God's 10 Spokes in Genesis 1 = 620 letters [Archive] - Bibles, Wheels, and Brains Forum

remi

11-23-2011, 07:36 AM

I know the site and forum for long, and three years ago I planned to translate some of my pages about maybe my best discovery: there are 620 letters in all the spokes God says in Genesis 1, exactly as in the Decalog.
I was anxious to see if Richard could do a holographic version of it, and what all of you could add to what I saw.

But I was lazy, or probably I had other things to study... Now I just translated the essential page today, with the tables:
http://remi.schulz.perso.neuf.fr/bw/3crowns.htm

Some other things that are not there:
There are similitudes between Gen 1:1 and Exo 20:1 which introduces the Decalog
- 7 words and 28 letters each
- gematrias having to do with 37, 2701 = 37.73 and 1332 = 37.36, difference 37.37
- Exo 20:1 = 222-86-401-50-261-41-271 allows 222-407-703 = 37(6+11+19)

Richard's database allowed me to find the two central verses of Ps 119 (88-89) have values 1332 and 962, 37.36 and 37.26.

Gen 1 (all) + Ex 20 (1-17) = 474 + 7 + 172 = 613 words, a well-known number.

When I started my research in 1985, in the week of my 35th birthday, I was obsessed by a pattern, 1-2-3-1. I don't remember exactly why, it probably had to do with the Axiom of Maria: "One becomes two, two becomes three, and out of the third comes the one as the fourth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_of_Maria
I thought then I might find interesting gematrias 1231, and after my discovery of the double 620 letters I found
Keter Tora = 'esret hadevarim = 1231
there were 26 generations between Creation and Decalog, and
'esrim weshesha = 1231

Another little thing, the 3rd set of 620 letters (see my page) doesn't work in the Leningrad Codex, used by Richard for the database. Still the problem of additional Waw's.
Cheers.
ps : I apologize for the 10 Spokes in the title of the thread. My poor English let me suppose the word 'spoke', often met on this forum, meant 'speech' or 'saying'.

remi

11-25-2011, 10:05 AM

Richard Amiel McGough

11-25-2011, 10:40 AM

I know the site and forum for long, and three years ago I planned to translate some of my pages about maybe my best discovery: there are 620 letters in all the spokes God says in Genesis 1, exactly as in the Decalog.
I was anxious to see if Richard could do a holographic version of it, and what all of you could add to what I saw.

But I was lazy, or probably I had other things to study... Now I just translated the essential page today, with the tables:
http://remi.schulz.perso.neuf.fr/bw/3crowns.htm

Some other things that are not there:
There are similitudes between Gen 1:1 and Exo 20:1 which introduces the Decalog
- 7 words and 28 letters each
- gematrias having to do with 37, 2701 = 37.73 and 1332 = 37.36, difference 37.37
- Exo 20:1 = 222-86-401-50-261-41-271 allows 222-407-703 = 37(6+11+19)

Richard's database allowed me to find the two central verses of Ps 119 (88-89) have values 1332 and 962, 37.36 and 37.26.

Gen 1 (all) + Ex 20 (1-17) = 474 + 7 + 172 = 613 words, a well-known number.

When I started my research in 1985, in the week of my 35th birthday, I was obsessed by a pattern, 1-2-3-1. I don't remember exactly why, it probably had to do with the Axiom of Maria: "One becomes two, two becomes three, and out of the third comes the one as the fourth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_of_Maria
I thought then I might find interesting gematrias 1231, and after my discovery of the double 620 letters I found
Keter Tora = 'esret hadevarim = 1231
there were 26 generations between Creation and Decalog, and
'esrim weshesha = 1231

Another little thing, the 3rd set of 620 letters (see my page) doesn't work in the Leningrad Codex, used by Richard for the database. Still the problem of additional Waw's.
Cheers.
Hey there Remi, :yo:

It is interesting that we made the same discoveries. The gematria of Keter Tora = 'esret hadevarim = 1231 has always struck me as very signficant.

I had not noticed the introduction of 7 words and 28 letters in Exodus 20. That is interesting.

You said there were "gematrias having to do with 37, 2701 = 37.73 and 1332 = 37.36, difference 37.37." I didn't see them on the page you linked. Perhaps you could list them?

Richard

Richard Amiel McGough

11-25-2011, 10:47 AM

Previous post made me find, with the help of Richard's database, that
the two central verses of Ps 119 (88-89) have values 1332 and 962, 37.36 and 37.26.
This made me wonder if other verses were multiples of 37, and again this wonderful tool allowed to find two others,
52 and 112, that have both the gematria 1813 = 37.49 (or 37.7.7).

It's about normal to find 4 multiples of 37 among 176 verses (176/37 = 4.75...), but there are interesting points, added to the central verses:
- the average gematria is 5920/4 = 1480, the wellknown Greek value of Christos (among others).
- the gematrias of 88-89 were (36 + 26)37, and the two 1813 make 3626.
- 52 and 112 easily find 'divine' meanings, with YHWH-YHWH and YHWH Elohim.

I rapidly checked there was 4461 letters for Psalm 119 in the common Hebrew Bible, as in the Stuttgart Bible used in the database.
The patterns in Psalm 119:88-89 are very interesting because they are the "turning point" between Kaph and Lamed in the middle of the alphabet. They are symmetrical with Aleph Tav, and the number 1332 = Alpha (532) + Omega (800). There are many interesting patterns there. I listed a few of them in this post from October 2007:

I don't recall if we've talked about this, but its worth repeating anyway.

Speaking of the "center" of the Bible, we have the sum of Psalm 117:

Psa 117:1 = 1080
Psa 117:2 = 1264
----------------
Total = 2294 = 37 x 62

Likewise, the exact center of Psalm 119 is found in the last Kaph verse and the first Lamed verse:

Psa 119:88 = 1332
Psa 119:89 = 962
------------------
Total = 2294 = 37 x 62

Thus we have an exact identity in the numerical values of the exact center chapter of the Bible and the exact center verses of Psalm 119.

Note also that 1332 = 532 + 800 = Alpha Omega

And there is a symmetry in the factors 26 <> 62

37 x 26 = 962
37 x 62 = 2294

Richard
All the best,

Richard

RC Christian

11-25-2011, 11:45 AM

The patterns in Psalm 119:88-89 are very interesting because they are the "turning point" between Kaph and Lamed in the middle of the alphabet. They are symmetrical with Aleph Tav, and the number 1332 = Alpha (532) + Omega (800). There are many interesting patterns there. I listed a few of them in this post from October 2007:

All the best,

Richard

Hi Remi and Richard,

Just wanted to add this in, since part of the thread is about 2701:

Richard also note, that the 26:62 reflection was the relationship we discussed when performing the calculations of AB X BA = WXYZ, and WXYZ + ZYXW = ABBA

37 x 73 = 2701, and 2701 + 1072 = 3773

26 x 62 = 1612, and 1612 + 2161 = 3773

Richard Amiel McGough

11-25-2011, 12:08 PM

Hi Remi and Richard,

Just wanted to add this in, since part of the thread is about 2701:

Richard also note, that the 26:62 reflection was the relationship we discussed when performing the calculations of AB X BA = WXYZ, and WXYZ + ZYXW = ABBA

37 x 73 = 2701, and 2701 + 1072 = 3773

26 x 62 = 1612, and 1612 + 2161 = 3773
Glad you brought that up! I hadn't made that connection yet.

remi

11-25-2011, 01:50 PM

Speaking of the "center" of the Bible, we have the sum of Psalm 117:

Psa 117:1 = 1080
Psa 117:2 = 1264
----------------
Total = 2294 = 37 x 62

Likewise, the exact center of Psalm 119 is found in the last Kaph verse and the first Lamed verse:

Psa 119:88 = 1332
Psa 119:89 = 962
------------------
Total = 2294 = 37 x 62

Now I remember this one. It struck me much when I visited the forum some years ago, and I wrote it somewhere, but alas I forgot it, although Psalm 119 is very important to me. Now I hope I will remember it...
What may we find if we could remember everything at any moment?

Richard Amiel McGough

11-25-2011, 02:25 PM

What may we find if we could remember everything at any moment?

I've often wondered that myself. Did you see the movie Limitless? It played off what it would be like to have unlimited mental powers of recollection and problem solving.

This points to one of the great values of the Bible Wheel and gematria - they form powerful mnemonic devices. The Bible Wheel presents the whole bible as a matrix so that every book is in a context with every other book as well as with a Hebrew letter so it is almost impossible to forget where they go and how they fit together. And gematria has helped me remember lots of stuff too.

remi

11-26-2011, 11:35 AM

First I apologize for my bad English. I wrote 'Spokes' thinking it was meaning 'Speeches' or 'Sayings'. If the webmaster modifies the title of the thread then I'll edit my first post.

Did you see the movie Limitless? It played off what it would be like to have unlimited mental powers of recollection and problem solving.

Yes I saw it.
Sometimes, quite seldomly, I have the feeling that my brain is really working at its best, not at 5% as normal, and it's a great feeling.

Reading another recent thread I found this:

As I was thinking about the symbolic meaning of the cubic New Jerusalem, I recalled that the Holy of Holies, also known as the "Oracle" that resided in the center of the Temple of Solomon, was cubic 20 x 20 x 20:
1 Kings 6:20 And the oracle in the forepart was twenty cubits in length, and twenty cubits in breadth, and twenty cubits in the height (...)

I already noticed this verse 6:20, as "Oracle" is in Hebrew devir = 216 = 6 x 6 x6, and in this devir were the Tables with the 'esret hadevarim, the Decalog in 620 letters. The midrashim stated each table was a square of 6 palms, 3 palms thick, so the two Tables together could form a cube of 6.6.6.
So this verse 6:20 is about the cubes of 6 and 20. Richard 'spoke' too of the Spokes 11-22 of the Bible Wheel (now I know what is a spoke), which are too letters Kaph and Taw, and these two letters met in about all synagogs mean Keter Tora, the 620 letters.
When I wrote my post about the House of Jacob, I checked Iokeved was mentioned in the Bible, and that was in Exo 6:20. She's the mother of Moses who received the 620 letters.

About cubes there is something I wanted to share when I read long ago a post on the forum by Craig Paardekooper, about 216 and 64.
I studied a bit Kabbala and was fascinated by the two sefirot 'Hesed and Gevura, gematrias 72 and 216, and the relation with the three verses of Exodus 14:19-21, each one 72 letters, then 216 in all.
There are two important numbers of letters in Hebrew tradition, this 72-216 and the 620 letters of Decalog, and the first sefira is Keter = 620.
The last sefira is Malkhut = 496
Quite a strange thing to have
'H - SD - GBWRH = 8 - 64 - 216 = 23 + 43 + 63
MLKWT = 496 = 1 - 27 - 125 - 343 = 13 + 33 + 53 + 73
111
Above the couple of sefirot 'Hesed-Gevura we have the couple 'Hokhma-Bina = 73+67 = 140, which is the sum of the seven first squares.
We have interesting things with the
- sum of seven first integers = 28
- sum of seven first squares = 140 = 5.28
- sum of seven first cubes = 784 = 28.28
- sum of seven first fourth powers = 4676 = 28.167
Exo 24:3 = 4676 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.
- sum of seven first fifth powers = 29008 = 28 x 1036 = 28.28.37

RC Christian

11-26-2011, 12:03 PM

First I apologize for my bad English. I wrote 'Spokes' thinking it was meaning 'Speeches' or 'Sayings'. If the webmaster modifies the title of the thread then I'll edit my first post.

Yes I saw it.
Sometimes, quite seldomly, I have the feeling that my brain is really working at its best, not at 5% as normal, and it's a great feeling.

Reading another recent thread I found this:

I already noticed this verse 6:20, as "Oracle" is in Hebrew devir = 216 = 6 x 6 x6, and in this devir were the Tables with the 'esret hadevarim, the Decalog in 620 letters. The midrashim stated each table was a square of 6 palms, 3 palms thick, so the two Tables together could form a cube of 6.6.6.
So this verse 6:20 is about the cubes of 6 and 20. Richard 'spoke' too of the Spokes 11-22 of the Bible Wheel (now I know what is a spoke), which are too letters Kaph and Taw, and these two letters met in about all synagogs mean Keter Tora, the 620 letters.
When I wrote my post about the House of Jacob, I checked Iokeved was mentioned in the Bible, and that was in Exo 6:20. She's the mother of Moses who received the 620 letters.

About cubes there is something I wanted to share when I read long ago a post on the forum by Craig Paardekooper, about 216 and 64.
I studied a bit Kabbala and was fascinated by the two sefirot 'Hesed and Gevura, gematrias 72 and 216, and the relation with the three verses of Exodus 14:19-21, each one 72 letters, then 216 in all.
There are two important numbers of letters in Hebrew tradition, this 72-216 and the 620 letters of Decalog, and the first sefira is Keter = 620.
The last sefira is Malkhut = 496
Quite a strange thing to have
'H - SD - GBWRH = 8 - 64 - 216 = 23 + 43 + 63
MLKWT = 496 = 1 - 27 - 125 - 343 = 13 + 33 + 53 + 73
111
Above the couple of sefirot 'Hesed-Gevura we have the couple 'Hokhma-Bina = 73+67 = 140, which is the sum of the seven first squares.
We have interesting things with the
- sum of seven first integers = 28
- sum of seven first squares = 140 = 5.28
- sum of seven first cubes = 784 = 28.28
- sum of seven first fourth powers = 4676 = 28.167
Exo 24:3 = 4676 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.
- sum of seven first fifth powers = 29008 = 28 x 1036 = 28.28.37

Hi Remi and Richard,

Just to add a point here, and I'm sure you guys are probably aware of it, but Ecclesiastes has a beautiful 216 structure woven within it, also. And of course, there is the 216 perimeter count of the Genesis 1:1 Triangle...and the 216 names of God in Kabbalah.

Roberto

12-19-2011, 11:13 AM

http://www.biblewheel.com/Collaboration/darroch2002_07_03.asp

http://www.whatabeginning.com/BBooks/LangtonLegacy/P.htm

This makes me think that everything in the bible is there for a supernatural way for the reader to believe.
And all the dark stories in the bible is just a reflection of our dark sides, and that we say it is because of God, This was people from before, that you would have been like if you lived at that time where Jesus only was symbolized, and the law was what man relied on. The closest thing to be a good man was David.
But because of Psalm 117 being the middle chapter and all the math there, i believe the bible is sealed to be like it is, 66 books, 1189 chapters.
The forming of the biblewheel also is like an confirmation.
Its like God CREATING the heavens and the earth, and later FORMING the sun and stars and the sea. To be as perfect as it is today.

remi

12-21-2011, 02:18 AM

It's quite difficult for me to see Bible as sealed, as there are so many different Bibles.
I already told about the beginning of my doubts when I learnt the different spellings in Torah, but there are less microscopic changes in the whole Bible.
It's a nice pattern to have Ps 117, the shortest chapter, at the exact middle of the 1189 chapters of the whole Christian Bible, but it's true only with the KJV and some other versions coming from the KJV. In LXX and the Vulgata, Ps 117 is the actual Ps 118 of KJV.
I find it a nice pattern too to have the middle between the shortest chapter and the longest one, thinking the gematria of the two middle verses of Ps 119 (or 118) equates the gematria of the two only verses of Ps 117 (or 116).
It seems quite hard to find if there is any genuine numbering of the psalms.

In France, the first important translation of the Bible was made by Sacy at the end of the 17th Century. It follows the Bible Wheel order, with only the 66 canonic books.
You can see here the table of contents, with the number of chapters for each book:
http://books.google.fr/books?id=8GcOAAAAQAAJ&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q&f=false
And you can see there the Ps 117 is the Ps 118 of KJV:
http://books.google.fr/books?id=8GcOAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA545#v=onepage&q&f=false

I read carefully the thread about the Heart of Bible and appreciated the whole of it:
http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?220-The-Alphabetic-Heart-of-hearts-of-God-s-Word

Richard Amiel McGough

12-21-2011, 09:06 AM

Roberto

01-04-2012, 07:46 AM

I agree that evidence like Psalm 117 would far too weak to convince me that the Bible was "sealed" - that kind of pattern would only seem significant if I already had reason to think the 66 book canon were "sealed."

The only evidence that I have found convincing is the Bible Wheel. The fact that there are other versions in the pattern does not appear says nothing about the validity of the pattern. All those other versions can be thought of as "rough drafts."

