those are interesting observations. Can you tell us where the quote comes from?

[RC Christian]

But isn't there one person too many there?
They count 18 persons, but there are 19. This means there are 13 apostles. According to the quotes below, that is rather unusual:
[INDENT]'We find that when the Apostles are represented together in art, while their number is always twelve, the same persons are not in all cases depicted, selection being made from the extended list.

According to the canon of the Mass, the Apostles are thirteen in number, and stand in order as follows:- St. Peter, St. Paul, St. Andrew, St. James the Great, St. John, St. Thomas, St. James the Less, St. Philip, St. Bartholomew, St. Matthew, St. Simon, St. Jude, and St. Matthias.



Facterd,

Have you located a source in regards to who each person is suppose to represent, on the Title Page? I found one yesterday, but accidentally closed it and can't seem to find it again. I'll look again for it.

[Facterd]

Those are interesting observations. Can you tell us where the quote comes from?

I assume you know this, but maybe not everyone else. "sub umbra alarum tuarum Jehova" (Under the shadow of thy wings, Jehovah) are the last five words in Fama Fraternitatis, an anonymous Rosicrucian manifesto published in 1614. Here is an English translation of the last sentence:


"Also our building (although one hundred thousand people had very near seen and beheld the same) shall for ever remain untouched, undestroyed, and hidden to the wicked world, sub umbra alarum tuarum Jehova."

Facterd

[RC Christian]

I assume you know this, but maybe not everyone else. "sub umbra alarum tuarum Jehova" (Under the shadow of thy wings, Jehovah) are the last five words in Fama Fraternitatis, an anonymous Rosicrucian manifesto published in 1614. Here is an English translation of the last sentence:


"Also our building (although one hundred thousand people had very near seen and beheld the same) shall for ever remain untouched, undestroyed, and hidden to the wicked world, sub umbra alarum tuarum Jehova."

Facterd


Yes. I posted the 2 Manifestos recently, but sometimes it sounds better coming from a second source. Thanks.

[Facterd]

Facterd,

Have you located a source in regards to who each person is suppose to represent, on the Title Page? I found one yesterday, but accidentally closed it and can't seem to find it again. I'll look again for it.

No, I haven't. The suggestions I have seen have identified the apostles on the title page differently, so it seems to be rather confusing. I think the one with the carpenter's square is Matthias, the apostle replacing Judas Iscariot. On the title page for the 1611 KJV New Testament "Matth." is pictured holding a carpenter's square, and Matthias is the catholic patron of carpenters and tailors.

[RC Christian]

No, I haven't. The suggestions I have seen have identified the apostles on the title page differently, so it seems to be rather confusing. I think the one with the carpenter's square is Matthias, the apostle replacing Judas Iscariot. On the title page for the 1611 KJV New Testament "Matth." is pictured holding a carpenter's square, and Matthias is the catholic patron of carpenters and tailors.

I didn't know that about him being the Patron Saint of Carpenters and Tailors. That's interesting. I didn't even think to look at the cover page for the New Testament section...great thinking and find! I'll try to upload a copy of that page.

Also,I think it's important for everyone reading this to notice that the one character in question, holding the carpenter's square, is located under the dove's left wing, in its shadow, and of all the characters on the page, he is more shadowed than any other.

[RC Christian]

Here's a link directly to the Title page Facterd was referring to:

http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=1217

This link is to an excellent website. If you notice in the upper right corner of the screen, you can choose magnification levels to view with, or simply click your cursor on the area you would like to enlarge.

[Facterd]

Here's a link directly to the Title page Facterd was referring to:

http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=1217


Notice that on this title page there are 4 evangelists and 12 apostles (while I have pointed out that there are 4 evangelists and 13 apostles on the main title page).

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I assume you know this, but maybe not everyone else. "sub umbra alarum tuarum Jehova" (Under the shadow of thy wings, Jehovah) are the last five words in Fama Fraternitatis, an anonymous Rosicrucian manifesto published in 1614. Here is an English translation of the last sentence:

"Also our building (although one hundred thousand people had very near seen and beheld the same) shall for ever remain untouched, undestroyed, and hidden to the wicked world, sub umbra alarum tuarum Jehova."

Facterd
I didn't know that. Very interesting. But then again, aren't all the figures under the shadow of YHVH in that picture?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

No, I haven't. The suggestions I have seen have identified the apostles on the title page differently, so it seems to be rather confusing. I think the one with the carpenter's square is Matthias, the apostle replacing Judas Iscariot. On the title page for the 1611 KJV New Testament "Matth." is pictured holding a carpenter's square, and Matthias is the catholic patron of carpenters and tailors.
Here's the "Matth" from the KJV 1611 NT title page.