I believe God can make his pattern fit even if there is many different chapter divisions or book divisions. It's just for him to take the believer who arrange and take over a bit of his life, because if we believe, he will live His life through us. And its not a rulebreak of not interfeering with our free will. Hehe.
But the real midddlepoint of the bible is Jesus, and its confirmated by the 117 chapters of NT History from Matthew to Acts.
But Psalm 117 has a nice math thow, having 62 letters and its sum is 2294 which is 37*62.
If Jesus was 33 years old when going up to heaven and vanishing behind the skies. From that time on until the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem was 37 years.

sylvius

05-26-2012, 01:12 PM

I already noticed this verse 6:20, as "Oracle" is in Hebrew devir = 216 = 6 x 6 x6, and in this devir were the Tables with the 'esret hadevarim, the Decalog in 620 letters.

The tablets with the 620 letters were smashed by Moses.

In the ark that was placed in the "devir" were the tablets with 706 letters (second version of the decalogue, Dt. 5:6-18), so with 86 letters more.

86 is gematria of "kos"= goblet, cup.

Which I think is the cup of the new testament.

Mark 15:38 has
Καὶ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη εἰς δύο ἀπ' ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω
And the curtain of the sanctuary split in two from above to below

Which I think does allude to "devir" as coinciding the "216-lettered Name" in Exodus 14:19-21, of which the last ten letters form "vayibakku hamayim" , "and the water split", translated in LXX as καὶ ἐσχίσθη τὸ ὕδωρ.

The second version of the decalogue has 17 words more than the first version.

First version is written with 172 words, second version with 189 words.

17 is gematria of "tov", good, the very essence of "b'sorah tovah", good news.

172, gematria of "akev", heel, has to do with wine. Wine can make you drunk.

Wine, the fruit of the vine, is fruit of the third day (after Deuteronomy 8:8).

The third day has two times "And God saw that it was good", "wayar elohim ki-tov".

The second "tov" (in Genesis 1:12) is the 153rd word from the beginning,
which woudln't have been the case if the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri" (fruit tree making fruit) instead of "ets oseh pri" (tree making fruit).

Which is the secret of divine mercy.

The second set of tablets were brought down by Moses on the tenth of Tishri = Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement, the day on which the High Priest enters the "devir".

Note that "devir" is not only mentioned in 1Kings 6:20 ...

Richard Amiel McGough

05-26-2012, 01:43 PM

Note that "devir" is not only mentioned in 1Kings 6:20 ...
That looked like a hint, so checked the other occurrences and found this:

Psalm 28:2 Hear the voice of my supplications, when I cry unto thee, when I lift up my hands toward thy holy oracle.

We have the identity: Holy Oracle (davir qadosh, דביר קדש) = f620

sylvius

05-26-2012, 02:01 PM

That looked like a hint, so checked the other occurrences and found this:

Psalm 28:2 Hear the voice of my supplications, when I cry unto thee, when I lift up my hands toward thy holy oracle.

We have the identity: Holy Oracle (davir qadosh, דביר קדש) = f620

It is written:
"b'nasi yadav el-d'vir kadshècha"

דְּבִיר קָדְשֶׁךָ = 640

sylvius

05-26-2012, 02:18 PM

By the way,

"Devir" is 9 times mentioned in 1Kings 6.

v.5, v.16, v.17, v.19, v.20, v.21, v.22, v.23, v.31.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-26-2012, 02:23 PM

The tablets with the 620 letters were smashed by Moses.

In the ark that was placed in the "devir" were the tablets with 706 letters (second version of the decalogue, Dt. 5:6-18), so with 86 letters more.

86 is gematria of "kos"= goblet, cup.

Which I think is the cup of the new testament.

My first association of the number 86 is always "Elohim."

I studied the Exodus version of the Ten Commandments in depth and was very impressed by what I saw. I wrote a series of articles that starts here (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_TenC.asp). The number 620 is the value of Keter (Crown) and the phrase "Keter Torah" is traditionally inscribed on the Torah shield. It has the same value as "The Ten Commandments":

The Ten Commandments
http://biblewheel.com/images/TenCommandments.gif
Esret HaDevarim

= 1231 (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_1231.asp) =
The Crown of the Torah
http://biblewheel.com/images/CrownOfTheTorah.gif
Keter Torah

http://biblewheel.com/images/TorahCrown2.jpg

The 620 letters show amazing patterns based on prime multiples of the number 40:

http://biblewheel.com/images/TenC.gif

I've never studied the detailed structure of the Deuteronomy version. Have you? Does it show a detailed structure like the Exodus version? I see one connection right off the bat. The number 706 = 2 x 353 and 353 is one of the primes found in the Exodus version. It is the value of "Eternal Light" and relates to another prime in the Exodus version - 383 - because 383 = "For an eternal light" (l'aur olam).

Mark 15:38 has
Καὶ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη εἰς δύο ἀπ' ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω
And the curtain of the sanctuary split in two from above to below

Which I think does allude to "devir" as coinciding the "216-lettered Name" in Exodus 14:19-21, of which the last ten letters form "vayibakku hamayim" , "and the water split", translated in LXX as ἐσχίσθη τὸ ὕδωρ.

The second version of the decalogue has 17 words more than the first version.

First version is written with 172 words, second version with 189 words.

17 is gematria of "tov", good, the very essence of "b'sorah tovah", good news.

172, gematria of "akev", heel, has to do with wine. Wine can make you drunk.

Wine, the fruit of the vine, is fruit of the third day (after Deuteronomy 8:8).

The third day has two times "And God saw that it was good", "wayar elohim ki-tov".

The second "tov" (in Genesis 1:12) is the 153rd word from the beginning,
which woudln't have been the case if the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri" (fruit tree making fruit) instead of "ets oseh pri" (tree making fruit).

Which is the secret of divine mercy.

The second set of tablets were brought down by Moses on the tenth of Tishri = Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement, the day on which the High Priest enters the "devir".

Note that "devir" is not only mentioned in 1Kings 6:20 ...

Why do you think the Deuteronomy version was the version put into the ark? The text says that God wrote the same words in the second set of tablets that were put in the ark:

Exodus 34:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

:confused2:

Richard Amiel McGough

05-26-2012, 02:27 PM

It is written:
"b'nasi yadav el-d'vir kadshècha"

דְּבִיר קָדְשֶׁךָ = 640
Yes, of course. But the identity I showed is true. It's just not written in that verse.

Do you work only with words exactly as written in the Bible, or do you also consider the values of legitimate Hebrew phrases derived from what is written, as I did with davir qadosh?

sylvius

05-26-2012, 11:14 PM

Why do you think the Deuteronomy version was the version put into the ark? The text says that God wrote the same words in the second set of tablets that were put in the ark:

Exodus 34:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

:confused2:

I picked it up from Rabbi Munk, "The wisdom in the Hebrew alphabet", p.121.

"In the first version every letter of the Hebrew alphabet appears except for "tet", in the second version "tet" appears in the fifth commandment, וּלְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ "ul'maan yitav lach", that it may go well with you on the land that the Lord, your God, is giving you.

The Sages explain: It was known to the Omniscient One that the First Tablets would be smashed by Moses. Had they contained the word "tov", the world would have feared that the smashing of the Tablets signified tat all "tov", goodness, on earth had come to an end. In order to spare mankind this anxiety, god omitted the "tet" (Bava Kama 55a)."

And also:

"The Second Tablets contain seventeen words more than the First. the gematria of "tov" is seventeen, indicating that the Second Tablets assuaged man's fear taht goodnes had disappeared (Baal HaTurim)."

This I do see confirmed in John 21:11, the number of 153 large fish.

The third "tov" of Genesis being the 153rd word from teh beginning.

Genesis 1:11-12,
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים תַּדְשֵׁא הָאָרֶץ דֶּשֶׁא עֵשֶׂב מַזְרִיעַ זֶרַע עֵץ פְּרִי עֹשֶׂה פְּרִי לְמִינוֹ אֲשֶׁר זַרְעוֹ בוֹ עַל הָאָרֶץ וַיְהִי כֵן

וַתּוֹצֵא הָאָרֶץ דֶּשֶׁא עֵשֶׂב מַזְרִיעַ זֶרַע לְמִינֵהוּ וְעֵץ עֹשֶׂה פְּרִי אֲשֶׁר זַרְעוֹ בוֹ לְמִינֵהוּ וַיַּרְא אֱ־לֹהִים כִּי טוֹב

Rashi:
עץ פריfruit trees: That the taste of the tree should be like the taste of the fruit. It [the earth] did not do so, however, but“the earth gave forth, etc., trees producing fruit,” but the trees themselves were not fruit. Therefore, when man was cursed because of his iniquity, it [the earth] too was punished for its iniquity (and was cursed-not in all editions). - [from Gen. Rabbah 5:9]

sylvius

05-26-2012, 11:40 PM

Yes, of course. But the identity I showed is true. It's just not written in that verse.

Nor anywhere else.

Moreover I do think it is not a right expression "d'vir kodesh"-

I think it should have been then "d'vir kadosh" (gematria 626), and that would have been a pleonasm. The "d'vir" being already the holy place, holy of holies.

But I am not an expert like prof. Mordochai ben-Tziyyon:

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/2681

רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh doesn't mean "the holy spirit"; that would have to be הָרוּחַ הַקָּדוֹשׁ ha-ru'ah ha-kadosh or הָרוּחַ הַקְּדוֹשָׁה ha-ru'ah ha-k'doshah (because רוּחַ ru'ah can be both masculine & feminine). קוֹדֶשׁ is a noun ("holiness" or "sanctity") and the term רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh correctly translates as "a/the spirit of [the] holiness" or "a/the spirit of [the] sanctity".

Do you work only with words exactly as written in the Bible, or do you also consider the values of legitimate Hebrew phrases derived from what is written, as I did with davir qadosh?

No, my hobbyhorse is gematria of "yom shishi" = 666, while there is written in Genesis 1:31 "yom hashishi" , the sixth day.

http://www.google.nl/search?q=Vaychu...SzI4mw8gPI7KVJ

We introduce our Shabbat Kiddush with "yom hashishi [the sixth day], two words which are entirely out of place since they constitute the conclusion of a previous verse (we may even say a previous chapter) with no grammatical connection with what follows. Why do we do this? In order that the first four words uttered aloud bear the initials that spell Hashem [Yom Hashishi Vaychulu Hashamayim]."

The letter "hei" in "hashishi" being extra, alluding to the wellknown sixth day of Sivan, which actually is today , Shavuot = Pentecost, day on which Torah was given.

sylvius

05-27-2012, 02:33 AM

Rectification,

I didn't count well,
I did recount and found 708 letters in the second version of the Ten Commandments.
so 88 letters more than in the first version, and not 86, so also not "kos" = cup.

I found this on the internet:

http://kabbalahsecrets.com/?page_id=1555

Like the 2 palms and the 2 sets of Tablets given to Moses, there are 2 recitals of the 10 Commandments in the Torah, for a total of 20, one in Exodus and the other in Deuteronomy. While the first has 620 letters, the second has 708 letters, with 708 being the numerical value of the Upper 42-Letter Name (the 42 letters of the 3 iterations of the spelled out Tetragrammaton (YHVH).

Richard Amiel McGough

05-27-2012, 10:13 AM

First version is written with 172 words, second version with 189 words.

Rectification,

I didn't count well,
I did recount and found 708 letters in the second version of the Ten Commandments.
so 88 letters more than in the first version, and not 86, so also not "kos" = cup.

I found this on the internet:

http://kabbalahsecrets.com/?page_id=1555
I can confirm your counts. I did an automated count of Dt. 5:6-21.

verse

words

letters

gematria

6
9
41
2495

7
7
23
696

8
16
58
6066

9
21
76
4689

10
6
29
1820

11
17
51
4451

12
9
34
2879

13
6
24
2923

14
26
109
7290

15
23
87
5285

16
22
80
3793

17
2
6
729

18
2
7
568

19
2
7
492

20
5
16
1235

21
16
60
5536

Totals

189

708

50947

Gotta love computers, eh? Makes counting things pretty quick and easy, and it helps avoid counting errors. Or so I thought until I noticed that my program accidentally included a samek (text marker) and counted it as a word and a letter, so my counts were initially off by 1, 1, and 60. Doh! :doh:

Anyway, this count appears accurate.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-27-2012, 10:53 AM

Here is a comparison of the two versions of the Ten Commandments. Five verses are identical, and four verses are identical except for a different number of vavs.:

EXODUS

Words

Letters

Gematria

DEUT

Words

Letters

Gematria

2

9
41

2495

6
9
41
2495

Same

3
7
23
696

7
7
23
696

Same

4
16
59
6072

8
16

58
6066

Dt: 1 missing vav

5
21
74
4677

9
21
76
4689

Dt: 2 extra vavs

6
6
29
1824

10
6
29
1820

Dt: Kethiv has vav vs. yod

7

17
51
4451

11
17
51
4451

Same

8
5
18
1837

12
9
34
2879

Different words: keep vs. remember, etc.

9

6
24
2923

13
6

24
2923

Same

10
18
75
5515

14
26
109
7290

Different words

11
26
86
7028

15
23
87
5285

Different words

12
15
53
2783

16
22
80
3793

Different words

13

2
6
729

17
2
6
729

Same

14
2
6
562

18
2
7
568

Dt: extra vav

15
2
6
486

19
2
7
492

Dt: extra vav

16
5
15
1522

20
5
16
1235

Dt: extra vav and replaces shaqar with shav

17
15
54
4855

21
16
60
5536

Dt: diff word for covet, extra vavs

TOTALS

172
620
48455

189
708
50947

sylvius

05-27-2012, 10:55 AM

I can confirm your counts. I did an automated count of Dt. 5:6-21.

Any, this count appears accurate.

Ah I see,

v21 (v.18 in Jewish bibles) has the "samech" that doesn't count

וְלֹא תַחְמֹד אֵשֶׁת רֵעֶךָ ס וְלֹא תִתְאַוֶּה בֵּית רֵעֶךָ שָׂדֵהוּ וְעַבְדּוֹ וַאֲמָתוֹ שׁוֹרוֹ וַחֲמֹרוֹ וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר לְרֵעֶךָ

sylvius

05-27-2012, 11:08 AM

Richard Amiel McGough

05-27-2012, 11:19 AM

Strange thing about the number 620 (= 10 x 62):

"dalet", fourth letter, as a word has gematria 434 = 7 x 62

"kuf", nineteenth letter, as a word has gematria 186 = 3 x 62

"dalet" and "kuf" are eachothers "atbash" ("kuf" being the fourth letter counting backwards from "tav").

Like twins? (Sivan, the month in which Torah is given, is the month of zodiac-sign the twins)

4 x 62 = 248, another signicant number. (gematria of the name Abraham, and more).

"dalet" and "kuf" together form the word "dak"= thin, lean, small.

Known from the "kol demamah dakkah" (1Kings 19:12)

I would say "subtile".

Interesting insights. They make sense to me. It is curious that daq (דק) and raq (רק) have essentially the same meaning, and the Dalet and Resh look very similar.

דק daq {dak} from 01854; TWOT - 448a; adj AV - thin 5, small 5, leanfleshed 01320 2, dwarf 1, little thing 1; 14 1) thin, small, fine, gaunt 1a) thin 1b) small, fine
רק raq {rak} from 07556 in its original sense; TWOT - 2218a AV - lean 1, thin 1, leanfleshed + 01320 1; 3 adj 1) thin, lean

sylvius

05-27-2012, 11:19 AM

Richard Amiel McGough

05-27-2012, 11:31 AM

Jeremiah 31:32,

נָתַתִּי אֶת-תּוֹרָתִי בְּקִרְבָּם, וְעַל-לִבָּם אֶכְתְּבֶנָּה

"I will give my Torah in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts"

Would this be about the 620-letter version of the Ten Commandments?

I am inclined to think so.

I don't think it refers to the Ten Commandments at all. The "Law" is the "Law of the Spirit" and the NT contrasts it with the law written in stone (i.e. the Ten Commandments).

2 Corinthians 3:2 You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read by all men; 3 clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart. 4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God.

It doesn't make any sense to me to literalize the statement in Jeremiah as if we had the commandments literally written on our physical hearts.

sylvius

05-27-2012, 12:14 PM

I don't think it refers to the Ten Commandments at all. The "Law" is the "Law of the Spirit" and the NT contrasts it with the law written in stone (i.e. the Ten Commandments).

2 Corinthians 3:2 You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read by all men; 3 clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart. 4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God.

It doesn't make any sense to me to literalize the statement in Jeremiah as if we had the commandments literally written on our physical hearts.

Not "literally written" of course.

If you assume that the tablets that were broken contained the 620-letter version an that the tablets that were laid in the ark contained the 708-letter version (like Rabbi Munk does), then it makes sense.

The new covenant being a matter of mercy, for Jews and Gentiles alike.

It is said that the (620) letters that were inscribed on the first set of tablets wurmed themselves loose from the stone when seeing the people making merry around the golden calf and flew back to heaven, the tablets becoming too heavy for Moses to carry slipped from his hands and scattered on the rocks.

These letters abiding somewhere to be some time inscribed upon human heart. Maybe now.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-27-2012, 03:20 PM

Not "literally written" of course.

Right ... but even so, I wouldn't say that the the law that gets written on the heart is to be identified with the Ten Commandments. It's the "Law of Liberty" and the "Law of the Spirit" that get written. The Ten Commandments being part of "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" that were abolished:

Ephesians 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.

It seems rather odd to have the Fourth Commandment written on my heart. A day of the week? Written on my heart? And laws like "thou shalt not kill" - what's that doing in my heart if my heart is filled with love? A heart filled with love wouldn't even think about about killing. So I think the law that gets written is just a metaphor for a transformed heart.

If you assume that the tablets that were broken contained the 620-letter version an that the tablets that were laid in the ark contained the 708-letter version (like Rabbi Munk does), then it makes sense.

How could I assume that when God said that the second tablet contained the same words as the first?

The new covenant being a matter of mercy, for Jews and Gentiles alike.

It is said that the (620) letters that were inscribed on the first set of tablets wurmed themselves loose from the stone when seeing the people making merry around the golden calf and flew back to heaven, the tablets becoming too heavy for Moses to carry slipped from his hands and scattered on the rocks.

These letters abiding somewhere to be some time inscribed upon human heart. Maybe now.
Methinks those old rabbis made up too many stories! :p

sylvius

05-28-2012, 12:09 AM

Richard Amiel McGough

05-28-2012, 08:20 AM

Right ... but even so, I wouldn't say that the the law that gets written on the heart is to be identified with the Ten Commandments. It's the "Law of Liberty" and the "Law of the Spirit" that get written.
"Law of Liberty" :confused: "Law of Spirit" :confused:

The Ten Commandments being part of "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" that were abolished:

Ephesians 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.

Ain't that just another language for the same "written on the heart"?

No, that's not "just another language" for "written on the heart." Paul said the law was abolished. And he explained that this is because the law brings condemnation and it cannot bring life:
Galatians 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law.

Paul contrasted the "law of the Spirit" with the law of sin and death (Ten Commandments):
Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.

The Law is very negative. It says "thou shalt NOT" do this and "thou shalt NOT" do that. No law could ever list all the things you shouldn't do in order to be good. That's why Paul said that there was no law that could give life.

The law was a tutor to bring us to Christ. It was not an end in itself:

Galatians 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

Now I suppose it could be possible to view the Ten Commandments in some sort of abstract way where it is transformed into a source of divine wisdom. I've got no problem with that. But before going there, it's probably a good idea to get a handle on what Paul actually said about the "curse of the law" and why it could not bring life.

Christ's summation of the law was very positive - "thou shalt love." This covers everything, whereas no finite list of prohibitive commandments could cover every kind of sin. And besides, who would want a list of sins written on their heart?

"zachor et-yom hashabbat l'kadsho" - "remember the sabbath day to sanctify it" - is about the secret of NT - The son of man being master also of the sabbath.
(The entrance, door, of Jesus' grave coninciding the entrance of sabbath (Mark 15:46) which is about the 434 ("delet") words in the first chapter of Genesis, "hashishi" being the 434th and last).
Rashi:
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_...showrashi/true (http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9881/showrashi/true)
[The word] זָכוֹר is in the פָּעוֹל form, an expression of ongoing action, like "[Let us engage in] eating and drinking אָכוֹל וְשָׁתוֹ) )" (Isa. 22:13), [and] "walking and weeping הָלוֹ וָּבָכֹה) )" (II Sam. 3:16), and this is its interpretation: Pay attention to always remember the Sabbath day, so that if you chance upon a beautiful thing, you shall prepare it for the Sabbath (Mechilta).

That's what I meant - we could spend our lives speculating about the spiritual meaning of every letter of the Ten Commandments. I've got no problem with that. Indeed, it fits well with Paul's statement that everything in the OT was written for our admonition. And I suppose from this spiritual point of view, we could think of the Ten Commandments being what is "written on our hearts" in the symbolic language of God. That's pretty cool, really.

How could I assume that when God said that the second tablet contained the same words as the first?

It doesn't say "the same words", Exodus 34:1,
And I will inscribe upon the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke.

Yes it does. It just doesn't use the word "same" because that word is not needed. He said "I will write the words that were on the first tablet." If he wrote different words, then he would not be writing the words that were on the first tablet.

Methinks those old rabbis made up too many stories! :p

The story says that the letters carried the stone, which is profound knowledge, like John 1:1, "In te beginning was the word.'

And how do you know that story is true? How do you distinguish between falsehood, fantasy, speculation, and authentic knowledge? For you to call it "knowledge" seems very strange. Do you believe everything any rabbi says? What if some false stories got into their tradition? How would they clean them out?

sylvius

05-28-2012, 09:07 AM

No, that's not "just another language" for "written on the heart." Paul said the law was abolished.

Paul speaks about "nomos", law, while Jeremiah 31:32 speaks about Torah.
Torah as "law" is external.
Paul stresses the inner meaning, like Jeremiah does too.

Yes it does. It just doesn't use the word "same" because that word is not needed. He said "I will write the words that were on the first tablet." If he wrote different words, then he would not be writing the words that were on the first tablet.

Hebrew "davar" does not per se denote a specific word.
Exodus 34:1,
"I and I will write upon the tablets the words that were on the first tablets that you did break."

the words = אֶת-הַדְּבָרִים = "et-had'varim" = the (ten) sayings

And how do you know that story is true? How do you distinguish between falsehood, fantasy, speculation, and authentic knowledge? For you to call it "knowledge" seems very strange.

From where you know that "in the beginning was the word"? That everything did become through the word?
What proof you got?
Was it not gematria 2701 of Genesis 1:1, a triangle with outline 216 = 6x6x6?
Or the 1:4 ratio of the two trees?

Richard Amiel McGough

05-28-2012, 10:10 AM

Paul speaks about "nomos", law, while Jeremiah 31:32 speaks about Torah.
Torah as "law" is external.
Paul stresses the inner meaning, like Jeremiah does too.

Your distinction between nomos and torah is invalid because when that verse is quoted in the NT (Heb 8:10) it uses the word nomos. So nomos and torah are treated as synonyms.

There is a lot of ambiguity around the words nomos and torah. Sometimes they appear to refer to the entire Tanach, other times the Pentateuch, sometimes just the abstract idea of "God's law," sometimes just general principles, etc. And Paul mentions things as being in the law that are not written in the law, such as a women being bound to her husband as long as he lives (Rom 7).

Hebrew "davar" does not per se denote a specific word.
Exodus 34:1,
"I and I will write upon the tablets the words that were on the first tablets that you did break."

the words = אֶת-הַדְּבָרִים = "et-had'varim" = the (ten) sayings

True, but there's still no reason to think that God wrote the version we find in Deuteronomy.

From where you know that "in the beginning was the word"? That everything did become through the word?
What proof you got?
Was it not gematria 2701 of Genesis 1:1, a triangle with outline 216 = 6x6x6?
Or the 1:4 ratio of the two trees?
Yes, I considered gematria and the Bible Wheel to be good evidence for the Bible. But what does that have to do with stories made up by rabbis? Is the idea of the letters carrying the stone tablets supported by any evidence?

sylvius

05-28-2012, 11:07 AM

Your distinction between nomos and torah is invalid because when that verse is quoted in the NT (Heb 8:10) it uses the word nomos. So nomos and torah are treated as synonyms.

Hebrews was not written by Paul.

John 1:17, ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο.

"charis kai alètheia" -- the inner meaning of the "nomos".

True, but there's still no reason to think that God wrote the version we find in Deuteronomy. ,

Yes, but the seventeen words more are. 17 = "tov" and third "tov" of Genesis the 153rd word from the beginning. John knew that too.

[
]Yes, I considered gematria and the Bible Wheel to be good evidence for the Bible. But what does that have to do with stories made up by rabbis? Is the idea of the letters carrying the stone tablets supported by any evidence?

It is parable.

The letters went through the stone, The tablets were written "mizeh mizeh". the miracle was that the middelparts of "samech"and "mem-sofit" stayed on place.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-28-2012, 11:42 AM

Hebrews was not written by Paul.

Nobody knows who wrote Hebrews. There is much in it that sounds like him, and much that does not. Throughout most history the Church both east and west has attributed it to Paul. But it doesn't matter who wrote it. When Paul quoted the OT concerning the Torah, he used the word "nomos." So my point stands.

John 1:17, ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο.

"charis kai alètheia" -- the inner meaning of the "nomos".
That's not true. John contrasted the law with "truth and grace." He didn't say that "truth and grace" were the "inner meaning of nomos."

True, but there's still no reason to think that God wrote the version we find in Deuteronomy.

Yes, but the seventeen words more are. 17 = "tov" and third "tov" of Genesis the 153rd word from the beginning. John knew that too.
But it would be an error to think that every occurrence of the number 17 pointed to tov and its first appearance in Genesis.

You have not given me any reason to think that the version in Deuteronomy is the second version that God wrote in Exodus.

And you have not given me any reason to think that the version in Deuteronomy was put in the ark.

It is parable.

The letters went through the stone, The tablets were written "mizeh mizeh". the miracle was that the middelparts of "samech"and "mem-sofit" stayed on place.
Parables are cool! I love parables. But you said it was "knowledge" and I don't see any knowledge in that parable. It's more like a speculation, a hint, a little something to think about. It's not knowledge. It didn't really happen but you presented it as if it did really happen.

It's just like the "parable" about the midparts of the letters magically floating in space. You seem to be accepting that as fact. So which is it?

sylvius

05-28-2012, 12:41 PM

Nobody knows who wrote Hebrews. There is much in it that sounds like him, and much that does not. Throughout most history the Church both east and west has attributed it to Paul. But it doesn't matter who wrote it. When Paul quoted the OT concerning the Torah, he used the word "nomos." So my point stands.

Paul was master of gematria, which migth be clear from 1Corinthians 13, "the song of love", written in 13 verses, 13 being gematria of "ahavah", love.
13x13 = 169, gematria of the name Joktan. Joktan means "little one" like (Latin) Paulus.
Joktan forms together with his brother Peleg the 15th generation of Adam, the 15th of the 26 generations from Adam to Moses, from Ädam to the giving of the Torah, revelation at the Sinai, on the 6th day of Sivan in the biblical year 2448.

26 is gematria of God's name 10-5-6-5, name revealed at Sinai.

The split, division, lies in the fifteenth generation.

Genesis 10:25,
And to Eber were born two sons: one was named Peleg, because in his days the earth was divided, and the name of his brother was Joktan.

Rashi:

was divided: The tongues became confused, and they were scattered from the valley and were dispersed throughout the entire world. We learn that Eber was a prophet, since he named his son for a future event . And we learned in Seder Olam (ch. 1) that at the end of his [Peleg’s] days, they were dispersed. For if you say that [they were dispersed] at the beginning of his days, behold his brother Joktan was his junior, and he begot many families before that, as it is said (verse 26): “And Joktan begot, etc.,” and [only] afterwards, [is it written] (11: 1):“And the whole earth was one language.” Now if you say [that they were dispersed] in the middle of his [Peleg’s] days, [this is not so, because] Scripture does not come to make things obscure but to explain. Hence, you learn that in the year of Peleg’s death, they were dispersed

Joktan: Because he was humble and considered himself small (קָטָן). Therefore, he merited to raise all these families. — [from Gen. Rabbah 37:7]

"all these families" , thirteen in total (next verses).

The writer of Hebrews was certainly not "master of gematria" on the contrary, which might be clear from his (mis)interpretation of Psalms 110.

That's not true. John [I]contrasted the law with "truth and grace." He didn't say that "truth and grace" were the "inner meaning of nomos."
How you came to that?
John knew about the number 153, the earth being cursed because of Adam's sin, and God seeing "ki-tov", that it was good.
And next:
Genesis 5:29,
And he named him Noach, saying, "This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands from the ground, which the Lord has cursed."
and Genesis 6:8,
But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
LXX:
νωε δὲ εὗρεν χάριν ἐναντίον κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ

So where John uses "charis" he means Hebrew "chen" - gematria 58, like gematria of the name Noach.

You have not given me any reason to think that the version in Deuteronomy is the second version that God wrote in Exodus. And you have not given me any reason to think that the version in Deuteronomy was put in the ark.

That's not true.
On the contrary, you didn't give reason to think that the second set of tablets was inscribed with the same 172 words / 620 letters as the first.

Parables are cool! I love parables. But you said it was "knowledge" and I don't see any knowledge in that parable. It's more like a speculation, a hint, a little something to think about. It's not knowledge. It didn't really happen but you presented it as if it did really happen.
It's just like the "parable" about the midparts of the letters magically floating in space. You seem to be accepting that as fact. So which is it?[/

There is certain knowledge behind it.

refugeeguru

05-28-2012, 01:25 PM

Hi guys!

Some GREAT stuff in all this - ditto for Richard's HoloDec material.

Keep it coming - it's wonderful!

Richard Amiel McGough

05-28-2012, 01:39 PM

Paul was master of gematria, which migth be clear from 1Corinthians 13, "the song of love", written in 13 verses, 13 being gematria of "ahavah", love.
13x13 = 169, gematria of the name Joktan. Joktan means "little one" like (Latin) Paulus.
Joktan forms together with his brother Peleg the 15th generation of Adam, the 15th of the 26 generations from Adam to Moses, from Adam to the giving of the Torah, revelation at the Sinai, on the 6th day of Sivan in the biblical year 2448.

26 is gematria of God's name 10-5-6-5, name revealed at Sinai.

I well remember many years ago when I first noticed that the 13 verses of the 13th chapter of 1 Corinthians were the great "Love Chapter" in the Bible. I already knew that Love (Ahavah) = 13 = One (Echad) and so was very impressed. But it is impossible to attribute this to Paul because he had nothing to do with the way that 1 Corinthians was divided into chapter and verse. The verse numbers were added more than a thousand years after Paul wrote. He had nothing to do with it. That's why it is evidence for a supernatural influence on the structure of Scripture.

The writer of Hebrews was certainly not "master of gematria" on the contrary, which might be clear from his (mis)interpretation of Psalms 110.
Oh really? Then how do you explain the Logos Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Logos.asp) found in Hebrews 4:12?

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/LogosHolograph.GIF

And now you have me mystified. It sounds like you reject some books of the Bible if they don't fit your own interpretation. Is that correct? If so, which books do you think are valid, and which do you reject? Do you reject any books of the Tanakh?

So where John uses "charis" he means Hebrew "chen" - gematria 58, like gematria of the name Noach.
That's right, but it doesn't mean that John was teaching the "inner meaning" of the law. Like I said, he contrasted the law with "grace and truth."

That's not true.
On the contrary, you didn't give reason to think that the second set of tablets was inscribed with the same 172 words / 620 letters as the first.
Yes I did and you know it. Scripture records God as saying that he would write the words that he wrote on the first tablets. If he changed those words, then he didn't write them. It seems pretty plain and obvious to me.

There is certain knowledge behind it.
What makes you think that?

Richard Amiel McGough

05-28-2012, 01:41 PM

Hi guys!

Some GREAT stuff in all this - ditto for Richard's HoloDec material.

Keep it coming - it's wonderful!

:specool:

sylvius

05-28-2012, 11:40 PM

I well remember many years ago when I first noticed that the 13 verses of the 13th chapter of 1 Corinthians were the great "Love Chapter" in the Bible. I already knew that Love (Ahavah) = 13 = One (Echad) and so was very impressed. But it is impossible to attribute this to Paul because he had nothing to do with the way that 1 Corinthians was divided into chapter and verse. The verse numbers were added more than a thousand years after Paul wrote. He had nothing to do with it. Ok, but the division is not arbitrary, and Paul's name, Paulus, seems to be meant to express his humbleness, "Παῦλος κλητὸς ἀπόστολος" (1Cor.1:1), Ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι ὁ ἐλάχιστος τῶν ἀποστόλων, ὃς οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς καλεῖσθαι ἀπόστολος (1Cor .15:9), the thirteenth apostle. After Joktan.