138

He's holding an axe and something else. Judas (not Iscariot, I presume) is holding a sword.

[Facterd]

I didn't know that. Very interesting. But then again, aren't all the figures under the shadow of YHVH in that picture?

All the figures are under the wings (placed lower on the page), but one figure is right beneath the bird, and he is also the figure with least light on him.

[Facterd]

Here's the "Matth" from the KJV 1611 NT title page.


138

He's holding an axe and something else. Judas (not Iscariot, I presume) is holding a sword.


I misspelled the abbreviation. On the title page of NT there is one apostle referred to as 'Matth.' (the one you showed a picture of) and another referred to as 'Math.' (with only one t). It is the one referred to as 'Math.' who is carrying a carpenter’s square:

139

Although 'Matthias' is spelled with two ts in KJV (Acts 1:23 & 1:26), the abbreviation is 'Math.' I can’t avoid speculating about a connection between 'Math.' and 'Mathematics'.

[RC Christian]

I misspelled the abbreviation. On the title page of NT there is one apostle referred to as 'Matth.' (the one you showed a picture of) and another referred to as 'Math.' (with only one t). It is the one referred to as 'Math.' who is carrying a carpenter’s square:

139

Although 'Matthias' is spelled with two ts in KJV (Acts 1:23 & 1:26), the abbreviation is 'Math.' I can’t avoid speculating about a connection between 'Math.' and 'Mathematics'.

I believe "MATH" is referring to Matthew, not Matthias, based on the listing of MATH being in the middle with the more 'prominent' disciples, versus being the last one, since Matthias did become the last of the 12.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I believe "MATH" is referring to Matthew, not Matthias, based on the listing of MATH being in the middle with the more 'prominent' disciples, versus being the last one, since Matthias did become the last of the 12.
That's correct. The apostles on the title page follow the order listed in the Gospels:

Mark 3:16 And Simon he surnamed Peter; And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder: 18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite, 19 ¶ And Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed him: and they went into an house.

[Facterd]

I believe "MATH" is referring to Matthew, not Matthias, based on the listing of MATH being in the middle with the more 'prominent' disciples, versus being the last one, since Matthias did become the last of the 12.

Yes, I was wrong. I found this in a book about silver and goldsmiths


"While in Christian art the carpenter's rule is a standard attribute of the apostle Thomas, English goldsmiths invariably endowed him with the spear with which he was martyred. It is St. Matthew who, generally before 1560 and sometimes even after, is represented on apostle spoons carrying the carpenter's square to symbolize the church he is said to have built for the King of Ethiopia."

Matthew is depicted twice, both as evangelist (sitting to the left) and as apostle (standing in the middle with the carpenter's square) on the top of the KJV title page.

[RC Christian]

The artwork of "The Genealogies of the Holy Scriptures" are very intriguing and unusual. One point to note in the photos below, is the appearance of "handshakes" in certain locations throughout the 'branches' of the family trees. There are no known public explanations for the "handshakes" and what they are intended to represent.


Descending from Adam and Eve...

142




...and descending from Abraham...


141




...and descending from Jacob


140


One thing to notice about the different handshakes in the depictions above, is the positioning of the thumb of that can be seen.


Below, are examples of Freemason handshakes, available over the internet:


143


144

[Facterd]

XXXXXXXXXX

[Facterd]

XXXXXXXXXX

[RC Christian]

There are only 6 known signatures of William Shakespeare that remain. There is much speculation on whether a person with such a non-fluent and inconsistent handwriting could have actually written any of the plays and sonnets contributed to him. Notice also, that his name isn't spelled as "Shakespeare" in any of the signatures.

Example 1:


157

Example 2:


159


Example 3:


158

Best guesses are each of these surviving signatures are worth between $3-6M each...not bad for chicken scratch! :winking0071:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Fascinating analysis Facterd! I wish I had more hours in the day! But keep posting ... I'll find time eventually. That's the beauty of this forum. It is a database for all this information and it's all be replicated on Google and other search engines, so it's part of the planetary mind now and forever. Remember that if you find yourself feeling tired and wondering if all your efforts are worth it.

[RC Christian]

That would be great.