1Cor. 15:51, ἰδοὺ μυστήριον ὑμῖν λέγω, See I tell you mystery
v.52, ἐν ἀτόμῳ, ἐν ῥιπῇ ὀφθαλμοῦ, in an indivisible moment, which is Hebrew "rega" - the smallest unit of time -- you cannot break further.
Exodus 33:5, if I go up into your midst for one moment, I will destroy you
"for one moment" = רֶגַע אֶחָד
Gematria of "rega" is 273, like of "arba", four. 273 = 21 x 13 (= "echad", one) - which expresses the 1-4 principle of the bible and of creation.
Every single moment of time is eternal, and all of eternity exists in one single moment of time.

Mystery is abracadabra for most people, that's why it is mystery.

Only recently I learned abracadabra is Aramaic: "I do create according to the word"

That's why it is evidence for a supernatural influence on the structure of Scripture.
Ain't there supernatural influence on everything?

Oh really? Then how do you explain the Logos Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Logos.asp) found in Hebrews 4:12?

I don't see,
Do you think the writer of Hebrews intended it this way?

And now you have me mystified. It sounds like you reject some books of the Bible if they don't fit your own interpretation. Is that correct? If so, which books do you think are valid, and which do you reject? Do you reject any books of the Tanakh?

NT is a marginal note to the Tenach.

Mark 1:1-2, "Principle of the gospel of Jesus Christ according to what was written in Isaiah the prophet "

. Like I said, he contrasted the law with "grace and truth."
I think this be nonsense.

Yes I did and you know it. Scripture records God as saying that he would write the words that he wrote on the first tablets. If he changed those words, then he didn't write them. It seems pretty plain and obvious to me.

He changed his mind upon Moses's pleed.
Exodus 32:32, And now, if You forgive their sin. But if not, erase me now from Your book, which You have written."

What makes you think that

I was enticed by my own invention of the NT numbers 666 and 153 in the first chapter of Genesis.

refugeeguru

05-29-2012, 01:03 AM

The pdf shows some patterns across the first two verses of the ten commandments, and the first two verses of the Shema.

(Slightly tangential to the discussion, but might be of interest??).

[With a "near-miss" (529) on Richard's 528.)

sylvius

05-29-2012, 11:47 PM

The mist, "ed", written "alef-dalet" , "1-4", of Genesis 2:6, is principle of time and and strucuring principle of creation, principle of speech and also principle of the resurrection

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?95841-the-quot-mist-quot-of-Genesis-2-6

From this Paul "knew", so that he could say:

Behold! I tell you a mystery. All we shall not sleep, but all we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet

Which is Torah-knowledge.

Genesis 2:7,
"And the Lord God formed man"

"formed",
Rashi:"vayyitzer"

וַיִּיצֶר, with two “yuds,” hints at] two creations, a creation for this world and a creation for the [time of the] resurrection of the dead, but in connection with the animals, which do not stand in judgment, two“yuds” are not written in [the word וַיִּצֶר describing their creation. — [from Tan. Tazria 1]

The writer of Hebrews had no idea of that.

Note gematria 318 of "siach" in Genesis 2:5 equals the number of Abraham's trained servants (Genesis 14:14).

"siach", bush, shrub; also: conversation, talk, meditation, thought.

318 being gematria of the name Eliezer, Genesis 14:14 being the only instance where gematria comes to the surface.

Abraham gaining victory over the four kings in favor of the five, and next
"And Malchizedek the king of Salem brought out bread and wine, and he was a priest to the Most High God."

That is what Psalms 110 is about.

sylvius

05-30-2012, 03:44 AM

This is something great, I did forget
( link posted in
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?95841-the-quot-mist-quot-of-Genesis-2-6)

http://thetrugmans.com/parsha_05_53_haazinu.shtml

The arousal we are referring to is summed up best by the words: “with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might.” This phrase is found in the first paragraph of the Shema. The word meodecha, “with all your might,” could also be read as m’-ed-cha, “from your ed,” “your mist;” your awakening from below. This teaches us that concentration and devotion in prayer has the ability to facilitate a true arousal from below, where we can harness all our innate and hidden soul powers to emulate the Divine powers of creation.

This aroused aspect of prayer is perhaps most revealed in Neila, the last of the five prayers of Yom Kippur. These five prayers can be related to the word ed, “mist,” whose numerical value is also five. No matter how tired we are by the day long fast of Yom Kippur, with the approaching of Neila, (which means the closing of the gates,) each person musters all of their energy to ensure that the gates of heaven and his or her soul is actually open the widest. This is truly a quintessential moment of “with all your might.” Like true witnesses we forcefully arouse ourselves from below to proclaim at the end of Neila:

“Hear O Israel the Lord our God the Lord is One”.

“Blessed is His Kingdom forever and ever”

“God He is the Lord”

The final shofar blast uplifts all the prayers to the height of heaven, even those which are beyond words. May we all merit to experience God “raining down” His grace upon us.

Which might prove Paul's mystery is about the same (final shofar = last trumpet).

sylvius

05-30-2012, 04:38 AM

And next of course, טוֹב מְאֹד "tov m'od", very good, Genesis 1:31, can be read as "tov m'ed".

"tov", gematria 17 equals the number of 17 words the second version of Ten Cammandments has more than the first, Moses coming down with the second set of tablets on the 10th of Tishri ( 3 x 40 days after the 7th day of Sivan, day on which Mosee ascended the mountain to recieve the tablets).

Nothing but good coming from "ed" -- LXX has πηγὴ = fountain, spring. After this John 4:13-14,

Jesus answered and said to her, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again; but whoever drinks the water I shall give will never thirst; the water I shall give will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life, πηγὴ ὕδατος ἁλλομένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

"tov m'od" is also read as "tov mavet", death is good. (without death no resurrection-- which is also the secret of the 153rd word, the third "tov" of the Torah).

"Tov m'od" is also read as "tov adam", man is good.

When God wanted to create man he knew that the angels would envy him (man), that's why he told them beforehand "Let us make man".
The angels started quarreling amongst eachother, some saying : "Do it", others: "Don't do it". While they were quarreling God created man, so that not one could prevent.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-30-2012, 09:28 AM

I well remember many years ago when I first noticed that the 13 verses of the 13th chapter of 1 Corinthians were the great "Love Chapter" in the Bible. I already knew that Love (Ahavah) = 13 = One (Echad) and so was very impressed. But it is impossible to attribute this to Paul because he had nothing to do with the way that 1 Corinthians was divided into chapter and verse. The verse numbers were added more than a thousand years after Paul wrote. He had nothing to do with it.
Ok, but the division is not arbitrary, and Paul's name, Paulus, seems to be meant to express his humbleness, "Παῦλος κλητὸς ἀπόστολος" (1Cor.1:1), Ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι ὁ ἐλάχιστος τῶν ἀποστόλων, ὃς οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς καλεῖσθαι ἀπόστολος (1Cor .15:9), the thirteenth apostle. After Joktan.

1Cor. 15:51, ἰδοὺ μυστήριον ὑμῖν λέγω, See I tell you mystery
v.52, ἐν ἀτόμῳ, ἐν ῥιπῇ ὀφθαλμοῦ, in an indivisible moment, which is Hebrew "rega" - the smallest unit of time -- you cannot break further.
Exodus 33:5, if I go up into your midst for one moment, I will destroy you
"for one moment" = רֶגַע אֶחָד
Gematria of "rega" is 273, like of "arba", four. 273 = 21 x 13 (= "echad", one) - which expresses the 1-4 principle of the bible and of creation.
Every single moment of time is eternal, and all of eternity exists in one single moment of time.

I agree it is not arbitrary. My point was that we cannot attribute the versification to Paul since it was created many centuries after he wrote.

And I agree that Paul may have taken his name because he liked the implication of "smallness" but I don't understand why you would make a connection with Joktan merely because his name means the same thing.

Mystery is abracadabra for most people, that's why it is mystery.

Only recently I learned abracadabra is Aramaic: "I do create according to the word"

I learned that many years ago. I think it's pretty cool.

Ain't there supernatural influence on everything?

Not in the way that I was talking about. You won't usually find patterns like the gematria of Genesis 1:1 or Hebrews 4:12 in the Sunday comics.

I don't see,
Do you think the writer of Hebrews intended it this way?

What do you think about the alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1? Do you think it was designed by Moses? Or is it just a coincidence? Or is it meaningless to you?

NT is a marginal note to the Tenach.

Mark 1:1-2, "Principle of the gospel of Jesus Christ according to what was written in Isaiah the prophet "

A marginal note? It sounds like your opinion of the NT is pretty "marginal."

I think this be nonsense.

Then how can you understand anything in the NT? It constantly contrasts law vs. grace.

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Galatians 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

He changed his mind upon Moses's pleed.
Exodus 32:32, And now, if You forgive their sin. But if not, erase me now from Your book, which You have written."

That doesn't mean he changed the words he wrote on the second tablets. He said he wrote the words that were on the first tablet. Seems pretty plain to me.

sylvius

05-30-2012, 10:35 AM

I agree it is not arbitrary. My point was that we cannot attribute the versification to Paul since it was created many centuries after he wrote.

And I agree that Paul may have taken his name because he liked the implication of "smallness" but I don't understand why you would make a connection with Joktan merely because his name means the same thing.

Joktan forms together withhis brother Peleg the 15th of the 26 generations from Adam to Moses, coinciding the "y-h"-part of the Name of God.
Name of God that is also hidden in the initial letters of "yom hashishi vay'chulu hashamayim" (last two words of Genesis 1:31 and first two words of Genesis 2:1), where the letter "hey" in "hashishi" seems to be superfluous, extra, since the other day-indications do without.
Letter "hey" that is characterized by its little opening, opening like a needle's eye.\
"Hey" value 5, which is gematria of "ed" in Genesis 2:6.
Genesis 2:4 has "these are the generations of heaven and earth when they were created" (some do see this as the last verse of the first story of creation, "b'hibaram" being the last word, 474th word from the beginning. 474 = "da'at", knowledge. "B'hibaram" being read as "with the letter "hey"they were created", or also "for the sake of Abraham (they were created)"

Not in the way that I was talking about. You won't usually find patterns like the gematria of Genesis 1:1 or Hebrews 4:12 in the Sunday comics.
I do see gematria 2701 as a miracle, but I don't see the miracle of Hebrews 4:12. I think it sought.

What do you think about the alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1? Do you think it was designed by Moses? Or is it just a coincidence? Or is it meaningless to you?
Maybe designed. Someone wrote it down, once. A miracle-worker?

A marginal note? It sounds like your opinion of the NT is pretty "marginal."
NT leans on Tenach but Tenach doesn't lean on NT.
NT is about the inner meaning of Tenach.

Then how can you understand anything in the NT? It constantly contrasts law vs. grace.

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Galatians 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

It doesn't.

See what Rashi says on Genesis 1:1, "Elohim created":

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8165/showrashi/true

God’s creation of the heavens and the earth: But it does not say “of the Lord’s creation of” (i.e., it should say “of the Lord God’s creation of” as below 2:4 “on the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven”) for in the beginning it was His intention to create it with the Divine Standard of Justice, but he perceived that the world would not endure; so He preceded it with the Divine Standard of Mercy, allying it with the Divine Standard of Justice, and that is the reason it is written:“on the day the Lord God made earth and heaven.”

That doesn't mean he changed the words he wrote on the second tablets. He said he wrote the words that were on the first tablet. Seems pretty plain to me.

He didn't change the words, but just had another wording, 17 words more.
On the first tablets was no letter "tet" , "tet" first letter of "tov".

Richard Amiel McGough

05-30-2012, 11:55 AM

I do see gematria 2701 as a miracle, but I don't see the miracle of Hebrews 4:12. I think it sought.

The evidence for Hebrews 4:12 being a "miracle" is the same as that for Genesis 1:1.

If the pattern in Hebrews 4:12 is "sought" then so is the pattern in Genesis 1:1.

The evidence is the same. It is irrational to accept one and not the other.

NT leans on Tenach but Tenach doesn't lean on NT.
NT is about the inner meaning of Tenach.

Yes, the NT gives the "inner meaning" of the Tanakh. But you reject Hebrews as erroneous, so why do you accept any of the NT?

Then how can you understand anything in the NT? It constantly contrasts law vs. grace.

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Galatians 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
It doesn't.

Yes it does. The phrase "not under law, but under grace" contrasts law and grace, as do many other statements in the NT.

See what Rashi says on Genesis 1:1, "Elohim created":

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8165/showrashi/true

God’s creation of the heavens and the earth: But it does not say “of the Lord’s creation of” (i.e., it should say “of the Lord God’s creation of” as below 2:4 “on the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven”) for in the beginning it was His intention to create it with the Divine Standard of Justice, but he perceived that the world would not endure; so He preceded it with the Divine Standard of Mercy, allying it with the Divine Standard of Justice, and that is the reason it is written:“on the day the Lord God made earth and heaven.”

So what? Rashi has no authority. He was just another guy with an opinion. He has to justify his assertions just like any other man. Merely stating a tradition someone made up means nothing. It could be true. It could be false. Why should we believe him?

He didn't change the words, but just had another wording, 17 words more.
On the first tablets was no letter "tet" , "tet" first letter of "tov".
Yes he did. He changed the words. He did not merely add more words, he changed words too. But in the Bible he said he would write the words that were on the first tablet. You say he didn't do that.

sylvius

05-30-2012, 11:21 PM

The evidence for Hebrews 4:12 being a "miracle" is the same as that for Genesis 1:1.

No it isn't.

Hebrew letters are consonants, physical forms, forming the body of the word.
So not Greek letters.

More: Gematria 2701 leaves things open. You can "make a way" with it, play with it, like Jesus's disciples did, plucking grain, heads of corn, on the sabbath.
f.e. if you leave out the letter "shin" from "shamayim" you're left with a phrase with gematria 2401 = 49x49, while the lettervalue 300 is gematria of "ruach elohim" in the next verse: "and the spirit of God was hovering upon the face of the water" . Water, "mayim" being heaven, "shamayim", with left out "shin".
I bet Mark had something like that in mind when writing: καὶ εὐθὺς ἀναβαίνων ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος εἶδεν σχιζομένους τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα ὡς περιστερὰν καταβαῖνον εἰς αὐτόν: (Mark 1:10)
The verb σχίζω was also found in LXX Exodus 14:21, "and the water split", Hebrew "vayibbaku hamayim", etc.

If the pattern in Hebrews 4:12 is "sought" then so is the pattern in Genesis 1:1.

The evidence is the same. It is irrational to accept one and not the other.

I cannot do nothing with your pattern in Hebrews 4:12. It doesn't say me a thing.

Yes, the NT gives the "inner meaning" of the Tanakh. But you reject Hebrews as erroneous, so why do you accept any of the NT?

Hebrews has had a very bad influence on Christianity, especially with:

Hebrews 9:22,

without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins
and Hebrews 10:26-31,

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Yes it does. The phrase "not under law, but under grace" contrasts law and grace, as do many other statements in the NT.

How do you explain then Romans 2:13-15?
For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts
and Romans 2:

So what? Rashi has no authority. He was just another guy with an opinion. He has to justify his assertions just like any other man. Merely stating a tradition someone made up means nothing. It could be true. It could be false. Why should we believe him?

Yes he did. He changed the words. He did not merely add more words, he changed words too. But in the Bible he said he would write the words that were on the first tablet. You say he didn't do that.[/QUOTE]

sylvius

05-31-2012, 12:18 AM

Something went wrong, and i am not able to edit.

So continue:

Yes it does. The phrase "not under law, but under grace" contrasts law and grace, as do many other statements in the NT.

How do you explain then Romans 2:13-15?

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their heartsand Romans 2:28-29?

For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

So what? Rashi has no authority. He was just another guy with an opinion. He has to justify his assertions just like any other man. Merely stating a tradition someone made up means nothing. It could be true. It could be false. Why should we believe him?
He explains, and does so with authority, according to tradition.
In the first story creation (Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 2:3 or Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 2:4a) the name of God does not occur. There is just mentioning of "elohim". While in the second story of creation there is mentioning of "hashem elohim". Why?
We've seen the name of God being hidden in the initial letters of "yom hashishi vay'chulu hashamayim" - not just by happenstance.
You can "smell" God's name also in Genesis 1:26, 26 being the gematria of God's name.
If man was not created, v.25 would have been the last verse of the first chapter of Genesis. Creation and bible indeed would have been without sense then. Everything was created for the sake of Abraham = for the sake of man = for the sake of you and me.

Yes he did. He changed the words. He did not merely add more words, he changed words too. But in the Bible he said he would write the words that were on the first tablet. You say he didn't do that.

Exodus 20:1 reads:
וַיְדַבֵּר אֱ־לֹהִים אֵת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה לֵאמֹר

Exodus 34:1 reads:
וְכָתַבְתִּי עַל הַלֻּחֹת אֶת הַדְּבָרִים אֲשֶׁר הָיוּ עַל הַלֻּחֹת הָרִאשֹׁ

As said "davar" doesn't necessarily mean "single word". Exodus 20:1 doesn't say: "And God spoke all these (172) words" - but rather: "And God spoke all these (ten) sayings". Same goes for Exodus 34:1.

Rashi:
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9881/showrashi/true

all these words: [This] teaches [us] that the Holy One, blessed be He, said the Ten Commandments in one utterance, something that is impossible for a human being to say [in a similar way]. If so, why does the Torah say again, “I am [the Lord, your God (verse 2)]” and “You shall have no…” (verse 3)? Because He later explained each statement [of the Ten Commandments] individually. — [from Mechilta]

cf. Genesis 15:1,
אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה הָיָה דְבַר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל אַבְרָם בַּמַּחֲזֶה
[B]After these incidents, the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, "Fear not, Abram; I am your Shield; your reward is exceedingly great."

Richard Amiel McGough

05-31-2012, 04:18 PM

Something went wrong, and i am not able to edit.

There is a bug in the software. If your post contains special characters, like curly quotes that are copy/pasted from Microsoft, it breaks the code and the edit box will be empty. This also happens when someone tries to quote a post with special characters. I'm looking for a solution. Hopefully it will be soon. Meanwhile, copy/paste should be a sufficient workaround.

Richard Amiel McGough

05-31-2012, 05:48 PM

No it isn't.

Hebrew letters are consonants, physical forms, forming the body of the word.
So not Greek letters.

More: Gematria 2701 leaves things open. You can "make a way" with it, play with it, like Jesus's disciples did, plucking grain, heads of corn, on the sabbath.
f.e. if you leave out the letter "shin" from "shamayim" you're left with a phrase with gematria 2401 = 49x49, while the lettervalue 300 is gematria of "ruach elohim" in the next verse: "and the spirit of God was hovering upon the face of the water" . Water, "mayim" being heaven, "shamayim", with left out "shin".
I bet Mark had something like that in mind when writing: καὶ εὐθὺς ἀναβαίνων ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος εἶδεν σχιζομένους τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα ὡς περιστερὰν καταβαῖνον εἰς αὐτόν: (Mark 1:10)
The verb σχίζω was also found in LXX Exodus 14:21, "and the water split", Hebrew "vayibbaku hamayim", etc.
I think you misunderstood my comment. I agree that you can do a lot more with the Hebrew text by playing with the words. That's because Hebrew is a "building block" language where the letters are symbols with their own meaning. Greek is not like that, but that's not what I was talking about when I said the evidence was the same for the alphanumeric structures the Greek and Hebrew verses.

The evidence I was talking about has nothing to do with the ability to play with the letters to make new meanings. The evidence I was talking about is what I call the "holographic structure" of the verses. It is the same for both the Greek and the Hebrew holographs. For example, here is the Creation Holograph (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Creation_Hyper.asp) that shows the integrated alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5:

http://biblewheel.com/images/Creation_DDa.gif

This structure is built upon prime Hexagonal and Star numbers like 13, 37, 73, 271, and the fractal Star number (Koch Snowflake) 373 which is the value of "Logos" in Greek. Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 37 x 73 = Hex(4) x Star(4). The Creation Holograph is based on the set Holographic Generating Set (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Creation_Set.asp) (27, 37, 73) and it's sum 27 + 37 + 73 = 137 which is the value of "QBLH" (Kaballah). Many of these geometrically numbers also appear in the Logos Holograph:

http://biblewheel.com/images/LogosHolograph.GIF

And the second Star number Star(2) = 13 is the basis of the Unity Holograph, the alphanumeric structure of the Shema, which Christ said was the greatest commandment. And it is integrated with Greek gematria too:

http://biblewheel.com/images/UnityHolograph.gif

The evidence is the same for both the Greek and the Hebrew Holographs.

I cannot do nothing with your pattern in Hebrews 4:12. It doesn't say me a thing.
I think that's because you don't understand it.

sylvius

06-01-2012, 12:07 AM

http://biblewheel.com/images/LogosHolograph.GIF
I think that's because you don't understand it.

I see some (more or less) nice picture, that needs explanation.

But what explains it better than the plain text?

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Ζῶν γὰρ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐνεργὴς καὶ τομώτερος ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν μάχαιραν δίστομον καὶ διϊκνούμενος ἄχρι μερισμοῦ ψυχῆς καὶ πνεύματος, ἁρμῶν τε καὶ μυελῶν, καὶ κριτικὸς ἐνθυμήσεων καὶ ἐννοιῶν καρδίας:

Might it be that he had Exodus 17 in mind?

v.8, Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim.

v. 13, Joshua weakened Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword

v. 16, And he said, For there is a hand on the throne of the Eternal, [that there shall be] a war for the Lord against Amalek from generation to generation

Rashi:

Now what is the meaning of כֵּס [as opposed to כִּסֵא and also [why is] the Divine Name divided in half? [I.e., why is the Name יָ-הּ used instead of י-ה-ו-ה ?] [The answer is that] the Holy One, blessed be He, swore that His Name will not be complete and His throne will not be complete until the name of Amalek is completely obliterated. And when his name is obliterated, the Divine Name will be complete, and the throne will be complete, as it is said: “The enemy has been destroyed; swords exist forever (לָנֶצַח)” (Ps. 9:7); this [who they are referring to] is Amalek, about whom it is written: “and kept their fury forever (נֶצַח)” (Amos 1:11). "And You have uprooted the cities-their remembrance is lost" (Ps. 9:7) [i.e., Amalek’s obliteration]. What does it say afterwards? “And the Lord (וַיהוה) shall sit forever” (Ps. 9:8); thus [after Amalek is obliterated] the Name is complete. "He has established His throne (כִּסְאוֹ) for judgment" (Ps. 9:8). Thus the throne is complete [i.e., thus the throne, here spelled with an “aleph,” is now complete]. — [from Midrash Tanchuma, end of Ki Theitzei]

Richard Amiel McGough

06-01-2012, 02:25 PM

I see some (more or less) nice picture, that needs explanation.

But what explains it better than the plain text?

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Ζῶν γὰρ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐνεργὴς καὶ τομώτερος ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν μάχαιραν δίστομον καὶ διϊκνούμενος ἄχρι μερισμοῦ ψυχῆς καὶ πνεύματος, ἁρμῶν τε καὶ μυελῶν, καὶ κριτικὸς ἐνθυμήσεων καὶ ἐννοιῶν καρδίας:

The explanation is given in the link (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Logos.asp) I provided.

It is infinitely more than a "nice picture." It shows that the text has an alphanumeric structure based on the values of the central concepts, most significantly the large prime number 373 which is the value of "Logos" (Word). But there is much more to it than that. The second letter Bet means "house" and is a symbol of the Word as a container of ideas. It sums to 412, which links to the verse number Hebrews 4:12. The Word (Logos) is the title of the Second Person of the Trinity, the Son, which in Hebrew begins with a Bet, just like the first person Father (Av) begins with an Aleph. And the phrase "Bet El" meaning "house of God" sums to 443 which is another prime and the value of Ho Logos = The Word, and this value appears twice in the opening phrase "For the Word (= 443) of God is living" = 6 x 443. And the entire verse subdivides coherently according to grammar into multiples of 73 (Wisdom) and 373 (Logos).

Might it be that he had Exodus 17 in mind?

v.8, Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim.

v. 13, Joshua weakened Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword

v. 16, And he said, For there is a hand on the throne of the Eternal, [that there shall be] a war for the Lord against Amalek from generation to generation

Rashi:

Now what is the meaning of כֵּס [as opposed to כִּסֵא and also [why is] the Divine Name divided in half? [I.e., why is the Name יָ-הּ used instead of י-ה-ו-ה ?] [The answer is that] the Holy One, blessed be He, swore that His Name will not be complete and His throne will not be complete until the name of Amalek is completely obliterated. And when his name is obliterated, the Divine Name will be complete, and the throne will be complete, as it is said: “The enemy has been destroyed; swords exist forever (לָנֶצַח)” (Ps. 9:7); this [who they are referring to] is Amalek, about whom it is written: “and kept their fury forever (נֶצַח)” (Amos 1:11). "And You have uprooted the cities-their remembrance is lost" (Ps. 9:7) [i.e., Amalek’s obliteration]. What does it say afterwards? “And the Lord (וַיהוה) shall sit forever” (Ps. 9:8); thus [after Amalek is obliterated] the Name is complete. "He has established His throne (כִּסְאוֹ) for judgment" (Ps. 9:8). Thus the throne is complete [i.e., thus the throne, here spelled with an “aleph,” is now complete]. — [from Midrash Tanchuma, end of Ki Theitzei]

I can see why you might think that is related, but there is a better explanation from the Christian tradition that says Amalek is a symbol (type) of the flesh which opposes the spirit. Here is how Ray Stedman explained it:

The judgment of God is absolutely inescapable for Esau. God is forever set against him. One of the grandsons of Esau was a man named Amalek, who withstood the Israelites on their way into Canaan. In Exodus 17:14-16 it is recorded that God said to Moses, "I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." And Moses says, "The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation." That is what God is saying about the flesh. He will never make peace with it.
I don't understand why you accept whatever the Rabbis wrote as if it were authoritative Scripture. They made up a lot of stuff you know.

sylvius

06-02-2012, 01:11 AM

The second letter Bet (...) is a symbol of the Word as a container of ideas.
How you come to that?

"House" is something with inside and outside, with door and roof, and with an inner chamber in which you should withdraw when praying (Matthew 6:6)

It sums to 412, which links to the verse number Hebrews 4:12.
Doesn't it link then also to f.e. the verse number Genesis 4:12 or Matthew 4:12, etc?

And what about Hebrews 4:06? Is that verse linked to the letter "tav"?

the Son, which in Hebrew begins with a Bet, just like the first person Father (Av) begins with an Aleph.
And the third person with a Gimel?

like:
"Samael rode upon the serpent as big as a camel when he tempted Eve" ?

http://www.umsl.edu/~sheschw/samplemyths_9.htm

Samael was the great prince in heaven. After God created the world, Samael took his band of followers and descended and saw the creatures that God had created. Among them he found none so skilled to do evil than the serpent, as it is said, Now the serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild beasts (Gen. 3:1). Its appearance was something like that of a camel, and Samael mounted and rode upon it. Riding on the serpent, the angel Samael came to Eve in the night and seduced her, and she conceived Cain. Later, while Eve was pregnant by the angel, Adam came to her, and she conceived Abel.

And the phrase "Bet El" meaning "house of God" sums to 443 which is another prime and the value of Ho Logos = The Word, and this value appears twice in the opening phrase "For the Word (= 443) of God is living" = 6 x 443. And the entire verse subdivides coherently according to grammar into multiples of 73 (Wisdom) and 373 (Logos).
You are comparing apples with pears.

I can see why you might think that is related, but there is a better explanation from the Christian tradition that says Amalek is a symbol (type) of the flesh which opposes the spirit. Here is how Ray Stedman explained it:

(...)

I don't understand why you accept whatever the Rabbis wrote as if it were authoritative Scripture. They made up a lot of stuff you know.
But why you should accept what Stedman wrote? (which is nonsense)

Hebrews 3:7 - 4:13 is about "entering God's rest", based on Psalms 95, which again is about Exodus 17.

Hebrews 3:7,

Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.
Psalms 95:7-8,

(...) today, if you hearken to my voice, do not harden your heart as Meribah, as [on] the day of Massah in the desert

Hebrews 3:19,

So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief.

Unbelief = ἀπιστία "apistia",

Expressed in Exodus 17:7,

He named the place Massah [testing] and Meribah [quarreling] because of the quarrel of the children of Israel and because of their testing the Lord, saying, Is the Lord in our midst or not?

And then immediately Amalek came, v.8,
Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim

Rashi:

Amalek came, etc.: He [God] juxtaposed this section to this verse, ["Is the Lord in our midst or not? "] implying: “I am always among you, and [I am] always prepared for all your necessities, but you say, Is the Lord in our midst or not?’ By your life, the dog will come and bite you, and you will cry out to Me, and [then] you will know where I am ”

Gematria of Amalek is 240, same as of "safek", doubt.

http://www.inner.org/healing/healing35.htm

There is more to it.

Wasn't Jesus called Immanuel = "God with us" = the final answer on the question: Is the Lord in our midst or not?

Matthew 28:19,

[I]See I am with you all teh days until the end of time

Richard Amiel McGough

06-02-2012, 11:44 AM

How you come to that?

"House" is something with inside and outside, with door and roof, and with an inner chamber in which you should withdraw when praying (Matthew 6:6)

Doesn't it link then also to f.e. the verse number Genesis 4:12 or Matthew 4:12, etc?

And what about Hebrews 4:06? Is that verse linked to the letter "tav"?

It looks like you are trying to not understand. If that's your choice, no amount of explanation will help. If you applied similar nit-picky standards to the writings of the Rabbis, you would shred them in a minute. This shows that your logic is imbalanced and biased in favor of your prejudices.

For example, when you thought that there were 86 more letters in the Deuteronomy version of the Ten Commandments, you thought that it referred to a cup (kos). Why not "Elohim"? You never said. Or why not any of the many other words that sum to 86? You never said. You just made up an arbitrary association. We see the same problem with all your gematria. You just pick and choose words and numbers that fit the pattern you are looking for. That's why the patterns you find in your kind of gematria are generally "sought." But now you ask why the value of Bet doesn't apply to Genesis 4:12 or Matthew 4:12. This shows that your methods are inconsistent and biased. If we took a hundred people and asked them to do your kind of gematria, they'd all come up with a hundred different answers. This is not true of the kind of gematria I do, which is based on the objective alphanumeric structures in the text.

As for your specific points: The Hebrew letters represent ARCHETYPES which are abstract concepts exemplified in concrete things. And the amazing thing about the Hebrew letters is that the archetypes are categorized by number. Case in point: The second letter Bet encompasses the whole range of concepts found in the Numerical Category defined by the Number Two, such as Duality, Division, Image, and Reflection. This is based on many facts, such as the literal meaning of its name, house, which links directly to its role in Hebrew grammar as the sign of the preposition "in." Its numerical value of "2" which relates to Duality, etc. And we see its archetypal meaning exhibited quite plainly in Scripture. I explain all this in many Spoke 2 articles, such as The Dividing Line (http://biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Bet_Division.asp) where I lay out the main points in this table:

The Numerical Category defined by the Number Two

Second Divine Person
The Son of God, Word of God, Image of God

Second Psalm
Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee.

Second Day
Division of the waters

Second Book
Division of the waters of the Red Sea and the declaration of Israel as God's Son

Second Commandment
No graven Images

Second Seal
Horseman with Sword - the instrument of Division.

Second Geometric Construct
The Line - the root of the symbols of the Rod and the Sword, which in turn symbolize the Word.

This is how a real study of the symbolic nature of Scripture is done. Nothing depends on any human "authority" like that of the Rabbis. It is "real" because it is based on objectively verifiable facts. The Rabbinical writings are nothing like this. They just make whatever they want with no justification or proof. Some rabbi a thousand years ago makes something up, and now it is venerated as "tradition" with no way for anyone to know if it is true or not.

And the third person with a Gimel?

like:
"Samael rode upon the serpent as big as a camel when he tempted Eve" ?

http://www.umsl.edu/~sheschw/samplemyths_9.htm (http://www.umsl.edu/%7Esheschw/samplemyths_9.htm)

That you would suggest such a connection makes it look like you are willfully ignoring the ancient Rabbinical tradition concerning the meaning of Gimel (which happens to be valid). The Talmud explains it this way (Shabbat 104a):
Gimel Dalet means Gemol Dallim (be generous to the poor). Why is the foot of the Gimel pointed toward the Dalet? Because so the feet of those who are bountiful should be ever ready to seek beneficiaries.