Thanks for the info. It's funny to think how much opposition there is from certain Christian circles given the extreme emphasis upon traditional Christians doctrines in the stuff you are posting. It's also ironic that Christians often think that the number 33 is evil because of the 33 degrees in Masonry, seemingly forgetting that the number 33 stamps both the Bible of 66 = 33 + 33 books and the life of Christ who lived to be 33 years on this earth. Prejudice and fear are mind killers.



Those signs "of the Zodiac" are also the traditional cherubs associated with the Four Evangelists who are shown writing with their cherub beside them. They are the Four Writers in the image. I have always thought it curious that the cherubim, which go back to Ezekiel's time, align well with the four cardinal signs of the zodiac. Which came first? The astrological symbols or Ezekiel's vision? Who knows?

Richard,

Sorry about not responding to this earlier. I must have missed this post along the way. This evening was the first time I've seen it. In regards to the dating of which came first, the astrological symbols or Ezekiel's vision, I believe the correct answer is the astrological symbols. Most sources date the origin of the common symbols that are utilized today, in most tropical and sidereal astrology, to the Babylonians, no later than around 1000 BCE. Many sources would go as far as 1500 BCE, for the Babylonian origins of the common zodiac. I believe the best dating of Ezekiel's time in Babylonian captivity was around 600 BCE. I'm not sure about when the text, itself, is assumed to have been written.

Among numerous Biblical commentators, in his book, The Witness of the Stars, EW Bullinger, interprets Ezekiel's 4 creatures and John's version of 4 creatures, as the fixed signs of the zodiac. The eagle that stands in the place of the more common scorpion in our day, representing Scorpio, is thought to have originated in Babylon, also. I've attached some images below of the Beit-Alfa Synagogue zodiac mosaic, that was built sometime in the 5th century CE. The Zodiac Mosaic covered the floor of the central room in the synagogue, thought to be the room of worship. The Zodiac shows the names of the 12 Signs spelled in Hebrew with a depiction of each of the traditional Signs, 4 women located in the 4 corners, representing the 4 seasons, and in the center is Helios on his Chariot, being pulled by 4 beasts, along with the Moon in the background. Along with the Zodiac, the mosaic also contains depictions of the Holy Ark of the Covenant and the Binding of Isaac.

This archaeological finding of a Zodiac found in Jewish synagogues represents 1 of 8 discovered in recent times.

167

168

169

170

171

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

Sorry about not responding to this earlier. I must have missed this post along the way. This evening was the first time I've seen it. In regards to the dating of which came first, the astrological symbols or Ezekiel's vision, I believe the correct answer is the astrological symbols. Most sources date the origin of the common symbols that are utilized today, in most tropical and sidereal astrology, to the Babylonians, no later than around 1000 BCE. Many sources would go as far as 1500 BCE, for the Babylonian origins of the common zodiac. I believe the best dating of Ezekiel's time in Babylonian captivity was around 600 BCE. I'm not sure about when the text, itself, is assumed to have been written.

Among numerous Biblical commentators, in his book, The Witness of the Stars, EW Bullinger, interprets Ezekiel's 4 creatures and John's version of 4 creatures, as the fixed signs of the zodiac. The eagle that stands in the place of the more common scorpion in our day, representing Scorpio, is thought to have originated in Babylon, also. I've attached some images below of the Beit-Alfa Synagogue zodiac mosaic, that was built sometime in the 5th century CE. The Zodiac Mosaic covered the floor of the central room in the synagogue, thought to be the room of worship. The Zodiac shows the names of the 12 Signs spelled in Hebrew with a depiction of each of the traditional Signs, 4 women located in the 4 corners, representing the 4 seasons, and in the center is Helios on his Chariot, being pulled by 4 beasts, along with the Moon in the background. Along with the Zodiac, the mosaic also contains depictions of the Holy Ark of the Covenant and the Binding of Isaac.

This archaeological finding of a Zodiac found in Jewish synagogues represents 1 of 8 discovered in recent times.

Hey there RC,

Thanks for those pics. I agree, Astrology came first. I wonder if Ezekiel had conscious knowledge of that, or if he was only reporting what he saw in the visions?

The wiki has a very interesting article about Christianity and Astrology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_astrology). Like the Jews, there were times when it was fully integrated into the Christian institution.

Richard

PS: Have you looked at how the Dumbo Dream thread is developing? It's getting pretty hot! It would be great if you could share you insights. You played a central role in the synchronicities that led to that post. I've never "brainstormed" with anyone about it before, and it's leading to lots of new insights.

[RC Christian]

Hey there RC,

Thanks for those pics. I agree, Astrology came first. I wonder if Ezekiel had conscious knowledge of that, or if he was only reporting what he saw in the visions?