This is one of the primary meanings of the third letter Gimel. It links directly to the essential character of the Third Person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, who is the Giver of God's Abundant Gifts (http://biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Gimel_Spirit.asp). This meaning manifests with perfect clarity on Spoke 3 of the Bible Wheel, as explained in this article (http://biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Gimel_Giver.asp).

The alphabetic sequence Aleph, Bet, Gimel represents the Christian Trinity with great clarity, and it follows the sequence of books on the Bible Wheel:

http://biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Gimel_Trinity.gif

And the phrase "Bet El" meaning "house of God" sums to 443 which is another prime and the value of Ho Logos = The Word, and this value appears twice in the opening phrase "For the Word (= 443) of God is living" = 6 x 443. And the entire verse subdivides coherently according to grammar into multiples of 73 (Wisdom) and 373 (Logos).
You are comparing apples with pears.

That's what you say because you don't understand or accept Greek gematria. The identities speak for themselves.

But why you should accept what Stedman wrote? (which is nonsense)

I don't "accept what Stedman" wrote as if he were an authority. He is merely a witness who saw the same thing I saw. This is the difference between you and me. You base all your stuff on fallible human "authorities" as if the Rabbis could never be wrong. That's your error.

Gematria of Amalek is 240, same as of "safek", doubt.

240 is also Ruach YHVH (The Spirit of the Lord). There are over 60 words and hundreds of phrases that sum to 240. Your gematria is therefore arbitrary and meaningless. You can pick and choose whatever words/numbers you want and make up any story you want. Mere lists of words and numbers mean nothing. The holographs are entirely different. They confirm the meaning of the words and numbers because they are objective self-verifying integrated alphanumeric structures.

This is what's so ironic about your "skepticism" about the connection between Bet = 412 and Hebrews 4:12. All your gematria would fall by that sword.

The verse number appears significant for a host of reasons. Its meaning is integrated with the holograph it indexes. The letter Bet represents the "Word" and indexes the Logos Holograph which is all about the WORD. With the definite article we have the identity THE WORD = 443 = BET EL, reflecting back on the letter that indexes the verse and which represents the concept of "Word" or rather "THE WORD OF GOD." It is exceedingly deep and profound.

sylvius

06-02-2012, 01:01 PM

For example, when you thought that there were 86 more letters in the Deuteronomy version of the Ten Commandments, you thought that it referred to a cup (kos).
Because of Mark 14:23,
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it.

And because of the 172 words on the first tablets and the 17 words more on the second set of tablets, related to the fruit of the vine as fruit of the third day (day of double "ki-tov".

This is not true of the kind of gematria I do, which is based on the objective alphanumeric structures in the text. :yo: (goes above my head)

As for your specific points: The Hebrew letters represent ARCHETYPES which are abstract concepts exemplified in concrete things. And the amazing thing about the Hebrew letters is that the archetypes are categorized by number. Case in point: The second letter Bet encompasses the whole range of concepts found in the Numerical Category defined by the Number Two, such as Duality, Division, Image, and Reflection. (...)

But before you said:

The second letter Bet (...) is a symbol of the Word as a container of ideas.

This is how a real study of the symbolic nature of Scripture is done. Nothing depends on any human "authority" like that of the Rabbis. It is "real" because it is based on objectively verifiable facts.
What about dreams? Are they of no value?

The Rabbinical writings are nothing like this. They just make whatever they want with no justification or proof.
John 14:8-9,
Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Some rabbi a thousand years ago makes something up, and now it is venerated as "tradition" with no way for anyone to know if it is true or not.

It is a matter of revelation, not of making things up.

That you would suggest such a connection makes it look like you are willfully ignoring the ancient Rabbinical tradition concerning the meaning of Gimel (which happens to be valid).
(...)
The alphabetic sequence Aleph, Bet, Gimel represents the Christian Trinity with great clarity, and it follows the sequence of books on the Bible Wheel:
(...)
That's what you say because you don't understand or accept Greek gematria. The identities speak for themselves.

Samael has gematria 131.

Camel, "gamal", gematria 73 = your "hokmah"
"Samael rode upon the serpent as big as a camel when he tempted Eve" "
Big camel = "gimel + mem + lamed" = 83 + 80 + 74 = 227.
131 +227 = 358
358 gematria of "nachash" = snake.
227 is also gematria of "zachar", male.
Which suggests something.
As known, Genesis 1:28", Rashi:

and subdue her: The“vav” [in וְכִבְשֻׁהָ is missing, [allowing the word to be read וְכִבְשָׁה, the masculine singular imperative] to teach you that the male subdues the female that she should not be a gadabout (Gen. Rabbah 8:12), and it is also meant to teach you that the man, whose way it is to subdue, is commanded to propagate, but not the woman (Yev. Yev. 65b).
Picked up in NT, Mark 10:42-45, You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles subdue them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slavee of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

I don't "accept what Stedman" wrote as if he were an authority. He is merely a witness who saw the same thing I saw. This is the difference between you and me. You base all your stuff on fallible human "authorities" as if the Rabbis could never be wrong. That's your error.
It derives meaning from context.
that you can say Amalek equals doubt, doubt in the existence of God, which is very modern, not somthing from thousands of year ago.

Exodus 17:1,
there was no water for the people to drink.

Repeats in Numbers 20:2,
The congregation had no water

Right after v. 1,
Miriam died there and was buried there.

Rashi:

had no water: From here [we learn that] all forty years they had the well in Miriam’s merit. — [Ta’anith 9a]

That's why Jesus' mother was named Mary.

Moses struck the rock with his staff instead speaking to it, which was why he had to die in the desert, and another one having to bring the people to the promised land, one who would reveal the secret of the well.

The holographs are entirely different. They confirm the meaning of the words and numbers because they are objective self-verifying integrated alphanumeric structures. :yo:

This is what's so ironic about your "skepticism" about the connection between Bet = 412 and Hebrews 4:12. All your gematria would fall by that sword. :eek:

The verse number appears significant for a host of reasons. Its meaning is integrated with the holograph it indexes. The letter Bet represents the "Word" and indexes the Logos Holograph which is all about the WORD. With the definite article we have the identity THE WORD = 443 = BET EL, reflecting back on the letter that indexes the verse and which represents the concept of "Word" or rather "THE WORD OF GOD." It is exceedingly deep and profound.

What about Luz = 43?
Genesis 28:12,
And he dreamed, and behold! a ladder set up on the ground and its top reached to heaven; and behold, angels of God were ascending and descending upon it.
Genesis 28:19,
. And he named the place Beth El, but Luz was orignally the name of the city.
Genesis 35:6,
And Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan that is Beth el he and all the people who were with him.

Richard Amiel McGough

06-02-2012, 02:49 PM

Because of Mark 14:23,
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it.

And because of the 172 words on the first tablets and the 17 words more on the second set of tablets, related to the fruit of the vine as fruit of the third day (day of double "ki-tov".
But there is nothing that would suggest the two different versions relate in any way to the New Covenant. You are starting with an arbitrary assumption without any reason that I can see. And there is nothing in those 86 letters that have anything to do with the New Covenant except the fact that for the appearance of the word "tov." But that is not sufficient reason for anyone to come to your conclusions. Your theories seem very idiosyncratic.

:yo: (goes above my head)

That's what I thought. I trust you have the wisdom not to criticize things you don't understand.

As for your specific points: The Hebrew letters represent ARCHETYPES which are abstract concepts exemplified in concrete things. And the amazing thing about the Hebrew letters is that the archetypes are categorized by number. Case in point: The second letter Bet encompasses the whole range of concepts found in the Numerical Category defined by the Number Two, such as Duality, Division, Image, and Reflection. (...)
But before you said:

The second letter Bet (...) is a symbol of the Word as a container of ideas.
That's right. The idea of the "Word" is one of the concepts subsumed by the numerical category defined by the Number 2 and the Letter Bet. There is no confusion.

This is how a real study of the symbolic nature of Scripture is done. Nothing depends on any human "authority" like that of the Rabbis. It is "real" because it is based on objectively verifiable facts.
What about dreams? Are they of no value?

Of course dreams have value. Take a look at my thread Looking for Dumbo (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?2619-Looking-for-Dumbo) and you'll know what I mean. My single sentence was not meant as an exhaustive statement of everything that is involved with the study of the symbolic nature of Scripture.

It is a matter of revelation, not of making things up.

And when reading the rabbinical writings, how do you discern between something "revealed" vs. something made up? Do you just assume that all rabbinical writings are directly inspired by God?

And I'm still unclear about your position on the Bible. Do you accept the Tanakh as totally inspired? Do you rejection some OT books? How much the NT do you think is authoritative? I know you reject the book of Hebrews. Do you reject other NT books? Is any of it inspired in the same way as the OT?

That you would suggest such a connection makes it look like you are willfully ignoring the ancient Rabbinical tradition concerning the meaning of Gimel (which happens to be valid).
(...)
The alphabetic sequence Aleph, Bet, Gimel represents the Christian Trinity with great clarity, and it follows the sequence of books on the Bible Wheel:
(...)
That's what you say because you don't understand or accept Greek gematria. The identities speak for themselves.
Samael has gematria 131.

Camel, "gamal", gematria 73 = your "hokmah"
"Samael rode upon the serpent as big as a camel when he tempted Eve" "
Big camel = "gimel + mem + lamed" = 83 + 80 + 74 = 227.
131 +227 = 358
358 gematria of "nachash" = snake.
227 is also gematria of "zachar", male.

Maybe the rabbi made up the story about the Samael riding a big camel because of the gematria. That's very common in the rabbinical writings. They start with the gematria and make up stories to fit. For example, they say that Eliezer was the only one to accompany Abram to retrieve Lot:
That Eliezer took part in that battle, or was, perhaps, the only combatant at Abraham's side, the Rabbis find indicated in the number (318) of the soldiers (Gen. xiv. 14), the numerical value of the letters in http://d3sva65x0i5hnc.cloudfront.net/V05p112003.jpg being 1 + 30 + 10 + 70 + 7 + 200 = 318 (Gen. R. xliii., xliv.; Pesiḳ. 70a, b; Ned. 32a; Shoḥer Ṭob to Ps. cx.; compare Ep. Barnabas ix.; it is the classical illustration of Gemaṭria under the twenty-ninth Exegetical Rule of Eliezer, the son of Jose the Galilean)

This kind of gematria is meaningless because nothing can be established with any certainty. And it makes a mockery of serious Bible study when folks feel free to make up interpretations that directly contradict what the text plainly states (Abram took 318 trained servants).

And besides, Samael is not even in the Bible. That's Jewish demonology. Why would you believe any of it? Do you really think there is a demon names Samael who "rode upon the serpent as big as a camel when he tempted Eve." The Bible says nothing about that!

And you didn't address the answer I gave. You didn't understand the connection between Gimel and the Holy Spirit so I explained it to you but you have not responded.

sylvius

06-03-2012, 01:16 AM

But there is nothing that would suggest the two different versions relate in any way to the New Covenant. You are starting with an arbitrary assumption without any reason that I can see. And there is nothing in those 86 letters that have anything to do with the New Covenant except the fact that for the appearance of the word "tov." But that is not sufficient reason for anyone to come to your conclusions. Your theories seem very idiosyncratic.

As said, I am "blinded" by my own discovery of the NT-number 666 in Genesis 1:31 and of the NT-number 153 in Genesis 1:12.

The tabernacle is said to be rectification of the sin of the golden calf.

http://www.breslov.com/world/parsha/terumah_5756.html

The sin of worshipping the Golden Calf incorporated every sin in the entire Torah. Moshe was commanded to construct the Mishkan as a rectification for it

So without the smashing of the tablets there even would't have been an ark of the covenant and a holy of holies named "d'vir" with gematria 216.\ and no rending of the curtain at the moment Jesus died at the cross.

That's what I thought. I trust you have the wisdom not to criticize things you don't understand.
It was a bit sarcastic.

That's right. The idea of the "Word" is one of the concepts subsumed by the numerical category defined by the Number 2 and the Letter Bet. There is no confusion.
"Bet" is the second letter after "alef". "Alef" is silent, the "bet" explosive.
"Bara", translated as to create, has tot do with what is called "big bang", I think.
"In the beginning God bigbanged the heaven and the earth"
while "ïn the beginning"is also not a very good translation, "b'reishit" (with large written"letter "bet") - How you would translate?
Strange: "yirah", fear, also has gematria 216.
Psalms 111:10, רֵאשִׁית חָכְמָה יִרְאַת יְ-ה-וָ-ה
LXX has ἐν ἀρχῇ, "en archei", clearly taken over by John, Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος. How you would translate that?
I think it is also in Mark 1:1, Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [υἱοῦ θεοῦ].
So I think Mark's ἀρχή has to be understood as רֵאשִׁית, especially since Mark as a whole can be read in a circular way. (The original Mark ending with Mark 16:8, καὶ οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπαν, ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ, and they said nothing to no one, for they feared
(circular way -- "amphodon" --in Mark 11:4 καὶ ἀπῆλθον καὶ εὗρον πῶλον δεδεμένον πρὸς θύραν ἔξω ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀμφόδου
θύρα = door, Herew "delet", gematria 434, coinciding the 434 words in the first chapter of Hebrew Genesis.
πῶλον, after Zechariah 9:9, the colt of a donkey, donkey = chamor, חֲמוֹר, carrying "donkey-burden", "chomer" = 100 "omer", the secret of the parable of the sower -- they found hundredfold = "meah sh'arim" מֵאָה שְׁעָרִים(Geneis 26:12 ), gematria 666.

And when reading the rabbinical writings, how do you discern between something "revealed" vs. something made up? There is some discerner, even after Hebrews 4:12.

And I'm still unclear about your position on the Bible. Do you accept the Tanakh as totally inspired? Do you rejection some OT books? How much the NT do you think is authoritative? I know you reject the book of Hebrews. Do you reject other NT books? Is any of it inspired in the same way as the OT?
I don't reject books. I just said Hebrews is not written by Paul, that it misinterprets Pslams 110 and that it had a very bad influence on Christianity.

Maybe the rabbi made up the story about the Samael riding a big camel because of the gematria. That's very common in the rabbinical writings. They start with the gematria and make up stories to fit. For example, they say that Eliezer was the only one to accompany Abram to retrieve Lot:
That Eliezer took part in that battle, or was, perhaps, the only combatant at Abraham's side, the Rabbis find indicated in the number (318) of the soldiers (Gen. xiv. 14), the numerical value of the letters in http://d3sva65x0i5hnc.cloudfront.net/V05p112003.jpg being 1 + 30 + 10 + 70 + 7 + 200 = 318 (Gen. R. xliii., xliv.; Pesiḳ. 70a, b; Ned. 32a; Shoḥer Ṭob to Ps. cx.; compare Ep. Barnabas ix.; it is the classical illustration of Gemaṭria under the twenty-ninth Exegetical Rule of Eliezer, the son of Jose the Galilean)

This kind of gematria is meaningless because nothing can be established with any certainty. And it makes a mockery of serious Bible study when folks feel free to make up interpretations that directly contradict what the text plainly states (Abram took 318 trained servants).

Eliezer returns als Lazarus in NT, Lazarus the disciple whom Jesus loved, and Jesus being crucified because of the bringing back to life of Lazarus.
Gematria 318 is also gematria of "siach" in Genesis 2:5,
וְכֹל שִׂיחַ הַשָּׂדֶה טֶרֶם יִהְיֶה בָאָרֶץ
"siach", bush, shrub, but also: speech, meditation, thought.
Note what Rashi says about "terem":

Every טֶרֶם in Scripture has the meaning of “not yet,” and it does not mean“before,” and it cannot be made into a verb form, to say הִטְרִים, as one says הִקְדִּים This verse proves this, as well as another verse (Exod. 9:30):“ כִּי טֶרֶם תִּירְאוּן, You will not yet fear.” This verse too should be explained to mean that [no tree] was yet on the earth (Targum Onkelos). When the creation of the world was completed on the sixth day, before man was created, no herb of the field had yet grown. And on the third [day], where it is written:“Let the earth bring forth,” they [the plants] had not yet emerged, but they stood at the entrance of the ground until the sixth day. And why? Because He had not caused it to rain, because there was no man to work the soil, and no one recognized the benefit of rain, but when man came and understood that they were essential to the world, he prayed for them, and they fell, and the trees and the herbs sprouted. — [from Chul. 60b]

which means the "ed" אֵד, "1-4", in Genesis 2:6 is principle of time, but also principle of speech (language), even principle of the resurrection.

And besides, Samael is not even in the Bible. That's Jewish demonology. Why would you believe any of it? Do you really think there is a demon names Samael who "rode upon the serpent as big as a camel when he tempted Eve." The Bible says nothing about that!
Someone who is imposing his own right, his own dogma, is like Samael.

And you didn't address the answer I gave. You didn't understand the connection between Gimel and the Holy Spirit so I explained it to you but you have not responded.
My discerner said it is nonsense, your connection between gimel and the holy spirit.
The spirit connects holy and profane.

Richard Amiel McGough

06-03-2012, 01:05 PM

As said, I am "blinded" by my own discovery of the NT-number 666 in Genesis 1:31 and of the NT-number 153 in Genesis 1:12.
But yom shishi is not what is written. You methods seem very inconsistent because when I noted that d'vir kadesh = 620 you answered by saying:

It is written:
"b'nasi yadav el-d'vir kadshècha"

דְּבִיר קָדְשֶׁךָ = 640

So what's going on? Do you feel free to make conclusions from things not written in the Bible when it suits your purpose, but you reject them otherwise?

But as for the number 666 appearing in Genesis 1:31 - it appears a lot earlier than that. It appears in the first verse:

http://biblewheel.com/images/Gen1_1_Triangles_37x36a_border.gif

See my article on 666 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_666.asp).

The tabernacle is said to be rectification of the sin of the golden calf.

http://www.breslov.com/world/parsha/terumah_5756.html

So without the smashing of the tablets there even would't have been an ark of the covenant and a holy of holies named "d'vir" with gematria 216.\ and no rending of the curtain at the moment Jesus died at the cross.
You don't know that. How do you know the tradition is true? Why do you believe it? Why should I believe it?

That's what I thought. I trust you have the wisdom not to criticize things you don't understand.
It was a bit sarcastic.
I think it was truer than you intended, given your response to the evidence I've shown.

Richard Amiel McGough

06-03-2012, 01:15 PM

"Bet" is the second letter after "alef". "Alef" is silent, the "bet" explosive.
"Bara", translated as to create, has tot do with what is called "big bang", I think.
"In the beginning God bigbanged the heaven and the earth"
while "ïn the beginning"is also not a very good translation, "b'reishit" (with large written"letter "bet") - How you would translate?
Strange: "yirah", fear, also has gematria 216.
Psalms 111:10, רֵאשִׁית חָכְמָה יִרְאַת יְ-ה-וָ-ה
LXX has ἐν ἀρχῇ, "en archei", clearly taken over by John, Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος. How you would translate that?
I think it is also in Mark 1:1, Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [υἱοῦ θεοῦ].
So I think Mark's ἀρχή has to be understood as רֵאשִׁית, especially since Mark as a whole can be read in a circular way. (The original Mark ending with Mark 16:8, καὶ οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπαν, ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ, and they said nothing to no one, for they feared
(circular way -- "amphodon" --in Mark 11:4 καὶ ἀπῆλθον καὶ εὗρον πῶλον δεδεμένον πρὸς θύραν ἔξω ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀμφόδου
θύρα = door, Herew "delet", gematria 434, coinciding the 434 words in the first chapter of Hebrew Genesis.
πῶλον, after Zechariah 9:9, the colt of a donkey, donkey = chamor, חֲמוֹר, carrying "donkey-burden", "chomer" = 100 "omer", the secret of the parable of the sower -- they found hundredfold = "meah sh'arim" מֵאָה שְׁעָרִים(Geneis 26:12 ), gematria 666.
I think "in the beginning" is the best translation for both Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. If folks want to study the deeper meaning, they need to go beyond translation and deal with the original text.

It is interesting that the construct form yirat = 611 = Torah. And b'yirat = 613 = b'torah.

How does the omer relate to the parable of the sower?

And I'm still unclear about your position on the Bible. Do you accept the Tanakh as totally inspired? Do you rejection some OT books? How much the NT do you think is authoritative? I know you reject the book of Hebrews. Do you reject other NT books? Is any of it inspired in the same way as the OT?I don't reject books. I just said Hebrews is not written by Paul, that it misinterprets Pslams 110 and that it had a very bad influence on Christianity.
It would help if you could be a little more clear. Are you saying that you accept the NT as "inspired" in the same way as the OT?

And it sounds like you reject Hebrews as authoritative like the Tanakh.

And you didn't address the answer I gave. You didn't understand the connection between Gimel and the Holy Spirit so I explained it to you but you have not responded.
My discerner said it is nonsense, your connection between gimel and the holy spirit.
The spirit connects holy and profane.

Your answer is nonsense.

sylvius

06-03-2012, 11:48 PM

But yom shishi is not what is written.

it is written יוֹם אֶחָד, יוֹם שֵׁנִי, יוֹם שְׁלִישִׁי, יוֹם רְבִיעִי, יוֹם חֲמִישִׁי, יוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי:

So only to "shishi" the letter "hey" was added.

It is written:
"b'nasi yadav el-d'vir kadshècha"

דְּבִיר קָדְשֶׁךָ = 640

So what's going on? Do you feel free to make conclusions from things not written in the Bible when it suits your purpose, but you reject them otherwise?

In the case of "yom hashishi" the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, appears to be hidden in the initial letters of "yom hashishi", יוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי, the last two words of Genesis 1:31 ( "hashishi" being the 434th and last word of the first chapter of Genesis) and of "vay'chulu hashamayim", וַיְכֻלּוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם , the first two words of Genesis 2:1, thus binding together the sixth and the seventh day (sabbath) , the profane and the holy.

Otherwise the name of God doesn't occur in the first story of creation. there is just mentioning of "elohim".

This being something most Jews forbid me to say, me being a non-Jew.
Some times you'll find something:
http://tophqbooks.com/books/81161

we introduce our Shabbat Kiddush with "yom hashishi [the sixth day], two words which are entirely out of place since they constitute the conclusion of a previous verse (we may even say a previous chapter) with no grammatical connection with what follows. Why do we do this? In order that the first four words uttered aloud bear the initials that spell Hashem [Yom Hashishi Vaychulu Hashamayim].

And more: Jesus was crucified on the sixth day and laid in the tomb exactly at te entrance of sabbath, Mark using the word θύρα, door.
Mark 15:46, καὶ προσεκύλισεν λίθον ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τοῦ μνημείου

λίθος, stone, also occuring in Mark 12:10,
Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας.

ἀποδοκιμάζω, to disapprove, reject, repudiate, also occuring in Mark 8:31,
Καὶ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν αὐτοὺς ὅτι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πολλὰ παθεῖν καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ὑπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ τῶν γραμματέων καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀναστῆναι.

And more: after Deuteronomy 8:8 the olive is fruit of the sixth day, olive that has to be pressed to obtain the oil "shemen".

And more: The letter "hey" that was added to "shishi'has the numerical value of 5, gematria of "ed" in Genesis 2:6, where LXX has πηγὴ, fountain, spring.

And more: Genesis 2:4 has "b'hibaram", to be read as "with the letter "hey" they were created", same letter that was added to the name Abra(ha)m, the 474th word from the beginning, 474 being gematria of "da'at", knowledge.

And more : Joktan ("the little one") forms together with his brother Peleg the 15 th of the 26 generations form Adam to the revelation at Siani, where God revealed his name on the sixth day of Sivan

Rashi:

the sixth day: Scripture added a “hey” on the sixth [day], at the completion of the Creation, to tell us that He stipulated with them, [“you were created] on the condition that Israel accept the Five Books of the Torah.” [The numerical value of the “hey” is five.] (Tanchuma Bereishith 1). Another explanation for “the sixth day” : They [the works of creation] were all suspended until the “sixth day,” referring to the sixth day of Sivan, which was prepared for the giving of the Torah (Shab. 88a). [The“hey” is the definite article, alluding to the well-known sixth day, the sixth day of Sivan, when the Torah was given (ad loc.).]

And there is still much more .

You don't know that. How do you know the tradition is true? Why do you believe it? Why should I believe it?

golden calf = "egel hazahav".

"egel" from same root as "igul" , circle, and "agalah", wagon.

Worshipping the golden calf being like worshipping a closed system, sticking to a circular reasoning.

Hinted at in Geneis 45:27,
And they told him all of Joseph's words that he had said to them, and he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent to carry him, and the spirit of their father Jacob was revived.
Rashi:

He (Joseph) gave them a sign, viz., in what topic he was engaged when he (Joseph) separated from him (Jacob). [That was] the section dealing with the heifer that was to be beheaded (עֶגְלָה עִרוּפָה) (Deut. 21), and this is what [Scripture] says, “and he saw the wagons that Joseph had sent,” and it (Scripture) does not say, “that Pharaoh had sent.” [from Gen. Rabbah 94:3]

Strange thing is that in the first chapter of Genesis no letter "samech" occurs.
First time "samech" appears is in Genesis 2:11, הוּא הַסֹּבֵב אֵת כָּל אֶרֶץ הַחֲוִילָה , "hu hasoveiv et kol erets hachavilah", the one that encircles all teh land of Chavilah . From which you might conclude that the Ashuri script, in which "samech" is written round, like a circle, is the original script with which the tablets of stone were inscribed.

But also that indeed the letter "hey" in "hashishi" is extra, being the (roof)window/opening in every self-sufficient system.

sylvius

06-04-2012, 01:13 AM

I think "in the beginning" is the best translation for both Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. If folks want to study the deeper meaning, they need to go beyond translation and deal with the original text.

Why then it was not written: "bat'chillah"?

Vulgata has:
in principio creavit Deus caelum et terram

Obviously knowing the difference between "reishit" and "t'chillah".

Vulgata John 1:1,
in principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum

Vulgata Mark 1:1,
initium evangelii Iesu Christi Filii Dei

(which is a capital blunder)

How does the omer relate to the parable of the sower?

The "omer" is the amount of manna gathered each day, Exodus 16:16.
Exodus 16:28, It came to pass on the sixth day that they gathered a double portion of bread, two omers for [each] one
Rashi on Genesis 2:3,

And…blessed…and hallowed: He blessed it with manna, for on all the days of the week, it descended for them [in the amount of] an omer per person, whereas on the sixth day,[each one received] a double portion. And He hallowed it with manna, that it did not descend at all on the Sabbath.

"omer" is a grain-measure.
1 "chomer" (donkey-burden) = 100 "omer" -- the ones sown on the good earth found "meah sh'arim" = 666.
Mark 4:21,
And he said unto them, Is a candle brought to be put under a bushel
(the sixth and the seventh day bound together forming a new day one, day one = day of the light)

Why also mentioned thirtyfold and sixtyfold?

Might be because of 10+20+30+40=100 (a triangle)

But that's just a guess.

It would help if you could be a little more clear. Are you saying that you accept the NT as "inspired" in the same way as the OT? I wouldn't say so.

And it sounds like you reject Hebrews as authoritative like the Tanakh.
I would subscribe to 1 Corinthians 13:12, For now we see as through a mirror in riddles

Richard Amiel McGough

06-04-2012, 10:25 PM

it is written יוֹם אֶחָד, יוֹם שֵׁנִי, יוֹם שְׁלִישִׁי, יוֹם רְבִיעִי, יוֹם חֲמִישִׁי, יוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי:

So only to "shishi" the letter "hey" was added.

It's not what was written. That's what you told me when I presented an identity that was not written in Scripture. It seems you hold others to a different standard than yourself.

In the case of "yom hashishi" the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, appears to be hidden in the initial letters of "yom hashishi", יוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי, the last two words of Genesis 1:31 ( "hashishi" being the 434th and last word of the first chapter of Genesis) and of "vay'chulu hashamayim", וַיְכֻלּוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם , the first two words of Genesis 2:1, thus binding together the sixth and the seventh day (sabbath) , the profane and the holy.

Otherwise the name of God doesn't occur in the first story of creation. there is just mentioning of "elohim".

You can find little patterns scattered everywhere in Scripture. Why is this one so important? What do you think it means? It's been your "hobby horse" for years. Why is it significant? What information does it give us?

This being something most Jews forbid me to say, me being a non-Jew.
Some times you'll find something:
http://tophqbooks.com/books/81161

What was the "something" you found?

And more: Jesus was crucified on the sixth day and laid in the tomb exactly at te entrance of sabbath, Mark using the word θύρα, door.
Mark 15:46, καὶ προσεκύλισεν λίθον ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τοῦ μνημείου

λίθος, stone, also occuring in Mark 12:10,
Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας.

ἀποδοκιμάζω, to disapprove, reject, repudiate, also occuring in Mark 8:31,
Καὶ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν αὐτοὺς ὅτι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πολλὰ παθεῖν καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ὑπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ τῶν γραμματέων καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀναστῆναι.

And more: after Deuteronomy 8:8 the olive is fruit of the sixth day, olive that has to be pressed to obtain the oil "shemen".

And more: The letter "hey" that was added to "shishi'has the numerical value of 5, gematria of "ed" in Genesis 2:6, where LXX has πηγὴ, fountain, spring.

And more: Genesis 2:4 has "b'hibaram", to be read as "with the letter "hey" they were created", same letter that was added to the name Abra(ha)m, the 474th word from the beginning, 474 being gematria of "da'at", knowledge.

And more : Joktan ("the little one") forms together with his brother Peleg the 15 th of the 26 generations form Adam to the revelation at Siani, where God revealed his name on the sixth day of Sivan

Long lists of uninterpreted facts don't really help much. What's the point of all those facts? What do you think it all means?

You talk a lot about the NT. Do you consider yourself a Christian? A Nazarene? A Messianic Jew? ???

sylvius

06-04-2012, 11:29 PM

It's not what was written. That's what you told me when I presented an identity that was not written in Scripture. It seems you hold others to a different standard than yourself.
"yom shishi" is a valid, existing, combination of words, whereas "d'vir kodesh" is not; it should have been "d'vir kadosh", which is a pleonasm.
the leaving out of the letterr "hey"from "hashishi" doesn't hurt the plain meaning of the text. Most translations don't respect the extra letter,
LXX doesn't
http://www.septuagint.org/LXX/Genesis/1
ἐγένετο ἑσπέρα καὶ ἐγένετο πρωί ἡμέρα ἕκτη

KJV doesn't, although it has
And the evening and the morning were the sixth day,
it has also:
And the evening and the morning were the first day.
And the evening and the morning were the second day.etc.
"The first day" being double blunder -- it translates Hebrew "yom echad" - day one.
Not for nothing KJV is sarcastically called KJPV .. King James Perversion.

But USCCB is also wrong, perverse:
http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/1

You can find little patterns scattered everywhere in Scripture. Why is this one so important?
This is the place of God's Name.

What was the "something" you found?

"we introduce our Shabbat Kiddush with "yom hashishi [the sixth day], two words which are entirely out of place since they constitute the conclusion of a previous verse (we may even say a previous chapter) with no grammatical connection with what follows. Why do we do this? In order that the first four words uttered aloud bear the initials that spell Hashem [Yom Hashishi Vaychulu Hashamayim]."

I am not Jewish and not allowed to partake.

Long lists of uninterpreted facts don't really help much. What's the point of all those facts? What do you think it all means?

It means crisis.

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 12:13 AM

"yom shishi" is a valid, existing, combination of words, whereas "d'vir kodesh" is not; it should have been "d'vir kadosh", which is a pleonasm.

D'vir kodesh is perfectly valid. Many nouns are modified by kadosh and kadosheka. We have examples that prove it is a valid form:

עַם-קָדְשֶׁךָ
.
Am Kadosheka (Isaiah 63:18)

עַם-קָדֹשׁ
.
Am Kadosh (Deut 26:19)

דְּבִיר קָדְשֶׁךָ
.
D'vir Kadosheka (Psalm 28:2)

דְּבִיר קָדֹשׁ
.
D'vir Kadosh (Not written)

You just don't want to admit you are wrong.

the leaving out of the letterr "hey"from "hashishi" doesn't hurt the plain meaning of the text. Most translations don't respect the extra letter,
LXX doesn't

Now you are making up excuses for changing the text of the Bible to fit your hobby horse? :eek:

sylvius

06-05-2012, 01:24 AM

D'vir kodesh is perfectly valid. Many nouns are modified by kadosh and kadosheka. We have examples that prove it is a valid form:

You just don't want to admit you are wrong.

You wrote "d'vir kodesh", but meant "d'vir kadosh", which is a pleonasm, because "d'vir" is already the name of the holy of holies.

and "kadosh" is ususally written with "vav".

Dt. 14:2,

כִּי עַם קָדוֹשׁ אַתָּה

Dt. 26:19 being an exception, you computerd up for to get your own right.

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 08:04 AM

You wrote "d'vir kodesh", but meant "d'vir kadosh", which is a pleonasm, because "d'vir" is already the name of the holy of holies.

and "kadosh" is ususally written with "vav".

Dt. 14:2,

כִּי עַם קָדוֹשׁ אַתָּה

Dt. 26:19 being an exception, you computerd up for to get your own right.
I wrote kadosheka and kadosh in the four examples I gave:

עַם-קָדְשֶׁךָ
.
Am Kadosheka (Isaiah 63:18)

עַם-קָדֹשׁ
.
Am Kadosh (Deut 26:19)

דְּבִיר קָדְשֶׁךָ
.
D'vir Kadosheka (Psalm 28:2)

דְּבִיר קָדֹשׁ
.
D'vir Kadosh (Not written)

It was a simple typo when I wrote "d'vir kodesh." You can't make a case out of a typo - your posts are filled with many typos.

And it wouldn't matter if kadosh is "usually" written with a vav. You said it is wrong to write it the way it is written in the Bible. You have been proven wrong. But you won't admit it. It's sad that you don't you realize what this does to your credibility.

It is absurd for you to say that I "computered up for to get your own right." I used the computer to find the facts that prove you are wrong. But you still won't admit it. This makes all your posts suspect. If you refuse to admit an incontrovertible fact when it is staring you in the face, why should anyone believe anything you say?

sylvius

06-05-2012, 09:12 AM

It was a simple typo when I wrote "d'vir kodesh." You can't make a case out of a typo - your posts are filled with many typos.

#16

We have the identity: Holy Oracle (davir qadosh, דביר קדש) = f620
Did you change that?

Or was it my mistake thinking that you wrote "davir qodesh"?

#22

Moreover I do think it is not a right expression "d'vir kodesh"-

I think it should have been then "d'vir kadosh" (gematria 626),

Anyway "d'vir kadshecha" in Psalms 28:2 doesn't prove that the second set of tablets were inscribed with 620 letters.

By the way "am kadshecha" doesn't mean the same as "am kadosh".

"am kadshecha" = people of your holiness.

"kadshecha" is a form of "kodesh", a noun.

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 09:36 AM

#16

We have the identity: Holy Oracle (davir qadosh, דביר קדש) = f620
Did you change that?

Or was it my mistake thinking that you wrote "davir qodesh"?

Yes, it looks like it was a simple mistake on your part, probably because I did write "d'vir kodesh" two posts ago. But that was in the same post where I wrote kadosh and kadosheka twice, so I would have thought you would have understood it was a simple typo on my part.

And no, I didn't change anything in post #16 (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?2605-God-s-10-Spokes-in-Genesis-1-620-letters&p=44878#post44878). If a post is edited, the software shows the time it was done. There is no edit time displayed on that post. But none of this matters since we both know that I was talking about d'vir kadosh, which is perfectly valid Hebrew.

BTW - I just noticed I mistook the dot marking the shin (vs. sin) for a holem. That's why I've been writing kadosheka rather than kadsheka. Oops.

#22

Moreover I do think it is not a right expression "d'vir kodesh"-

I think it should have been then "d'vir kadosh" (gematria 626),

I can see why there was a confusion. You were focusing on my typo!

Anyway "d'vir kadshecha" in Psalms 28:2 doesn't prove that the second set of tablets were inscribed with 620 letters.

I never said it did. But the Bible does say that God wrote the words of the first tablets on the second tablets, so your idea that he wrote different words directly contradicts the Bible.

By the way "am kadshecha" doesn't mean the same as "am kadosh".

"am kadshecha" = people of your holiness.

"kadshecha" is a form of "kodesh", a noun.
That's not correct. Am kadosh means "holy people" and am kadsheka means "thy holy people."

If you disagree, then tell me how to write "thy holy people" in Hebrew.

sylvius

06-05-2012, 10:04 AM

.

That's not correct. Am kadosh means "holy people" and am kadsheka means "thy holy people."

If you disagree, then tell me how to write "thy holy people" in Hebrew.

"amcha" = your people.

"amcha kadosh"= your holy people

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 11:31 AM

"amcha" = your people.

"amcha kadosh"= your holy people
That does not appear to be correct. When two words are in a construct relation like am kadosh, the pronomial suffix is always attached to the second word. The phrase you have suggested appears nowhere in Scripture. And as far as I know, neither does anything like it.

If you want to support your assertion, you will have to show me an example where two words are in a construct relation with the first word taking the pronominal suffix.

sylvius

06-05-2012, 12:08 PM

That does not appear to be correct. When two words are in a construct relation like am kadosh, the pronomial suffix is always attached to the second word. The phrase you have suggested appears nowhere in Scripture. And as far as I know, neither does anything like it.

If you want to support your assertion, you will have to show me an example where two words are in a construct relation with the first word taking the pronominal suffix.

Ask some expert in Hebrew.

You asked; " tell me how to write "thy holy people" in Hebrew."

I think such a phrase is never used.

"ruach hakodesh" is not "holy spirit", but "spirit of the holy" I learned:

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/reply/34150/Holy-Ghost#reply-34150

רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh doesn't mean "the holy spirit"; that would have to be הָרוּחַ הַקָּדוֹשׁ ha-ru'ah ha-kadosh or הָרוּחַ הַקְּדוֹשָׁה ha-ru'ah ha-k'doshah (because רוּחַ ru'ah can be both masculine & feminine). קוֹדֶשׁ is a noun ("holiness" or "sanctity") and the term רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh correctly translates as "a/the spirit of [the] holiness" or "a/the spirit of [the] sanctity".

Secondly, רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh does not occur at all in the T'nach, the closest terms to it being
(1) רוּחַ קָדְשׁוֹ ru'ah kod'sho ("the spirit of His holiness"), occurring in Y'shayahu 63:10 and 63:11, and

(2) רוּחַ קָדְשְׁךָ ru'ah kod'sh'cha ("the spirit of Your holiness"), which occurs in T'hillim 51:13. A much more common term is רוּחַ יְיָ ru'ah adonai ("Adonai's Spirit"), which is similar in meaning to the term שְׁכִינָה Sh'chinah, or "Holy Presence".

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 12:42 PM

Ask some expert in Hebrew.

You asked; " tell me how to write "thy holy people" in Hebrew."

I think such a phrase is never used.

It is used. It is am kadsheka. That's how "thy holy people" is written in Hebrew. That's how it is translated in both the JPS Tanakh and the Complete Jewish Bible:

TNK Isaiah 63:18 Our foes have trampled Your Sanctuary, Which Your holy people possessed but a little while.

CJB Isaiah 63:18 Your holy people held your sanctuary such a short time, before our adversaries trampled it down.

Why are you so stubborn about something you don't even know?

"ruach hakodesh" is not "holy spirit", but "spirit of the holy" I learned:

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/reply/34150/Holy-Ghost#reply-34150

רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh doesn't mean "the holy spirit"; that would have to be הָרוּחַ הַקָּדוֹשׁ ha-ru'ah ha-kadosh or הָרוּחַ הַקְּדוֹשָׁה ha-ru'ah ha-k'doshah (because רוּחַ ru'ah can be both masculine & feminine). קוֹדֶשׁ is a noun ("holiness" or "sanctity") and the term רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh correctly translates as "a/the spirit of [the] holiness" or "a/the spirit of [the] sanctity".

Secondly, רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ ru'ah ha-kodesh does not occur at all in the T'nach, the closest terms to it being
(1) רוּחַ קָדְשׁוֹ ru'ah kod'sho ("the spirit of His holiness"), occurring in Y'shayahu 63:10 and 63:11, and

(2) רוּחַ קָדְשְׁךָ ru'ah kod'sh'cha ("the spirit of Your holiness"), which occurs in T'hillim 51:13. A much more common term is רוּחַ יְיָ ru'ah adonai ("Adonai's Spirit"), which is similar in meaning to the term שְׁכִינָה Sh'chinah, or "Holy Presence".

That information doesn't seem correct. "The spirit of the holiness" is not correct English. It seems like he's just not very good at translation into English. Ruach hakadosh could perhaps mean either "the holy spirit" or "the spirit of holiness" depending on context. You don't need to prefix "ha" to both nouns unless you want to emphatically refer to THE holy spirit. This is common knowledge amongst those who know Hebrew.

And who cares? What's the point you are trying to make? And why do yo focus on such hair-splitting over things you don't even know?

sylvius

06-05-2012, 01:26 PM

And who cares? What's the point you are trying to make? And why do yo focus on such hair-splitting over things you don't even know?

you started in #16 with:

We have the identity: Holy Oracle (davir qadosh, דביר קדש) = f620

"Your holy people" might not be correct translation, surely not according to Prof. Mordochai ben-Tziyyon.

How would you translate into Hebrew "your great city"?

sylvius

06-05-2012, 01:59 PM

Thinking about it:

I think Isaiah 63:18, "Am Kadshecha", is about the priests, the personal of the temple, temple called here "mikdashecha", which rhymes with "am kadshecha"

לַמִּצְעָר יָרְשׁוּ עַם-קָדְשֶׁךָ צָרֵינוּ בּוֹסְסוּ מִקְדָּשֶׁךָ

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 02:07 PM

How would you translate into Hebrew "your great city"?.
Your question brings up an important point. The phrase "your great city" doesn't appear in Scripture, but similar phrases do. For example, "your great name" is either shimka gedol (psa 99:3) or shimka hagadol (2 Chr 6:32). In these cases, the pronominal suffix is attached to the first word. I think this is because the second word is an adjective but I'd have to refer to my Hebrew grammars to be sure. Following this pattern, "your great city" would be "irka gadol" or irka hagadol."

Richard Amiel McGough

06-05-2012, 02:11 PM

sylvius

06-06-2012, 07:42 AM

Kind of comment on Isaiah 63:18?

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/144569/jewish/The-First-Temple.htm

Our Sages taught: When the first Holy Temple was destroyed, groups of young priests gathered with the keys to the Sanctuary in their hands. They ascended the roof and declared: "Master of the World! Since we have not merited to be trustworthy custodians, let the keys be given back to You." They then threw the keys toward Heaven. A hand emerged and received them, and the priests threw themselves into the fire (Talmud, Ta'anit 29b).

Interesting is that Mark 1:10 seems to be written after Isaiah 63:19,
We were [like those] over whom You never ruled, over whom Your name was not called; had You rent the heavens, had You descended, mountains would have dripped from before You.

"keys to the Sanctuary" , what might those be?

"Rending of heaven" we saw as a play with the word "shamayim" in Genesis 1:1 as "shin" + "mayim".

"shin" has lettervalue 300 that equals the gematria of "ruach elohim"

Sanctuary = "d'vir", gematria 216, the outline of triangle 73 = 2701, gematria of Genesis 1:1.

And with Jesus' dying on the cross the curtain of the Sanctuary is said to be rent, Mark 15:38.
Greek: Καὶ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη εἰς δύο ἀπ' ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω

The splitting of the water also mentioned in Isaiah 63, in verse 12,
He led at Moses' right the arm of His glory, splitting the water before them to make for Himself an everlasting name.

"Vayibaku hamayim" en Exodus 14:21, written with the last ten letters of the 216-letter Name (Exodus 14:19-21)

Translated in LXX as: καὶ ἐσχίσθη τὸ ὕδωρ

sylvius

06-06-2012, 12:53 PM

Isaiah 63:12

splitting the water before them to make for Himself an everlasting name.
בּוֹקֵעַ מַיִם מִפְּנֵיהֶם, לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ שֵׁם עוֹלָם

Which seemingly hints at the name of God as being 10-5-6-5

Splitting of "mayim" being splitting of letter "yud" with lettervalue 10.

10 = 5 +5

also 1 + 2 + 3 + 4

Rabbi Ginsburgh told amazing things about it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7flC5DY-8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cl1eyC-cC3g&feature=player_embedded

He led at Moses' right the arm of His glory
מוֹלִיךְ לִימִין מֹשֶׁה זְרוֹעַ תִּפְאַרְתּוֹ

"Right (hand)" seemingly having to do with gematria.

since Psalms 110 is about Genesis 14, the war of the four kings against the five, where Abrham gained victory in favor of the five with assistance of his 318 trained servants, 318 being gematria of Eliezer.

v.1
Of David a psalm. The word of the Lord to my master; "Sit at My right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool at your feet."

and also since Daniel 12:13 ends with לְקֵץ הַיָּמִין, "l'keits hayamin", instead of "l'keits hayomim".

Unregistered

10-31-2012, 09:33 PM

In the Hebrew Text of Genesis 1:1-4, there is a fascinating prospectus of scientific study involving solar emissions and planetary shielding.

Literal transliteration off 1st verse reads as: He created, Elohim, aleph tav heaven and aleph tav earth.

He created,. Who is the he? He is symbol of Helium atom. He2 is emitted by the sun, becomes He 3 as it passes through space making it negatively charged or neutron radiation, a substance that cuts DNA into a different assembly. It also has the same effect on computer programs. So consider the He as Helium 3.

What did He create. Elohim called aleph tav heaven and aleph tav earth. Aleph tav is same as alpha omega and is interpreted Miltha in Aramaic, meaning spirit. So the two spirits of heaven and earth are created. Spirit that guards in heaven is magnetosphere. Spirit of the earth is core resonance, or vibration. He (possibly 3) vibrated over the (two) waters (spirits).

In verse 4, the aleph tav earth is given a gender of she/her/female. So by verse four, Father and Mother are determined. As they are separated from each other, they are the same as Adam and Eve, father and mother of Earth's children. Yahweh is often given female gender, especially during the forty year wilderness journey. Yahweh is Mother Earth. The El (Allah) is the Father who is Heaven. The moon, Luna, influenced the Mother into a lower place in Her orbit.

In the Hebrew text, Adam and Eve are created on fourth day and humankind on the sixth day. Adam and Eve existed in the heaven. Adam and Eve are El ad Yahweh who were separated, one from the other, jusst like Adam and Eve. Phoenician Ea and Enki.

Navy says that HAARP is a valid science and did monitor both tsunami events involving Christchurch and Japan. Nixon signed a treaty stating that such devisces would not be used in war with the USSR. Obama has been rumored to have encouraged the NSA to continue development of such a device two years ago.

Now search out the battle of Leviathon and Behemoth. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9841-leviathan-and-behemoth Behemoth is the creature of the land, Leviathon (the serpent/dragon) is creature of the deep (waters). So mankind (behemoth) destroys Leviathon (magnetosphere and core resonance) causing He (first word of the Torah) to destroy all creatures of the Earth (Mother). That is why Tesla was never followed up on.

Prospectus, theory and proof. God does exist as depicted in the OT.

I know the site and forum for long, and three years ago I planned to translate some of my pages about maybe my best discovery: there are 620 letters in all the spokes God says in Genesis 1, exactly as in the Decalog.
I was anxious to see if Richard could do a holographic version of it, and what all of you could add to what I saw.

But I was lazy, or probably I had other things to study... Now I just translated the essential page today, with the tables:
http://remi.schulz.perso.neuf.fr/bw/3crowns.htm

Some other things that are not there:
There are similitudes between Gen 1:1 and Exo 20:1 which introduces the Decalog
- 7 words and 28 letters each
- gematrias having to do with 37, 2701 = 37.73 and 1332 = 37.36, difference 37.37
- Exo 20:1 = 222-86-401-50-261-41-271 allows 222-407-703 = 37(6+11+19)

Richard's database allowed me to find the two central verses of Ps 119 (88-89) have values 1332 and 962, 37.36 and 37.26.

Gen 1 (all) + Ex 20 (1-17) = 474 + 7 + 172 = 613 words, a well-known number.

When I started my research in 1985, in the week of my 35th birthday, I was obsessed by a pattern, 1-2-3-1. I don't remember exactly why, it probably had to do with the Axiom of Maria: "One becomes two, two becomes three, and out of the third comes the one as the fourth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_of_Maria
I thought then I might find interesting gematrias 1231, and after my discovery of the double 620 letters I found
Keter Tora = 'esret hadevarim = 1231
there were 26 generations between Creation and Decalog, and
'esrim weshesha = 1231

Another little thing, the 3rd set of 620 letters (see my page) doesn't work in the Leningrad Codex, used by Richard for the database. Still the problem of additional Waw's.
Cheers.
ps : I apologize for the 10 Spokes in the title of the thread. My poor English let me suppose the word 'spoke', often met on this forum, meant 'speech' or 'saying'.