The wiki has a very interesting article about Christianity and Astrology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_astrology). Like the Jews, there were times when it was fully integrated into the Christian institution.

That was an interesting article, thanks. If Ezekiel or whoever wrote the Book of Ezekiel was actually in captivity in Babylon, astrology was flourishing at the time in question, so I would suppose that he learned most of what he wrote about from the Babylonians and veiled in the stories of his beautiful visions. Babylon is credited as being the "mother" of astrology, along with Chaldea...the home of Abraham.

There are a number of references which link Ezekiel and Pythagoras together as companions, and students of astrology and mathematics. A Google search will locate several references, but none that conclusively prove anything.


The link below gives some insight into Babylonian astrology, and brings up Ezekiel. It is accurate that scholars believe that the 4 fixed Signs of the zodiac originated in Babylon:

http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.com/2011/10/eyes-in-their-stars-ezekiel-meets.html




PS: Have you looked at how the Dumbo Dream thread is developing? It's getting pretty hot! It would be great if you could share you insights. You played a central role in the synchronicities that led to that post. I've never "brainstormed" with anyone about it before, and it's leading to lots of new insights.

Yes, I have been following it...and I've been holding off on adding a couple of other 528 related posts...but...it seems that 'fate' has told me, by you bringing it to my attention (here it goes again, lol)...that I should post them. I will tonight. :winking0071:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

That was an interesting article, thanks. If Ezekiel or whoever wrote the Book of Ezekiel was actually in captivity in Babylon, astrology was flourishing at the time in question, so I would suppose that he learned most of what he wrote about from the Babylonians and veiled in the stories of his beautiful visions. Babylon is credited as being the "mother" of astrology, along with Chaldea...the home of Abraham.

There are a number of references which link Ezekiel and Pythagoras together as companions, and students of astrology and mathematics. A Google search will locate several references, but none that conclusively prove anything.


The link below gives some insight into Babylonian astrology, and brings up Ezekiel. It is accurate that scholars believe that the 4 fixed Signs of the zodiac originated in Babylon:

http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.com/2011/10/eyes-in-their-stars-ezekiel-meets.html


Thanks for the link. It is curious that he has a different take on two of the astrological signs:



He observes that Ezekiel has his vision while in Babylon and that in Babylonian astrology the four Babylonian seasonal constellations are:

Leo (the lion),
Scorpio (who had a human face),
Taurus (the bull),
and Pegasus (the thunderbird/eagle).
In Babylonian astrology these four constellations depict the four directions of the sky, being about 90 degrees from each other. Thus they represent the entire sky with God’s throne at the centre.


I've never heard of Pegasus being a Babylonian astrological sign. I'll have to check into this. Do you know anything about it?

But yeah, Ezekiel was in Babylon (or so the story goes) so it would be no surprise if Babylonian elements are found in his writings. But I hadn't ever heard of him hanging out with Pythagoras. Guess I'll have to check that out too.



Yes, I have been following it...and I've been holding off on adding a couple of other 528 related posts...but...it seems that 'fate' has told me, by you bringing it to my attention (here it goes again, lol)...that I should post them. I will tonight. :winking0071:
Holding off? Were talking synchronicity here. You gotta go with the flow man!

172

[RC Christian]

Thanks for the link. It is curious that he has a different take on two of the astrological signs:



I've never heard of Pegasus being a Babylonian astrological sign. I'll have to check into this. Do you know anything about it?

No, but I'll check into it also. There zodiac changed over time, from it's origins, close to 1800 BCE. Sometime between 700-500 BCE, I believe, is when the version that we utilize and the Hebrews utilized, was settled on. I have several books on ancient Babylonian, Egyptian, and Hebrew astrology, I'll double check that.


But yeah, Ezekiel was in Babylon (or so the story goes) so it would be no surprise if Babylonian elements are found in his writings. But I hadn't ever heard of him hanging out with Pythagoras. Guess I'll have to check that out too.

Yeah, me neither. I read that recently and looked around some on Google, but again, nothing conclusive. Bear in mind, we don't have any conclusive evidence that "Pythagoras" actually existed...kind of like Socrates. There's not a lot of doubt about him being an actual person, just no "eye-witness" accounts that are credible.



Holding off? Were talking synchronicity here. You gotta go with the flow man!

You're right, but I'm running around handling the 'dad-husband' stuff right now. Only time to spit out left hemisphere posts :lol: ...but I'll let the right hemisphere do some talking later... :thumb: